Church for the Unchurched

I am not m even 100% sure what my title means exactly. But this is a phrase I hear a lot in Baptist circles today. We need to plant a church for the unchurched! Or all churches must be a church for the unchurched!

What does this even mean?

 It sounds like saying "We need a baseball team for non-baseball players!" Or "We need a Chinese restaurant for people who hate Chinese food!" 

First of all, in the entire New Testament there is not the phrase "church for" anybody. There is the "church of God" the "churches of Galatia" the "church of the Laodiceans" etc. 

What is a church for the unchurched? 

What is meant by unchurched?

Do we mean a church of the unchurched? That doesn't seem like something that jives with Scripture. 

Here's the only thing I see that "unchurched" can possibly mean: not regularly gathering with a local church. If it means something other than that, well I don't understand language!

So if someone is not regularly gathering with a local church what does that mean? Here are two options:

1. They are lost. They are in rebellion against God. They need the gospel. They need someone to go to them and share the good news of the life, death and resurrection of Christ. 

2. They are saved but living in sin (not gathering with a church is sin - Heb 10:24-25, 1 Jn 3:14, etc). They need the gospel. Specifically, they need church discipline. They need confronted with their sin and called to repentance. If they refuse to repent we are to assume they are in category 1 (see above). 

And yet, a big drive behind our current affinity based church planting craze is that we need 'church for the unchurched.' We need churches to consist of lost people? That isn't even possible (well, yes it is 'possible' but it isn't a church). Or does it mean we need churches made up of unrepentant people who've skipped out on regularly attending a church? That doesn't make sense either! 

Do we mean we need to create church meetings that are just inviting and comfortable to lost people or unrepentant church members not attending their church? If by inviting we mean friendly, that's fine. But if it means we need to create church services for lost/unrepentant people, well that's not a church gathering!

As I have discussed this affinity based stuff with people over the years, I really am convinced that many well meaning people think the main, regular gathering of the church should be focused on reaching lost people. You will not find that anywhere in the New Testament. We don't need a church for the unchurched. We need a church for the churched! Or how about I just say the biblical term: we need churches.

Wait. You don't care about lost people!? Don't you want to see people saved!? Absolutely! But this isn't the purpose of the regular gathering of Believers. Sure, a lost person may wander in, and if so I hope they hear the gospel and repent and believe! But our regular gatherings are for Believers (see 1 Cor. 14:26). Churches in the New Testament weren't set up to attract unbelievers to their gatherings. 

A church is not required to gather in a building to be a church. She may meet in a home/homes or even a shop. But do we think this warrants turning the church gathering into a circus, rodeo, or rock concert? Do we think this warrants intentionally not gathering on Sundays because that's a good day to hunt? If so, we've missed the purpose of the local church gathering in the New Testament. 

What is the church to do? A church should gather for worship, ordinances, edification, the Word, discipline, discipleship, giving, fellowship, prayer, etc. And then, she should scatter to proclaim the gospel to the lost. 

If any unbeliever is in your regular gathering, he ought to feel conviction and be called to account (1 Cor 14:24-25). 

What biblical basis is there for setting up the main gathering of a local church to be tailored for lost people or unrepentant church members? Beloved, there is no basis for this. We must quit any such practices in repentance. 

Back to the baseball analogy. It's like we see tons of people who don't like baseball, so we'll change it up! Replace a bat with a hoop. Get a bigger ball. Play on a court not a diamond. Doesn't look like you're playing baseball anymore. 

We do need to honestly asses our current situation and seek to align what we do with Scripture. I am in no way giving the established church a pass. In fact, I'm saying that's where reformation, revival, revitalization or whatever word you want to use needs to happen. 

Perhaps I'm fighting a losing battle with this but my hope is the people of our denomination will consider these truths and adjust our church planting, and established church, practices accordingly. 

For help: A short 9Marks article

Or you can watch this "funny" YouTube video (which would be a lot funnier if it didn't hit so close to home!)

