Great Commission Resurgence – Revisited
Posted byIt seems that some are trying to paint SBC Today into a corner with accusations that simply are not true. Of those out there that are trying such, they are resorting to false statements and outlandish claims about the motives of SBC Today (here), while others use a cover-up tactic of writing accolades about someone while taking a shot (here). (UPDATE: The owner of this link has commented that he mis-read me on a previous blog. He apologized for that in this comment section and we do thank him as he has displayed courage and humbleness.) It seems that these fortune tellers of the blogging world are trying to paint those of us that are asking questions as somehow trying to tear something down. It would seem that they want to base their accusations on such statements as follows, a statement that was made by me.
I just think your questions about the GCR suspect some hidden agenda… I do not believe Brother Robin sees a hidden agenda, it is just that some who are promoting a GCR say one thing, but actions do not quite go along with what is being said. For example. Dr. Akin when giving his 5 steps to accomplish a GCR states, “We need a revival of authentic expository preaching that will lead us to be genuine people of the book Then he explains, Unfortunately we have a generation of preachers, good and godly men, who believe themselves to be expositors, when what they do in the pulpit betrays their confession.” These are statements to which I can say, “Yes, Amen.” But then he places on his faculty a preaching prof that is known for teaching preachers to preach a “storying” format. This format in its simplest form has for its thesis that Jesus taught in parables and we must just tell the stories and do so in story form. If I understand expository preaching correctly, when you preach parables you use that genre to exposit the text. When you deal with the poetic genre you present the message in the poetic genre. Not every sermon has three points and a poem. Expository messages are text driven not story-form driven. As I said, that is just one example from Dr. Akin’s paper that he promotes something and says that we must do this in order to have a clear GCR. But…
Please do not take the above illustration as a slam against Dr. Akin. I do not desire to do that. I respect him as my President as I am an alum of SEBTS.
The above statement was made in this comment thread. Allow me to walk you through this statement and then tell you a true story. As you look at the statement you will notice that no one has attacked Dr. Akin. Yes, his name is used and yes he is painted, by me, as being inconsistent. From his writings and apparent actions I saw what I perceived to be some semblance of inconsistency. However, what these detractors do not understand is that Dr. Akin and I have since spoken personally about this issue and my assessment is not the same. While I am not in total agreement with his assessment, he and I have arrived at an understanding and I am in support of his position.
I do owe Dr. Akin an apology for releasing information in such a way that would bring a wrong perception of his hiring practices and his commitment to expository preaching. He has spoken to me and expressed that he has not hired a Professor on faculty that is committed to anything less than expository preaching. In fact he was clear that he never would. My statement implied that the Preaching Department at SEBTS was not advocating expository preaching. The prof that I referenced was not hired as a professor but will be used by SEBTS in a joint venture with the IMB in an adjunct role to instruct missionary students in the art to Chronological Bible Storying. This particular teaching style is used where illiteracy is prevalent. After a couple of conversations with Dr. Akin I would like to express publicly my apologies for anything that I said that may have placed him in a less than favorable light. Dr. Akin has consistently beaten the drum for expository preaching. I certainly do not desire to muffle that drum beat by misrepresenting his position.
Now for the story. I was surprised by a Friday afternoon phone call on my cell. My cell phone rings on Friday afternoons, so that is not the surprise. The surprise came by who was on the other end of the line:Dr. Danny Akin. I must say that I am very impressed with his ability to find me. I am honored when he speaks to me at various venues we attend and he is one of the keynote speakers, but was amazed that he would track down my phone number and call me. It seems that he just returned to the country and was in an airport awaiting a connection when he discovered on his email some statements reported to him I had said. We discussed various statements and were able to work through various areas to better understand each other. This is what Christian brothers and sister should do for one another. One area that I pointed out to him was various items that concerned me about the GCR. He expressed to me that the basis of the GCR was the paper delivered at the Building Bridges conference. This conference was identified as a Southern Baptist endeavor. He also expressed to me that the Building Bridges in his mind was within the SBC in order have a GCR within the SBC. Of course if this GCR expanded outside of the SBC it would bring that much more glory to God. However, he was quick to point out to me that he did not advocate and did not think it wise to form partnerships with others outside of the SBC for church plants. We can learn from others, but our assignment is to plant biblically based Baptist churches. I asked him about others using his language and advocating something different. He expressed to me that he could not speak for others. However, when he used this language that is what he believed.
I was elated when I got off the phone with him. He is, I believe, trying to be consistent in what he says and what he does. He also assured me that in the future if I had any questions concerning his words or positions, to feel free to contact him. As busy as he is, I certainly will use that invitation sparingly, but will also make certain I understand his position before I present questions concerning it.
94 Comments
July 9th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Brother Tim,
I guess what strikes me most about this post, is that it is not too difficult to find the truth and to work out the details with our brothers in Christ. There are many cowards in this world and many men in the pastorate that would rather cast dispersions rather than work diligently to rightly divide the Word of God.
Thank you for taking the time to follow up with Dr. Akin, and for sharing your conversations. It is good to know that men (and women) can talk things out and discover just how close they may really be theologically, without assuming to know and then revealing their ignorance.
Blessings,
Chris
July 9th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Brother Chris,
Dr. Akin has been very gracious and I can tell you that his bridges is being built within the SBC. As he told me it is unwise to partner with organizations outside of the SBC to plant churches. While I still had some areas of disagreement with him concerning minor issues he certainly has been very understanding with my concerns.
Blessings,
Tim
July 9th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
So … the only bridges we need to build are within the SBC? That doesn’t make much sense. Aren’t we already on the same “bridge?”
July 9th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Tim,
I appreciate the fact that you corrected your blog and admitted that you jumped to a conclusion. There are bloggers who have not been willing to do that in the face of evidence of glaring inconsistencies. Thank you for that.
July 10th, 2008 at 5:21 am
Brother Geoff,
Dr. Akin delivered his paper at a conference that was designed to get SB together. In that paper he states that we are under the banner of the BF&M. So, yes, it is a bridge within the SBC.
Brother Dave Miller,
Thanks.
Blessings,
Tim
July 10th, 2008 at 7:48 am
Bro. Tim,
Can you fix the “here and here” links in the first paragraph, I can’t get them to work.
