"Every now and then someone in the church will ask me before a sermon, 'Are you ready?' When asked, I greatly appreciate the loving care for me as a pastor and the anticipation for the preaching of God’s Word, and yet I always have to smile to myself as I think how to answer. 'Are you ready?' How do you answer that question?
From one perspective, I don’t know that I am ever fully ready to preach God’s Word. The holy weight of the task demands humility, brokenness and dependence. Preaching is a sobering task for which no one is ever fully ready, able or worthy. The pastor is merely a redeemed sinner that God graciously works through. We are but beggars, longing that God would magnify Himself through us as unworthy broken vessels. Therefore we preach, praying that God would graciously do what only he can do—cause growth (1 Cor 3:7).
In addition, no matter how much preparation one does, there is always more that can be done: more to read, more time in the text, more prayer, more time in crafting the sermon, more time on illustrations or application, etc. Readiness can imply the arrival at some point as if one is finished or has exhausted all that needs to be done. There is always more than can be done! From this standpoint, one is never fully ready. At some point in the preparation process, the pastor has to trust in the grace of God and get up and preach. We work hard in study and prayer and then trust the Lord to work.
Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Friday, July 27, 2018
Future Things: The Glorious 2nd Coming. Matthew 24:29-35
INTRO:
As you think about the future, what do you look
forward to the most? note Titus 2:13
I) The Horrific Tribulation
(Matthew 24:4-28)
(Matthew 24:4-28)
After the Tribulation Period (note Matthew 24:29f) comes
II) The Glorious 2nd Advent of Christ
(Matthew 24:29f)
The “Horrific
Tribulation” and the “Glorious Return of Christ” should impact our lives in a
multiplicity of ways:
Jesus’ disciples must be: 1) Well Versed Students of Scripture (and of Biblical Prophecy)
(Matthew 24:32-35)
Notice the first two commands of Christ in verses 32-33: "LEARN and RECOGNIZE!"
Tribulation showers (vv.
3-28) bring what? _____ Millennial Kingdom flowers!
What is “the pain then
glory” principle. (Rom. 8:16-18; 2 Cor.
4:16-18)
Thursday, July 26, 2018
The Preaching Moment and Why It is So Special
"Another week means two more sermons for me to prepare. And that means the weekly ritual of opening my Bible, clicking on the Logos program on the Mac, and grabbing my favorite fountain pen and the familiar canary legal pad.
It’s amazing that after doing this thousands of times, the first thought that comes into my mind as I start is, “Now what am I really doing and how am I actually going to do it?” Word studies, diagrammatical analysis, Greek and Hebrew, homiletical outlines, illustrations, introductions and conclusions, applications, implications, transitions, titles—sermon prep is not for that faint of heart or the lazy of spirit. But I have to admit that I love it. Really, it is my favorite part of my 'job.'
But it is far easier to forget what the design of preaching is than I would like to admit. In the forward to The Salvation of Souls edited by Richard A. Bailey and Gregory A. Wills, George Marsden provides this insightful context and quote from the preaching of Jonathan Edwards: In the midst of debates over the Great Awakening, Edwards, made a revealing comment about the effects of preaching. During intense periods of awakenings, evangelists often preached to the same audience daily, or even more frequently. Opponents of the awakening argued that people could not possibly remember what they heard in all these sermons. [Jonathan] Edwards, responded that “The main benefit that is obtained by preaching is by impression made upon the mind in the time of it, and not by the effect that arises afterwards by a remembrance of what was delivered.” Preaching, in other words, should be designed primarily to awaken, to shake people out of their blind slumbers in the addictive comforts of their sins. Though only God can give them new eyes to see, preaching should be designed to jolt the unconverted or the converted who doze back into their sins (as all do) into recognizing their true estate (pp. 11-12).
It’s amazing that after doing this thousands of times, the first thought that comes into my mind as I start is, “Now what am I really doing and how am I actually going to do it?” Word studies, diagrammatical analysis, Greek and Hebrew, homiletical outlines, illustrations, introductions and conclusions, applications, implications, transitions, titles—sermon prep is not for that faint of heart or the lazy of spirit. But I have to admit that I love it. Really, it is my favorite part of my 'job.'
But it is far easier to forget what the design of preaching is than I would like to admit. In the forward to The Salvation of Souls edited by Richard A. Bailey and Gregory A. Wills, George Marsden provides this insightful context and quote from the preaching of Jonathan Edwards: In the midst of debates over the Great Awakening, Edwards, made a revealing comment about the effects of preaching. During intense periods of awakenings, evangelists often preached to the same audience daily, or even more frequently. Opponents of the awakening argued that people could not possibly remember what they heard in all these sermons. [Jonathan] Edwards, responded that “The main benefit that is obtained by preaching is by impression made upon the mind in the time of it, and not by the effect that arises afterwards by a remembrance of what was delivered.” Preaching, in other words, should be designed primarily to awaken, to shake people out of their blind slumbers in the addictive comforts of their sins. Though only God can give them new eyes to see, preaching should be designed to jolt the unconverted or the converted who doze back into their sins (as all do) into recognizing their true estate (pp. 11-12).
Friday, July 20, 2018
Matthew 24:15-28: The Horrific Tribulation. Study Guide For Comprehension and Application
(pt. 8)
INTRO:
What do you wish you could know about your immediate future?
In the Master-teacher’s “Olivet
Discourse” the Good Shepherd let’s his beloved sheep know:
A) What to expect?
B) What signs to look
for?
& C) What they/we
ought to do with this head full of knowledge?
This morning we’ll zero
in on what Jesus' disciples ought to do” in view of
the revealed truth that is Matthew 24:15-28
1) UNDERSTAND THE PROPHETIC SIGNS
(Matthew 24:15; Daniel 9-11; Rev. 11:2; 13)
2) RUN FOR YOUR LIVES
(Matthew 24:16-19)
3) PRAY FOR PROVIDENTIAL MERCIES
(Matthew 24:20-22; Genesis 6 Psalm 67;
Isaiah 64)
4) EXERCISE BIBLICAL DISCERNMENT
(Matthew 24:23-28; 1 Thess. 5:21-22; 1
Chron. 12:32)
For Further Reflection/Application:
We
must be doers of the Word and not
merely hearers
What do you wish you
could know as it relates to your immediate future?
Why do so many
unbelievers live for the moment? Many
secular songs promote this mindset.
