Plagiarizing Sermons

17Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. (1 Timothy 5:17, ESV)

It is becoming alarmingly prevalent for many pastors to get their sermons from sources over the Internet or popular books and materials. It is feasible today for a pastor to go to sources on the Internet and download a sermon to be preached from his pulpit on any given Sunday. No prayer or laboring over the Word of God, just click “download” and you have an instant sermon for the upcoming Sunday service. Worse yet, these sermons are being passed off as if it were their own work.

But the Bible gives clear direction concerning the obligation of those in pastoral leadership. And key to the role of the pastor-teacher is just that – to teach. And before the pastor has anything to give to the congregation, he must first be taught and receive instruction from Scripture. The only way to achieve this is for him to be challenged through laboring in God’s truth, pouring himself out over Scripture, allowing it to penetrate his heart and mind. The phrase “labor in preaching and teaching” means to literally work to the point of exhaustion. Should we expect anything less? It amazes me that in many leadership positions in the secular world, how many are willing to wear themselves out for material gain or fame and fortune. This includes those who aspire to be in political office. All this is to achieve and earthly “crown”. It should not be out of the ordinary to expect that someone in spiritual leadership in pastoral ministry should seek to labor with at least as much intensity for spiritual gain and a heavenly crown.

All elders are to be able to teach, but this passage of Scripture points to a particular group of elders who are particularly gifted and driven to preach and teach. The man who stands in the pulpit as the so-called senior pastor week after week, since he is the key teaching pastor, needs to be this type of man. If he shows no inclination to do so, he is unfit for this position. To take the lazy way out cheats himself out of the life changing experiencing of digging into God’s truth, and subsequently deprives his congregation of keen insights that would be normally gained by laboring in the Word of God.

I remember visiting one church close to us some time ago and discovering that the pastor got his whole sermon series from a popular author’s book – practically word for word! Needless to say, I never felt compelled to go back.

It is no wonder that the evangelical church is in such a mess today, when the pulpits are overrun with lazy shepherds who are unwilling to engage in the necessary work of expositional teaching and preaching of Scripture.

Tim Challies published an article entitled “Plagiarism in the Pulpit” a couple of years ago. Challies sites an article published by Suzanne Sataline in the Wall Street Journal discussing this issue. In the article she discusses how this issue has created quite a stir over ethics. Quite frankly, I find the issue of taking another’s work and using it as one’s own blatantly unethical, not to mention patently unbiblical. Apparently Sataline quotes from several Christians who are in favor of this practice. Perhaps it should not come as any surprise that Rick Warren is among those who are in favor of using other people’s sermons without giving credit for the source of the material.

Tim Challies reflected on a couple of reasons as to why this is taking place. One is the laziness on the part of the pastors who are looking for a way to avoid the arduous task of sermon preparation. This, I believe, is the primary cause of the problem. But Tim offers the other side of the coin, which is the pressure that congregations place on the pastor as a result of the on-going “spirit of pragmatism” that has become so prevalent today. Pastors have succumbed to the pressure to be witty and entertaining. The expectations of far too many congregations is that the pastor be some charismatic leader similar to what the secular culture looks for in corporate America. While endeavoring to meet the demands of the congregation in light of this expectation, many pastors simply do not have the time for adequate sermon preparation. I agree that there is certainly quite a bit of pressure from churches to fit this expectation, however, it is the pastor's duty to give the congregation what they actually need biblically, rather than what they want. Perhaps it is time for more pastors to put a stop to the whims of man-made expectations and follow their Scriptural mandate for pastoral ministry. If they cannot fulfill it there, perhaps it is time to move on elsewhere, where they can fulfill their role biblically. I feel that the pastor’s study of the Word of God should be central to what he does. I wholeheartedly agree with this quote from Tim’s article:

“The pastor must lead the way in studying the Word. This must be his primary occupation and must take precedence over other tasks, and even important tasks, such as pastoral counseling or providing leadership.”