If the problem is on my end, I apologize and would appreciate someone to point out my error.
ABClay
July 10th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Brother AB,
Thanks for the head’s up. I believe I have them fixed now.
Blessings,
Tim
July 10th, 2008 at 9:36 am
It is reassuring to hear Dr. Akin clarify that the bridge building being proposed is to be done within the SBC, under the banner of the BF&M, for a Great Commission Resurgence within the SBC. It is also reassuring to hear of two brothers in Christ talking and working things out. The two of you have set a good example for us to follow in building bridges.
July 10th, 2008 at 9:43 am
This is a good thing to read. I am glad you guys got this worked out between the two of you without the participation of others that may have personal agendas for their involvement.
This was the biblical way. I wish it could have been this way in the past and that it will be the way in the future for all of us. May we all mature as we grow older and wiser in the faith.
cb
July 10th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Tim…this is why I like you so much. Always willing to be transparent. selahV
July 10th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Dave Miller,
You know, it’s interesting that you encourage being irenic and understanding at the so called “BI” blogs, but you really laugh and think it’s hilarious when the “BI” guys are ridiculed and put down on SBCTOODAZED blog. Dont you think that you’re being a little bit inconsistent?
Tim Rogers,
I, too, am glad that Dr. Akins gave you the response that he did. I’m glad to hear that the Bridge Building that he was talking about was within the SBC. Good stuff.
David
July 10th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Tim,
My name is David Crane and I serve with the IMB in Kenya. I read with interest your blog regarding speaking with Danny Akin regarding his asking someone to serve on staff at the SEBTS who can teach the chronological Bible storying method to students who are preparing to serve as cross cultural missionaries. I have the feeling that you might not know all that much about this particular method for communicating gospel truth to those whom we call “primary oral learners.” I suspect that many SBC pastors are in this same boat.
In light of that fact, I would like to highly encourage you to read an article written by Jim Slack, one of the IMB’s top researchers for many years, entitled “Three Frontiers of Lostness in America.” I downloaded the article from the website of the group called “The Great Commission Initiative.” Tim Ahlen is the director of that group. He is the pastor of the Forest Meadow Baptist Church of Dallas, TX. You could call him and ask him for a copy of the article if you have any trouble finding it in the GCI’s website. Once you get the article, read carefully what Jim has to say about the second frontier of lostness, which is composed of those in the USA who are either illiterate or functionally illiterate. I think you will be astounded at the challenge this particular frontier presents to the American church, and at the same time very pleased that Danny Akin has the foresight to make sure that SEBTS students are getting solid training in this most strategic and widely applicable method of teaching the Bible and making disciples.
David Crane
July 10th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
David,
Do you ever read things, or do you just form an opinion and act on that? I am not going to fight with you online.
I think SBC TooDazed is witty sometimes, stupid other times. I have laughed and I have confronted them when I thought they were offbase.
Again, David, I have not found it profitable to try to engage you online. Generally, I have been accused of being a liberal or an agent of Enid.
One more time, pastordave@cableone.net if you wish to talk privately.
July 10th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Dave,
I do not recall ever calling you a liberal, nor do I remember ever calling you an “agent of Enid.”
Also, ridiculing people on an anonymous blog is not humorous for the people being ridiculed and made fun of….even if you find it “witty.”
May the Lord bless you today in many good ways,
David
July 10th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Trust me, David. You did exactly that. If you do not remember it, I do.
July 10th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
We are all more concerned about the hurt we receive than the hurt we cause.
July 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Dave,
Show me where I said either one of those things to you, personally. I still dont believe that I said either one of those two things to you, but show me where and I will believe it. In fact, I dont ever remember using the phrase “agent of Enid.” That’s not a phrase I use. Now, I do use the word “liberal” to describe beliefs like denying the inerrancy of Scripure, ordination of women, etc. So, I concede that I may have used that word in a discussion, and if the shoe fits, wear it. But, I dont remember calling you, personally, a liberal. I’m not saying that I didnt, but I sure dont remember that.
Also, Dave, you can try to turn this on me all you want, but you have made statements over at SBC Toodazed that show you liking very much the ridicule that the anonymous person is handing out to the BI crowd. So, you get mad at the BI crowd and at me for simply using descriptive words about someone’s beliefs, but laugh at out and out ridicule of others. Interesting.
That’s all. I just find that interesting, especially when someone claims to be neutral, and irenic, and wants everyone to get along.
God bless you, Brother,
David
July 10th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
David,
I see no point in engaging with you like this.
But I will say this. Scripture says that blessings and curses cannot come from the same mouth. You cannot consistent question my love for the Word of God and insinuate that I am just one of Wade’s minions, then say, “God bless you, Brother.”
It doesn’t work that way.
Tim, I apologize for carrying this forward here. I have repeatedly asked David to engage me privately at pastordave@cableone.net. He has consistently refused.
I promise you, no matter what David says about me here, I will not respond to him again on your site.
July 10th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Please note comment #12 by David Crane to learn more about orality.
July 10th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Brother bj,
I believe if you notice my link in the post, I link to the Chronological Bible Storying website.
Blessings,
Tim
July 10th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
David Crane,
Remember me? I cannot tell you how many times I have told the story of Oneipu’s cow.
But … back to the subject … it’s not just the illiterate and functionally illiterate who concern us. What about the biblically illiterate? That group probably comprises a majority of the people in the United States today. I submit that storying of the Gospel is and will continue to be an effective method among the biblically illiterate, as well.
After all, haven’t we always used such a method with our own children.
I, personally, use a topical expository method of preaching … for the most part. But I also use drama, storying, music … many other Bible-teaching methods.
I grow weary of the claim that, “If every preacher would just practice expository preaching, everything would be right in the church again.” I think we can learn quite a few pointers from the teaching methods of our Lord, as well.
July 10th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Brother Geoff,
Would you say then, that this is the same as Storying?
Blessings,
Tim
July 10th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Tim,
I am so old-fashioned on this it is silly. I open a book of the Bible, cover as much as I can (a word, a sentence, maybe a couple of them) then pick up next week where I left off last week. I took 2 1/2 years to cover Ephesians. Now, I have spent about 2 months preaching the Great Commission, almost word by word.
