But, what I really want you to see in this post is some of the reasons that the CR had to be, and where the SBC would be today if it had not happened.  The ABP is a good place to look when trying to see what the SBC would’ve been.  Look at this article:    http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5411/53/   and this one:   http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5410/9/      So, clearly going against the teaching of the Bible does not seem to matter  to these people.  They could care less that the Bible clearly teaches that only men should be Pastors/Elders in a church.  This just shows their total disregard for what the Bible teaches.  They’d rather fit in with society.  And, this is where the SBC was going before the CR.

Also, I’ve always thought that winning souls and worshipping Jesus was at the heart of Christian ministry?  I always thought that fulfilling the Great Commission was at the heart of what a Christian should be about?  I’ve always thought that people knowing God and loving Him would answer the problem of man.  Is that not what the Bible teaches?  But, according to the ABP, the heart of Christian ministry should be something else.  Now, please, dont come in here telling me that I dont believe in helping the sick and the poor.  Of course, Christian compassion should lead us to help people in need, and we’re commanded to do that in the Bible.  But, is this the “heart” of Christian ministry?  Is this the core of what we should be about?  Look at this article:   http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5410/9/    Also, notice that it’s a woman that’s “preaching” it!  lol.  And again, this is where the SBC was going before the CR. 

Also, the ABP has shown how the liberal/moderate crowd of  the former SBC’ers disregard the clear teachings of the Scripture concerning homosexuality.  Look at this: http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3469&Itemid=9   and this one:  http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5001/9/  And then, look at this one:   http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5281/53/  This is where the SBC would be today had not the CR taken place.  This is the way we were going before the CR. 

Folks, we need to thank the Lord that the leaders of the CR had the courage and the faith to lead our SBC back to the Bible.  We need to thank God most of all for doing this great work in the SBC.  God has blessed us in the SBC in great ways.  God is using the SBC in tremendous ways to carry out His work on this Earth.  And, we need to realize that being a people of the BOOK is the reason that God uses us and blesses us so greatly.  The fact that we preach the Gospel and teach His Word is why He continues to choose to bless us and use us.  And, if we ever drift away from a true faith….based on the Bible….then we’ll go the way of the other denominations and churches that left the faith.  You dont have to look far to see how dead and dying these churches and denominations are.

So, when the research tells us that 91% of non-Christians see evangelicals as anti-homosexual, what are we supposed to do?  Quit saying that homosexuality is a sin?   Because, I’ll guarantee you that no matter how nice you try to say it, and no matter how many times you say that you love the homosexual person; whenever you say that the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin, people are gonna accuse us of being anti-homosexual.   I’ve seen this first hand on more than one occasion.  The lost crowd just does not want to hear that it’s sin against God; plain and simple.

And, when 87% of the lost crowd sees evangelical Christians as judgmental, are we supposed to stop calling sin what it is…”sin?”  Because, listen, the lost, rebellious crowd will say this just because we call sin by it’s ugly name.  That’s just how a lost person is, when they’re living in those sins. They don’t like for their sin to be brought to light.  And, once again, no matter how nice and loving you try to be, once you name a sin as a sin, especially one that a person is living in; then you’re labeled as judgmental.  Go on a talk show, and as nice and as lovingly kind as you can possibly say it; say that any sex outside of the marriage boundary is a sin against God.  See how the crowd responds.   It wont be pretty.

Okay, the next thing on the research list is  that famous old, worn out line that a lot of lost people like to use about evangelical Chrisitans.  85% of the lost crowd sees us as hypocritical.  So, what’s new here?  I’ll bet this has been said ever since Noah first lifted a hammer and told people to get right with God, because it was gonna rain.  Christians have faults and shortcomings.  Every Christian sins; every last one of us.  We all fail to be all that God wants us to be.  So, everytime a Christian fails God, the lost crowd is waiting to pounce on it like  a coyote after a fat, plump bunny rabbit.  I think it makes them feel better about their own sins, when they can call Christians “hypocrites.”  I think it eases their consciences just a little bit to point out the failures of a Believer.  It gives them a good excuse to stay lost.  And, you know what, lost people just dont understand grace.  Again, what do we do with this info?  I mean, we cant stop sinning.  We’re gonna sin.  We’re gonna fail God.  So, what good is it to know this info?  How does this help us?  What in the world can we do with it?

Now, I’m not gonna go over every single research item that was listed in the Spring 2010 On Mission magazine by NAMB.  But, here are the other topics: Non-Christians see evangelicals as Old Fashioned 78%; Too involved in Politics 75%; Out of Touch with Reality 72%; Insensitive to Others  70%; Boring 68%; Not Accepting of Others Faiths  64%; Confusing 61%.   Well, some of these things we can work on.  The old fashioned thing can be remedied, and it is being remedied by many, many Churches with contemporary music, technology, and dressing more cool and hip at Church.  The “Too involved in Politics” thing is something that we’ll always be accused of, if we ever take a political stand for moral reasons.  I do agree that some Pastors are too involved in politics.  But, I’m glad that some Christians feel led to get into politics, in order to do good.   And, any political stand that we take will be seen as too much for a lot of the lost crowd out there

Now, I’d imagine that evangelical Christians will always be looked upon as being out of touch with reality by the lost crowd.  After all, we look thru the lens of faith at the world, and the lost crowd doesn’t.  We can work on being more sensitive to others, but I doubt that us being more sensitive to others will ever be good enough for the lost crowd.  The boring thing….well, I was bored with worship and Bible study and prayer, too, back when I was lost and living in sin.  It didn’t do anything for me, as a lost person.  I doubt that there was anything that could’ve been done to make it less boring for me, as long as I was lost and living in sin.  Then, the “Not Accepting of Other’s Faiths” thing…well, this is just how it’s always gonna be.  How could it ever be seen as any different?  I mean, as Christians, who believe the Bible, Muslims are lost and wrong, and they worship a false god.  Buddhists are lost, and they will not go to Heaven.  Jews are not going to Heaven when they die, unless they put their faith in Jesus as their Messiah.  Mormons are involved in a cult, and they definitely worship a false god.  So, how in the world could we ever change this perspective, and still be true to God and to His Word?  The Bible is exclusive.  God is exclusive.  All dogs don’t go to Heaven.