10 Reasons to Reconsider the 'Affinity Based' Model of Church Planting

I think we need to have a conversation as Southern Baptists. And I want you to know it's because I love church planters, lost people, the local church, and God's glory that I write this. 

What possible other motivation might I have? I don't consider myself old enough yet to simply be a stick in the mud for the sake of being a stick in the mud! So, I humbly ask that you hear my heart on this. 

Let me preface this with a few things:

First of all, I want to state that my goal in using this medium to address this issue is not to squabble or fight but hopefully bring awareness to a real issue we are facing as Southern Baptists, and particularly Arkansas Baptists. I don't want to beat each other up but to really consider these things based on God's Book for Churches and Church Planting, written by about 40 different authors with One overarching Author breathing out His Holy words.

Secondly, (to reiterate) I am not against church planting, nor am I against seeing people come to Christ! I just think that while a 'brick' may work as a hammer, there's actually something that works much better than a brick - a hammer (hopefully you catch the analogy)! In that sense, in a funny sort of twist, I may actually be the biggest pragmatist I know (not really, but see the point here)! See, I do actually want to do what works. But I believe that a biblically faithful local church is what works.

Thirdly, I am encouraged by men in our state and country with a burden for the lost. While I appreciate their zeal, I cannot condone their methods. I will also add here that their methods actually run counter to their zeal. Unbiblical methods don't help us reach people but rather create false converts and stifle maturity. 

Fourthly, in relation to what I just said,  I often hear the question "yeah, but if just one soul comes to Christ, isn't it worth it?" No it's not. We can think of countless testimonies from which people were rescued from sin once they had reached rock bottom (whether it was rock bottom in a life of fornication, drinking, drugs, etc). Who is going to say we ought to now promote these means so that "one more person" will get saved!? Furthermore, don't we believe more people will come to Christ when we use the proper means? I mean I think there were genuine conversions in the 2nd Great Awakening, despite the absurdity of various Finneyisms - but this doesn't mean people were saved because of these absurdities but in spite of them. Whether or not a person 'gets saved' is never a proper barometer for judging whether or not a particular method 'works'. It's heartbreaking to continue to see posts where '20 kids came forward and got saved' when recent history in our convention has shown that the majority of those same 20 kids aren't truly converted. 

Finally, a word on tone. I've had faithful friends tell me not to write because your time can't be judged. I understand that counsel but I am also convinced we must talke about these issues if we hope to ever change. 

Ok, here we go, here's 10 reasons to reconsider the 'Affinity Based' Model of church planting. This is by no means an exhaustive list and there is much more that could be said about each point:

1. It's contrary to Galatians 3:28, 1 Corinthians 1:13, and John 13:35 (and like passages) -

Why would we aspire to plant churches that intentionally separated people? The gospel unites Believers and this is a testimony to a lost and dying world. No one cares if Jews and Gentiles gather separately, but they start scratching heads when they are united.

It has been asked, "What is the difference between 'affinity' and 'culture'?" I'm not sure where you want to draw the line, but I am sure of this: planting 'sub-culture' churches is not a New Testament strategy.

What kind of love is it to just be around people like me? Even a ravenous wolf loves her cubs. There is nothing supernatural about that.

2. It misunderstands the purpose of the church as an evangelistic gathering - (see for example Heb. 10:24-25)

We think "church" is where people come to get saved. Can people get saved during a church service? Of course! But is this the purpose of the local church's weekly gathering? Absolutely not. You won't find that anywhere in the New Testament. It's strange to even consider how we came to assume this.

So, the idea is "we need to create a church for the 'unchurched'." Well, there's a reason men are 'unchurched' (not a biblical category btw) - they are lost.  How can we read the New Testament and come away with the idea that we need to plant churches that people will come to and get saved? Not one church in the New Testament was planted that way. Instead, the gospel was preached, people were saved, and a church was planted (no adjective before the church either). We don't "come to church". We are the church that goes to people (Mt 28:18-20 That's the great commission - GO! Not "ya'll come!")

3. It perpetuates the problem we already have in many churches -

The argument has been made that "most churches are already affinity based!" Most churches in Arkansas are the "white middle class" affinity. No argument there. Don't we all agree that's a problem?