Thursday, July 19, 2018
Shepherding the Flock During the Week: Sermon Study Packets
When you visit the dentist they always send you home with what? A tooth brush, tooth paste, and floss (hint, hint). I have yet to find a dentist who will come to my home each week to brush my teeth. Oh the nerve. :) Our weekly sermon packets at LCBC are intended, in some ways, to function as a spiritual dental kits.
What brought about the weekly sermon study guides? When I started my new ministry over a year ago established members graciously shared that they had grown accustom to Pastor Sal’s PowerPoint presentation that went along with his sermons. Some of these members explained that it would help them acclimate to the new Senior Pastor’s style of preaching if I provided a listener handouts or utilized PowerPoint. As a new minister you attempt to do what you can to make transitions like this as easy as you can on the existing flock (by God's grace it's been a nearly seamless transition). Hence the four page weekly sermon packets.
Why invest time each week putting together such lengthy packets and why do we encourage each of you to spend at least one morning or evening reviewing your sermon notes via this packet? We do so to help with these five things: 1) Comprehension, 2) Clarification, 3) Application, 4) Shepherding care, and 5) Praise and Adoration.
1) Comprehension- I want to help the listener follow along as the sermon is being preached. One can’t grasp everything- but I prayerfully desire that my flock will process as much as they can and that they'll understand the key points of the inspired Text. The meaning of Scripture is the Scripture. It's why 2 Timothy 2:15 is such an important verse. If you get the authorial intent wrong you are more likely to offer up the wrong application. This ties right in with reason number two- clarification.
What brought about the weekly sermon study guides? When I started my new ministry over a year ago established members graciously shared that they had grown accustom to Pastor Sal’s PowerPoint presentation that went along with his sermons. Some of these members explained that it would help them acclimate to the new Senior Pastor’s style of preaching if I provided a listener handouts or utilized PowerPoint. As a new minister you attempt to do what you can to make transitions like this as easy as you can on the existing flock (by God's grace it's been a nearly seamless transition). Hence the four page weekly sermon packets.
Why invest time each week putting together such lengthy packets and why do we encourage each of you to spend at least one morning or evening reviewing your sermon notes via this packet? We do so to help with these five things: 1) Comprehension, 2) Clarification, 3) Application, 4) Shepherding care, and 5) Praise and Adoration.
1) Comprehension- I want to help the listener follow along as the sermon is being preached. One can’t grasp everything- but I prayerfully desire that my flock will process as much as they can and that they'll understand the key points of the inspired Text. The meaning of Scripture is the Scripture. It's why 2 Timothy 2:15 is such an important verse. If you get the authorial intent wrong you are more likely to offer up the wrong application. This ties right in with reason number two- clarification.
Wednesday, July 18, 2018
Matthew 24:3-14: Signs that the End is Near
(pt. 7)
INTRO:
End Times Confusion and/or Indifference to Biblical Prophecy is
commonplace.
LCBC believes that end
times details that are recorded in the Scriptures matter: Explain why-____________________________________________________________________________
_______
Summarize Matthew 24-25
in a sentence or two: _____________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________.
How should an unbeliever respond to facts of history (1 Cor. 15:1-11) and the details that God has revealed concerning things to come? (Acts 17:30-31; Hebrews 9:27-28; Romans 2:3-11). When you talk with lost friends, family members, and co-workers about what you’re being taught at church, help them to understand the practical ramifications of God’s revealed truth.
The Olivet Discourse: (Overview Outline)
A) End Times Confusion
(Mathew 24:3)
B) Red-Letter Clarification
(Matthew 24:4-25:46)
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
The Instagrammable Christian Life
"Do you remember when Instagram came out? I do, and I remember in particular the little camera icon. Touching that little icon has always filled me with a vague sense of anticipation. Today, Instagram has more than 700 million users. Having used the service since 2011, I’ve watched friends as their lives have developed. I’m sure you have too. It feels like I’ve seen it all: their trips, their weddings, their kids—their best life moments. These are their “Instagram moments.” They’ve seen my Instagram moments, too. Your friends have probably seen yours.
Yet if we’re honest with ourselves, today for most of us is made up of many ordinary moments—not Instagram moments. Yes, there are some of those, but getting up in the morning is rarely, if ever, a picturesque moment. Neither is eating breakfast, nor taking the kids to school. Neither is answering e-mails from coworkers, nor brushing our teeth. That’s not to speak of the bad moments: the despair, the failures, and the hardships. Those moments are rarely posted.
The effects of Instagram on mental health have been well documented.1 Instagram use is associated with higher levels of anxiety, FOMO (fear of missing out), and loneliness. Of course, you can’t attribute these feelings just to browsing Instagram. It’s likely that we browse Instagram when we’re feeling lonely, and so there’s not necessarily a cause-and-effect relationship. Instagram and services like it, however, have given rise, especially among younger generations, to dissatisfaction with the ordinary. As perfect lives made up of perfect moments constantly enter our minds, we feel like we don’t measure up.2
Why is that? There’s a conflict that occurs between our expectation of what things ought to be like (Instagram) and what they’re really like (real life). Our expectations for life shift and change as we view images of other people’s best moments. We come to believe in a subliminal way that the extraordinary, perfect life in the here and now is ideal and achievable, and the monotony and struggle of ordinary life is drab and worthless. We want our ordinary life to be extraordinary all of the time. But, as we all know, that’s not real life. The very definition of extraordinary requires the existence of the ordinary. Extraordinary things are a deviation from the ordinary. Instagram gives the impression that it’s possible to have the extraordinary without any ordinary at all.
Yet if we’re honest with ourselves, today for most of us is made up of many ordinary moments—not Instagram moments. Yes, there are some of those, but getting up in the morning is rarely, if ever, a picturesque moment. Neither is eating breakfast, nor taking the kids to school. Neither is answering e-mails from coworkers, nor brushing our teeth. That’s not to speak of the bad moments: the despair, the failures, and the hardships. Those moments are rarely posted.
The effects of Instagram on mental health have been well documented.1 Instagram use is associated with higher levels of anxiety, FOMO (fear of missing out), and loneliness. Of course, you can’t attribute these feelings just to browsing Instagram. It’s likely that we browse Instagram when we’re feeling lonely, and so there’s not necessarily a cause-and-effect relationship. Instagram and services like it, however, have given rise, especially among younger generations, to dissatisfaction with the ordinary. As perfect lives made up of perfect moments constantly enter our minds, we feel like we don’t measure up.2
Why is that? There’s a conflict that occurs between our expectation of what things ought to be like (Instagram) and what they’re really like (real life). Our expectations for life shift and change as we view images of other people’s best moments. We come to believe in a subliminal way that the extraordinary, perfect life in the here and now is ideal and achievable, and the monotony and struggle of ordinary life is drab and worthless. We want our ordinary life to be extraordinary all of the time. But, as we all know, that’s not real life. The very definition of extraordinary requires the existence of the ordinary. Extraordinary things are a deviation from the ordinary. Instagram gives the impression that it’s possible to have the extraordinary without any ordinary at all.