You know what I think?  I think that the lost, rebellious crowd is always gonna view us, Christ Followers, as a strange and peculiar people, no matter what we do.  I think that the lost crowd is gonna look upon us in a bad light, no matter what.  I think that the lost crowd is not gonna be accepting of our beliefs, nor change their view of us, unless we’re willing to compromise our faith.  They will look upon us in a bad way, unless we’re willing stop living for the Lord.  I knew this before this study was ever done, and we all knew this before NAMB chose to put it in their magazine.  I mean, I didn’t expect to win any popularity contest in the arena of the world, as a Believer.  Who does?  Anyone?  The simple fact is that the lost crowd does not like us due to our walk with God; due to our being a follower of Jesus; due to us calling sin what it is; due to us preaching the Gospel….exhorting them to repent and put their faith in Jesus. 

I’m not really sure why NAMB put this in their magazine, nor what we’re supposed to do with this study; but I’m sure that there’ll be some wimpy Christians out there that this will really disturb.  There will be some namby, pamby Christians out there, who’ll be really upset that the lost crowd doesn’t like us.  And, they’ll want to make every change possible to “get the lost crowd to like us.”  Why?  Why are there some Believers out there, who think like this?  Who think that we have to please the worldly crowd? Who think that we have to be acceptable to the lost bunch?  Who honestly think that somehow we can “make the lost people out there like us and accept us?”  Who think this study  is even important to know? 

Are we gonna stop preaching against the sins of adultery and fornication and lying?  Are we gonna start preaching that “all dogs go to Heaven?”  Do we need to start telling homosexuals that “you’re ok, and I’m ok?”  Are we gonna start having scantily clothed dancing girls in our church, so that the men will not be bored?  And,  sign up men from the church to be in our newly formed, worship leaders group the “Holy Chippendales,” so that the ladies will be more excited about coming to church?  Do we need to start advertising that pre-worship cocktails will be available in the lobby?  Maybe that’ll make the lost crowd feel better about us? or, at least,  less bored with our worship? 

I dont think so.  I think that what we really need is  for Christians to be more like the Believers in the book of Acts, and turn our world upside down.  I really think that we need to trust the power of the Holy Spirit to call people to salvation.  I really think that we need to preach the Gospel, stand on the truth of God’s Word, and leave the results to God.  I really think that we should tweak how we do worship without violating Scripture; be creative in our outreach without getting stupid or crazy; and be open to making sensible changes that might open doors for us to able to reach lost people, without compromising our faith.  Now, please know that I was not saying that NAMB, nor Barna, was saying anything about compromising, nor even hinting at compromising.  I’m really not sure why they felt that this study was important.  Maybe they just did it, and printed it merely for information’s sake, or out of curiousity, or to tell us what we all should already be aware of? I don’t know.  But, I can just see the wheels turning in some “Evangelical Christians” minds about this info.  They might start thinking of all the things that we need to do to be more acceptable to the lost crowd.  I can just hear their thoughts about the shame it is that the lost crowd would think this of us, and how we need to change this perception. 

Again, I ask how?  And, will anything really change their perception of us?  Do we honestly think that the lost crowd will ever view us in a truly positive light?  I mean, if we really live for God, and preach the Gospel?

UPDATE:  Franklin Graham was cancelled from speaking at the Pentagon for some remarks he made about Islam.  Franklin Graham spoke the truth about Islam, and he was censored.  Anyone surprised?  Some of the people, who think that lost people will love us are probably a little shocked.

Before I articulate my thesis I want our readers to understand a couple of things.  First, I am not against doing social ministry.  I believe that every church must involve herself in reaching out to community projects and other secular ministries in order to help meet the needs of the poor.  Second, I do not discount the power of meeting the needs of someone that is in need of help.  It certainly opens a door that otherwise would not be opened.  Third, I am by no means insinuating that the ministries mentioned below are pushing for a Social Gospel.  With that said, allow me to reveal my concern that we may be heading down a road in a return to a Social Gospel movement within the SBC.

Some leading SBC Churches

I am limiting these brief examples to two churches in North Carolina.  Let me first say that I applaud these churches in what they are doing.  I also want to applaud their evangelistic efforts.  Elevation Church is only four years old and Pastor Steven Furtick is doing an outstanding job.  According to the Elevation website they began with 121 people in 2006 and have seen over 6200 people make decisions to follow Christ.  Of those 6200 they have seen 1930 baptisms which translates into approximately 500 people per yer.   Also, Summit Church in Durham is doing a remarkable job with evangelism.  While their baptism rates are not at the 500 yearly mark they are averaging around 100 baptisms per year.  Elevation does not publish an Annual Church Profile (ACP) and Summit does.  Thus, the numbers on Summit are straight from their ACP while Elevation numbers are what is posted on the website today.  It does raise the question if the 6200 professions of faith are those who are members of the church.  If they are church members, then does the church claim that a person joining Elevation is “making a profession of faith”?   However, what I want to point our reader’s to is the projects these churches have going on.

Elevation Church recently did a “Love Week” centered around Valentine’s Day.  It is during this week that volunteers from the church volunteer their time in the community through a community project.  These projects usually are located around homeless shelters, clothes closets, and food distribution points.  Summit’s Church in Durham has been involved in doing ministry outreach in their community through a project called Hope for RDU.  Summit is doing a great job in helping to meet various societal needs in the RDU area.  One particular project is Spring Saunter where they are raising money to build a Habitat for Humanity house.  It should be noted that Summit has been recognized by the Durham Public School system for their involvement in their public schools. It should also be noted that Summit’s Pastor, Dr. JD Greear, was the keynote speaker at the 2010 Martin Luther King Jr. ecumenical gathering. I commend Dr. Greear on his presentation of the Gospel at such a gathering.  Notice what he said;

the center of…Christianity… is a man on the cross loving people who don’t love Him, pouring His life out for people who aren’t even interested in Him.

You can read the full manuscript here

Are these two isolated examples what I am basing the question of a movement toward the Social Gospel in the SBC?  While these two examples are relevant to my concerns, in and of themselves they do not reveal any kind of real concern.  However, when one looks across the convention what does one see?  There are many churches doing exactly what you see these two churches doing but without the evangelistic results in a personal evangelism of sharing the gospel.  Many churches, who were once hot for evangelism, are now attributing their growth to nothing more than having community events and making certain the church is presented as any other non-profit organization concerned with doing good.  Many secularist see this and acknowledge that one can “give back” to the community and also get a tax deduction on their gifts. Thus, they join the church with a desire to invest in some social ministries.  Then as the church promotes projects they have to promote it in a way of how they will help provide food and other basic necessities.

