Third Hand Quote

Me...quoting CJ Mahaney...quoting Spurgeon:

They may be able to preach the gospel better, but praise God they cannot preach a better gospel!

Bou's Brief

Due to the long delays while I write/rewrite/delete/rewrite my posts, I plan to offer a short glimpse of something near the end of each week. However, unlike old blog, I do plan to relate these thoughts to preaching.
________________________________________

But Times Have Changed...

Somehow, Biblical Exposition runs into a significant amount of resistance. Though opposed, a person will usually admit that the history of the church supports this mode of preaching. Often, they will even recognize that many New Testament preachers were expositing an Old Testament text. Usually, they will concede that Biblical Exposition is the only logical application to one who believes in verbal, plenary inspiration. However, most continue to resist for one reason:

Times have changed. That form just won't work anymore.

The Lord has blessed our church tremendously. We have growing believers, who are being transformed into the image of Christ. We have people who have faced incredibly difficult circumstances and have a faith that is growing. We have men (and wives) who are preparing themselves for more involved (potentially full-time) ministry. We've had the unparalleled joy of seeing sheep added to the fold!

Anyone who knows me knows this is not my doing. I regularly pray that God would simply keep me out of the way and not let me mess things up. Yet, despite all my weaknesses...despite the radical (and unplanned) changes our church has had to endure...despite the fact that people have been moving out of our community and jobs are hard to come by...despite all of these things (and more) our church has continued to grow in size and in depth...all while growing more and more dear in my heart. I simply don't know of another pastor who loves and enjoys his church body more.

I hate the effect pragmatism has had on the church. To simply encourage pastors to try Biblical Exposition because it gains numbers is not to really fix the problem. Preaching the Bible simply becomes another method, rather than the way to build a church. I had plead with another pastor to consider the merits of Biblical Exposition, with each argument failing to convince. In desperation I finally asked, "How come it works at our church?"

Without a blink, this man (who, to my knowledge has never been to my town) began to inform me about the culture surrounding my church. We're stuck about 30 years behind the rest of society, we're simplistic and overly modernistic. Therefore, my archaic ways are effective...for now. In time, these methods will quit working (as my town "progresses") and even today, the closer I'd get to metropolitan areas, the more outdated my methods would seem. (Ironically, we have several families from his neighborhood who drive past his church and make the long trip to "Mayberry"...pretty much disproving his theory.)

It's not really about the results...

I've just returned from an amazing conference. Each speaker, a pastor/elder in their local congregation strongly advocates Sequential Exposition through Scripture. Consider these names:

CJ Mahaney
Ligon Duncan
Al Mohler
Mark Dever
John Piper
John MacArthur
RC Sproul
Thabiti Anyabwile

Despite the staggering diversity in the preachers and their churches, each church is incredibly healthy. Consider Dever's (in his words, the smallest church of these preachers, by 10-fold in some cases) church. Though right in the heart of Washington DC, and yet possibly more traditional than most churches in the country, Capital Hill continues to reach people, grow, deepen walks and have a tremendous impact on young people. All the stereotypes are completely shattered.

Yet, some will continue to protest that Biblical Exposition can't work.

It's almost like some don't want it to work.

Bou's Brief

Due to the long delays while I write/rewrite/delete/rewrite my posts, I plan to offer a short glimpse of something near the end of each week. However, unlike old blog, I do plan to relate these thoughts to preaching.
________________________________________

What's in a Name?

I'm ashamed to admit that American Idol has become a ritual in our home. Personally, I prefer the early weeks (when the yelping "contestants" more mirror my vocal qualities) while my wife loves the finals (again, when the contestants more mirror her vocal quality). This week featured a special edition entitled "Idol Gives Back." It was a sort of pledge drive to raise funds for various humanitarian charities. As they we closing the show, the host announced that the remaining contestants were going to sing "Shout to the Lord."

I looked up from my laptop (which is usually open while I "watch" TV, another point of regular discussion with my wife) to listen. Surely, they don't mean Shout to the Lord (by Darlene Zschech), I thought. And if they do mean that song, I wonder if they'll sing all the lyrics.

They largely kept the song in tact. They sang every word of the song but one. In the midst of the song they sang words like: My Savior, Lord there is none like You, My Comfort, My Shelter, Praise to the King, never cease to worship You. They didn't slur, exchange or hide any of these clearly religious words with very clear Biblically driven imagery.