Monday, July 16, 2018
Must Everything Be Racialized? Reflections on a Recent Article by John C. Richards
Yesterday on his blog, The Exchange, hosted by Christianity Today online, Ed Stetzer gave space to his colleague, John C. Richards, to write about the recent SCOTUS nominee. Richards, a “Christian person of color,” serves as the Managing Director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College. His article is entitled, “Brett Kavanaugh is a Troubling Supreme Court Pick for Black Christians.”
Richards’ article strikes me as an example of much that is wrong in American evangelicalism today. It reflects a conviction-shaping-narrative that cannot be sustained by historical facts (and, as we all know, you can have your own opinions, but you cannot have your own facts) as well as the kind of racialized thinking that clouds judgment.
He writes, “I long for the days when Supreme Court judges weren’t viewed as representing a particular ideology.” I assume he means “any” particular ideology rather than only one particular ideology. If that is correct, I wonder when those days existed? Both strict constructionism and loose constructionism are ideological approaches to interpreting the constitution of the United States (as is regarding it as a living document). The former fulfills the 9th Commandment while the latter is the spirit that permeated the days of the judges in Israel’s history (Judges 17:6). Every Supreme Court judge has an ideology. Granted, there may have been times when that was not as readily recognized as it is today. If so, it is a good thing that such naiveté no longer exists.
Richards also opines, Never before in history has our country been so divided politically. In the past, Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court justices were informative and valuable in determining a judge’s fitness to serve in this critical office. Today, confirmation hearings are nothing less than a political slugfest that often values partisanship over a jurist’s ability to fill a seat on the highest court in the land.
There is no doubt that we are living in an era of deep political division but, thus far, we have not paid the price of 600,000 deaths, as we once did, for our divisions. Further, I am not sure how far into the past Richards is looking to contrast to today’s “political slugfest[s]” that are confirmation hearings (which have only been going on since 1916). It must surely be more than three decades since during that time such hearings have given us a “high tech lynching” and coined “bork” as a new verb.
My greater concern stems from the way that Richards racializes the nomination of Kavanaugh.
Richards’ article strikes me as an example of much that is wrong in American evangelicalism today. It reflects a conviction-shaping-narrative that cannot be sustained by historical facts (and, as we all know, you can have your own opinions, but you cannot have your own facts) as well as the kind of racialized thinking that clouds judgment.
He writes, “I long for the days when Supreme Court judges weren’t viewed as representing a particular ideology.” I assume he means “any” particular ideology rather than only one particular ideology. If that is correct, I wonder when those days existed? Both strict constructionism and loose constructionism are ideological approaches to interpreting the constitution of the United States (as is regarding it as a living document). The former fulfills the 9th Commandment while the latter is the spirit that permeated the days of the judges in Israel’s history (Judges 17:6). Every Supreme Court judge has an ideology. Granted, there may have been times when that was not as readily recognized as it is today. If so, it is a good thing that such naiveté no longer exists.
Richards also opines, Never before in history has our country been so divided politically. In the past, Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court justices were informative and valuable in determining a judge’s fitness to serve in this critical office. Today, confirmation hearings are nothing less than a political slugfest that often values partisanship over a jurist’s ability to fill a seat on the highest court in the land.
There is no doubt that we are living in an era of deep political division but, thus far, we have not paid the price of 600,000 deaths, as we once did, for our divisions. Further, I am not sure how far into the past Richards is looking to contrast to today’s “political slugfest[s]” that are confirmation hearings (which have only been going on since 1916). It must surely be more than three decades since during that time such hearings have given us a “high tech lynching” and coined “bork” as a new verb.
My greater concern stems from the way that Richards racializes the nomination of Kavanaugh.
Friday, July 13, 2018
"Act Like Men! Be Strong!" (Despite the Feminization Trend of the Church)
A recent N.Y. Post story was recently released with a most unexpected title (for a secular news organization)- Feminism Has Destabilized the American Family. Despite such admissions, Christian feminism has made a resurgence within conservative evangelical camps- from the PCA to Southern Baptist to non-denominational churches.
A Pastor-friend of mine summarized the biblical view of manhood and womanhood as follows: The woman was created from the man TO SHOW THE MAN that he is to cherish his wife as he does his own flesh.
The woman was not created from his head TO SHOW HER that she is not to usurp his authority as her head.
But the woman was also not created from his feet TO SHOW HIM that she is not to be trampled and walked upon as if she does not also bear the image and dignity of God.
The woman is created not from the head or the feet of man, but from his rib, from his side, and close to his heart. She is his companion. She complements him; completes him. In the great mystery of Divinely instituted marriage the two become one.
Man and woman are "joined at the hip". They flourish in the world when they join one another in showcasing their distinctions. In this God is glorified and the gospel put on effective and full display.
The woman was not created from his head TO SHOW HER that she is not to usurp his authority as her head.
But the woman was also not created from his feet TO SHOW HIM that she is not to be trampled and walked upon as if she does not also bear the image and dignity of God.
The woman is created not from the head or the feet of man, but from his rib, from his side, and close to his heart. She is his companion. She complements him; completes him. In the great mystery of Divinely instituted marriage the two become one.
Man and woman are "joined at the hip". They flourish in the world when they join one another in showcasing their distinctions. In this God is glorified and the gospel put on effective and full display.
Today's post by Pastor Buice goes along with a series of articles on Troubling Trends Influencing the Christian Church.
"Satan delights in denigrating what God created as good. It has always been God’s plan for his Church to possess a certain masculinity in leadership and that masculinity flows into the general membership as well. One of the depressing realities of our modern culture is the assault upon masculinity as if it’s somehow a bad thing. While we can all certainly agree that male dominance is not God’s plan for his Church—the plan to extract male leadership and characteristics from God’s Church is certainly not healthy—in fact it’s downright sinful.