I was raised on expository preaching and I think it is the single most important tool in the preacher’s arsenal.
But I have known missionaries who use the storying method. It is primarily for people who have no concept of the Bible, of the biblical story, or of who the God of the Bible is.
I am friends with a missionary who uses this system in dealing with new people groups. It is effective.
I think I agree with you that it is not a substitute for expository preaching. It is a foundation for it – if I understand your position.
July 10th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Brother Tim,
Would you also say that parables are the same as story telling? Mark gave us Christ’s description for the giving of parables…..
Mark 4:11-12 And He was saying to them, “To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but those who are outside get everything in parables, (12) so that WHILE SEEING, THEY MAY SEE AND NOT PERCEIVE, AND WHILE HEARING, THEY MAY HEAR AND NOT UNDERSTAND, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT RETURN AND BE FORGIVEN.”
Would you say that story telling is in that same category of thought?
Blessings,
Chris
July 10th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Brother Tim,
Another thing that I have noticed in the American culture is the insatiable desire for entertainment, and sometimes pastors will story tell for entertainment value. In fact, the story telling / joke telling is much more enlivened for the audience, since in many cases the preaching is void of any substance.
I have listened to great expositors that can use a story to better illuminate the meaning of the text….and I think that is very valuable. The Apostle Paul was very good at communicating the gospel with that style. The problem to avoid is to train your hearers with story telling which most often results in a lack of substance and consequently the holy text begins to appear boring….in other words, no entertainment value.
If I were to lean any direction, it would be to expose the text (more substance, less story) and depend upon the Holy Spirit to work the application.
Blessings,
Chris
July 10th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Brother Dave,
I believe “storying” presents the theology of scripture. As I understand it, storying takes approximately 1 year before the gospel is presented. The reason is that people do not understand the basis for Jesus’ death.
Brother Chris,
Would you also say that parables are the same as story telling? No, I do not believe I would say that for two reasons. First, is the response I have given to Brother Dave Miller. Second, it seems that Jesus used parables and for the purpose that you have presented. I am not sure that Storying does the same as parables because the Gospel has to be presented and it is God’s Word, not stories about God’s Word that saves.
Blessings,
Tim
July 10th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Tim,
I don’t know what “that” is. What does “that” have to do with anything with regards to a missiological approach to Gospel communication through storying?
July 11th, 2008 at 1:41 am
Dear Brother Tim,
I apologize for the statement I made in linking to your post “Everybody Wants to Build a Bridge” I have struck through the statement on my post and added a note of explanation and apology. There were several sections in your post that I glossed over too quickly and consequently came to the wrong conclusion, misunderstanding your purpose. I ask your forgiveness in this matter, and pledge to be more careful as I read and post.
Phillip Wayne
July 11th, 2008 at 2:56 am
goodness
July 11th, 2008 at 3:02 am
Well I’m showing my ignorance re how to submit a comment. I submitted the anti-spam word. Geoff Baggett, I remember you very well and I thank God for the S. Baptists who gave so much to help our Maasai Team spread the gospel among those precious people. The use of the chronological Bible storying method is indeed one major chapter in that work.
I mainly wanted to say that the comments which followed my first contribution bear out what I say re there perhaps being a widespread ignorance of what the chronological Bible storying method is all about. Please read the article by Jim Slack that I referred you to as it will help to answer some of the questions and misperceptions that have come through in the comments that follow post # 12.
July 11th, 2008 at 5:47 am
Brother Geoff,
Did you follow the link?
Brother Phillip,
Thank you for your clarification. I will place an update in this post.
David Crane,
Ok, I confess an ignorance. Please help me understand where my ignorance comes through in my answer to Brother Dave Miller #26. Also, educate us without sending us into a reading marathon on trying to figure out exactly what is being said. Will you give us in a paragraph or two exactly what takes place in Chronological Bible Storying? Also, if CBS is the bridge for illiteracy, and we believe the Bible is God’s Word–without error–express for us how a story about God’s word accomplishes the same thing. One other question. If we are speaking about presenting the gospel, where does telling the story take the place of presenting John 3:16? As I understand the Bible, it is the Word of God that saves, not my packaging of the Word of God. Please help me understand. I am not trying to be difficult, but these are the same question I asked back in 1999 in a seminary class that Dr. Buchannan taught when we examined this new phenomenon. There really were not adequate answers then and I have not seen any since. Maybe you can help me better understand and I am open to that.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Yes, Tim, I followed the link. But I still don’t see your point. Are you saying that, because a CBF-er used storying and wrote a book about it, that it somehow taints the entire strategy for communicating Christ?
July 11th, 2008 at 7:40 am
And Tim,
Isn’t the Word of God still the Word of God, whether it is read from between the leather, or told orally, or even read from a screen?
I an having trouble understanding your aversion to this fundamental, effective missiological practice (CBS). It seems that your real problem with it is that it is not “expository preaching.”
Perhaps you do need to follow David’s links.
July 11th, 2008 at 7:41 am
David Crane,
Can you send me an e-mail at geoff@sbcimpact.net ? It’s been a while…
July 11th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Brother Geoff,
Please do not take my link as something that relegates a CBFer writing a book on storying as the reason of my aversion to CBS. I have not advocated that in any way.
CBS is a means of explaining theology. In 1999 I studied this approach in a class. We were told this approach was used in the missions setting where the language was not in Scripture, and the people were basically illiterate. The purpose of CBS was to lay a foundation of theology in order to help people who have never heard the story to understand why Jesus died. CBS is all about presenting Jesus. It takes approximately one year to 1 and a half years to get to Jesus’ death. I have no problem at all with this approach. I believe it is an approach that is useful and helpful.
My concern, and the reason for the link, is where CBS seems to be heading. If we are speaking about, and it seems we are, CBS replacing expository preaching then, yes, I have more than an aversion to this technique. Some say that Jesus taught in parables and that is what we should do. Well there an issue we seem to forget about that argument. Jesus is Jesus, I am not. He can teach in parables all He desires because He is the Word.