Let’s look at a recent blog that reports Dr. Cecil Sherman’s presentation of the history of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and it ties this together.  The nicest Moderate I have ever met,  Dr. Tony Cartledge, used to be Editor of our Baptist state paper here in NC and is now Professor of Old Testament at Campbell University.  In a recent blog article, about the sixteen year celebration of Cooperative Baptist Fellowship of North Carolina, Dr. Cartledege wrote;

Although some early participants wanted CBF to focus on single issues, Sherman said, its early and continuing focus has been to provide a “missions delivery system for the churches” that defined missions as more than evangelism and church starts, to support Baptist theological education, and “to teach Baptist polity to people who have forgotten it or never knew it.”

Notice that missions is defined as more than evangelism and church starts.  Please understand that I agree with that statement.  However, I have found out that in 20 years of ministry if one does not keep evangelism and church starts at the forefront of the people then evangelism and church starts will be an after thought of the people.  What seems to be the norm across the convention is to be more receptive to things we usually would not have even tolerated.  Why do I say this?  We have the elected President of a state convention nominating a Pastor that does internet baptisms by proxy, has a woman on staff he references as “Pastor”, and calls himself the “Naked Preacher”.  What is truly amazing is the ones that taught me these type of antics were not tolerable, who are now in leadership positions,  have become mute.

One other incident took place in a conference I was in attendance.  A question of how the church he served did outreach was asked of a leading pastor and his response was; ‘I do not teach my people to go door-to-door because that is outdated.  I teach them to take the gospel as they go to work and in their daily lives.’  Do not get me wrong, I am not against this type of teaching.  However, the pastor seemed to separate the difference in teaching to fish and fishing.  How does one effectively share the Gospel if one is not taught to share the Gospel?  This pastor seemed to indicate that it was taught by osmosis and his people were just heading out sharing the Gospel.  On the other hand, this pastor stood and told story after story of how the church was raising money to give to world hunger, and volunteering at the local community clothes closet.

I say all of this to remind all of us, the Gospel needs to be presented at some point in time.  However, if the road heading out of Baptist Zion is a road of the Social Gospel, then the SBC will never experience a Great Commission Resurgence.

Maybe you haven’t seen this video of a young man making this poetic “speech” about being sorry for being a Christian.  He even uses the F word a couple of times in his “poem.”  It makes you wonder why he felt the need to use the F word in a poem, where he was going after Christians and others for all the ills of Christendom that he sees.  You can see his “poem” on this site  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EieFdXy_HwM on youtube.  I warn you now that he has a potty mouth, and he uses the F word.  But, he recites this “poem” to the jeers of the crowd.  They’re especially happy, and you can hear the laughter, when he apologizes right off the bat for being a Christian.

Well, I’m not sorry for being a Christian.  I’m not sorry for calling sin what it is…sin.  I’m not sorry for saying that sin will be judged by God.  Why am I not sorry?  Because a lost man’s sins will be judged by God.  And, the lost crowd needs to hear that.  How can a lost man be saved, until he sees his need of a Savior?  He cant.  So, why would I apologize for calling sin what it is, and for telling people that God is not happy with our sins?  I know that some lost people will call that intolerance, and they’ll think it’s mean and narrow; but it’s the truth.  The truth shall set you free.

Also, I’m sad about the loss of life at the hands of the Crusaders and the Catholic Church.  But, why should I apologize for the Crusades that happened hundreds of years ago.  I wasnt there.  I didn’t do it.  So, why should I apologize for something that happened hundreds of years ago.  Why, it wasn’t even my Church that did this thing.  It wasn’t a Southern Baptist Church.  It wasn’t any Churches that came out of the Reformation.  So, why should I, a 48 year old Believer, apologize  for something that some misguided people did a long time ago?  Why would any Christian feel the need to bring this up and apologize for it?  Why would this make anyone be sorry that they’re a Christian.  I’m not sorry that I’m a Christ Follower, just because of what some knights did back in the dark ages.

BTW, while we should love gay people, I’m certainly not sorry for calling homosexuality what it is.  It is sin.  It is sin that God will judge.  Now,  I know that God will also judge the adulterers and the liars and the thieves and all other sinners.  But, this young man seems to be saying that he’s sorry for calling homosexuality a sin.  Well, young man, it is a sin.  And, those people, who die in this sin, will go to Hell.  They need to be saved, and I do pray that they’ll be saved and go to Heaven.  I love gay people.  I do not hate gay people.  I wish that everyone of them would get saved today.  I certainly hope that I get to spend eternity with all the gay people in this world, because they repented and put their faith in Jesus.  I really do.  But, should I apologize for calling homosexual sex what it is?  A sin.  Never.

Also, I hate that there are homeless people, and I really hate that some men beat their wives.  I wish every homeless person had a home, and I wish that every wife beater would have to spend 30 minutes with CB Scott in a locked room by themselves.  But, you know what?  There will always be homeless people. Jesus said that the poor will always be here. And, some people are homeless because of the bad choices they’ve made in life, and people will continue to make bad choices, and do things like drink alcohol, use drugs, gamble, etc.  And, these choices will cause them and their family to suffer financially, and in many other ways.  Why should I, as a Christ Follower, apologize for the homeless?  I didn’t make them that way, nor can we give them all a home.  Some of them dont even want a home!  Also, why should I apologize and be sorry that I’m a Christian, because of what some drunken, mean man did to his wife?  Christians didn’t make this man into a wife beater.  Christians cant stop men from being wife beaters.  There will always be mean, ornery men out there, who will beat women and children.  That’s just a sad fact of life, and a result of the fall of man.  So, why would this make me be sorry for being a Christian?  I don’t get it.

Also, what Indian tribe was wiped out in the name of the Church?  I thought it was done, because white men wanted the land.  Some of it was done, because white men thought that gold was on the land that the Indians claimed belonged to them.  Why bring the Church into this?  Was General Custer a Christian attacking Indian tribes for some Church?  I mean, really; is some school out there teaching young people that the Church wiped out Indian tribes in America?