You really need to ask yourself that question. Is it a problem that many Arkansas Baptist churches only reflect the white middle class? I say yes since Arkansas is represented by more people than just that. 

But how can we say that the way to fix this problem is just to create more churches with the same problem? This only perpetuates disunity and the consumer driven mindset held by many church members.

4. It neglects the solution we need in many churches - (Revelation 3:3)

The solution we need in many churches is reformation and revival. But when we don't confront these issues and instead say "Well, we need to create different churches! That will be the solution to this!", we don't really fix anything.  It's uncomfortable telling the people of a particular local church their issue is that they need to repent. Parachurch leaders have no issue telling churches they need to give more to the cooperative program, but when it comes to telling a church they need to repent the "We can't do that because the local church is autonomous" card is played. Shame, shame.

Look, I am 100% on board saying that we are not being as effective as we need to be, but the problem isn't that we aren't being innovative enough. The problem is we need a heart check and to repent. If a cowboy, or biker, or tattooed person, or clown, or outdoorsman doesn't feel welcomed in my church then the solution isn't to plant a church for them but for our local church to do a heart check and change.


5. It is potentially comforting people on their way to hell - (Hebrews 3:12-14)

Now, let me follow up the last point with this: The reason a cowboy, biker, tattooed person, clown, outdoorsman, or any person may feel uncomfortable or unwelcomed in my church could be because they hate Jesus. Gathering on Sunday is too troublesome, or singing gospel rich tunes is too boring because they don't love God. So, then we plant churches that will accommodate these desires. Then, there are people, who because of Bible Belt culture, feel a burden to go to church to assuage their guilt. Now they are able to go to a church that is tailor made for them when in reality it is a possibility they never have repented and believed the gospel and now they will have a way to keep their guilty conscience at bay. 

Let me stress very strongly here that the solution we need in many churches is a 'recovery' of the gospel and its effects on our lives. So many Southern Baptists are (rightly) against the Liberal mentality of "if we can just fix this or that outward problem the world will be better"! So, the idea is if we can just take away guns or redistribute wealth or give everybody a free education, we can make the world a better place. We know that's not true! People don't need their actions changed but their hearts. And yet, we think when it comes to church planting that what people need is just outward change. We got to change the 'atmosphere'. We need deer heads, horses, or lattes! That'll fix the issue! No. People need the gospel. They need God's saving grace to regenerate their dead heart. Furthermore, by planting 'come join people already like you' churches, we take away a serious effect that the Gospel has on us, namely horizontal reconciliation. Read Genesis 11 and Acts 2 and see God separating the nations and then through the gospel reconciling them.

6. It teaches us that we don't have to deny ourselves - (see Philippians 2:1-11)

If the church doesn't fit my tastes all I need to do is pack up and head to a different one. I don't have to consider others as more significant. Instead, I can keep looking out for number one and find an affinity that best suits me and my family.

7. There are some churches that actually run contrary to the BFM (2000) -

I didn't even know this was a possibility! Call me naive but I thought for a church to receive Cooperative Program dollars it had to align fully with our doctrinal statement. So, we are actually planting churches were people don't meet on the Lord's Day in the name of hunting and family time. Whose day is it again?

A church planter just the other night (4/20/16) jokes about how they didn't meet on Sundays because they like to hunt. Again, I'm just going by what oit confession of faith says. 

So, what I want to know is, which points of the BFM are binding and which aren't? We are saying "It doesn't matter what the BFM says on the Lord's Day". Fine. Does it matter what it says in other areas or not? And if not, why do we even have the thing?

8. It denies the sufficiency of Scripture - 

In the name of "winning people to Jesus" it denies a lot of what the New Testament teaches us about the nature, purpose, and function of the local church. Again, the New Testament doesn't speak of churches that set out to attract unbelievers to their services. So, if we are creating a particular style of service in the name of reaching the lost, we are doing church all wrong. Do we get to define what the local church is and does based on contemporary concerns, or does Scripture?