I believe that one of the primary problems being faced in the church today is a crisis concerning the lack of recognition of the biblical role for the pastor-teacher. When you think of it, the pastoral leadership is to provide the biblical vision and direction for the ministry of the church. This direction must be gleaned from the careful study of Scripture. And if the leadership fails to provide this, then it should be no surprise that the congregation will fail to function in a biblical manner and its spiritual growth will be severely diminished.

Another Example

Yet another example of crazy pragmatism. This type of nonsense is one of the many reasons that the evangelical church is in such a mess today.



To put this in perspective, click here to watch "The Church Growth Movie".

An Example of How Far Churches Will Take Their Pragmatism

This is a video clip from an actual church service where the so-called praise and worship band played the AC/DC song, “Hell’s Bells”, as an apparent attempt to be relevant to the “seekers”. The first minute or so is a clip from Eric Holmberg’s first documentary on rock music, “Hell’s Bells”, subtitled “The Dangers of Rock ‘n’ Roll”, which provides the lyrics of the song.

This illustrates just how far many of the seeker churches are willing to take their pragmatism, embracing the “end justifies the means” mentality, justifying any worldly method.

Attempting to Make Sense of the Different "Streams" of the Emerging Church

While there are those in the general Emerging Church movement who may quip “’Emergent’ does not speak for us” or “’Emergent’ is not our denomination”, many of those same people also use and refer to books and material promoted by the organization referred to as “Emergent”. I have been amazed at some who take offense at being associated with Brian McLaren, but they are also the same ones who will often adopt many of his philosophies and quote from his books. Emergent (also known as Emergent Village) is the official liberal wing of the broader Emerging Church Movement. Emergent also seeks to be a profound influence in the broader Emerging Church.


But the movement can be broken down a bit more than just Emerging and Emergent. Mark Driscoll in an article entitled “A Pastoral Perspective on the Emerging Church”, explains the differences between three basic streams of the Emerging Church Movement as identified by Dr. Ed Stetzer. This is an interesting article that describes the various segments of the Emerging Church movement. But even in the category of the more conservative “Relevants”, I have great concern, especially since Rob Bell and Donald Miller tend to be their prominent spokesmen. Rob Bell is not in the least bit truly conservative theologically as many people unfortunately consider him to be. And Donald Miller tends to be doctrinally ambiguous, particularly in his book “Blue Like Jazz”. To me it is very telling when Brian McLaren can provide his glowing endorsement on the back of Miller’s book. Furthermore, there is information in Miller’s book pointing people to Emergent Village, including the URL to the website. Neither individual inspires any enthusiasm on my part. In fact, I feel the need to warn others about their teaching, especially in the case of Rob Bell. There is, however, a relatively small group within the Relevants who do embrace Reformed Theology and are more inclined to gain theological insight from such men as John Piper and Tim Keller. This group is generally theologically conservative, but is, in my estimation, very small. This is where Mark Driscoll would fit in. However, I am apprehensive to heartily recommend Driscoll's ministry given his propensity to utilize slang terms and phrases that are essentially unsuitable for Christians to use in general speech, let alone from the pulpit. Unfortunately, this has earned him the notoriety of being known as "Mark the cussing pastor", a term that Donald Miller refers to him as in his book "Blue Like Jazz". It is not his theology that I have the problem with, it is the way he presents himself in an apparent effort to be hip and cool to appeal to the younger generation.


While I recognize that there are certainly those who may hold to orthodox Christian beliefs within the broader Emerging Church, I often wonder what they expect to truly accomplish by being identified as “Emerging”, especially when their views are often in direct variance with the theological views of many of their colleagues. The very fact that they uphold the notion that there are indeed absolute truths, causes them to be ostracized by many if not the majority in the Emerging Church movement.


At the end of Mark’s article, he summarizes where he sees the movement heading.