As I mentioned, they did change one word. But even "the replacement" was rich with biblical imagery. In the "Idol Edition," they sang out My Shepherd, a non-relevant term to sing in Los Angeles unless we understand the obvious Biblical overtones. It was clearly a worship song (for the lyrics say it). It is clearly intended to be sung to someone divine. It was clearly a song intended to be sung about Jesus.

But if that's the case, why not be clear about it. In its original form, the fourth word of the song is Jesus. However, someone(s) involved with American Idol (I have no idea who makes these decisions) saw it fit to mute the message by replacing His name. Why is that? There is no other reason but for offense.

Now, I am not requesting you petition, boycott or protest anything about the show...not because I don't want to jeopardize hearing next season's William Hung, but because we should not expect non-Christians to act otherwise. I am simply asking us to consider the nature of the offense of Jesus' name. The powers-to-be of the show determined that a religious song full of religious language was not offensive, as long as Jesus' name was removed. We can even call the Chief Shepherd by His Title, as long as we resist using His Name.

This should not surprise us. For the power of Apostolic preaching is that the name of Jesus Christ can either convict and/or offend. This is why Paul would state:

For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.--1 Corinthians 2:2

Our determination should be no different than Paul's. Our preaching must name the name of Jesus. If a Jew, Muslim, Hindu, et al could sit through our sermon and apply terms (like Lord, Savior, God, etc) to fit their own system we have failed. We must eliminate their referents by clearly stating that we preach of Jesus.

We must shout the name of Jesus. The reason His Name is too offensive for American Idol is that His is the name that smashes all other idols!

to the praise of the glory of His grace!

Together for the Gospel (Updated)

I'm looking forward to seeing:

Thabiti Anyabwile
Mark Dever
Ligon Duncan
John MacArthur
CJ Mahaney
Albert Mohler
John Piper
RC Sproul

But I'd also love to see you.

If you are planning to be at "T4G", please either comment below (with some form of contact information) or email me. (Perhaps we can even get a larger group together.)

UPDATE: If you know of someone who is not going to be able to attend the conference, though they had registered, I know a brother who is willing to compensate them for their registration and attend the conference. Please contact me ASAP

DTMW4I: Alva J McClain

In this connection I would like to encourage Christians who delight in finding the Lord Jesus Christ upon every page of Scripture. Do not permit yourselves to be frightened by those overcautious souls who cry against what they call "too much typology." Doubtless there are some things which may properly be catalogued as "types" and others not. But whatever you may call it, it is the privilege and highest duty of the Christian to discover and behold the face of the Lord Jesus in Scripture--everywhere! Far better to break a few rules of classical hermeneutics than to miss the vision of His blessed face.

We need only one caution--let us be sure that what we find is always true to the historic revelation of the Son as recorded in the New Testament. With this safeguard, there is no end to what we may find in the inspired record of the infinite and incarnate Son of God. And by finding Him throughout Scripture, we shall be finding the perfect will of God in the wonderful context of His grace. For grace reigns "through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 5:21)--Law and Grace, p 67-68

Preaching Like the Antichrist

Spirit-driven Preaching. Most people speak of it, but few understand what it looks like. One man will say it is found in highly emotional preaching. Another man will claim it manifests itself when the preacher abandons any notes or outlines and simply shares what comes to him. Still another man will claim Spirit-driven preaching is revealed by unusual insight from the text. And though there may be diversity on how to explain it, each man will claim it as essential.

But what if someone claimed it is impossible to preach "spiritless?" Ultimately, a person's preaching cannot be devoid of spirit influence. Consider:

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.--1 John 4:1-3

John reminds us that every message comes with a Spirit influence. Therefore, it is critical that we filter each message we hear. Like the Bereans (Acts 17:10-12), we should be listening carefully and testing the spirits.

But the preacher must ask, "With what spirit do I preach?"

Few would aspire to preach in the spirit of the Antichrist, but many do. There is no "middle ground" in a message. Either we preach a message from God, or one from the Antichrist. The requirements for a God commissioned message are pretty specific...it must confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh.

Jesus
The earthly name given by Joseph in obedience to the angelic vision. His name literally declares "Jehovah Saves!" First criteria is to understand a message that originates from God is going to proclaim Jesus. The other elements of the confession simply describe Who this Jesus is.