As I listened to this video, I was also left wondering if all Christendom should be blamed for the child abuse that has happened in  some Churches?  I was left wondering if preaching the Gospel was something that a Christian should apologize for?  And, did Christians bring in the plague?  Really?  And, maybe he doesn’t know about all the 15 year old girls and others that have been helped by all of the Christian pregnancy centers and Christian counselors that have helped women deal with the awful affects of abortion? Another thing, did Christians start wars between the nations?  Did Christians start WW I; WW II; or the Gulf War?  I don’t recall Dr. R. G. Lee declaring war on Germany.  I don’t recall Dr. A. T. Robertson declaring war on Japan.  Do yall?  What’s this guy talking about in this poem?  Why would anyone say that this poem is something that needed to be heard by all Christ Followers?  What’s the point of this young man’s poem?

This poem reminds me of my college days, where we had some flaky people floating around, who were anti-Church.  You know the types.  They don’t belong to a Church.  They don’t like to commit to anything.  They’d rather show up at a college, Bible study group every now and then; but they don’t get into commitment.  They’re unsound in their doctrine, and they really don’t like for anyone to help them understand the Bible better.  They’d rather complain and whine about all the bad things that they see in their minds about the Church.  Every thing is looked at thru negative glasses concerning the Church and sound doctrine.  I saw many young people on my college campus, back in my college days, who were just flaky and out there, in deep center field, on the fringe, who just saw everything negatively.  Everything was bad, and they were the ones, who could fix it, of course.

Well, I’m glad to be a Christian.  When I look at how most of the hospitals and orphanages in our world were started by Christians, I rejoice.  When I look at all the institutions of higher learning that Christians started, I rejoice.  When I look at all the people who’ve been helped by Churches and Pastors and Christian counselors, then I rejoice.  When I look at all the millions of people, who’ve been saved thru the years, by the witness of Christians and missionaries, I rejoice.  When I look at all the people, who have been ministered to by the prayers of faithful Christian people, I rejoice.  When I look at all the marriages that have been not only helped, but saved, due to the grace of God coming thru a Pastor’s sermons and counsel and prayers and encouragement, then I rejoice that I’m a Christian.  When I look at the people, who were at the brink of suicide, but some Christian helped them find hope in the Lord Jesus, then I rejoice.  When I think of the disaster relief teams that go out in the name of Jesus from SB Churches, and they help people in incredible, heartbreaking disasters, then I rejoice.  When I think about all the people that have been fed, their electric bills paid, their water bills paid, clothes bought, etc. ; paid  by Churches all over the USA and the world, then I rejoice.  And, I’m talking about every week, SB Churches in little towns and big cities all across this land, helping people keep the lights and the heat on; feeding children, etc.; then I rejoice.

I’m not sorry for being a Christian.  I’m thrilled to be a Christ Follower.  I’m excited about being a child of God.  I’m ecstatic about what God is doing thru the Church.  I’m delighted that God uses Christians to do so much good in our world.  Sorry?  Apologize?  Why?  Why should we apologize for being a Christian?  Aren’t you glad to be Christian?

Listen to the podcast by using the player below, or subscribe in iTunes by clicking the image in this post or the link in the sidebar. We’d love to hear your ideas on how we can improve the podcast, and we’d also appreciate a review or a rating on our iTunes page. Thanks for listening.

Links to some of the items discussed:

• A Reply to Tom Nettles’ Review of William A. Dembski’s The End of Christianity: Finding a Good God in an Evil World
• Les Puryear’s original “storehouse tithing” post

Seriously, his words are what penetrated my heart as I was not able to involve myself in something like this during this summer.  But his emotions are what every short term mission worker experiences and what I also experience when I find myself with an open door to share a witness for Christ.

Just click play on the video below and take about 6 minutes to hear the honest emotions of a person doing something that fear keeps many of us from doing.

In the resurrection chapter of 1 Corinthians 15, Paul says much about evangelism. He says he declares to the Corinthians the gospel, which he preached to them previously (v.1). He said they could rest assured of their salvation if they held fast to the word he preached to them (v.2). He delivered to them first what he had received, namely Christ’s death, burial, resurrection, and appearances (v.3—4). He remarks that though he was least among the apostles, he preached and the Corinthians believed (v.11). He imagines Christians declaring the risen Christ (v.12). In fact, this is a point of contention in favor of Christ’s resurrection. Paul reasons that if Christ did not rise from the dead, he preached in vain (v.14) and was guilty of false witness against God because he had testified to Christ’s resurrection (v.15). To the Corinthians’ shame he chastises them that they had failed to introduce others to God (v.34). He tells them of the mystery of the resurrection of believers (v.51). Paul anticipates that believers in the resurrection would prioritize evangelism. Believers manifest their faith in the resurrection by working at evangelism.

Paul’s frequent references to evangelism as a primary Christian work helps readers understand the meaning of 1 Corinthians 15:58: “Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord.” The work Paul speaks of in this verse consists of evangelism. In that work believers should “be steadfast, immovable”, and “always abounding.” A little evangelism here and there on infrequent occasions does not match the expectations of the apostle. He even expected the chaotic Corinthians to always abound in evangelism. The urgent need of the hour is steadfast, immovable, and always abounding evangelism.

Southern Baptists have several champions who have modeled this for the churches. One of those champions was George W. Truett, pastor of First Baptist Church Dallas, and oftentimes chairman of the Board of Trustees of Southwestern Seminary. In his biography of George Truett, Powhatan James wrote of Truett’s commitment to evangelism. He took pains to describe the extent to which Truett had yielded his life to Jesus Christ and how this surrender manifested itself in evangelism. Many have attested to Truett’s unreserved surrender to Jesus Christ and Christ’s dominance of this great man. James reveals that Christ’s dominance over Truett surfaced at many points, but one of the most unusual episodes of Truett’s surrender occurred when Truett lay sick in a hospital bed in Dallas. Truett was preaching an area wide revival in Longview, Texas when influenza made it impossible for him to continue the meetings. An ambulance rushed him to a Dallas hospital where he spent a month under a doctor’s care, followed by a month of rehabilitation at his favorite resort in Mineral Wells, Texas.