“In the end, I believe the conversation will result in multiple communities arriving at different conclusions and breaking off to have their own conversations, with their own Bible translations, leaders, books, magazines, websites, blogs, conferences, and model churches. That is already happening as new networks are forming and new church planting networks are establishing new churches with varying answers to the missiological questions. Over time, this may result in new denominations because inevitably systems must be put in place to serve a movement and somehow an umpire must be put in place to make decisions about what is and what is not acceptable doctrine and practice.


The only hope is a return to the true gospel of Jesus Christ as revealed in Scripture. The gospel must be unleashed in the world through the Church for the transforming salvation of sinners and their cultures. If the gospel is lost, as I fear it already has been among some Revisionists, then tomorrow will be a dark day for the truth about Jesus.”



In my opinion, the Emerging Church is destined to end up as a terrible train wreck. And if the rest of the evangelical church follows their lead, it will be headed down the same collision course with disaster.

Sloppy Handling of Scripture

I saw this video clip over at Big Orange Truck. This is typical of far too many in the KJVOnly crowd and an example of why we need more men who will carefully and accurately teach the Word of God.

(Warning:Crude Language)

Some Never Learn

I know that this is not new news any more, and others have already commented on this, but I will give my two cents any way. Bill Hybels has apparently had a life changing experience after the facts revealed through their evaluation of their ministry. After years of instructing multitudes of churches and leaders about how they should be doing church, they have come to realize that what they have been doing has not been grounding people in Scripture and maturing them in the faith. As Phil Johnson pointed out in his post, isn’t this what many have been warning about for years, because Willow Creek was failing to follow a Biblical model for ministry? And it is only now, as a result of their own poll, that they have realized the truth. Wouldn’t they have avoided all of this had they followed a Scriptural model of church ministry?

What is frustrating is that there is not really any hint of true repentance for their actions. The only remedy they are going to offer apparently, is some new program for training on how the congregation can read, learn and apply the Bible for themselves. Now, I think that teaching people how they can read and learn the Bible for themselves is extremely important and certainly should be a fundamental part of what a church does. And it is also true that Christians should not rely solely on the church to provide all of their spiritual nourishment, spoon-feeding them all truth. Christians need to take responsibility for their spiritual growth. But in addition, God has ordained that there should be leadership that assists with that process as well. (Ephesians 4:11-16) And the church is biblically obligated to provide solid Bible teaching to help believers grow. This is why Paul exhorted Timothy to "be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth." (2 Timothy 3:15, NASB) Pastoral leadership is to labor in the Word of God, seeking to teach with precision and accuracy. In fact, those who "work hard", putting forth greater effort at preaching and teaching are considered worthy of greater honor (1 Timothy 5:17). This describes seeking to teach the more in-depth truths of Scripture. That is fundamental to contributing to the spiritual maturity of the congregation. Simply offering what is essentially a do-it-yourself kit is not going to achieve what they think. People need to be exposed consistently to solid biblical preaching. Also fundamental to the ministry is a mutual exhortation and accountability, and this can only occur as members have opportunities to share biblical truth with one another, challenging one another.

What is even more astounding though is what else is taking place at Willow Creek. You would think that after their discovery, they would be inclined to return to the Word of God, and be even more vigilant to make reforms to align themselves with Scripture. But instead, they are now cozying up with leadership in the emerging church, scheduling Brian McLaren as a keynote speaker at their youth conference. This is not the first time that they shared the platform with an emerging leader. They have had Rob Bell speak as a guest at their church before. So perhaps it is a case where they are exchanging one error for another jumping on the Emergent bandwagon.

But a similar revelation was also shared by Gilbert Bilezikian some time ago. Bilezikian was one of the founders of Willow Creek.

But these sudden revelations that what they have been doing has not proven beneficial has been realized by others in the popular seeker church movement. Take Sally Morgenthaler's realization that falls in line with what Bill Hybels has come to realize. I wrote a post on this awhile back. But then she partners with popular emerging church leaders Tony Jones and Doug Pagitt.