Christ
Christ is the greek rendering of Messiah. It is a statement that Jesus is the Anointed One. The Chosen One Whom all the Scriptures speak. Though second temple period understanding of the Messiah may be clouded, the Scriptures clearly enforce that a proper understanding of the Christ, is to understand His Sonship. (Cruise through these 488 mentions of Christ in the New Testament and notice how many are directly related to Jesus being the Son of God.)

Has Come
But in case a person continues to deny the emphasis on Jesus' eternality, John provides this glimpse. We simply do not speak this way of others. When we assess the life of all great leaders in history, we speak of two factors, their date of death and their date of birth. We speak of the day they were born, but we do not state it as the day they "have come in the flesh." John is making it clear to his readers that our understanding is that Jesus always existed eternally, yet at a determined point He clothed Himself with flesh. To say He has come is to say He was somewhere else before arriving on earth.

In the flesh
Though uncommon today, there still remain some who deny that Jesus literally came as man. This became pervasive in the gnostic teachings, which were just beginning to develop at the time of John's writing. In the early church period, some would actually claim that Jesus appeared to have come, but had not literally done so. Or, they claimed that His divine nature hovered over an earthly body, but was never truly united.

While this sort of teaching is not very popular today (It appears often today that the opposite is the attack. Acknowledging that Jesus came in the flesh but denying His divinity. Again, however, John addresses this matter earlier in Jesus' description.), some of its outworking remains. The reason people were tempted to deny the literal flesh of Jesus was that they believed all that was material was evil. Therefore, our calling to escape from the material issues of this world is seen as a form of sanctification. People are told that the physical world around them is either illusion or evil. Therefore our liberation from sin is found in escape from the material world. This, however, is a false hope. For the Word of God says we will one day receive literal, physical (though incorruptible) bodies. Jesus Christ came not to eliminate the physical world, but to restore it to its proper order.

This message must be at the center if we want to preach from the Spirit of God. It must be the message which we confess. But is that the standard we hold people to? Do we require a confession that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, or are we willing to settle for far less. Consider what is involved in the word "confession."

Confession is not denial. When we are told a spirit must confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, we can easily spot a denial. If a person were to deny any element of the message (regardless of their location or reputation) we know that message is not from God. For if their message denies these truths about Jesus, their message is inconsistent with the Scriptures and God is not double-minded. A denial is usually pretty easy to spot.

Confession is not silence. But John does not tell us to listen closely for a denial. He calls us to listen closely to for a confession. Therefore, if a person is silent regarding the message that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, it is not a message from God. God is not pleased simply with a message that avoids error, but God is glorified by a message that exalts His Son. Any message (whether written or spoken, art or argument) that does not confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not consistent with God's desire to bring glory to Himself through His Son. God will seek every opportunity to lift up Jesus Christ, therefore, if the message does not confess Christ, the message is not from God.

Confessing is not the same as admitting. Because silence is usually the most prevalent form of false messages, many listeners are inclined to ask the speaker/author/singer if they will affirm that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. Backed into a corner and asked the right questions, the person responds with an affirmation that "Yes, I will agree that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh." Does this constitute a confession?

Consider an example from parenting. If I walk through the house and notice magic marker on the wall around the front door, I immediately go on a hunt to find the guilty party. As I turn the corner and enter the hallway, I immediately see my son standing near the bathroom, shirt and hands covered with the the stains of magic marker with the graffiti device laying at his feet. My question, "Did you mark the wall?" becomes almost rhetorical. He is caught red handed (quite literally). If he has any brains about him, he knows he is caught and his only hope of pardon is to admit to his sin. Tears may even come, but what do they indicate? Is he repentant? Does he see his error? Is he simply upset that his fun is being cut short? Is he afraid of the discipline to come? I have no indication of the purpose of his admittance.

However, if you have had the privilege of receiving a confession from your child, you know it is an entirely different experience. When the child believes their sin is hidden and yet they come and confess their sin to you, you know repentance has happened. The child is simply coming to desire forgiveness and restoration. The parent doesn't have to question if genuine repentance is necessary, nor do you have to wonder if the child sees his error. He has taken the initiative and it generates a confidence in the child's authenticity.