During his stay in the hospital, something unusual happened, and Truett became delirious. Of course, when people become delirious they are likely to say almost anything, and, sadly, the things spew forth are things they would never say when lucid. Truett suffered in this condition. Fever, and perhaps medication, confused and demented his mind. Mrs. Truett stayed by his beside during these times, and she wrote to James of what she experienced at his side during these times of delirium. She wrote,

My task has not been an easy one these past two months. It is very sweet to me, and a source of comfort to him, to learn that all through his unconsciousness and delirium from fever or medication, his subconscious mind was just as clean and Christian as his daily life has always been. As you know, I did not leave his bedside for the four weeks of his hospitalization, nor [sic] the weeks since. In his delirium, he was quoting scripture, preaching, and calling men to Christ or praying for them. I feel that his illness was a great revelation of the real man.*

The debilitating illnesses could not debilitate Truett’s witness for Christ. Difficulties could not debilitate Paul’s witness for Christ either. Nothing should debilitate our witness for Christ. Believers in the resurrection can fashion a personal practice of evangelism that resembles the resurrection. That is, as the resurrection is steadfast, immovable, and always abounding towards the world, so our personal evangelism can be steadfast, immovable, and always abound. To accomplish this, witnesses can pray every day for a list of lost people, preferably fifteen. They can make a new friend every day. They can witness every day using scheduled evangelism (visitation), spontaneous evangelism (“As you go” Matt 10:7), and social evangelism (making friends for Christ). They can invite someone to church every day. Research indicates that 82% of the unchurched are “somewhat likely” to accept an invitation. By mastering simple efforts in personal evangelism—and if pastors do not master personal evangelism, no one else will—they can live in a manner reminiscent of the resurrection.

_________________________

*Powhatan W. James, George Truett: A Biography (Nashville: Broadman, 1939), 275-76.

This is part of an article originally published January 1922 in the Southwestern Journal of Theology by Dr. L. R. Scarborough entitled, “Poisoning the Fountains of Truth.” It was republished in the most recent Southwestern Journal of Theology, “Baptists and Unity.” May a voice of our past speak to us today. Below is part one of a four part series reprinting Dr. Scarborough’s essay:

Poisoning the Fountains of Truth

Christ’s churches are the most important institutions in the world. He gave them a definite form of government, a specific character of membership, set up in them the two ordinances, gave to them the great body of the truth found in the New testament, set for them their officers, and committed to them the great task of winning the world to Him and building His great Kingdom. He says through His inspired apostles in 1 Timothy 3:15 that this organization which He set up and called His church is “the pillar and ground of the truth.” He says this church was purchased by His blood; and in His spiritual economy He calls this institution His Bride. All this and many other things in the New testament indicate that these spiritual organizations set up by Christ and established in many places by the apostles and which have for their successors these New testament churches of today are the most important institutions in all the world. These churches are to keep, guard, and promote the ordinances. They are to propagate the gospel. They are to win souls. They are both the preservers and the heralds of the gospel truth. They are to establish Christ’s Kingdom and to make Christ King in all the world. From any angle you look at these churches their importance is magnified.

All the institutions established by the co-operation of these New Testament churches—such as mission boards, benevolent institutions, orphanages, hospitals, schools, and so on—are of great importance; but of far greater importance are the churches back of these institutions. It is exceedingly bad when in any of these institutions promoted by Christ’s churches there is false teaching; but far worse is it for false teachings to be carried on in the churches which are “the pillar and ground of the truth.”

These churches are the very fountains of the life of the Kingdom of Christ. In Elisha’s day, as recorded in 2 Kings 2:19–22, there is an incident described where the spring of waters which furnished the water to the city for its inhabitants to drink and for the irrigation of its gardens, orchards and farms was poisoned; and these waters had to be healed by the miraculous power of God through Elisha’s word. The life of the people was endangered and the trees of the orchard cast their fruit because of the poison in the waters. Just as poisoned waters will destroy the life of a city, so will the poison in the fountains of truth in our churches cause spiritual death and dearth and drouth to the life of the people. If we poison the spiritual waters that flow from our churches into the lives of the people, we cause death to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ.

Since the churches through their teaching service are commissioned to teach the “all things” commanded by Jesus Christ, and since this instruction goes Sunday by Sunday and week by week into the lives of the young, how very important it is that these fountains of life be kept pure from the poison of erroneous and false doctrine. It is far easier for us to correct false teaching in our schools, because the schools are under the control of our conventions, than it is to correct false teachings in our churches, because the churches are independent and sovereign and you cannot reach the false teachers, even though they be the pastors of the churches, except through the members of the churches themselves. This gives great emphasis to the importance of the right training for our young preachers who are to be pastors of our churches.

Reprinted with permission, Southwestern Journal of Theology

That said – I think the Stuart Smalley (apologies for the Al Franken, the former SNL now Senator reference) attempts of the church at large to formulate an image that communicates “doggone I want people to like me” fall somewhat short of a biblical mandate. I understand the need to be personally winsome in the way SBC president Johnny Hunt aptly exhibits the attributes of Colossians 4:5-6 in his wisdom toward outsiders and his speech being seasoned with grace. If this suggestion is the essence of what others mean by unbelievers liking what they see – all aboard that gospel train. I also understand the necessity of the Great Commandment in loving loud – the church too long has been unfairly caricatured as irrelevant and reactionary. A hallmark of a disciple is love for the Savior and love for humanity. It’s what leads believers to a gospel attempt to eradicate AIDS in Africa and send huge compassion teams in the form of disaster relief every time a crisis emerges.

My personal dissonance erupts when I contemplate the unintended consequences that spring forth when our modus operandi is for “unbelievers to like what they see.” 2 Timothy 3:12 says in ancient-future commentary, “And indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.” Men and women like William Tyndale, Balthasar and Elizabeth Hubmaier, Dietrich Bonheoffer, and a host of unnamed saints “slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained” demonstrate Tertullian’s claim that the “blood of martyrs is the seed of the church.” Much of the common refrain I hear today is that unbelievers like Jesus but they don’t like the church. The list of books that sound this trumpet are legion. It seems that the placebo offered up ad infinitum by those who shack up with this kind of theology is the inauthentic witness of the church of today. The prescription that is usually offered for what ails the church is to take a dose of cultural relevance and call me when you are finally hip and with it. We can be so relevant to culture we are irrelevant to God.