Paul warned the Ephesian elders of the wolves who would enter the flock in Acts 20. But instead of warning and protecting the flock, leadership today is merely going to allow the wolves to come in and play with the sheep. This graphic from Phil Johnson at TeamPyro captures the essense of the situation.

I am afraid that the evangelical church has become so removed from the truth, that even when they seem to come to their senses, they lack any real discernment to implement any true reforms.

Is the Reformation Necessary Any More?

The Albert Mohler program had an interesting topic for discussion a couple of weeks ago. There is controversy surrounding the topic of whether or not the Reformation is still necessary today. In fact, one prominent author, Mark Noll along with Carolyn Nystrom, pose the question “Is the Reformation Over?” in their book by the same title. They apparently seem to make a case that both Protestants and Catholics have perhaps moved closer together rather than moving farther apart. They site many changes including the outcome of Vatican II.

But what people need to remember is that the fundamental doctrinal stance of the Roman Catholic Church has not changed, and a careful reading of the latest Catholic catechism should prove that. Most of the changes have been mainly cosmetic, with most of the core beliefs remaining the same. Even a recent proclamation by the Vatican affirms their belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church. (Al Mohler commented on this back in June) At least they are now being honest and evangelicals should take notice that Rome has not genuinely changed. And they are on an aggressive campaign to win back former Catholics, as well as evangelizing new converts. Even utilizing strategies mimicking evangelicals. And the so-called ecumenical partnering with evangelicals has dubious intentions.

Some have concluded that the Reformation was a mistake, or the intent has been accomplished and now we need to build bridges with Rome. But I think that these conclusions are a result of not understanding the key issues that are still remaining. Not least of which is the doctrine of justification. And the current shallow state of evangelicalism does not help matters either. The average church-goer has little understanding of what the Bible teaches and the current trend does not look promising.

I hold to the view that the Reformation is still certainly necessary. In fact, we need another reformation to lead the church today back to solid Scriptural footing.

Unfortunately, the attitude that seems to pervade much of evangelicalism is that of indifference, or at times hostile to the principles of the Reformation. This is especially true of the attitude projected by many in the emerging church movement. But the attitude is not unique to the emerging church. It is pervasive of the evangelical church in general. And it has been for quite some time.

In fact, Rick Warren has called for a new Reformation, a reformation focusing on deeds rather than creeds, and in a sense, tends to deemphasize the importance of beliefs by emphasizing deeds over beliefs. And this can be seen in his approach to ministry. Let’s take for instance, Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven program.

This program is implemented by a whole host of denominations. This includes Roman Catholics. Holy Family Parish in Illinois was one of the first Catholic Churches to utilize Rick Warren’s approach. The purpose driven program is apparently so adaptable that Catholics can use it as a tool to evangelize people utilizing their doctrinal perspective. This should underscore its fundamental weakness and Rick Warren’s careless approach to fundamental doctrine. Don’t kid yourself; the RCC is on an aggressive campaign to win back former Catholics, as well as to win new converts. Catholics want to paint a picture that they are just another evangelical church, when their beliefs are different from us at very crucial points. Of course today, the average evangelical really knows little about his faith, so they really don’t understand the important differences.

Yes, the Reformation is still necessary after 500 years when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses on the door of the Whittenberg Church. The same crucial issues still divide Catholics and Evangelicals. Unfortunately, too many evangelicals do not understand their faith well enough to understand these differences.

The Church Has Been in a Mess Before

We may be thinking that our generation is the first generation that has experienced a spiritual decline in the church. But this is simply not true. There have been other times in the history of the church where the spiritual vitality of the church has waned. A study of church history should prove this to be true. Of course, it certainly seems that the decline today has reached unprecedented proportions and perhaps this is just one more sign that may be signaling Christ’s soon return.

But the period leading up to the first great awakening was awash in an attitude that is similar to what we are experiencing today. The state of affairs in the church was not good at all, and it was this backdrop that Jonathan Edwards proclaimed the truth of Scripture without shame. It was this approach that God blessed and it ignited the Great Awakening.