When Paul was closing out his letter to the church in the city of Corinth, he wrote these words in 1 Corinthians 16:13-14, “Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.” We must recall that Paul was writing to a church that was in desperate need of theological and practical correction. The apostle took a firm stance against their sin, and then pointed them to the proper means of living out the gospel of Christ. Apparently one of their struggles was centered on love and their lack of manliness. William Robertson Nicoll observes that these exhortations are “directed respectively against the heedlessness, fickleness, childishness, and moral enervation of the” church at Corinth. [1]
When Paul was closing out his letter to the church in the city of Corinth, he wrote these words in 1 Corinthians 16:13-14, “Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.” We must recall that Paul was writing to a church that was in desperate need of theological and practical correction. The apostle took a firm stance against their sin, and then pointed them to the proper means of living out the gospel of Christ. Apparently one of their struggles was centered on love and their lack of manliness. William Robertson Nicoll observes that these exhortations are “directed respectively against the heedlessness, fickleness, childishness, and moral enervation of the” church at Corinth. [1]
Thursday, July 12, 2018
The Rise of Woker-Than-Thou Evangelicalism
"Unless you have been living in seclusion somewhere, you will have noticed that a radical putsch is currently underway to get evangelicals on board with doctrines borrowed from Black Liberation Theology, Critical Race Theory, Intersectional Feminism, and other ideologies that are currently stylish in the left-leaning secular academy. All of these things are being aggressively promoted in the name of "racial reconciliation." This has suddenly given rise to a popular movement that looks to be far more influential—and a more ominous threat to evangelical unity and gospel clarity—than the Emergent campaign was 15 years ago. The movement doesn't have an official name yet, but the zealots therein like to refer to themselves as "woke." Evangelical thought leaders boast of their wokeness and vie with one another to be woker-than-thou.
In many ways, today's Woke Evangelicals are merely an echo of their Emergent forebears. The central threads of their rhetoric are identical, and many of their goals are similar—starting with their campaign to convince other evangelicals that gospel clarity alone will never reach a hostile culture. To do that, they say, we must strive for postmodern political correctness. We need to try to "make Christianity cool." Nowadays, that means race must be an issue in practically every subject we deal with. Meanwhile, diversity, tolerance, inclusivity, and a host of other postmodern "virtues" have begun to edge out the actual fruit of the Spirit in the language and conversation of some of our wokest brethren.
In many ways, today's Woke Evangelicals are merely an echo of their Emergent forebears. The central threads of their rhetoric are identical, and many of their goals are similar—starting with their campaign to convince other evangelicals that gospel clarity alone will never reach a hostile culture. To do that, they say, we must strive for postmodern political correctness. We need to try to "make Christianity cool." Nowadays, that means race must be an issue in practically every subject we deal with. Meanwhile, diversity, tolerance, inclusivity, and a host of other postmodern "virtues" have begun to edge out the actual fruit of the Spirit in the language and conversation of some of our wokest brethren.
Labels:
critical race theory,
diversity,
inclusivity,
MLK,
MLK50,
race,
racial justice,
racial politics,
racial reconciliation,
T4G,
TGC,
tolerance,
woke
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
A Friendly Letter to Single Christian Ladies Regarding Romance and Relationships
The author of this article-A Knight in Shining Armor: An Open Letter- is a faithful church member and friend. As a young professional and Christian single who is actively living according to the Good Book Dan understands what matters most when it comes to the life long covenant of marriage.
The author of this article does not think pursuing someone that you're attracted to and have things in common with is wrong. This article simply seeks to show what is of greater important in the eyes of God. He encourages young ladies to value and prioritize things in a wise and biblical manner. As my college pastor Rick Holland often said, "Choose who you love wisely and love whom you choose unconditionally" and "Every date is a potential mate."
Dear Sister in Christ,
I write to you as a brother in Christ who is concerned about the majority of men you are pursuing. It is said that every young girl dreams of finally meeting her knight in shining armor who fights dragons and is heroic. However, somewhere along the way, popular movies and TV shows distort this ideal by either denying the pursuit of such an ideal or by redefining what it means to be a knight in shining armor. Many woman fall for the “new” definition of a knight. It is defined as a man that: has an impeccable fashion sense, is an avid gamer, is a hero with alcohol, has a chiseled physique, has a high paying job, has Hollywood looks, has the game of a contestant on the Bachelorette, can woo you with love songs on a piano or guitar, and is an adventurous “bad” boy.
So you want a man with a sense of fashion? Does he put on a compassionate heart, kindness, humility, meekness, patience, love, and ultimately the Lord Jesus Christ (Colossians 3:12-15; Romans 13:14)?
I write to you as a brother in Christ who is concerned about the majority of men you are pursuing. It is said that every young girl dreams of finally meeting her knight in shining armor who fights dragons and is heroic. However, somewhere along the way, popular movies and TV shows distort this ideal by either denying the pursuit of such an ideal or by redefining what it means to be a knight in shining armor. Many woman fall for the “new” definition of a knight. It is defined as a man that: has an impeccable fashion sense, is an avid gamer, is a hero with alcohol, has a chiseled physique, has a high paying job, has Hollywood looks, has the game of a contestant on the Bachelorette, can woo you with love songs on a piano or guitar, and is an adventurous “bad” boy.
So you want a man with a sense of fashion? Does he put on a compassionate heart, kindness, humility, meekness, patience, love, and ultimately the Lord Jesus Christ (Colossians 3:12-15; Romans 13:14)?
So you want a man that slays dragons? Does he slay imaginary dragons on his TV or does he war against the Dragon of this world (Ephesians 6:10-12)?
So you want a man that is heroic? Does he “heroically” mix drinks or is he filled with the power of the Holy Spirit and is a man that boldly proclaims the gospel (Isaiah 5:22; Ephesians 5:18; Romans 1:16-17)?
Monday, July 9, 2018
Troubling Trends Coming to an American Church Near You
Photo Credit: www.noidentitytheft.com |
"There has been much to talk about in recent weeks in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). The problem is, we need to talk more. I (Pastor Josh Buice) write this article as a lifelong SBC member and pastor. I’m a graduate of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. I have no agenda to stir-up trouble in the SBC. However, there is trouble, and that’s why I write as a concerned pastor.
As the annual meeting in June approaches, the pace of the political structure intensifies as usual, but this year, with a new president to be elected and other factors at hand (such as moral failures of leading professors)—the pace has drastically increased to say the least. Albert Mohler has written a piece suggesting that the wrath of God has been poured out on the SBC. Sam Rainer has used the language of a “dumpster fire” in an article he published about the recent problems within the Convention.