One other thing about CBS that does concern me some. While I understand the premise that there should be some theological foundation before the gospel can be presented, I am concerned that we may be adding to the gospel with that argument. If it is sola scriptura, then why should we make certain someone understands the basis of the reason for Jesus’ death? Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that we need to help people understand that as a result of the fall they need a savior. However, I am saying that everyone knows a truth that Paul pointed out in Romans, Romans 7:18 (KJV) For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Tim,
I think your concerns are founded within you worldview. You are from a literate culture … and you have heard about the Gospel and the Bible all of your life. You already have a “frame of reference” for understanding God’s Word and truth. You already have a reverence and respect for the Bible as the Word of God.
But many people in our world do not have such a worldview / frame of reference … they never did. Yes, we believe in sola scriptura. But it is a bit naive to think that we can “parachute drop” into an orality-based culture with Bible in hand and say, “This is what the Bible, God’s Word, says.”
In most places you will receive some version of one of these responses:
1. What is a Bible?
2. What is that thing you’re holding in your hand?
3. Which God?
4. Why should I believe you?
5. So what?
Indeed, there are many, many people in our own culture who would ask the same questions.
The fundamental issue here is cross-cultural communication. Such communication is difficult within a home-grown, myopic worldview.
For an excellent reference on sharing the Gospel through storying, check out Story Journey by Thomas E. Boomershine. (I was introduced to this book and concept at SBTS – Intercultural Communication course in the Graham School).
And for a very visual demonstration of the power and effectiveness of storying the Gospel, check out the incredible video, EE Taow, which tells about some New Tribes missionaries … and how they led an entire tribe to Christ through storying.
July 11th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Tim,
FYI … I have a comment in moderation because of two links. Please get it and approve it for me. Gracias!
July 11th, 2008 at 9:15 am
I wish that all those who are in Christ would act this way toward their brothers and sisters in Christ. This is the way to do it!
July 11th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Storying may be a good method for introducing God, the Bible, and Jesus to a culture who have never heard of Jesus. It may be a good introduction. But, once the culture has been introduced to the Bible and Jesus, and people have started making professions of faith, then a beeline to expository preaching of the Word of God ought to take place. Teaching and preaching the Bible ought to happen very quickly. After all, God blesses His Word, and He uses His Word to bring people to salvation and to grow new Believers.
Our goal should be to always lead people deeper into God’s Word, and this wont happen if it’s not being taught by the Pastor.
David
July 11th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Tim,
My six year old knows that Jesus died and that some of his friends are being batized. And he’s even told me that he has “prayed a prayer” in Sunday School. But I won’t let him be baptized. Why? Because he doesn’t yet fully understand his own sinfulness. Jesus died on the cross. He’s got that down. He believes Jesus died for people. But so do the demons, and they shudder at the notion. He doesn’t yet grasp that HIS sin is a grievance to God and that HIS sin required the death of another in order to be forgiven. If he doesn’t get that part, then he doesn’t understand the gospel, regardless of what he prayed in Sunday School.
That’s not just an issue with small children, either. Maybe it’s because I’m immersed in a Catholic culture, but I encounter adults every day who fail to realize the severity of their own sinfulness, believing instead that enough good works will balance things out. They believe Jesus died and they believe they must believe in Him, but the don’t understand the gospel.
Now, I have no idea about the length of most evangelistic story sets, if there even is a standard, but a year seems like a really long time. The evangelistic story sets with which I’m most familiar are 9 stories each.
Do they add to the gospel? I guess it depends on how one defines the gospel.
The evangelistic story sets with which I’m familiar begin with creation to establish who God is and His sovereignty, they include The Fall to help people understand sin and their own sinfulness. They include some OT historical narrative stories to establish that God is/has been active in salvation history, etc. Obviously the stories include the birth or Christ to establish the Incarantion, the death of Christ and resurrection to establish the atonement, etc.
I’m but one person and I’m no expert in storying, but I wouldn’t consider that “adding” to the gospel nearly as much explaining it. Just my $.02.
July 11th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Brother Tim,
The links that were offered for ‘Chronological Storying” it seems to me are simply trying to help people understand the history of the people they are approaching. I found the information helpful to assist me in understanding the habits, nuances, customs, and traditions of a certain culture.
If I were going to confess Christ in Kosovo, I would find the information about Kosovo very helpful, so that I don’t wonder into the culture in ignorance. I have always got a kick out of Paul’s provocative statement to those religious folks in Greece….when he said, standing in the midst of the Areopogus…. Act 17:22-25 … “Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects. (23) “For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, ‘TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.’ Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you. (24) “The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; (25) nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything,……”
What I find in Paul’s “Storying” is a profound direction to proclaim Christ as the stumbling stone. If storying is used as Paul has given us direction,…then it can be helpful. I still get the feeling that many men and women may believe that “Storying” is the means to a better result. That would be to disagree with Paul’s directive and motive for confession.
I used “storying” a couple of weeks ago in the American culture when I detected that an American boy was depending upon his WWJD bracelet to remind him to keep the law. It appeared to me he was being religious by wearing the bracelet…. So I asked him why he would wear such a thing…I explained to him the dangers of appearing religious….and then went on to confess Christ and share God’s gospel with him.
So if I understand that my “Kosovo” neighbors idolize “knowledge” in their community and not “wealth”,…. I would probably speak in that direction to arrive at the message of the gospel quicker. Paul seem to use the “religious posturing of those in Athens” in the same manner.
One thing is certain, “Storying” does not effect results, only the gospel will.
Blessings,
Chris
July 11th, 2008 at 10:17 am
If you want expository preaching, then I gather you are praying for more workers in the mission field to translate the Bible to those who do not have the Bible in their language.
For these people, the only way to teach and disciple them is through stories and parts of the Bible that may be translated. Not everything is cut and dried here Tim. Not everyone has access to the Bible as we have here in the states. God however, can use anything.
July 11th, 2008 at 10:25 am
There is something else to consider in all this….if a language DOES NOT HAVE a good translation or a complete translation of the Bible, then how can there be good expository preaching?
There can’t be.
We are experiencing that in the country in which we work……
imb m
July 11th, 2008 at 10:27 am
oops…I see debbie posted above me just before I did….she has the idea!
July 11th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Debbie and Jenni,
You make good points. Let’s pray that the Bible will be translated so that all can have a copy in their own language. That would be a good work for those with high IQ’s to help reach all the people groups of the world. Would anyone out there take this on? Would you pray about it?