Here is an interesting article by Dan Jarvis entitled "The Next Great Awakening", discussing the “Halfway Covenant” that was the official policy followed by churches in the American colonies in 1662. It was a way the churches attempted to turn the tide of waning numbers, by allowing unregenerate children of members to become partial or "halfway" members.

Typically, to become a full member of a church meant one must have given testimony of a conversion experience. With the increasing affluence in the colonies, people became more concerned with comfort and material wealth and less concerned with spiritual matters. Under the half way covenant, if someone led a reasonably wholesome life and agreed to follow the creed and teaching of the church, they could become partial members without giving testimony of having a conversion experience. These partial members did not have voting privileges in the church, but they were allowed to partake of the Lord’s Supper.

The Halfway Covenant was implemented with the best intentions. The church would continue to grow and influence society, and new members would be brought in who would be exposed to the teachings of the church and eventually be converted. Or so they thought. Eventually just about anyone could become members and the half-way members outnumbered the full members. The plan had a disastrous effect on the church and eventually the spiritual vitality of the churches declined. Rather than the church having a positive influence on society, worldliness entered into the church and society continued to degenerate.

What turned things around? The straight forward preaching of God’s Truth by men like Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield. And it was sermons like Edward’s “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” that awakened people to their need to repent and embrace Jesus Christ as their Savior.

The dilemma of the Halfway Covenant sounds quite similar today with the seeker sensitive mentality of the church. It certainly shows how we really don’t learn from history, but have a habit of repeating some of the same mistakes of the past.

The Basis for Christian Music

I appreciate Steve Camp’s approach to Christian music, especially in a day and age when the CCM has given itself to wholesale compromise. He has made a stand against the worldly compromise within the Christian music industry. In this video explaining the objective of Audience One, he makes a case for more biblically based music. And he points out how much of Christian music has been turned into an industry instead of a ministry. Christian music should be centered on bringing glory to God and richly steeped in biblical truth. It is a shame that much of so-called Christian music today is theologically void and not able to cause people to think deeply about their God.

Audience One identifies 5 key pillars it bases its philosophy on:
1. Glory of God
2. Authority of Scripture
3. Local Church Accountability
4. Partner with Believers
5. Ministry not Industry

I believe that those are sound guiding principles.

Are You Really Good Enough?

The church that we left promoted this idea that we really do not need to emphasize that people are sinners, because they already know that they are sinners. So the philosophy became “we should not ‘camp out’ on sin” because it is not necessary. While it may be true that some may error in only telling people of the bad news of their sin and little time telling them of the solution – salvation through Jesus Christ – we must be careful not to error in the opposite direction. It is also absolutely necessary to explain to people and illustrate the reason they are lost so that they fully understand the gravity of their lost condition. They need to understand how lost and separated they are and that they are under the condemnation and judgment of God. And evangelicalism is failing to do much of this today.

While people will generally admit that they are sinners, they also have a tendency to minimize the seriousness of their sin. They tend to rationalize that “isn’t everyone a sinner?”, and that they are a basically a good person. After all, won’t God look more to our good deeds? Isn’t God all about love and forgiveness? Won’t He look at my heart and see that I am sincere?

The fact is that human nature resists the acknowledgement of the seriousness of sin. It is not enough to merely tell people they are sinners, we need to go into detail and explain how their sin has separated them from God and that it is not merely a minor infraction. People need to understand this in order to come under the full conviction of their sinful state.

This tendency of avoiding discussion of the depravity of man and his sin has become the bane of contemporary evangelicalism.

These video clips from CrossTV discuss this issue. Listen how people tend to avoid and dismiss their lost condition, including prison inmates, and actually claim that they have a basically good heart.

When Will the Church Learn?