Make no mistake about it, there are major fires in the SBC that need immediate attention. A great deal of attention is centered on the issues of immorality (SBC version of #MeToo) among leaders in the SBC and SBC entities. Certainly the SBC could benefit from a greater humility, so perhaps God is using such situations to bring Southern Baptists to a point of repentance. A few years ago the talk of the SBC was about church planting, but today the talk is centered on social justice, racial inequality, and the empowerment of women. One issue that must be addressed in the SBC today is the issue of political intersectionality. Make no mistake about it—if left unchallenged the SBC will see massive decline and a complete capitulation on matters of complementarianism.
What is Intersectionality?
Intersectionality was originally coined in 1989 by Kimberlé Crenshaw, a political activist and radical feminist, in order to describe oppression against women on specific different points of intersection. Today, it’s used in a more broad sense. In short, intersectionality as it has been defined, is discrimination based on overlapping layers of individual classes of discrimination. It’s when a person is subjected to discrimination for more than one classification such as a woman who is black and lesbian. She would classify, under this line of reasoning for three basic discriminatory marks—being a woman, who is black, and is also a lesbian. According to the definition of intersectionality, where these three marks “intersect” is the focus of her greatest and most severe discrimination which places her at the greatest risk of oppression in our culture.
Although this term was birthed out of a radical feminist political culture, it’s now being used within evangelical circles to describe people who are oppressed and “held back” from certain advancement within evangelicalism. Today, conferences are being held, articles are being written, and people are talking quite frequently about social justice and intersectionality as it pertains to ethnic diversity and women empowerment.
How Will Intersectionality Politics Change the SBC?
As this agenda continues to play itself out, the outcome has yet to be determined. Will the SBC split during this new era? Many people are predicting a split and splintering of the current denominational structures across evangelicalism. Some are suggesting that as this agenda continues to work its way through the SBC and other groups like the PCA, that we will see a fracture happen at some point in the near future.
While we must pray that it doesn’t happen, we must speak up and point out the dangers of ideologies such as intersectionality. God has created both male and female in his image and we as image-bearers of God have a specific purpose in God’s redemptive plan. This goes not only for men and women, but for all ethnicities. However, the ideologies of intersectionality do not run down the tracks of the gospel of Jesus Christ and they certainly don’t lead to the same end goal. How will intersectionality change evangelicalism?
Deconstructionism
Intersectionality, like many ideas, was not created in a vacuum. They are birthed from parent ideologies that create spin-off ideas and movements. Intersectionality was birthed from a Neo-Marxist view that seeks to tear down hierarchies and create new power structures that help the minorities achieve equality. This approach seeks to divide everyone in a specific population into race, class, and gender segments and place a great spotlight on the minority groups among that population. Then, by organizing an effort to “help” the minorities achieve equality, this movement works to create a great deal of sympathy, money, and support for those oppressed individuals.
The result of such a politically charged and emotionally driven movement is power and influence. In essence, it places the leaders of the pack in the captain’s chair. However, we must be clear, the ethnic division is never solved. This is an age-old model that does not work. It continues to keep the ethnicities divided while empowering people to solve the problems. In short, American politics pumped billions of dollars into the civil rights movement era up to our present day in attempt to solve such problems. While it created many jobs, gave people positions and titles, it never really solved the division between ethnic groups. Why did it fail? It failed because you can’t solve human depravity outside of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Today, the same ideas are being used to address the need to empower women and provide them with equality within evangelical circles such as the SBC. This same language was directed at racial inequality and injustice at the recent MLK50 conference as well resulting in a call for repentance for the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., as Thabiti Anyabwile articulated in his article:
My white neighbors and Christian brethren can start by at least saying their parents and grandparents and this country are complicit in murdering a man who only preached love and justice.
One must ask an honest question about this social justice war—is this movement the right way forward or will it lead to greater division? Will this movement deconstruct the SBC and other hierarchies in evangelicalism without harming local churches in the process? Does this whole social justice war empower women and minority ethnicities in our culture or does it patronize them?
Complementarianism
When we think of how women are used in the household of faith—we certainly see the value of faithful discipleship among the women who train the younger women and children (Titus 2:1-10). For nearly two millennia the Church understood their roles and responsibilities in regard to women teaching and exercising authority over men, and it wasn’t until the militant feminist movement of the 1960s that caused people to seriously question the boundaries of God—even among conservative evangelical circles.
Paul never held women back in his day, instead, he was helping them forward by pointing out their intended roles in God’s creation as he wrote about such roles to Timothy in his first letter to his son in the faith. As I’ve stated in a previous article on this subject, the word teach, “διδάσκω,” according to Thomas Schreiner, has in mind the public teaching and involves authoritative transmission of tradition about Christ and the Scriptures (1 Cor. 12:28-29; Eph. 4:11; 1 Tim. 2:7; 2 Tim. 3:16; James 3:1).[1] While women are permitted to discuss biblical theology in a mixed group setting such as a Sunday school class, women teaching children or other women (Titus 2), or in a private setting such as with Apollos’ instruction that was gleaned from meeting with Priscilla and Aquila—biblical teaching, when among the church as a whole or a mixed audience should be led by men. It seems clear that Paul was addressing an issue that was taking place in the life of the church and needed to be corrected.
The role distinction of women and men has been made clear from the beginning. God has one role for men and another for women—that goes for life in general and for leadership structure within the church. To rearrange God’s plan is dangerous, as we’ve seen in our American political debate surrounding the redefining of marriage. If the SBC should decide to redefine complementarianism—we can expect a massive landslide as the foundation crumbles on this issue.
Dawn M. Owens, an author, speaker, and radio show host said the following in a recent tweet:
If we are going to apply 1 Timothy 2:11-14 as our end all be all in this argument first we need to acknowledge is says “a woman” not all women. But since you are stuck in applying it that way, then you must apply it to ALL women whether in or out of church.
In the same conversation, Dwight McKissic, pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Texas responded by quoting Dawn and then stating the following:
Interesting insights&commentary on that passage,that I’d never heard,read,or considered. Grateful that women aren’t forbidden to tweet, scripturally [emoji not included here in the quote]. Women often bring out fresh perspectives interpretively, that are exegetically accurate&profound.I regret many refuse2hear wmn.
Is this how we’ve been trained to interpret the Bible? Is this rightly handling the Word of God or is this a method of eisegesis rather than exegesis? Certainly this can’t be the fruit of the Conservative Resurgence in the SBC. One must not mishandle God’s Word in order to uphold the dignity and value of women.
Jen Wilkin, popular author and speaker also weighed in on the issues in a recent tweet as she said:
As go our seminaries, so go our churches. It’s past time for a full re-evaluation of existing power structures, and for the strategic implementation of formal channels of influence/input/leadership for women in the SBC.