But, and certainly Tim can speak for himself, and if I understand Tim correctly, I believe that Tim was more concerned about storying being looked upon as a viable way to preach the Bible…to the exclusion of expository preaching, which is the best way to preach and teach the Bible. And certainly, anything that does away with teaching and preaching the whole council of God would be weak at best, and lead to error and confusion at it’s worse. I think that this is the point that Tim is trying to make here due to some of the things that comes at us from the “emergent” crowd that sounds like they’re trying to take us away from teaching the Word of God. And, that would be dangerous and disastrous to the Church and the souls of men.
Tim, did I understand you right?
David
PS. Please read my comment #38 if you think that I’m saying that Storying is bad.
July 11th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Sister Debbie,
I don’t believe that preaching the gospel requires a written translation be available….and you may be saying that as well. I think you make a good point though, in that the gospel must be somehow translated (all be it orally) in a language to be understood. Is translation (oral or written) required for “Storying” as well?
Blessings,
Chris
July 11th, 2008 at 11:29 am
To All,
My daughter is returning today from camp so I do apologize for my lack of interaction. However, I must tie up some loose ends before she gets back so I can spend the afternoon with her. Thus, I do not have time to answer each of you. I promise that as time permits I will respond, but until then I have time to briefly respond to some.
Brother Geoff,
Sorry about the moderation, I will fix it immediately. Also, I will read the articles linked already as well as the links you provide.
Brother David (volfan),
You have understood exactly what I am trying to say about this. Great redneck minds think alike.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Everybody having a copy of the Bible in their own language is not the heart issue. When people are illiterate or functionally illiterate, all the written material in the world won’t communicate clearly the Gospel. Also, many peoples think in terms of stories. They come from oral traditions where stories are handed down from generation to generation. Sharing Biblical truth in a storying format is an identifiable and understandable way of communication. Reading to them out of a book is not, necessarily.
July 11th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Brother Geoff,
I need to go, but I wanted to respond to your comment that was just released from moderation. As you noted it was in moderation because of the two links within the comment.
1. What is a Bible?
2. What is that thing you’re holding in your hand?
3. Which God?
4. Why should I believe you?
5. So what?
That is what we are dealing with in the culture I live in. I believe you will agree that when the gospel is shared here in the US, I have to explain (1.)that the Bible is God’s word and (2.)that it is the book of truth that (3) the one true God gave us through men that (4) is without error and I base my story on this inerrant text because it (5) reveals the truth that those who do not enter into a relationship with God will be eternally separated from him.
So we deal with the same thing in the US literate culture. Now, in an illiterate culture, as I have said, I understand the need for CBS. I agree that in that sort of culture there needs to be some way of presenting a basis for the reason that good news is good news. However, once the basis is presented and the Gospel is expressed there should be a move from just telling people about the Bible and teaching the Word to the people. As has already been alluded there should be some kind of translation process going on to get the Word of God into the language of the people. If we forsake this part of mission work then we need to close down Wycliffe.
Also, your links are not something new to me. I have seen that video many times and I have read the book you have presented. I also read David Hesselgrave’s Communicating Christ Cross-Culturally. So please do not think I am coming into this conversation as someone that has 1.) never been out of NC; 2.) thinks my way is the only way; 3.) will not read something someone else has presented; 4.) all of the other three together. I honestly see this concept of storying becoming the next issue that we will have to deal with in the area of preaching. It just seems to me that it is a return to the days when we left God’s Word in order to present our understanding of God’s Word.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Sister Bonnie,
Reading to them out of a book is not, necessarily. Is that statement not taking away the power of God’s Word. First, it is God’s Word that penetrates the heart, not a story about His Word. Second, the Bible is more than a Book. I do not believe we should parachute into a village and just read God’s Word to people out of the KJV. I do believe, though, if God’s Word is sufficient for salvation, then we need to get it into their language ASAP.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Many schools were started by Christian people in the past in order to help people read the Bible for themselves. Maybe a school could be started by missionaries in these lands for the purpose of helping them read the Bible…..which of course, the reading will then help in many other areas as well.
Bonnie, I have to agree with Tim strongly in his response to you. The Bible is God’s Word to men. It’s not just a book. And, even if they’re illiterate, still the Bible can be read to them, and it can be explained to them….until they learn to read for themselves. Cant it?
God’s Word will not come back void….not our word, but God’s Word. God’s Word is powerful and sharper than a two edged sword, not our thoughts and philosophies. Thus, it’s imperative that we preach and teach God’s Word…and, the whole council of God is what will help people get close to God, thus we need to preach and teach all of God’s Word.
David
July 11th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Tim,
Agreed … we need to get the Bible into the language of the people ASAP.
Our problem, though, in SBC life, is that Bible translation is not something we do. And if we are not willing to build bridges beyond the SBC, we are stuck somewhere between a rock and a hard place.
Another problem, Tim, is that many languages are not written. They are spoken only. Which makes the spoken Word (Which is still the Word) so vital.
My church is working among the Panao Quechua in Peru. We praise God that SIL will have the New Testament translated into the Panao Quechua sometime in early 2009. But there’s still a problem. Panao Quechua is spoken, not written. To translate the Scriptures the translating team first had to develop a phonetic alphabet. It has been a long, pain-staking process.
So, they will have the Bible soon … but all of the non-Spanish speakers (75% of the people) will first have to be taught to read to even benefit from the written Word!
Which makes storying so vital. We cannot afford to wait for all of the appropriate translations and for everyone in oral cultures to learn how to read. We have to tell God’s story.
I would submit to all that, more and more, the various cultures within the US are becoming more and more orally-focused. Media is powerful. The spoken word is powerful. The postmoderns are enamored with stories and storytelling. Therefore, storying the Gospel man, very well, be a very effective method of Gospel communication here, as well.
You said, “I honestly see this concept of storying becoming the next issue that we will have to deal with in the area of preaching. It just seems to me that it is a return to the days when we left God’s Word in order to present our understanding of God’s Word.”
But isn’t that what preaching is … communicating our understanding of God’s Word? If all we do is stand in front of the church and read from the Bible, we will, indeed, be reading the precious Word of God … but our listeners won’t stick around for very long. And in our culture today, if you do not use the power of the story and parable, again … you will soon find yourself lacking in listeners.