I was alerted to this article at Justin Taylor’s blog, Between Two Worlds. It seems that Sally Morgenthaler has changed her views on the so-called worship evangelism she pioneered. Her book, “Worship Evangelism” was very influential and enticed many churches to adopt her philosophy. In hindsight, she now admits that despite all the effort that the contemporary church has placed on cultural relevancy, it has not yielded the intended outcome. Despite the multiplication of mega churches utilizing strategies including her worship evangelism, the church has failed to significantly reach the unchurched.

But while I appreciate Morgenthaler’s honesty, I wonder if she has really changed her pragmatic thinking. In her article she points out that in the early days of the Worship Evangelism strategy, the unchurched were actually responding to the pragmatic strategy; that is until the novelty grew wearisome. Eventually, only the well-established seeker megachurches survived. Ultimately, these meagachurches became nothing more than one more choice on the menu for church-goers shopping for the next thrill. But I also noticed in her article that she is a contributor to the book, “An Emergent Manifesto of Hope”, edited by emerging gurus Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones. Given the emerging church's aversion to propositional truth, tragically, she may be just trading one error for another. Yes, I know, the emerging church denies any claims that they are simply adopting another pragmatic strategy, but that is essentially what they are doing. Pandering to what the postmodern society desires. I wrote a post some time ago pointing this out.

She comments on the observations by an “unchurched journalist”. “No sad songs. No angry songs. Songs about desperation, but none about despair. Worship for the perfect. The already arrived. The good-looking, inoffensive, and nice. No wonder the unchurched aren’t interested.” A little further and she advocates that that we “worship well and deeply”, including songs containing anger, despair and sadness, returning more to the Psalms, where David expressed these emotions. I agree that we should return to a more genuine heartfelt worship. Not as a tool to appeal to the lost, but for our expression of worship toward God. To be fair, I don’t think she was necessarily advocating using that as an attempt to appeal to the lost. The main thrust of her statement was directed at the focus of our worship being the “overflow of what God does through us beyond our walls.” And I agree, but with one caveat. I also agree with something that Jim Hamilton wrote in a post addressing this same article by Morganthaller; there should really not be a dichotomy between our corporate worship and our overall worship reflected in our daily life. Both are vitally important.

Singing and music in Scripture is never intended to be used as an evangelism tool. The Scriptural exhortation to sing songs, hymns and spiritual songs are meant to focus our thoughts on God and edification of one another. (Ephesians 5:19) They are not meant to be used as just one more tool in our arsenal of clever pragmatism to supposedly spread the gospel.

God chose the preaching of the simple message of the cross to be the vehicle by which to reach the lost with the gospel. Not eloquent, clever speeches or fanciful methodologies, appealing to the desires of the culture. (1 Corinthians 1:17-29; 1 Corinthians 2:1-5) This is to be done regardless of what the culture wants. (2 Timothy 4:2) If the culture resists and refuses to listen, we are to do it anyway. The measure of our success should not rest in numbers, but on the change in the hearts of those who believe, whether it is one or 1,000. If one were to judge the ministry of Jeremiah, according to the standards of contemporary evangelicalism, he would be deemed a failure. The man steadfastly preached the unadulterated message that God commanded him for over forty years, yet his message was continually rejected by the people. We must be willing to exercise the same steadfast faith and commitment.

In a vain attempt to supposedly reach the lost, churches have so watered down the truth in order to produce a lowest common denominator faith to get people in the church, and now are inept at providing any help in equipping believers in the faith. And this equipping is necessary if believers are going to be able to go into the world, being strengthened in their faith, brought to spiritual maturity and be an effective witness and testimony to the gospel of Christ.

While I certainly believe that churches should engage in outreach outside of the church, unless this effort is under girded by the proclamation of Scriptural truth, churches will come to the same dead-end that the liberal churches met; a hollow message that really offers no long-term hope to the spiritually needy.

It is time for the church get back to the basics of what the church should be doing instead of be driven by the latest pragmatic approaches devised through the clever schemes of man. It is time for the church to look to the teaching of Scripture to find out how we should be carrying out the ministry of the church, rather than the ideologies of man. Inevitably, man's ideas will lead to eventual failure, while providing a temporal illusion of success.