In a recent Tweet, Russell Moore (the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC) stated the following:
There would be no Southern Baptist Convention without Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong. We desperately need a resurgence of women’s voices and women’s leadership and women’s empowerment, again. It is way past time.
In that same line of thinking, J.D. Greear Tweeted out to Beth Moore regarding her article written to chart her own personal road of oppression, by stating the following:
Thank you, Beth! Hoping that we are entering a new era where we in the complementarian world take all the Word of God seriously–not just the parts about distinction of roles but also re: the tearing down of all hierarchy & his gracious distribution of gifts to all his children!
With two of the largest voices within the SBC today championing women’s empowerment and encouraging a tearing down of all hierarchy as we enter a new era, the question remains — what is this new era and what what will the result be for the SBC as we move forward as a collective group of partnering churches? Will women be invited to preach to the Convention in the days to come? Will once conservative evangelical circles redefine complementarianism and rearrange roles and boundaries for women in leadership? How will this change the SBC and perhaps other denominational structures in the broader evangelical world?
Only God knows the answer in full. While I’m not a prophet or the son of a prophet, my prediction is that the social justice agenda will keep the ethnicities divided and smash the foundation of a robust view of complementarianism. We should all work to root out racism and uphold the proper use of women’s gifts inside and outside the local church—but the social justice warrior movement is not the best way forward. A firm commitment to the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only way forward.
I’m reminded of that truth every time I read the story of the demon possessed man who was living in the tombs and rejected by society. When Jesus changed his life—he was suddenly pictured as a man in his right mind and clothed (Luke 8:35). It’s the gospel—not intersectionality or any other ideology that will bring about peace, unity, and respect for the image-bearing dignity deserved by all of God’s people. The longer we continue to import language of sociology on biblical texts and employ tactics from the political sphere—we will continue to see a divided SBC and one that may never fully recover. May the Lord spare the SBC from such a disaster."
Article by Dr. Buice first posted at sovereignnations. Dr. Josh Buice serves as the pastor of Pray's Mill Baptist Church in Douglasville, Georgia He is the founding director of the G3 Conference. Pastor Buice studied at SBTS where he earned his M.Div. and D.Min. in expository preaching.
Saturday, July 7, 2018
The HEART of the Matter
There are often two decisions on the shelf. Pleasing God or pleasing self? Choose wisely. 2 Corinthians 5:9. 1 Corinthians 10:31.
Friday, July 6, 2018
Am I Rightly Dividing the Word of God? (pt. 2)
So the Scripture is the beginning, middle, and end of the church. For that reason, we hold to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura means Scripture alone is authoritative for faith and practice. Scripture alone determines if your ministry is effective or not.
DO YOUR HERMENEUTICS HOLD TO SOLA SCRIPTURA? Are you rightly dividing the Word of truth in your personal bible study or when you share your convictions at a men's or ladies' bible study? When you quote the Bible on social media are you accurately reflecting what God's Word has to say about such and such an issue?
One needs to consider three questions before arriving at a personal verdict (2 Tim. 2:15; James 3). 1) Have I done the hard work? 2) Am I trying to use biblical interpretation fine print? 3) Do I have a hermeneutic of surrender?
"Our commitment to Sola Scriptura leads to a commitment to hermeneutics—how we study the Bible. Hermeneutics matters because it determines whether we truly hold to Sola Scriptura or not. Here are three questions to help you determine if your hermeneutics hold to Sola Scriptura:
Am I trying to use hermeneutical fine print?
We know what fine print is. It allows you to say one thing and undermine it through a loophole. That’s exactly what some have done with God’s Word. The excuse is pretty standard. They may claim they have a high view of Scripture, but at the same time, claim we can never know what it means. And because we do not know what it means, we cannot be held accountable to an errant view. At that point, people have subverted the authority of God’s Word through the hermeneutical fine print.
To be sure, Scripture has tough passages and doctrines (2 Pet 3:16). Knowing what it means takes hard work (cf. 2 Tim 2:15). Nevertheless, such difficulties in Scripture do not provide an excuse or fine print to hold to any view one desires. Let’s be clear. The moment you do that, you don’t have God’s Word, but your word and you’ve abandoned Sola Scriptura.
"Our commitment to Sola Scriptura leads to a commitment to hermeneutics—how we study the Bible. Hermeneutics matters because it determines whether we truly hold to Sola Scriptura or not. Here are three questions to help you determine if your hermeneutics hold to Sola Scriptura:
Do I have a hermeneutic of surrender?
God’s Word is His communication to us (cf. 2 Tim 3:16). God has made it clear and accessible via human language (Josh 23:14; Deut 30:11-14; Rom 10:5-10). He has also made it authoritative. We as readers do not have the right to argue with it or change it. It cannot be broken (John 10:35). Rather, we are empowered (Eph 1:17; Jer 31:33) and accountable (2 Pet 3:16) to understand and live out the Scriptures (Jas 1:22).We need to learn to stop struggling against the text and surrender
With that, we don’t have interpretative options when it comes to God’s Word. The Bible is not some platform from which we can pontificate our own theology and advice. Its assertions are also not that which we can shrug off and ignore. It doesn’t have to live up to our reason or sensibilities. Rather, we need to learn to stop struggling against the text and surrender. Its statements become our statements, its reasons our reasons, its categories our categories, and its implications/applications our own worldview and life. Anything else adds to or subtracts from Scripture. Anything else compromises Sola Scriptura.
So as we read Scripture we need to make sure we are surrendered to Scripture. Have I learned what the author has said for the reason he said it and with the range of applications he has ordained? Do I have Scripture’s intent alone? These are critical questions in making sure our hermeneutic upholds Sola Scriptura.
God’s Word is His communication to us (cf. 2 Tim 3:16). God has made it clear and accessible via human language (Josh 23:14; Deut 30:11-14; Rom 10:5-10). He has also made it authoritative. We as readers do not have the right to argue with it or change it. It cannot be broken (John 10:35). Rather, we are empowered (Eph 1:17; Jer 31:33) and accountable (2 Pet 3:16) to understand and live out the Scriptures (Jas 1:22).We need to learn to stop struggling against the text and surrender
With that, we don’t have interpretative options when it comes to God’s Word. The Bible is not some platform from which we can pontificate our own theology and advice. Its assertions are also not that which we can shrug off and ignore. It doesn’t have to live up to our reason or sensibilities. Rather, we need to learn to stop struggling against the text and surrender. Its statements become our statements, its reasons our reasons, its categories our categories, and its implications/applications our own worldview and life. Anything else adds to or subtracts from Scripture. Anything else compromises Sola Scriptura.