True evangelism is not merely the transmission of the right information. It is the translation of God’s truth.
Good discussion …
July 11th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Brother Geoff,
But isn’t that what preaching is … communicating our understanding of God’s Word?
Expository Preaching is not communicating our understanding of God’s Word, it is communicating God’s Word
Sorry, but I do have to go. I am enjoying the discussion, but I must take the afternoon and get Rebekah’s swimming pool set up in our back yard. I will try to return later this evening.
Keep the discussion going.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Tim,
Wow. So, expository preaching is inerrant and infallible?
You are putting forth a definition of preaching that I have never, ever seen or heard before.
The only way to arrive at the destination you describe is to simply read from the Word. At that point it is no longer preaching … just reading.
Any type of preaching (that, by definition, involves a human communicator) is that man’s best effort to “expound” upon the Word … to offer his best understanding of what the Word is saying.
Tim, I must reject your definition of expository preaching. It is a most excellent approach to teaching the Word of God. But expository preaching is most definitely not just the communication of God’s Word. It is the explanation of it.
Again … ranslating truth … not just communicating information.
July 11th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Brother Geoff,
I think that what “Storying” is ….is a natural outflow of cultural communication. If someone includes a little bit of Jesus and the Gospel in “Storying”, then it may become fashionable for some to use “Storying” as their vehicle for expression, but whether someone “Story’s” or “Exposits”, the expression is useless without the Word of God. If God’s word was fashioned by His breath, then it is probably worth repeating the Word’s that He breathed. God the Holy Spirit supplies the understanding even if the culture can’t.
I think Tim is correct to say that we should understand that God’s Word is His Word regardless of our exposition or storytelling (We messed it up most of the time). It is up to God’s called ministers to proclaim what he said to proclaim, …in His Words. God does the work of application.
Blessings,
Chris
July 11th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Brother Geoff,
I think you are right about explaining and translating though….
Ezra is our poster child for how to preach the word!…………..
Nehemiah 8:1-9 And all the people gathered as one man at the square which was in front of the Water Gate, and they asked Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses which the LORD had given to Israel. (2) Then Ezra the priest brought the law before the assembly of men, women and all who could listen with understanding, on the first day of the seventh month. (3) He read from it before the square which was in front of the Water Gate from early morning until midday, in the presence of men and women, those who could understand; and all the people were attentive to the book of the law. (4) Ezra the scribe stood at a wooden podium which they had made for the purpose. And beside him stood Mattithiah, Shema, Anaiah, Uriah, Hilkiah, and Maaseiah on his right hand; and Pedaiah, Mishael, Malchijah, Hashum, Hashbaddanah, Zechariah and Meshullam on his left hand. (5) Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people for he was standing above all the people; and when he opened it, all the people stood up. (6) Then Ezra blessed the LORD the great God. And all the people answered, “Amen, Amen!” while lifting up their hands; then they bowed low and worshiped the LORD with their faces to the ground. (7) Also Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, the Levites, explained the law to the people while the people remained in their place. (8) They read from the book, from the law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading. (9) Then Nehemiah, who was the governor, and Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who taught the people said to all the people, “This day is holy to the LORD your God; do not mourn or weep.” For all the people were weeping when they heard the words of the law.
Blessings,
Chris
July 11th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Brother Geoff,
Wow. So, expository preaching is inerrant and infallible? Your entire response to me was based on this rhetorical question. You know that is not what I said in comment #54. I have tried my best not to relegate my argument to straw men in order to strengthen my position, and I ask the same of you.
Let’s talk about the difference in expository preaching and Storying. Can storying be done in an expository way. No one has denied that it can. I linked to a person that has taken storying to an extreme and that is my aversion to it. I thought I made that clear in previous comments.
I have received information that David Crane–the commentor #12–spoke in chapel at SEBTS last fall. You can listen to his message here I am not advocating just telling stories, but these stories must come from the text in order to communicate God’s word. It is the Holy Spirit that explains it to the individual.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Brother Geoff,
I think Tim’s definition of expository preaching is accurate:
“Expository Preaching is not communicating our understanding of God’s Word, it is communicating God’s Word.”
Our goal should be to find THE truth of the Scripture and then explain that truth in a way that our hearers, whether oral learners or literate, can understand it. If we are correctly “communicating God’s Word” then that communication cannot be anything but truth. If expository preaching were to include error, it would not be correct expository preaching.
As I understand it, the goal of expository preaching is not to find our understanding or our interpretation of Scripture, but rather to find God’s intentended truth of the Scripture. Our understanding and interpretation often leaves a huge loophole through which wrong doctrine can enter our preaching.
In other words, I don’t think our preaching should settle for a “here’s what I think it means” approach. We ought to wrestle with the Scripture and study it through until we can come to the Scriptural truth and without hesitation proclaim, “Thus saith the Lord.”
July 11th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Wow. So, expository preaching is inerrant and infallible?
That’s what I was thinking as well.
July 11th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Matt: Think about what you are saying for a moment.
Expository preaching is precisely giving our understanding of God’s word. Look up the word exposit. Peaching, expository or not, relies upon fallible human agency. Explain (or exposit) to me any doctrine of Christianity or any biblical text and what you are giving me is your understanding of that doctrine or text. That is not to say you are wrong, for you might have the correct understanding of that particular doctrine or text. But to say that true expository preaching can contain no error simply relegates all preaching as false, unless you or someone else cares to claim errorless preaching. When do you know that you have passed from interpreting or understanding a text from an infallible knowledge of the truth of the text? How does that revelation come? Your last paragraph essentially claims that it is possible to achieve an inerrant interpretation of biblical text.
July 11th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Bill,
Thanks for the caution. I have thought about it and still believe that I am correct. I do indeed claim that it is possible to achieve an inerrant interpretation of a biblical text. Now let me clarify that statement. If an interpretation is correct then it is without error.
I am not saying that we always succeed at perfect exposition, but it is possible. I can’t imagine God calling men to preach His Word without also giving them the ability to study and discern what His Word is saying. The goal of expository preaching is not to find A truth, but to find THE truth. My job as a pastor is not to take a poll and see what everybody thinks a passage means or what it means to me. My goal is to find what God means and boldly proclaim it. Indeed, sometomes we fall short, but the goal should always be to explain God’s truth rather than sharing our opinions.