Dealing With False Teachers

“10For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision,
11who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.
12One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons."
13This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith,
14not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth.” (Titus 1:10-14; NASB)

It is true that patience must be practiced in persuading people in sound teaching. There are those who are victims, not the perpetrators of false teaching. (2 Timothy 2:24-26) However, those who persist and continue to spread the venom of errant doctrine need to be dealt with more sternly.

False teachers must be confronted and every effort taken to stop the spread of their errant doctrine. In Titus 1:11, Paul stresses that they be “silenced”, which means to “bridle” or “stop up the mouth”. The foolish talk of false teaching must be promptly stopped. The spread of the nonsense of the false teachers was overthrowing or destroying the faith of many, turning them from the foundation of biblical faith. The command given is to “reprove them severely”, with the intent that they would be restored to sound faith. The term “reprove” means to convict or refute even to the point of bringing shame on the person or persons responsible, making them accountable. It also includes using sharpness, being very terse with the intent of being peremptory, giving no room for the perpetrators to plead their cause and show reason for non-compliance. Their error must be exposed with the light of the truth. Persistent error needs to be dealt with harshly in order to contain it from spreading. That may not sound nice, but when you are dealing with false doctrine, swift drastic measures must be taken, as if you were dealing with gangrene in the human body. It is no time to be “nice”. Corrective action is crucial to the very health and survival of the church body!

Like any other sin in the church, those persistent in false teaching must be disciplined, even to the point of removing them from the congregation. In 1 Timothy 1:20, Paul banished Hymenaeus and Alexander from the church, placing them outside the protection and nurture of the congregation, outside of God’s blessing and under Satan’s control in hopes that they would repent and come to the knowledge of the truth. This is the same way that anyone who remains obstinate in their sin should be dealt with. Paul commanded the Corinthians to do the same thing in 1 Corinthians 5 with the man who was caught in immorality. God demands purity in His church. The church must not be tolerant of sin in any form if purity is to be maintained; “a little leaven leavens the whole lump”. (1 Corinthians 5:6) Just like leaven in a lump of dough, a small amount rapidly spreads throughout the whole lump.

This is why it irritates me when false teachers and their materials are tolerated in the church. The excuse given is that they are “chewing off the meat and spitting out the bones”. When you are dealing with false teachers who are attacking core essential doctrine in the church, this excuse will not fly. In fact, it is patently unbiblical. I will cover that subject further in my next post.

Misconceptions We Are Led To Believe

I was listening to Part 1 of an interesting three-part series on Focus on the Family a week ago entitled, “Do You Have a Christian Worldview”? (If you go out to OnePlace.com under the broadcast archives, scroll down until you see the title of the broadcast) It was concerning how youth are hungry for spiritual truth, and included Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel. What really stood out in the program was the fact that young people, contrary to the popular misconception produced by postmodern culture, really are indeed interested in truth. Apparently Lee Strobel was told halfway though a discussion he was having with an unnamed “scholar” concerning his book, "The Case for Christ", that young people would not buy his book because youth are not interested in truth today. Yet the largest group he receives letters from stating that they came to faith in Christ as a result of the book, are from the 16-24 age group! So much for the folly of postmodernism!

So much of this foolishness could be avoided by simply believing the Bible. Scripture is clear that the chosen vehicle for delivering the message of saving faith is through the simple preaching of God’s Word. Unfortunately, man thinks that he is smarter than God and can improve upon God’s simple command. Paul claimed to know nothing except Christ and Him crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2). This is what Paul preached.

It is interesting how we are led to believe many things that upon closer scrutiny are simply not true. Take for instance the notion that in order to reach the lost, we need to find out what the “seeker” wants, and then tailor our message and ministry to meet those wants in order to attract people to the Gospel. This is what led to the plethora of marketing methods that have been imposed upon the church, under the premise that unless we adopt those methods, the church will become irrelevant and wither and die. This has become the battle cry for the past couple of decades. A look at the results would indicate that the effect of these methods has had a negative effect on the health of the church.