9. It neglects several ministries that the local church ought to be doing -

If a local church is not feeding the hungry in Her community, the answer is not to plant a Hunger Church. The church ought to work on ministering to those in need.

Similarly, if there truly is a sub culture of cowboys or if there is a community of Hispanics, African Americans, or other ethnicity, the answer is not to plant churches "for those people" but to intentionally minister to the cultures around them. To just go plant an affinity church lets the local church off the hook of what she should be doing.

10. It misuses Cooperative Program dollars - 

As long as we continue to pour money into these things, we miss areas that money could be used more biblically and effectively. What if, when approached by a man who wanted to plant an affinity church, State Conventions sat down with the man and the pastor of a local church in the man’s desired area to plant and encouraged them, trained them, equipped them to partner together to create a ministry to reach the affinity that the planter feels lead to reach under the authority and leadership of a local church. Hey, what if the ABSC actually paid for a staff person for a local church! (If approved by the church of course). What if money was used on strengthening existing churches (who desired to be faithful and biblical)?

I am not against evangelistic ministries within the local church focusing on reaching youth, or strippers, or addicts, or cowboys, or Native Americans. In fact we can and must increase these evangelistic efforts in areas of the state where there are these specific needs. But, we have no biblical warrant to tailor make a new church just for these sub groups.

11. BONUS: Numbers lie - 

A biblically faithful church may appear to 'win' less people to the Lord, but you can be assured that a church faithful to Her King in all ways is going to be more effective than one who is not. We should all be concerned about numbers but numbers should not be our chief concern. Our greatest concern is gospel fidelity. As a good friend of mine has said "the true conversion rate may never surpass the false conversion rate so if the opponents are just counting decisions they are never going to see that this is actually more effective in fulfilling the great commission." The point of course is that if all we look at is 'numbers' we would be forced to conclude that what we need is more Joel Osteen churches. And surely no faithful Southern Baptist would approve of that.

One other thing about numbers is that you will see in a decade or two this falling by the wayside and something other taking its place. My proof of that is we see this right now. "Contemporary" churches aren't enough anymore are they? Affinity churches are taking the place of the 'contemporary' movement. And in a few decades something 'new and innovative' will take the place of affinity planting. How long will we be picking up the pieces of the harm caused by this sort of mentality? Finneyism "worked" 200 years ago and we are still dealing with the negative effects. Brothers, let's scrap this and get back to planting and revitalizing gospel churches.




So, I really think we need to keep this conversation going.  I think we've bought into this affinity methodology under the guise of "it works!" But, is it really worth it based on the above objections? I maintain that if God can save people with unbiblical means, He can save even more when we seek to be wholly faithful.

Let me also suggest two books and a blog that I've found helpful on this issue. I'm thankful for men more mature than me that are thinking through these issues:

1. Prodigal Church by Jared Wilson

2. The Compelling Community by Mark Dever and Jamie Dunlop

3. Slick Card-itus by Jim Elliff

Saving Faith Obeys

Do you have to obey God in order to receive eternal life?

And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him... - Hebrews 5:9

The truth is the only way one can find peace with God is by grace alone through faith alone (Eph 2:8-9). However, faithful Christians have always proclaimed that while it is faith alone that saves, saving faith is never alone (see Eph 2:10). In other words, one evidence of saving faith is that a person is obedient to Christ. 

Now, perhaps someone will look at Hebrews 5:9 and simply say that all one needs to do to be obedient to Christ is to 'believe' Him. So, to 'obey' is to have faith. It's not that I disagree with this, but I would emphasize that the obedience mentioned here is more than just to believe. In context, the author of Hebrews mentions the Son's obedience to the Father (5:8) and so we can safely assume that in v.9 our obedience ought to imitate that of Christ's. 

Let's be very clear here- we ARE NOT saved by our 'works'. If you hear the gospel and respond by saying "yeah I'll try harder to be a better person," you have missed the point. We are saved by Christ's work on our behalf. There is nothing left to 'do' to earn God's love or favor. We must run to Jesus in faith resting in His propitiatory work on our behalf. 