So as we read Scripture we need to make sure we are surrendered to Scripture. Have I learned what the author has said for the reason he said it and with the range of applications he has ordained? Do I have Scripture’s intent alone? These are critical questions in making sure our hermeneutic upholds Sola Scriptura.
Am I trying to use hermeneutical fine print?
We know what fine print is. It allows you to say one thing and undermine it through a loophole. That’s exactly what some have done with God’s Word. The excuse is pretty standard. They may claim they have a high view of Scripture, but at the same time, claim we can never know what it means. And because we do not know what it means, we cannot be held accountable to an errant view. At that point, people have subverted the authority of God’s Word through the hermeneutical fine print.
To be sure, Scripture has tough passages and doctrines (2 Pet 3:16). Knowing what it means takes hard work (cf. 2 Tim 2:15). Nevertheless, such difficulties in Scripture do not provide an excuse or fine print to hold to any view one desires. Let’s be clear. The moment you do that, you don’t have God’s Word, but your word and you’ve abandoned Sola Scriptura.
Thursday, July 5, 2018
Guiding Principles For Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth
Personal Bible Studies and Group Bible Studies are wonderful ways to grow in the knowledge and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Christians need to be careful however that they have done the hard work of bible study before sharing (note 2 Timothy 2:15; James 3). Too many "bible studies" turn into a well intentioned but biblically misguided "this is what this text means to me" share fest. Wrong interpretations can lead to wrong applications- some errors are more damaging then others.
Every believer is a theologian and every Christian employs biblical interpretation principles when reading, studying, and/or teaching the inerrant Word of God. So here is the important question: Do Your Hermeneutics Hold to Sola Scriptura?
"THE ARGUMENT FOR SOLA SCRIPTURA
How does Christ build His church? Arguably, He builds His
church by His Word (Eph 4:11-14; 2 Tim 4:1-2). To have a ministry that pleases God, we must be all about His
Word—it is central to true ministry. We could sum it up this way:
Scripture is the beginning, middle, and end of ministry.
Beginning- Ephesians
2:20, “having been built on the foundation of the apostles
and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone . . .”
Scripture is foundational for the church. The book of Acts
establishes the church’s origins (Acts 2) and its mission (Acts 1:8). The epistles
articulate its role (Eph 1-3) and operations (1 Tim 4:13; Tit 2:1-15). Thus,
you can’t even define the church apart from the Bible. We can see this in the
American church today. We have left the standard of Scripture and pursued every
distraction. The resulting chaos illustrates how central God’s Word is—without
it, we are confused, dysfunctional, and purposeless. You can’t have church or
ministry apart from the authority of Scripture.
Middle- John17:17, “Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.”
The Word of God drives the ministry of the church. As our
Lord prayed, sanctification revolves around Scripture. However, people may
wonder, “There are so many ways I can become a better and nicer person. Why do
I need the Scriptures?” But, God is not just interested in making you a better
and nicer person—He wants to make you like Christ. He doesn’t want you just to
change so you please the world, but that you would please Him. That is our true
destiny.There is no human manipulation on the planet that can transform you to
fulfill your destiny
We can see this from the very beginning. In Genesis 1, we
note that we are created in the image of God. However, because of Adam
and the fall, we observe that image is tarnished (cf. Gen 5:3). But there is
hope because of the second Adam. Daniel 7 teaches that there will be one
like a son of man, the true son of Adam. He is like a son of
man in that He is a man, but He is only like a son of man in that He is more
than that. He is God.
For this very reason, Jesus is called the Son of Man in the
Gospels. In Romans 5, He’s called the second Adam. In Colossians 1:15, Paul
proclaims He is the image of God. And in Romans 8:29, we were
predestined be conformed to His image.
At this point, Scripture ultimately reveals that the image
of God in Genesis 1 is the image of Christ in Romans 8. When God made us
in His image, He always meant for us to be like Christ. That is our destiny.
So yes, there are lots of human manipulations that can make
you nicer. But there is no human manipulation on the planet that can transform
you to fulfill your destiny. That belongs to the Word of God alone.
End- 1Timothy 3:15, “…the church of the living God, the pillar and
support of the truth.”
God’s Word is not only the beginning and middle of the
Church, but also its end. As the support of the truth, it is up to us to
preserve and uphold the truth for the next generation. That is our role in the
plan of God and our legacy. Championing Scripture is mission critical for the
church.
So the Scripture is the beginning, middle, and end of the
church. For that reason, we hold to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Sola
Scriptura means Scripture alone is authoritative for faith and practice.
Scripture alone determines if your ministry is effective or not."
Are You Handling God's Word With Extreme Care? Article to be continued.
This article was first published by Dr. Abner Chou. Chou is a foremost authority on hermeneutics. Dr. Chou is a professor at the Master's University and the Master's Seminary.
Wednesday, July 4, 2018
"The Social Justice Movement is Dangerous and Detrimental to the Church (For These Reasons)!"
"What I think about when I can't sleep at 3 am- Pastor Don Green writes,
...The preoccupation with so-called social justice in some professing Christian circles is profoundly dangerous and detrimental to the souls of unsaved and saved alike.
Its effect is to teach men to nurse their grievances and perceived injustices on a horizontal level, rather than to fear God for their own sins against Him on a vertical level. It thus preoccupies the thinking of men with passing earthly matters rather than pointing them to the eternal consequences of sin and God’s coming judgment. We badly need a corrective from the perspective of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31).
Furthermore, in the name of the gospel these so-called Christian social justice warriors testify to the world that the biblical message is really not that different that socialistic concerns after all. Rather than “declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because [God] has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead” (Acts 17:30-31), the SJWs drag our dialogue into the muck of current political discourse that will only be swallowed up by the next social cause in a matter of days, weeks, or months.
The pressing matters of personal sin, righteousness, and judgment (cf. John 16:8) are marginalized as men—in the name of Christ, no less—set our minds on earthly things, the end of which is only destruction (Philippians 3:18-19).
Not only that, the spirit of their complaints do something equally insidious to the minds of those who do indeed suffer in this life. Our hope is not—not, I say!!—to batter the perceived elite into submission and extract forced confessions and ultimately financial reparations from them for past wrongs in which they may or may not have personally participated.
...The preoccupation with so-called social justice in some professing Christian circles is profoundly dangerous and detrimental to the souls of unsaved and saved alike.