This is probably a greater divide in the Baptist continuum than any Calvinist-Arminian split – how and why we relate to culture with the gospel. Recent tomes have critiqued and dissected H. Richard Niebuhr’s classic, Christ and Culture, (See D.A. Carson’s Christ and Culture Revisited and Craig Carter’s Rethinking Christ and Culture). Carson’s full-orbed Reformed response to Niebuhr’s classic take deserves a long look. He structures his thoughts along the key stages of biblical theology and serves notice that in certain situations each of Niebuhr’s models (perhaps dismissing the Christ of culture scheme) may hold some value if rooted in Scriptural authority. Carson argues against a false reductionism that boils any scheme down to only one model. Such is a needed corrective. It’s easy to paint a picture that separates evangelism and biblical theology, something Thom Rainer recently warned against.

Here’s why my heart does flip-flops when I hear the phrase, “if unbelievers like what they see, they’ll listen to what we say.” Unbelievers according to Romans 1 suppress the truth in unrighteousness. They are futile in their speculations and darkened in their foolish hearts. Men love darkness rather than the light because of their evil deeds. The light that illuminates the darkness is the Light of the World. Any attempt to transform culture needs to understand that to emulate and imitate the Light of the World necessitates a call and vocation to bear the image of God. Such an image as modeled by Jesus Christ is lived in the form of a cross. James Smith aptly says,

And Christ, as the Second Adam, has shown us what it looks like to do this: in a fallen and broken world, the shape of such a vocation is cruciform; being cultural agents of the crucified God is not a project of triumphal transformation, but suffering witness.

Does this not suggest that even I, as an unbeliever, did not like what I saw? No matter how winsome the witness without the convicting power of God’s gospel and the Holy Spirit there is no transformation. I understand the passionate motive that calls for people to like what they see – the desire is to see lost souls come to know Jesus Christ. I’m not advocating a “bury your head in the sand” approach that does not even attempt to understand the environment in which you operate. Where I think Scripture draws the line is when we cross over and participate in the agenda of the world to win the world. Somehow the church must walk the tightrope between the libertine concept that we must somehow domesticate the radical and biblical message of Jesus while pretending to be just like everyone else and the legalistic concept that suggests we cannot be in the world at all.

The unintended and often unexamined consequence of the end justifies the means approach to attracting unbelievers is that we are way too willing to hide biblical (and I contend Baptist) distinctives and the sharp edges of the whole counsel of God so that we do not alienate outsiders. What some offer instead is an entertainment and show business salesmanship instead of a group of radical Christ-followers. Will unbelievers like what they see when we challenge rather than coddle the culture in which we live? Will unbelievers like what they see when the church embodies a biblical ethic that is countercultural and unpopular to the masses? Will unbelievers like what they see when the church lifts its prophetic voice to uphold biblical righteousness?

This short offering does not begin to cover the nuances of how to implement or even inculcate such a model. The charges will run the gamut that this encourages Amish separatism or a recalcitrant fundamentalism that is incapable of any interaction to society. Others may suggest that incipient legalism is the real culprit behind any desire for a church that is a countercultural agent. It always amuses me that charges of legalism are often lofted toward those things I adapt and adopt that I want to defend. Yet such reductionistic arguments really beg the question. The big question remaining is how will the church take the gospel to an increasingly secular culture. This is a task we all agree is worth our eternal efforts. I’m just suggesting (not so subtly) that perhaps what we need is not for the unbeliever to like what they see but to value the fact that we believe what they see. Perhaps the day will soon come when people might say I’m not so sure about the message of Jesus Christ (it seems offensive) but I really love the church. They not only believe the message – they live and love out loud.

We’re honored to present to our readers this essay by Dr. David Mills. Dr. Mills serves as Assistant Dean for Applied Ministries and Assistant Professor of Evangelism in the Roy J. Fish School of Evangelism and Missions at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. He holds an undergraduate degree from East Texas Baptist University, and graduate degrees from both Southwestern and Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminaries. Dr. Mills has pastored churches in North and South Carolina and Alabama, and has served several churches in interim pastorates, and has served the Georgia Baptist Convention as an evangelism consultant. He is the author of numerous scholarly articles. A native Texan, Dr. Mills and his wife Michelle make their home in Crowley, Texas, and have four children ranging in age from 2 to 14.

Jon Meacham’s Newsweek article “End of Christian America” has aroused considerable attention in the days surrounding Holy Week. Meacham reports on the 2009 American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS). He reveals that this study found that the number of self-identified Christians in America has declined by ten percentage points (86% down to 76%) since 1990. The number of non-religious persons has increased and expanded from the traditionally irreligious Northwest to the Northeast. He suspects that this may translate into less cultural and political influence for Christians.

In this article, I propose to offer questions about these notions and to recommend a perspective that I hope will enable serious Christians to navigate these new realities. Specifically, I propose to address what this means for evangelism in the present American culture.

When the Sky Falls into Place

That 76% of Americans identify themselves as Christians offers some opportunities to witnessing Christians and poses some challenges. Let us begin with the opportunities, and exploration of the opportunities will involve my annoying habit of mixing metaphors.

The Falling Sky is Common Ground

I have tracked similar surveys for several years. Most of them reveal that 78%-83% of Americans claim some Christian identity. The ARIS survey is within the range of other surveys. If form holds true, this number will be up in 2010, down in 2011, up in 2012, and down in 2013. While this may make some readers feel like a termite in a yo-yo, it heartens me to know that when I witness three out of four times I will speak with someone who agrees with me to some degree about important theological matters. We have known for some time that many Americans hold (to one degree or another) conservative views on many theological issues, leaving Europe aghast. Recent surveys  reveal that 75% of Americans believe the Bible is the literal or inspired word of God, 75% of Americans believe the virgin birth, and at least 52% (perhaps as high as 62%) of Americans believe the biblical account of creation. This common ground prepares the way for an evangelistic witness, and the Holy Spirit deserves all the glory for doing His work in such an effective manner.