However, we have erred greatly in the Bible Belt by preaching an assurance of salvation based on what someone did in the past. Commonly it goes like this:

"I'm really struggling with assurance of salvation."

"Well, did you ask Jesus in your heart?"

"Yes."

"Did you mean it?"

"Yes."

"Well, you're saved! It's just the devil trying to mess you up."

But what does our text say? Does it say Jesus is the source of eternal life to those who asked Him in their heart? Or those who obey Him?

Part of what it means to be a Believer is that we desire to have every ounce of our life joyfully submitted to Christ's sovereign reign. 

What does this look like? Just a few examples:

A life that knows, believes, loves, and shares the gospel

A life that desires to read, know, and apply Scripture

A life that loves the local church

A life that hates sin and desires to be free from its power and presence 

A life that is generous

A life that shows mercy, kindness, and compassion 

A life in awe of God's holiness and that delights in worshiping Him

Again, this doesn't mean we hope in our works. That God will find our works good enough so we can get into heaven. No beloved, we must rest in Christ's finished work on our behalf. But a faith that rests in Christ, is a faith that lives. And a faith that lives is a faith that obeys. 

Based on Hebrews 5:9, a person that is not walking in obedience has no right to claim Jesus as the source of his or her eternal salvation. (There are so many applications for the local church in this but I'll levee that for another blog sometime!) 

Grace and peace. 

 

Does Money Own You?

It is both amazing and alarming at the ease in which the love of money can creep into our hearts.

Jesus tells us in the Sermon on the Mount:

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money." - Matthew 6:24

It's not that you shouldn't simultaneously serve God and money. It's that you cannot simultaneously serve God and money. Serving money means that we see created things as better than the Creator of things. It means we see the cheap promises of satisfaction right now as greater than the gospel promises of Jesus even though many of those come later...

Have you considered how infatuated we are with material things in our culture? How even a lot of professing Christians and churches are caught up in it? Is it possible that instead of you owning money and material possessions, that they actually own you? Consider the following and take serious inventory of your heart: 

1. If you are unable to make responsible financial decisions because you’ve got to have this toy or that toy, money owns you
   
   
2. If ‘responsible financial decisions’ are determined by worldly financial sense with no grounding in or wisdom from Scripture, money owns you
   
   
3. If you are unable to be generous because you’ve got to pay off this debt or that debt, money owns you
   
   
4. If you are unable to give toward the Kingdom today, because you’re worried about whether God can take care of you tomorrow, money owns you
   
   
5. If you daydream about what you can do with a 1.5 billion dollar Lottery ticket payout, money owns you
   
   
6. If you are envious of what others can do with their money that you can’t, money owns you
   
   
7. If you relish the euphoria brought about by purchasing a new car, or clothes, or electronics, or whatever, money owns you
   
   
8. If you can’t tip because the waitress wasn’t up to your standards today at lunch, money owns you
   
   
9. If you like the feeling you get by people knowing you’ve got money, whether it’s a stock broker, or your insurance agent, or the president of the bank, money owns you
   
   
10. If you think, “I’d be a better person, or a better Christian, or have a better life - if I just had some more money”, money owns you
    
    
11. If you try and manipulate God for financial blessings, money owns you
    
    
12. If you think God’s love for you is manifested in financial prosperity, money owns you
    
    
13. If you think the gospel is just about getting to heaven, but doesn’t change the way you actually use your money now, money owns you
    
    
14. If you have no real desire to be generous because you worked hard for the money you have, money owns you
    
    
15. If you’re a senseless spender, money owns you
    
    
16. If you’re a Scrooge-esque saver, money owns you

The Eye of Mercy

A 75 year old woman stopped to pick me up today. I didn’t ask for her driver’s license or anything, so it’s just a guess. Maybe she was only 73.5.

In an effort to get a little more exercise in my daily routine I have been walking more around town as of late. Today, I was walking from my home to my study at our church building, only about ¼ of a mile away.