Now we are told that unless the church jumps on the bandwagon and learns to ride the wave of postmodernism, the church will essentially be swept away into irrelevancy. We have been in this position before; the admonition to change or die is once again upon us. But we need to look at where we have been and closely examine the results. We must scrutinize everything with the text of Scripture. If we do not abide by God’s Truth, we will be led further away from God. If one were to judge success based purely on numbers, it would seem that we have experienced success. But numbers are deceiving. Even the statistics prove that we have failed miserably. Even though we have built bigger and bigger mega-churches, according to Barna Research, while the population has only increased a mere 15%, the number of unchurched has increased by a whopping 92% since 1991. Furthermore, Biblical illiteracy has run rampant and worldliness has taken root.

But God’s Truth is spiritually discerned and it is God who opens the eyes of man to His truth. This is not a result of man’s clever formulas and methodologies.

“18For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
19For it is written,
"I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE,
AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE."
20Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.” (1 Corinthians 1:18-21; NASB®)

“9 But as it is written:
“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned”
(1 Corinthians 2:9-14, NKJV™)

“3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.” (2 Corinthians 4:3, NKJV™)

It is God who chooses and grants salvation. In John Chapter 6, many of the multitudes could not grasp the words of Jesus and ultimately turned away. Jesus does not come back with clever words or fleshly appeals in order to win them back. He does not try to find out what things interest them in an attempt to lure them in. He merely underscores the fact that it is God the Father who grants salvation to those who will be saved.

“All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.” (John 6:37, NKJV™)

“63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. 65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.” 66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.” (John 6:63-66, NKJV™)

No amount of human persuasion alone can save anyone.

There is no record in Scripture that the apostles employed clever methodologies. Their tactic was simple; just boldly proclaim the truth and abide by God’s Word. Dr. James MacDonald points this out in an article describing his philosophy of ministry.

“The focus on human persuasion in evangelism has produced an array of church growth methods that could be accurately sub-titled "how to fill your church with tares." The early church appears to have placed no emphasis on evangelistic methodology. Their approach was simple and powerful, they were BOLD! Many times in the New Testament the Greek word translated boldness which literally means "openness" or "candor," to speak freely especially in the face of hostility. It does not imply using a loud voice or an obnoxious presentation of spiritual truth that disregards the willingness of the listener. Boldness is the Spirit-directed conviction that one must share the good news of Jesus Christ and not fear the response or reproach of the listener. Spirit-led boldness has been replaced in our day by "the fear of man which brings a snare" (Proverbs 29:25).”
(from Pillar Four in “The Four Pillars” by James MacDonald)

The Scriptural command is simple;

"2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching." (2 Timothy 4:2, NKJV™)

This is to take place whether of not it is popular, for verses 3 and 4 tell us that the time will come when people will no longer tolerate sound doctrine. The term “preach”, means to proclaim something publicly and openly, with urgency, a message that needs to be heeded and obeyed. Unfortunately, much of what is passed off as “preaching” today is nothing more than casual, conversational dialogue. It is interesting that we seldom hear this passage proclaimed in many churches today. The Bible does not teach that since people do not want to hear truth, we therefore should water down or dress up the truth to make it palatable.

Greg Laurie, who pastors Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California, also did not follow the clever philosophy of the church growth movement. His book, "The Upside Down Church", tells of how they simply followed the Bible and actually did the opposite of what church growth experts recommend. Yet the church grew tremendously. I need to read that book again; unfortunately I will need to purchase another since the book was destroyed some time ago when our basement flooded. Tim Challies has done a good review of this book.

The church desperately needs to get back to the simple truth of Scripture, rather than following the latest clever formulas and philosophies produced by men. Our duty is simply to proclaim the message of the Cross to as many as possible. It is the sovereign God who brings about saving faith, not the clever techniques of man.