Bottom Line: To Consider the Message from God, It Must be about Christ

It's amazing how many preachers today wish to call themselves Christian, yet they neglect to preach Christ. They may preach good morals, or even precepts that can maximize potential, but they neglect to preach Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. Their books fly off the shelves of local bookstores, and the reader is left to assume the gospel message. When questioned, possibly they will admit that they believe in Christ, but even then, it is usually vague at best. But if the message does not exalt Jesus Christ, then how can we claim it is of God?

Some will argue that proper exegesis of the Old Testament requires a preaching in the "spirit of the Antichrist." While many preachers will acknowledge that Messianic prophecies speak of Christ, they will claim that the historic narratives ignore Jesus, and thus, our exposition should too. Therefore, it could appear that John's challenge to examine the spirit runs in contradiction to much of the Bible. However, Jesus proved this could not be the case. Referring to the Old Testament, Jesus stated:

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me--John 5:39

He does not say that portions speak of Him, or even that they "prepare the way for Him." He says that they testify about Him. They witness to who He is. Jesus modeled this for us in Luke 24:26-27:

"Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?" Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.

Jesus uses the Old Testament to unpack what His mission has always been. He walks these men through the Scriptures to point to this plan. Paul understood this concept, for he told the Galatians, "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith" (3:24). There should be no portion of the Scriptures from which we cannot preach Christ.

But this is not simply a problem in Old Testament exposition. Sinclair Ferguson states, "Most evangelical preachers don't preach Christ. Not only don't they preach Christ from the Old Testament, they don't preach Christ from the New Testament." And this becomes the crux of the problem. Whether parables, gospel narratives or epistles, much of the New Testament is simply treated as object lessons for moral living. The church becomes very good at sharing what we are to do, but can often neglect the how and why. It is even possible to preach a passage that contains Jesus' actions and words (for instance, the healing in John 9), and yet be so quick to look for "ourselves" that we forget to preach Him!

Every sermon ever preached comes from a spirit. But only the messages that preach Jesus Christ has come in the flesh are from the Spirit of God. Anything that neglects this message is of the spirit of the Antichrist. And just like he will sound good, and be so convincing that he will fool the entire world, a "good" message preached in the spirit of the Antichrist will probably contain a lot of passages and exhort people toward high morals...it just won't preach Christ. And just like his "ministry" will end in destruction, so will the preaching ministry of the man who neglects Christ. He may raise up moral, Bible minded people, but he will not raise up people who savor Christ.

Genuine Biblical exposition should result in glorious Christ exaltation.

And the preacher speaking from the spirit of God wouldn't want it any other way.

DTMW4I: Alistair Begg

From Preaching for God's Glory, Alistair Begg offers these six benefits to Sequential Exposition: (with a few thoughts added to explain each of his points)

1. It gives God glory alone. The focus is not on the wisdom or genius of the speaker, it is on the glory of God and His grace for revealing Himself to us.

2. It makes the preacher study God's Word. As a child, I remember our church hiring a pastor who seemed brilliant in the candidating process. However, it quickly became obvious that he had about five good sermons in his pocket to use at any time. A church that loves expository preaching places accountability before the pastor that he better be in the Word, because it is the Word they want to hear.

3. It helps the congregation. It is a deep prayer of mine that no one will sit in a sermon and feel the study and application is beyond their abilities. As we preach expository messages, we send a picture to the whole Body of how to study God's Word systematically.

4. It demands treatment of the entire Bible. It's much harder to preach "soapbox topics" or favorite doctrines. Know a pastor who only preaches about prophecy or continually preaches against Hollywood every week? Odds are that expository preaching is not happening.

5. It provides a balanced diet. Closely related, a church does not become fat on certain topics while starving in other areas. We grow in the whole council of Scripture.

6. It eliminates Saturday night fever. Begg is not claiming that expository preaching brought down disco (though if our churches had been more expository at the time, it may never have arrived!!!). Begg offers that expository preaching allows the pastor to be released from worrying about what he should preach on next. He no longer wrestles Saturday afternoon, wondering whether this is really what the people need. God's Word does the directing.

_________________________
Alistair Begg has been in pastoral ministry for 32 years. Following graduation from The London School of Theology he served eight years in Scotland at both Charlotte Chapel in Edinburgh and Hamilton Baptist Church. Since 1983, he has been the senior pastor at Parkside Church near Cleveland, Ohio. He has written several books and is heard daily and weekly on the radio program, Truth For Life. The teaching on Truth For Life stems from the week by week Bible teaching at Parkside Church. He and his wife, Susan, have been married 32 years and they have three grown children.