I can count on one hand the times people have stopped to give me a ride since I’ve been walking to the church building (almost a year and a half now). I remember one time our current Mayor stopped and was very friendly. A few others have stopped here or there to ask if I needed a ride.

This isn’t really about people giving me a ride because I don’t need a ride. I want to walk. Look, I’m 5’11” and about 250 pounds. I’ve got a beard that may either come across as intimidating or just makes me look like a vagabond (I’ve actually been told the latter). All that to say, I don’t really expect anyone to look at me and think “Maybe it’d be a good idea to stop and give this red-bearded stranger a ride.”

But then you have this lady. Two and half times my age and probably weighing in at 130 pounds less than I do. If I were to be someone wanting to overpower her and take her purse, or car, well, I’m not really trying to brag on my physical prowess, but it wouldn’t be a contest. And then she stopped. Right there on the main highway and she began to clear out her front seat so that there would be room for me to sit.

I don’t know why, perhaps it’s because of the passage I’m working through for this week’s sermon, but her act really moved my heart today. Of course, I told her I was just walking down the road a little further and didn’t need a ride. I thanked her, and she drove on, probably to never really think about the encounter ever again. Little did she know that her act would make it into a blog post, a sermon illustration, and my heart!

About that passage I’m working on…Here’s what Jesus says in Matthew 6:22-23:

“The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light, but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!”

This is actually one of the more difficult passages I think in the Sermon on the Mount, and something I’m still working through on what Jesus actually means. But, these verses are jammed between two other passages that deal with material possessions. So, while I’m sure there’s some application about us not looking at pornography or other wickedness, I can’t help but feel rather strongly that perhaps the main application here is to be wary of our lust for wealth and possessions.

How does this connect to what happened to me today? A woman, who saw a traveler (I wear a backpack with my books and things in it) walking down a busy highway stopped to give him a ride. Not thinking of her time, her gas, and not to overstretch this, but not even thinking of her life. She saw someone in need, and stopped. She had several excuses not to stop (some pretty legitimate ones I think) but she stopped anyway.

Look, I don’t even know if this lady was a Christian, but I think that her action may help illustrate part of the application of this text. Let our eyes be fixed upon our Master (see v.24) and His Kingdom. When our eye is healthy we will be less desirous of asking those self “preservatory” type questions. Questions that enter our hearts like ‘What is this going to cost me?’, ‘How does this fit in with my agenda?’, and ‘Why can’t somebody else deal with this’?

Again, this isn’t a plea to go pick up hitchhikers. It’s a plea to have an eye of mercy. An eye focused on Christ is an eye that will seek opportunity to show compassion. When our eye is fixed upon Powerball winnings, and daydreaming about what we could do with more money…Or when our eyes feast upon the affluence in our society…Or when our eyes hunger for what our neighbors and coworkers have that we don’t have…When our eyes wander toward these things, our hearts follow. If this isn’t dealt with the result is a severe lack of generosity.

I know, I know. You have excuses on why you’re not more generous than you are. But, my simple desire for you this day is to set your eyes upon the Generous One. The One who gave us the unspeakable gift. Run with endurance the race that is set before you, looking to Jesus the author and finisher of our faith.

Consider that if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness, and if the light in you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

It’s risky to stop the car for someone you don’t know on the road of life. But I’m comfortable saying that those with their eyes on Jesus are risk takers.


Trust Him.

In Love with Jesus but Ashamed of His Words

For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels." - Mark 8:38

If you think about it, Jesus is a pretty popular figure. The Muslims like him, as well as the Jehovah Witnesses and the Mormons. His name is used quite a bit in various movies and the occasional country song while he is still making appearances in cartoons like Family Guy. He was in a lot of people's yards just last month, and hey, even Oprah Winfrey has poured forth her accolades.

Of course, any discerning reader will quickly see that there's a big problem with the above Jesus(es). And that is, how can the Jesus of Oprah, Peter Griffin, and Joseph Smith possibly be the same person? 