The Falling Sky is a Rising Tide

Additionally, the ARIS numbers may guide us in our pursuit of spiritual awakening. Authors on the history and theology of spiritual awakening have written much about spiritual decline and low spiritual temperatures, and what they have said applies to the American nation as a whole. On the pages of their works, they escort the reader to the beach. Standing on its shores, they insist that when the tide is the farthest out it begins to return to shore. It is when the day appears the darkest that the redeemed cry out for mercy and relief, and God rises to answer them from on high. (Every Christian who is serious about spiritual awakening needs to find a copy of Alvin Reid’s and Malcolm McDow’s Firefall, David Bryant’s The Hope at Hand, and/or Bob Ecklund’s Spiritual Awakening. These works make this point far better than I can).

The Falling Sky Is a Tender Conscience

Further, the 76% of Americans who identify themselves as Christian offers a modest hope for the advance of a Christian view of culture. A few years ago, demographers found and the Wall Street Journal reported that Roe v. Wade molds the current electorate. They found that liberal voters were less likely to have large families and more likely to abort their unborn children than other Americans. In addition, they found that conservative, southern, and Christian voters were more likely to have large families and less likely to abort their children. They calculated that if abortion on demand were not legal, Al Gore would have won the 2000 election by 54% and John Kerry by a similar margin in 2004. Because abortion on demand is legal, the electorate voted conservative in 2000, 2002, and 2004. Since 1973, many liberals have aborted many of those who could sustain their movement. Demographers have teased out these implications to A.D. 2020 and argued that if these demographic changes continue, the nation will affirm social conservatism in greater numbers. In fact, they argue that even California will be voting 54% conservative on the social issues.

Stop laughing.

In 2008, Californians voted in favor of Proposition 8 (marriage defined as between a man and a woman) by 52%.

I oppose identifying the Christian faith with a single political party, and I oppose government advancing the views of a favored denomination. My point here has nothing to do with voting patterns, but has everything to do with the relationship between growth in social conservatism and evangelism. While political parties are never co-terminus with God’s Kingdom, witnesses should reflect upon the connection between conscience and conversion. If this demographic scenario is accurate, what does this mean for evangelism? How could a socially conservative populace converge with Great Commission interests? It may converge at several places, but the timeliest is this-often when a person’s conscience possesses strong moral convictions, he senses his guilt quicker than an amoral person does. Stricken with guilt, the person will more likely acknowledge a need for Christ.

Working with an amoral person poses greater challenges to evangelism. The amoral, however, must still live with their consciences. Witnesses who have dealt with the amoral suffering with a guilty conscience are well aware of how they deal with guilt-they smear those who remind them of it. They manipulate conversations, images, and often the media. This makes evangelizing such persons a serious challenge.

If a socially conservative nation uses the democratic process to outlaw other sins (abortion, gay marriage, pornography, etc.), it can inadvertently keep a nation’s conscience tender towards God without breaching the wall of separation between church and state. This can aid evangelism, for a nation that affirms truth concerning life and morality is promised more truth (Matt 13:11-12). A growing social conservatism will not rescue evangelism from its present crises, but it may help.

The Falling Sky is an Open Highway

Finally, the ARIS numbers help me recall my conversion as a high school kid on the West Coast. I came to Christ through the ministry of a Southern Baptist church in the San Joaquin Valley of central California. In my little town there stood a standard Southern Baptist church filled with members who evangelized and invited lost friends to church. The pastor explained the gospel, holiness, and evangelism almost every Sunday. Soon after he arrived, I came to Jesus, and soon after, youth workers trained me to witness. I started witnessing immediately after my conversion, but their instruction directed me to much needed Bible verses. I recall that the church members witnessed so regularly that it took me eighteen months to learn that some Christians never witness. I could avoid the impression all Christians witnessed regularly; I heard laypersons in my church offer witnessing testimonies in Sunday school classes, Church Training groups, Prayer Meetings, and Sunday evening worship services. Under my pastor’s ministry, our little church grew each year. In my pastor’s first two years, our church baptized more than 60 each year, and averaged almost 40 each year for his remaining four years. In this atmosphere, I concluded that silence injures the Christian far more than witnessing.

It was in that irreligious West coast context that I became optimistic about evangelism. In my first year as a Christian, I saw more than a dozen of my irreligious friends turn to Christ. We shared the Roman’s Road plan of salvation, sprinkled it with John 3:16, John 14:6, and Ephesians 2:8-9, and watched our irreligious friends collapse into the saving embrace of the King who pursued them.

What impresses me today about those witnessing encounters is that the culture did not force me to drive through 10,000 miles of misguided religion to point friends to Christ. Other than the Catholics, few of my friends faced religious obstacles. As far back as high school, then, I concluded that the absence of any religion is far better for evangelism than the presence of deceptive religion. If an increasing number of Americans claim no religion, as ARIS asserts, then the ARIS numbers may anticipate better days for evangelism.

When the Falling Sky Collapses Like a Roof

While some positive opportunities arise with the ARIS figures, some challenges arise, too. These challenges can simultaneously advance evangelism and mold ministry.

Self-Delusion Falls

One challenge involves the authenticity of the faith of those who confess Christ. What serious Christian really believes that 76% of Americans genuinely follow Christ? Human vulnerability to self-delusion escapes many of our ability to describe. The Enemy is adroit at inspiring self-righteousness (“I do not need to be saved,” “God loves me and would never condemn me,” “My life is not that bad”). While some within this 76% genuinely follow Christ, others suppose they do only by their own flawed reckoning. A quick read of Matthew 7:13-28 alerts the reader to the fear that some person’s Christian identity extends only as far as their words. Their minimalistic view of following Christ falls far short of the New Testament. The genuine Christian displays the birth marks of which John wrote in 1 John (humility over sin, true faith in Jesus Christ alone, love for the brethren, consistent obedience to Christ’s commands, overcoming the world). That these marks surface in due time in all genuine believers has come as a surprise to many unbelievers who profess a Christian identity. Vance Havner complained about this, saying, “Most ‘Christians’ are so subnormal, that if one of them became normal, the rest would think he is abnormal.” What may appear as an odd thing to many self-identified Christians may evince, in fact, genuine saving faith.

The ARIS figures could have served us better had they probed the respondent’s confessions. Had the ARIS used 1 John as the standard by which to evaluate genuine saving faith, I suspect the findings would have startled the researchers. Had respondents measured themselves against the biblical standard, it would have surprised me if 15% of Americans met it. Baptists need to receive the ARIS numbers with theological and historical sobriety, and this should come as no surprise. Baptist’s spiritual legacy derives from those who preached to a deluded religious people (i.e. John the Baptist, Christ, Jerusalem Church, the Anabaptists).

