Ray Ortlund has written a helpful post on being a gospel centered church.
How we treat one another reveals what we really believe as opposed to what we think we believe. It is possible to say, “We are a gospel-centered church,” and sincerely mean it, while we make our church into a law-centered social environment.
You can read the full post here.
Galatians 4:4-6 – “4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. 6 And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” 7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.”
Thank you most holy God for sending your Son into this sinful world to redeem us so that we may be adopted into your family and receive the gift of the Spirit. We delight to now call you “Father”. What an amazing privilege it is to be your sons and daughters! We praise and thank you in the name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.
John Piper has written a helpful post at the Desiring God blog titled “Why Require Unregenerate Children to Act Like They’re Good?”
Piper answers the question in the title of his post with three points.
I think many parents with young children struggle with this issue. Piper offers wise counsel so make sure to read the entire post.
Audio from the 2009 Matthias Media conference is available to download at peoplegrowth.org. The conference was titled “Gospel Growth = People Growth” and focused on how gospel growth happens in people and through people. Below is a list of topics addressed at the conference.
Tim Chester has written a review of The Trellis and the Vine, a new book on church ministry. Some of my fellow elders have ordered copies and I’m looking forward to borrowing the book from them when they’re finished reading it.
Make sure to watch the video below of Mark Dever recommending The Trellis and the Vine.
(If you’re reading this in an RSS reader you may need to click through to the blog to see the video clip)
Over at the White Horse Inn blog Mike Horton has written a review of the Manhattan Declaration. His critique of the document is fair and, I think, helpful.
You can read Horton’s review here.
From The Cross and Christian Ministry by D.A. Carson,
Western evangelicalism tends to run through cycles of fads. At the moment, books are pouring off the presses telling us how to plan for success, how “vision” consists in clearly articulated “ministry goals”, how the knowledge of detailed profiles of our communities constitutes the key to successful outreach. I am not for a moment suggesting that there is nothing to be learned from such studies. But after a while one may perhaps be excused for marveling how many churches were planted by Paul and Whitefield and Wesley and Stanway and Judson without enjoying these advantages. Of course all of us need to understand the people to whom we minister, and all of us can benefit from small doses of such literature. But massive doses sooner or later dilute the gospel. Ever so subtly, we start to think that success more critically depends on thoughtful sociological analysis than on the gospel; Barna becomes more important than the Bible. We depend on plans, programs, vision statements — but somewhere along the way we have succumbed to the temptation to displace the foolishness of the cross with the wisdom of strategic planning. Again, I insist, my position is not a thinly veiled plea for obscurantism, for seat-of-the-pants ministry that plans nothing. Rather, I fear that the cross, without ever being disowned, is constantly in danger of being dismissed from the central place it must enjoy, by relatively peripheral insights that take on far too much weight. Whenever the periphery is in danger of displacing the center, we are not far removed from idolatry (25-26).
In Fight Clubs: Gospel-Centered Discipleship, Jonathan Dodson discusses the failure of accountability groups. He explains that accountability groups tend toward two extremes.
1. Legalistic Accountability
Although the aim of accountability groups is good, misguided accountability practices can lead to legalism. In legalism, performance replaces obedience, we are motivated by works not grace. In legalistic accountability, failures to perform are punished through graduated penalties…Even if the intention is to honor God; the motivation is reduced to merit-making before God. Instead of holding one another accountable to trusting God, we become accountable for exacting punishments. The unfortunate result is a kind of legalism in which the healing of repentance and faith in the gospel is substituted by peer prescribed punishments. As a result, our motives for holiness get warped (20).
2. Confessional Booth Accountability
Alternatively, accountability groups can devolve into a kind of confessional booth. We confess our sins and depart absolved of any guilt, fearing merely the passing frown of our fellow confessor. I confess my sin; you confess yours. I pat your back. You pat mine. Then we pray. Accountability groups become circles of cheap grace, through which we obtain cheap peace from a troubled conscience. Confession is divorced from repentance, reducing holiness to half-hearted morality…This approach to discipleship is hollow. It lacks the urgency required by the fight of faith (21).
Dodson goes on to describe how these extremes can be avoided.
We need to remove accountability from the center and replace it with the Gospel. We need to orbit around Jesus, not rules or confession. Instead of groups gathered around accountability, we must gather around Jesus. Only then will we find something truly worth fighting for. The question, then, is not only “Will we fight” but “How will we fight?” What will motivate us, and how can we keep the gospel central in our obedience (21-22)?
I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on accountability groups and the issues Jonathan raises in his book.
Yesterday I posted a video of a talk given by Tim Keller on the role of persuasion in preaching the Gospel. As a follow up I wanted to provide an explanation of what Keller means by persuasion. The following is a paraphrase of Keller’s definition.
Persuasion is seeking to understand your audience so what you say to them will address their concerns and overcome their objections. In doing so, the barriers that formerly prevented your listeners from giving thought to the message you proclaim will be taken away and they can begin to see the attractiveness of the Gospel.
I encourage you to watch or listen to Keller’s talk in its entirety (see yesterday’s post).
At the 2008 Dwell Conference in New York City Tim Keller spoke on the topic of persuasion in preaching. I appreciated how at the very beginning of the session Keller addressed some of the common objections to the use of persuasion in preaching the Gospel. Video of the session is embedded below.
You can also download the audio and notes at the Acts 29 website.