Its effect is to teach men to nurse their grievances and perceived injustices on a horizontal level, rather than to fear God for their own sins against Him on a vertical level. It thus preoccupies the thinking of men with passing earthly matters rather than pointing them to the eternal consequences of sin and God’s coming judgment. We badly need a corrective from the perspective of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31).
Furthermore, in the name of the gospel these so-called Christian social justice warriors testify to the world that the biblical message is really not that different that socialistic concerns after all. Rather than “declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because [God] has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead” (Acts 17:30-31), the SJWs drag our dialogue into the muck of current political discourse that will only be swallowed up by the next social cause in a matter of days, weeks, or months.
The pressing matters of personal sin, righteousness, and judgment (cf. John 16:8) are marginalized as men—in the name of Christ, no less—set our minds on earthly things, the end of which is only destruction (Philippians 3:18-19).
Not only that, the spirit of their complaints do something equally insidious to the minds of those who do indeed suffer in this life. Our hope is not—not, I say!!—to batter the perceived elite into submission and extract forced confessions and ultimately financial reparations from them for past wrongs in which they may or may not have personally participated.
Tuesday, July 3, 2018
Convictions that Shape the Local Church and Biblical Counseling.
"With regards to biblical soul care well taught Biblical Counselors share 3 beliefs:
1) It is the church’s responsibility to counsel people through their struggles, rather than relying upon those outside the church.
This does not mean one never goes outside the church for help or that some problems aren't both/and body AND soul issues. Medical doctors have been trained with the physical body and biblical counselors have been taught how to care for the spiritual matters of the heart, soul, and mind.
2) Lasting life change is the goal of counseling, and the greatest change people need is to trust Christ enough to follow his ways. This decision of faith impacts all other decisions in life and helps them best deal with the struggles of life. Faith is never a secondary concern in counseling.
3) Christ models for us reliance upon the Holy Spirit and the Holy Scriptures, and counselors should seek to increase that reliance as they help individuals grow in Christlikeness. We do not have the power or wisdom to change on our own. We need the empowerment of the Holy Spirit and the wisdom of the scriptures to change.
Within the church, these 3 beliefs are usually met with agreement. However, within many Christian counseling offices, these beliefs are often met with skepticism and resistance leaving them outside the counseling process.
Sadly, the gospel, the church, and the Holy Spirit are rarely discussed in many “Christian” counseling practices. We talk to many pastors and churches who are troubled by this. They thought when they sought counseling at a “Christian Counseling” center that their faith would be part of the process and that their counselor would know how to direct them to the Scriptures for guidance.
So what do you do if you are troubled by this too?
Many churches are and have begun to respond. Rather than making a list of outside places where people can receive counseling/care, they have decided to equip individuals within their congregation to walk with the hurting. In order to consider this approach, you need to embrace four key convictions about Biblical Counseling that shape a ministry like this.
Key Conviction # 1 – Holistic Discipleship: Fulfilling the whole Great Commission
Within the church, these 3 beliefs are usually met with agreement. However, within many Christian counseling offices, these beliefs are often met with skepticism and resistance leaving them outside the counseling process.
Sadly, the gospel, the church, and the Holy Spirit are rarely discussed in many “Christian” counseling practices. We talk to many pastors and churches who are troubled by this. They thought when they sought counseling at a “Christian Counseling” center that their faith would be part of the process and that their counselor would know how to direct them to the Scriptures for guidance.
So what do you do if you are troubled by this too?
Many churches are and have begun to respond. Rather than making a list of outside places where people can receive counseling/care, they have decided to equip individuals within their congregation to walk with the hurting. In order to consider this approach, you need to embrace four key convictions about Biblical Counseling that shape a ministry like this.
Key Conviction # 1 – Holistic Discipleship: Fulfilling the whole Great Commission
Monday, July 2, 2018
Why You Might Be a Better Biblical Counselor Than You Think
"Right after I finished college, I was asked to meet with two middle school aged boys whose father had recently taken his life. I was a young single man and I was nervous that I would say the wrong thing. These boys had already been in so much pain, and I didn’t want to make it worse. I had taken some training in Biblical Counseling, had a reputation for connecting with young people, but I had never walked anyone through an issue like this before. I didn’t know if they would sit quietly, cry, or be angry. I knew one thing though: God loved them and desired for me to demonstrate that to them.
I hatched a plan: “Scripture and Stickball”.
Each week we would look at one truth about God, talk about it, and go to the parking lot to play stickball. Our counseling sessions rarely lasted more than 20 minutes but that is all that junior high boys in that situation could probably handle. We talked about God’s love, sovereignty and assured them that we were there for them. I listened and answered questions they had and found another older women to work with their mom through her grief.
You might wonder if you or your church should consider developing Biblical Counselors. While counseling situations can be complicated at times, “Scripture and Stickball” works. Stickball is really an example of building a bridge into the life of a hurting soul for the purpose of sharing God’s love and truth with them. Stickball with a young mom might be help folding laundry and holding a grown-up conversation. Stickball with a college student might be an invitation to Sunday dinner and a conversation about their future plans. Stickball with someone stricken with cancer might be a ride home when the nausea is unbearable. Stickball with a grieving widower might an early morning breakfast at the local pancake house. Your stickball might be conversations and coffee, working on cars for single moms, hospitality, or inviting disconnected men onto a work team.
Do you know what your stickball is? God calls all of us to find our stickball and use our unique interests to make a difference.
I hatched a plan: “Scripture and Stickball”.
Each week we would look at one truth about God, talk about it, and go to the parking lot to play stickball. Our counseling sessions rarely lasted more than 20 minutes but that is all that junior high boys in that situation could probably handle. We talked about God’s love, sovereignty and assured them that we were there for them. I listened and answered questions they had and found another older women to work with their mom through her grief.
You might wonder if you or your church should consider developing Biblical Counselors. While counseling situations can be complicated at times, “Scripture and Stickball” works. Stickball is really an example of building a bridge into the life of a hurting soul for the purpose of sharing God’s love and truth with them. Stickball with a young mom might be help folding laundry and holding a grown-up conversation. Stickball with a college student might be an invitation to Sunday dinner and a conversation about their future plans. Stickball with someone stricken with cancer might be a ride home when the nausea is unbearable. Stickball with a grieving widower might an early morning breakfast at the local pancake house. Your stickball might be conversations and coffee, working on cars for single moms, hospitality, or inviting disconnected men onto a work team.
Do you know what your stickball is? God calls all of us to find our stickball and use our unique interests to make a difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)