And then, we haven't even gotten to the Christian Jesus yet. The actual Jesus. The only Jesus. But I've got to start with the above illustration to establish my premise that the minds of men are capable of creating a false Jesus. And if pitiful cults and popular culture are able to invent their own version of Jesus, it doesn't seem too implausible that those sitting in the pews of what we consider orthodox churches can do the same thing, does it? 

The reality is, particularly in the Bible Belt, everybody loves Jesus. In fact, I'm not sure that I can think of more than 1-2 people (if that) I've ever encountered who openly admit that they hate Him. And yet, did we catch what Jesus said in the above text?  

...whoever is ashamed of me and of my words

Jesus doesn't let us choose here. He and His words are a take it or leave it package. We can't be unashamed of Jesus and ashamed of His words (or the other way around). To put it very plainly, if you are ashamed of Jesus' words, well you may love Jesus, but it's absolutely not the Jesus of Scripture (who, remember, is the only Jesus who matters).  Let me go ahead and drop another bombshell here: the words of Jesus aren't just those red ones you find in the gospel accounts. The words of Jesus begin in Genesis 1:1 and end in Revelation 22:21, and encompass every jot and tittle in between (we'll just have to leave it at that since this concept in itself is enough for a whole separate post). Here's about as simple as I can put it:

You can't love the Jesus of the Bible without loving the Bible of Jesus. 

To be ashamed of the words of Jesus is to be ashamed of Jesus. Here's a few ways to be ashamed of Jesus' words (NOT what we want to do btw):

1. Love what He hates -

To redefine sin or diminish it or excuse it is to be ashamed of the words of Jesus 

2. Hate what He loves -

To disdain righteousness, holiness, His church, etc is to be ashamed of the words of Jesus. 

3. Willfully neglect time in Scripture - 

None of us spend as much time in the Bible as we should. We all need to grow in this. But to fill our time with other things and to not include Scripture day after day, week after week, year after year, is to be ashamed of the words of Jesus. (Essentially, to neglect time in the Bible is to say Scripture is unnecessary - the height of folly and arrogance)

4. Dismiss parts of Scripture -

So you think "Hey I love the words of Jesus!" but then you dismiss the Epistles, or the Pentateuch, or any portion of Scripture that you consider "not nice" or "too judgmental." To do this is to be ashamed of the words of Jesus. 

5. Live as though the Bible is not authoritative -

Many professing Christians I know say the Bible bears highest authority but when it comes to practical living they let their own standards, or cultural pressure have the final say. Jesus didn't run a vote on what we thought about His words. This isn't a democracy. It's a Monarchy. To disobey the words of Jesus is to be ashamed of them. 

6. Live as though the Bible is not sufficient - 

Scripture is sufficient for us knowing God and His will. To live as though you need extra revelations of God or to trust in your experiences over and against Scripture is to be ashamed of the words of Jesus. 

I'm sure as you go through that list you see at least an area or two that you need to seriously think about. Is the Jesus you love the Jesus of Scripture? If so, you will not be ashamed of His words. Why? Because if we are ashamed of His words, we can be sure that He will be ashamed of us in His coming Kingdom no matter how many times we've sung Oh How I Love Jesus on Sunday mornings. 

Ultimately then, the most important thing isn't what we think of Jesus, but what He thinks of us. We can think we have love for Jesus that's as pure as the freshly fallen snow, but if we are ashamed of Scripture (see the enumerated points above!) it's not the Jesus of the Bible that we love. It's a figment of our own imagination, and that Jesus can't save. 

Let me close with one final application. I think one thing that keeps so many from seeing these truths is neglect of the Bible. So many rest their head on a pillow each night with a false peace in their hearts simply because they won't open God's Book and read it. Because when we read the Word, we find that it actually reads us! Therefore, my final application can be summarized in this: get in the Book. 

Open my eyes that I might behold wondrous things out of your Law

Get out of the Way

Spiked hair, cool clothes, and now days even an occasional beard (or at least a soul patch!). Meet the typical music leader in today's contemporary church. A man with a great voice that can sing every choir part simultaneously. That last part might be a bit of an exaggeration. 