July 11th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Sorry. That last sentence should say, “sometImes we fall short.”
July 11th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Matt,
You are correct in your understanding of preaching and the goal. Telling a story is fine but rightly dividing the Word requires the expository approach or else our stories will appear to conflict as many points. Scripture must be used to intrepret scritpure.
WA Criswell said it best “take the text and make a straight line for Jesus!” You cannot wrong with that approach.
July 11th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Tim G.,
Thanks for the encouragement.
Bill,
I think part of the problem is that we may be working from a different definition of “exposition.” According to Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary:
1: a setting forth of the meaning or purpose (as of a writing)
ww.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exposition
The key words for me are “the meaning.” As a expository preacher, I am to explain THE meaning of the text. If I am not sure what the meaning is, then I am in no position to explain it. I would not be explaining the text, but just explaining my opinion. Believe me, nobody would want to sit through 45 minutes of my opinions. I’m not smart enough for that kind of preaching. Our congregation would dwindle to nothing in a hurry.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Brother Matt,
Great job of defining what I am trying to say. Let me take it even further.
An expository sermon is not just someone taking a text, parsing the verbs, and then explaining what the verse means. An expository sermon contains an examination of the text, an explanation of that particular truth of the text, an argumentation in order to strengthen that point, and illustration to illustrate the truth of the text and then an application to apply that truth bringing it into the culture in which we reside.
Expository preaching does not just consist of exposing the text. While there are many other steps before getting to the presentation of the text to the people, we do not just stop at exposing a text. As I understand Storying we explain the theological meaning of the text in order to bring others knowledge. While I am not going to throw Storying out of the window, neither am I going to back up on Expository Preaching as being the most Biblical accurate form of presenting God’s Word to man. I certainly am not saying that what CBS has accomplished has been for naught. However, I still cannot get past that Storying, in some way, seems to be based more in knowledge than in a trust in God’s Word.
Blessings,
Tim
July 11th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Matt, Tim: I believe in expository preaching as well. I believe in studying scripture using exposition. Yet, I disagree with both of you on things not essential. Why is that? In fact theologians, good solid ministers disagree who teach and preach the same way. Somebody’s wrong aren’t they? Now I understand what you are saying and I agree to a point…of course I think I’m right,
but then why doesn’t every single minister agree or every single Christian?
July 11th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
I think I see where we are talking around each other. I fully agree that any particular text has a true meaning and purpose, and not many true meanings or purposes relative to the needs or situation of the hearers. I also agree that expository preaching seeks to explicate the true meaning of the text.
I would still contend however that when you or I or anyone preaches an expository message, you are explaining the text based upon your understanding and interpretation of the text. It can be nothing else. Now, that understanding can and should be informed by careful study, historic doctrines, and the testimony of other scriptures. Most importantly we seek wisdom and illumination of the Holy Spirit. But in the end the message comes through a fallible human being. That is fine. God evidently wishes it to be that way.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:50 am
Let’s just preach to everyone’s “felt needs” It works for Joel Osteen.
July 12th, 2008 at 8:00 am
CB,
David
July 12th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Bill,
I don’t think you and I are that far apart in what we are saying. I think we are both in agreement that men are fallible and the Word of God is infallible. Preachers sometimes miss the mark, but if an expositor succeeds at fulfilling the definition of exposition, then his preaching is correct. That is where I see the strength of exposition over storying. Exposition is tied more tightly to the infallible text than storying. The more we can stick to the infallible versus the fallible, the more accurate we will be in proclaiming truth.
July 12th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
CB,
…and we all know that pragmatic personal preferences preached produce perfectly proficient people!
Sola Gratia…
…this is my Bible…
July 12th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Those of us who advocate expositional preaching need do so humbly. Exposition is a METHODOLOGY of teaching the bible. Care must be taken when one espouses that his/her methodology is better (or in some cases the only right way) than another.
And though I am a fan of WA, having spent many hours listening to him, his approach to preaching is best describe not as expositional but as a running homily with topical subjects. Beside, if expositional preaching was the best method, Jesus would have used it. Instead, Jesus decided to tell timeless stories to experience truth.
July 12th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
CB
Nothin’ wrong with preaching to felt needs. Jesus did.
July 12th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Rick,
I am not sure where Jesus preached to people’s “felt needs.” Often, people feel one need, when the real need is totally different.
I may feel that I need a new wife. God’s Word reveals I need to change the way I treat mine. I might think I need more money. God’s Word might say that I need to handle what I have in a more honorable way.
Jesus had insight into the soul that perhaps we don’t have. He certainly didn’t preach to the rich young man’s felt need. He addressed his real need. Jesus certainly didn’t deal with the Pharisee’s felt needs in Matthew 23. He called them poisonous snakes. He spoke such hard truths to the people that the crowds left him and turned away.
Jesus spoke from the heart of the Father, not the needs of the people.
Our difference on this issue might be semantic, but I think CB was talking about what the Bible calls “giving people what their itching ears want to hear.”
We are not called to make seekers comfortable, but to confront all men with the hard truths of God’s word.
July 12th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Dave
One is hard pressed to find an example where Jesus didn’t preach to felt needs. Your examples included.
Certainly Jesus addresses and corrects one’s felt need. But after all, isn’t that the purpose of preaching on felt needs.
Are you suggesting that preaching must only be confrontational and not comforting, affirming, consoling, and edifying? I hope not.
July 12th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
My point is that preaching is supposed to flow from the Father’s will, not the people’s felt needs.
The prophets said, “Thus saith the Lord.” They didn’t ask what the people wanted to hear.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Show me one post where anyone has said that we preach what people want to hear, but I will tell you gentleman, the message for the believer is not the Old Testament laws or ways. We no longer have to be afraid of God’s wrath as that was taken care of on the cross. That is what the Bible teaches expositionally, yet it is something that I do not hear preached often.
Sin should be preached, but so should that we have obtained forgiveness through Christ’s death on the cross, and we do not have to suffer hell and damnation. ever. Never. Even if we do sin. The natural consequences of sin is the way God deals with sin. And sin in scripture does not always line up to the sins preached about, which is not systematic or expository but a twisting of a verse to meet an agenda.