Meacham’s article and the ARIS, then, should arouse Baptists to a new (but old) kind of evangelism. Many evangelism strategies provide helpful training, but not many instruct participants to witness to those with a false sense of security. Some address evangelism in a Roman Catholic context. This too is helpful, but what the contemporary context begs for is a training strategy that guides the witness in witnessing to deluded evangelicals/ Pentecostals/Baptists/Protestants/Unaffiliated. I address this issue early and often at the beginning of each semester with students at Southwestern. In a culture where 76% of Americans claim a Christian identity, they must know how to witness to unbelievers with a false sense of security. Paul’s words about the new creation in 2 Corinthians 5:17 have served this need well.

Incomplete “Gospels” Fall

The ARIS figures and Meacham’s article offer some hope for expanded opportunities for evangelism. The Holy Spirit has done a sufficient work in making unbelievers ready for our witness for Christ. As with most things evangelistic, the problem with evangelism then does not fall upon the world. Jesus said, “The harvest is truly plentiful” (Matt 9:37). Jesus did not hold pessimistic views of the harvest; He radiated a godly optimism about evangelism. The problem with evangelism in any age or culture has little to do with the world; most evangelism problems arise from nervous Nellies within the churches. While the harvest truly is plentiful, Jesus warned, “but the laborers are few.”

Many hindrances to evangelism arise from churches and their ministers, and although this article cannot address them all, one does deserve special attention here. If the ARIS numbers and Meacham are correct regarding the decline of self-identified Christians, some panicked ministerial soul will face the temptation to push back on pulpits and preachers, urging they become kinder and gentler (and some may need this counsel). They will hope that pastors and evangelists will “tell the world more of what we are for than what we are against.” Of course, if someone defines the terms appropriately, I might take this as sage counsel. Those who magnify Crucified Love, Redemptive Blessing, and Living Hope deserve my attention. Who among us has not quivered with delight at seeing the condemned express startled surprise at hearing of the Savior who satisfied the wrath of God? Escorting the guilty to Calvary is necessary in any age and in any culture. In truth, the blessings of the gospel are the only real positive truths this world really has.

To access the positive elements of the gospel, however, a person must use the key of humility. Without humility, there is no salvation. While we should cheer on those who preach grace, we should announce with considerable alarm that holiness bars all from it until they humble themselves before the God who opposes the proud.

Those who preach in this manner stand with the prophets. What the contemporary preacher should note here is that while the prophets denounced covenant Israel (Isaiah 1:1-31), they also addressed the sins of the unbelieving Gentile nations. Among these were Obadiah, Nahum (Nah. 1-3), Zephaniah (Zeph. 2-3), Isaiah (Isa. 13-21, 23-24, 34-37, 46-48), and Jeremiah (Jer. 46-51).

The prophets do not stand alone in including a negative tone in their ministry; they enjoy the company of Jesus Christ. While read this morning of Jesus promising words of comfort and life, I also read of His warnings. In fact, Jesus spoke often of God’s wrath, hell, judgment, and human sin. The Evangelists dedicate about a third of their Gospels to these negative subjects (Matthew 27%, Mark 37%, Luke 30%, and John 29%). I have yet to determine the percentage of the Gospel materials given to neutral and positive subjects, but this negative one-third provides abundant material to make use of in evangelism.

What is a preacher or witness to do then? Should he preach on grace? Should he preach on sin and wrath? Should he tell the world what God favors? Should he tell the world what God opposes? The answer to this question is the same answer I would offer if asked, “Does God love Texans or Oklahomans?” This may surprise a few, but the correct answer is, “Both.” Likewise, the preacher and witness must speak of grace and severity.

A word of caution is in order at this point. Christians must guard their reputations by letting their light shine before the world in service, humility, reverence, and godliness. It is naïve to suppose, however, that the world will endorse them. The world did not endorse Jesus, and a servant is not above his master. The Christian should not expect the world’s endorsement until (1) the Holy Spirit begins convicting the unbeliever, or (2) the Christian abandons the gospel (2 Tim. 3:12), a trade some have made to gain cultural approval. Therefore, they should announce both God’s severity and His mercy without any expectation of reward from the world.

Every Christian sermon should include a “John the Baptist element,” a “Calvary moment,” and a “Peter moment.” John the Baptist preached a frightening message of wrath, called for repentance, and thereby prepared Israel for salvation in Christ. Jesus came and propitiated the wrath of God at Calvary that Israel and the world might know grace. Peter preached these truths and invited hearers to respond immediately to Christ’s claims (Acts 2:14-40).

Each Christian sermon, then, must address sin to prepare hearers for salvation. Once hearers humble themselves, they can experience Calvary’s love, and what joy it is for the preacher to play matchmaker between the sinner and Calvary! “For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all” (Rom. 11:32, NASB). Once the preacher has established the reality of sin and the hope of redemption, he should find a simple and direct way to invite hearers to respond in repentance and faith.

Without this balanced pulpit ministry, preachers and churches will find it difficult to cultivate unbelievers for Christ. If preachers limit the ministry of the word to those matters viewed with favor, they may find it difficult to cultivate unbelievers for salvation. The negative elements of the gospel are necessary in preaching if the lost are to know the humility necessary for salvation. By the law (80% of which is negative) comes the knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:19-20). Dr. Fish stated in class one day, “You can’t be true to your calling as a preacher if you avoid the ‘thou shalt nots’ and ‘repent.’” Without a clear and cogent understanding of God’s hate for sin and the coming judgment, how can anyone make sense of the cross and resurrection? It is most appropriate, then, for the preacher to preach against abortion, homosexuality, gluttony, lust, gossip, bitterness, covetousness, and other sins. Expository preaching will help the preacher maintain this balanced ministry better than any other approach to preaching.

I fear that it is ignorance of these truths that enables 76% of Americans to claim a Christian identity without fear and trembling. At least the demons believe and tremble. I do not see much trembling these days, but it happens frequently in the kingdom of hell. The crying need of the hour, then, is a biblically defined evangelism. Let us labor so that if the number of self-identified Christians continues to decline, the number of biblically faithful witnesses will not.