Let me say first of all that I'm appreciative of the talent and creativity we see in music leaders in the church today. Part of being made in the image of God means that we should expect certain people to be gifted in the arts. I for one am thankful for my brothers who are exceptionally talented in music and seek to use these gifts to serve the local church. 

Furthermore, let me make it clear that what I'm about to say doesn't just apply to the "hipster" type music leaders only. Whether you sing straight out of the Heavenly Highway Hymnal, or have an iPad stand, or you're anywhere in between, I implore you to listen to an important truth from Scripture about facilitating worship: get out of the way. 

We all know the passage in Isaiah where the prophet has his vision of the Lord seated on His throne, high and lifted up. We often (rightly) make a point of Isaiah's  response, but he's not really who I want to draw your attention to in this particular pericope. Consider this:

Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. - Isaiah 6:2

Seraphim. You want to talk about creatures in the presence of a Holy God! Are there any closer than these? The name literally is conveying the concept of "burning ones." And it's been said the reason they are burning is because they are simply emanating the light of the ineffably Holy God to whom they sing their never ending song. What do you think about these creatures? Do you imagine them to be displeasing to the eye? I don't. I think a case can be made that these creatures are indescribably beautiful. That if you or I were to see them, we simply wouldn't be satisfied with any beauty to be found in this fallen world. I imagine their song to be magnificent as well, as nothing less is befitting of our holy and awesome God's unceasing praise. 

So here we have these amazing creatures. They are closer to the holy presence of God than you. They are more beautiful than you are. And then to top it off, they sing better than you can! Yeah, so what? They've never known the Fall! And Jesus didn't shed His precious blood for them! True. But I still think we can learn from them. Let's look at the verse again: 

Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.

Did you catch that? As glorious as these creatures are, what are they doing? Getting out of the way. They are doing everything they can to say "Don't look at me!" They literally shield their bodies as if to remind us that to even consider them as we worship the Holy Triune God is both heinous and foolish. The song they sing would probably disappoint advocates of "new" stuff as it never changes. At the same time it would probably disappoint advocates of "traditional" stuff as the whole song is less than 20 English words and sang on repeat! Now, I say those last two sentence in slight jest, but really in this vision the emphasis isn't on engaging style or presentation gimmicks is it? The focus is unquestionably on the LORD of hosts. 

Look, we ought to do things well, don't get me wrong. But I wonder what your church's gathering would look like if you were more concerned about showing the congregants the holiness of God than you were about what you and your band looked and sounded like. If you were intentional about not singing songs describing what you or I do and instead sang more about who He is and what He has done. Holy, Holy, Holy. 

So here's my plea music leaders: would you work this week on getting out of the way? Dress well. Sing well. But also lead well by covering your face (in the figurative sense of course) and fading into the background. Let folks think in worship not how great a particular guitar or drum solo is or how many octives you can switch or how many "good ole time religion" songs you may sing, but rather let them think about how glorious, awesome, and holy the Lord God Almighty is. 

It's interesting how divisive music can be in our churches isn't it? And how much money churches will spend on smoke, lights, lasers, screens, and presentation software. It's almost as we've been duped into thinking we need something extra in order to make God's holiness "unboring." Like, if we aren't staying ahead of the technological curve, there won't be any exciting experience. Or even, if we can't get people jumping, flipping, dancing, or shaking, they might not find things engaging enough. But I promise you, show your people God's holiness and (if they see that) no one will leave bored. Sure, it's possible some may respond in Woe!, but none will respond with "meh." Don't be complicite in anything that works to take people's attention away from the Holy One. Don't be a part of anything that works to make the music about the music and creates an atmosphere of entertainment instead of an environment of reverence. What do you really have to offer in comparison to the Thrice Holy God anyway? Or simply put, work harder at getting out of the way. Show us Christ. 

And then, let me say one final thing. Pastors, there's a lot of application in this for us as well. I don't want to walk away thinking about how funny or winsome you were. I don't want to be amazed at your creativity and innovation. Show me the Holy and He will suffice. 

He must increase but I must decrease. 

Grace and Peace.