So let’s not preach what people want to hear, but let’s preach the Bible, which ends up being what true born again Christians want to hear, as they learn it’s what Christ has done not us, that is why we are considered righteous.
That will bring about the holiness that a Holy God requires.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Dave: Places where Jesus preached to people’s felt needs, the woman at the well, the blind man, Mary and Martha, Zaccheus, and the list goes on, the parable of the Prodigal son, the woman who was about to be stoned, that was all preaching too.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Oh and let’s not forget “Come unto me all you who are labored and heavy burdened and I will give you rest” or “Let the little children come unto me…”
July 12th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Brothers and Sister,
Need we be reminded that Jesus is God thus, he knew the needs not just the felt needs. We are human beings and all we have to use in order to reach people’s felt needs is the Scripture. Therefore, expository preaching is the method best used to speak truth.
Blessings,
Tim
July 12th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Leaping lizards Timmy.
When Jesus preached the Scriptures he didn’t use the expository methodology. Expository methodology is a relatively recent literary invention of hermeneutics.
July 12th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Rick,
I am not sure what your point is here. Are you against expository preaching? Or are you just quarreling with the contention many of us are making that it is the best kind of preaching? I am not sure.
Expository preaching is designed to bring out the meaning of the revealed scripture. Jesus did not expose the meaning of scripture – he was revealing truth. He did revelatory preaching.
I love exposition for several reasons.
1) It recognizes the power of scripture. All I have to do is reveal the truth of scripture and the Spirit uses the Word to do the work of God.
2) Expository preaching, especially the verse-by-verse kind, keep us focused on biblical priorities of truth. The text sets your topic and your emphasis. When you preach Paul, you spend a lot of time talking about unity in the body because that is a constant emphasis of his. It tends to keep you focused on the things that are highest priorities, and keeps you from riding personal hobby horses into the ground.
I am not saying it is the only method of preaching, but I certainly think it is the best way to communicate the Word to people.
July 12th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Rick,
No, actually He did not.
Jesus was, is and always will be the God-Man.
Work on it. You will catch on, maybe.
cb
July 13th, 2008 at 6:31 am
Dave,
I’m an expositor. Jut reminding all that exposition is a methodology and as such to say its the best kind is a preference. Others who use a different methodolgy also preach God’s word.
cb
Your better than that. Jesus the God-Man never had an incarnational second without identifying with human need.
July 13th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Rick,
Maybe you should work on defining exposition as to what it really is.
Also, it seems you have no idea what the concept of preaching to “felt needs” is or any idea of the history of the term.
cb
July 13th, 2008 at 9:06 am
cb
There’s a lot I have no ideas about but save this one: the clarity of your un-clarity in defining exposition and felt needs.
TaTa.
I’m off to preach about the felt need for repentance from a historical narrative NOT using any major or minor points. I’m gonna tell a story today. I’ll not do any etymologies of a word. I completely intend to ignore the Hebrew syntactical structure. Yet, God’s word will pour forth from the heavens…Hmm how does that happen without an expository methodology. Of yeah that’s right, I remember now… God’s word is above my reason, faculties, and deductions.
July 13th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Dave Miller,
Amen, Brother! You and I are completely on the same page on this issue. Mark this day down as a golden day for the ages.
Also, there’s nothing wrong with topical preaching as long as it’s true to the Scriptures. Many great and godly men preached topical messages…good messages. But, I firmly believe that expository preaching is the best way to go. It will help your people grow in thier faith. And, if anything out there suggests to Churches that we get away from preaching and teaching the Bible….that it’s outdated and antiquidated, that we preach psychological, self help, “ten steps to making friends,” or “five ways to be successful” type messages, then that way is not only weak, but it’s wrong and dangerous and will lead to an unsound, unBiblical Churches.
David
July 13th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
“The surprise came by who was on the other end of the line:Dr. Danny Akin. I must say that I am very impressed with his ability to find me. I am honored when he speaks to me at various venues we attend and he is one of the keynote speakers, but was amazed that he would track down my phone number and call me. ”
This is the whole problem. You revere these men too much. He is just a man.Isaiah 2:22 God is no respector of persons nor should you be.
Grow up and be impressed with Christ alone.
July 13th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Sister Wanda,
I am impressed with Christ. It impresses me when I read His Word and it pierces my heart and leaps off the page at me.
Are you trying to say that you are never impressed when you get a call from someone that usually would not dial your number?
I am sorry if my position in life is not as those you may know that are on the speed dialing list from presidents of seminaries.
Blessings,
Tim
July 14th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
“I am sorry if my position in life is not as those you may know that are on the speed dialing list from presidents of seminaries”
See, you are too impressed and you have to brag about being on speed dial. Boast in the Lord, son.
The ground is level at the foot of the cross. There will be NO special lines for seminary presidents on J-Day. Not even for Al Mohler. (ha ha)
If you were really impressed with Christ, you would not have boasted about him calling you. It would be no big deal in the grand scheme of temporal things and eternal life. You know I am right. That makes it harder, I know.
Christ uses the foolish to shame the wise, son. He is not impressed by earthly greatness. Why should you be?
July 14th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Wanda,
How you read my last comment and ascertain that I am saying I am on someone’s speed dial is beyond me. I have said nothing of the sort You appear to be bartering for a fight and I just will disengage from this comment stream with you.
Blessings,
Tim
July 15th, 2008 at 7:37 am
Sister Wanda,
Your comments have reminded me of one of Paul’s most endearing passages to us all….
Philippians 1:27-30 Only conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or remain absent, I will hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel; (28) in no way alarmed by your opponents–which is a sign of destruction for them, but of salvation for you, and that too, from God. (29) For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake, (30) experiencing the same conflict which you saw in me, and now hear to be in me.
And then this instruction….
Philippians 2:1-7 Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, (2) make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. (3) Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; (4) do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. (5) Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, (6) who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, (7) but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
Thank you for bringing this to mind.
Blessings,
Chris
July 16th, 2008 at 1:04 am
[...] it seems that the only “bridges” that some in the SBC want to build are “… within the SBC in order have a GCR (Great Commission Resurgence) within the SBC.” I, personally, find the [...]
June 17th, 2009 at 1:10 am
[...] Great Commission Resurgence Revisited by Tim Rogers (July 9, 2008) [...]