Appropriately preaching, teaching, and defending God's wrath

I am by inclination, believe it or not, much more enthusiastic about preaching God's love, mercy, and grace than I am about preaching hell-fire, brimstone, and wrath. I've seen churches and preachers who have overemphasized God's wrath and it's not only ugly it's a perversion of God and of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Today, however, I feel like the trend is not overemphasizing God's wrath but to completely ignore it. My inner being rejoices because I am so much more comfortable with this "tickle my ears" (pseudo-)Christian message, but, unfortunately for my "inner being", I know that my desire to preach and teach this truncated gospel is inspired by selfishness and out of a desire to please people and not from a love of God or, even, out of a love for people. The gospel without wrath is incomplete. The cross is pointless (even twisted) and the Scripture and gospel become simply inspirational messages but give us nothing of eternal value.

That is not to say that we don't need to be cautious when we preach God's wrath. I've heard preaching before that unintentionally made God look like a capricious three year old with occasional temper tantrums. We can't preach God's wrath without helping people understand why God's wrath is appropriate. Telling people that "God is angry at sin" is good, but needs meat. We need to help people see why God is angry at sin. I think people are willing to accept the assertion that they do wrong things, but what's the big deal? Why would God get so angry at sin? Why hell? Why the purging of the Canaanites and the subsequent punishment of Israel for not wiping them out when they are told to? Why doesn't God just forgive us?

It seems like those of us who remain committed to preaching a gospel which includes God's wrath, do a good job of telling people that God hates sin but do a very poor job of helping people understand why. If people don't understand how bad their sin is and how much they need forgiveness, then they will miss out on the depth and power and wonder of God's love. Believers who know that God is angry at sin but don't have a full understanding as to what is so bad about sin, may see God as harsh and unjust (even though they wouldn't verbalize this underlying doubt since that would make it look as though they are questioning God, and we can't have that!).

If any of you still remember my Apology of Hell novel thing from about a year ago, that's kind of what I'm trying to accomplish, defending the need and appropriateness of God's wrath in response to sin. I've recently begun to revive this stuff and will have another chapter finished pretty soon. But I would like your feedback before I share some of my thoughts in both fictional and nonfictional formats.

How do we help people understand the appropriateness of God's wrath towards sin?

P.S. I'm still getting to the baptist distinctive series, but those take work in the form of research! SO you have to wait until I get the time!

Quick thoughts and questions on Christian education in the church setting.

My credentials to addressing this topic are neither impressive nor overly deficient. I've been a youth pastor for the last 4 years at a relatively small (about 120) congregation, so I do have a good deal of first hand experience, but I've very little exposure to big churches or various denominations/traditions contexts. In other words, my resume is deep but not wide. I suspect that much of what I have to say will be relevant in a variety of settings, but some of it will be rather useless. Regardless I would very much like to hear your thoughts and feedback.

1) Is expository preaching really sufficient?

In the church contexts in which I grew up, asking this question amounts to heresy. I think I understand and can sympathize with the arguments for it. John MacArthur, one of it's most famous proponents, answers a question in regard to why he has has remained committed to expository preaching:

Well first, because it is a biblical mandate. It doesn’t fluctuate with culture, with expectations, with times or seasons. Expository preaching is the best way to preach the Bible. If every word of God is pure, if every word of God is true, then every word needs to be dealt with. And expository preaching is only way you actually come to grips with every word in the Scriptures.

Secondly, expository preaching familiarizes people with the Scripture itself instead of simply giving them a speech, as true and as reflective of biblical teaching as that speech may be. With expository preaching, people become familiar with the Scripture. They can go back to the passages that have been addressed, and they can be reminded by the text itself of what it means. So you give people the Word of God in a way that has long-term impact, because it makes them familiar with Scripture.

Thirdly, it makes the authority unequivocal, and that authority is the Scripture. That’s very clear no matter how powerful or gifted the preacher might be. In consistent, expository preaching, the people always know what the authority is. It’s not about homiletics. It’s not about personal viewpoints and insights. It’s about relentlessly affirming the true authority of Scripture, which is the most critical thing that anybody can ever learn. It isn’t about, “Wasn’t that a great sermon?” It isn’t about, “Wasn’t that a great outline? Wasn’t that clever?” It’s always about, “What did the Word of God say?” And that makes it truly authoritative, because the Word is from God. No other preaching paradigm does this.
Source

I respect John MacArthur, even though I may complain about him from time to time, because I think he really does try to be a faithful minister of the Word of God. I'm becoming more and more convinced, however, that expository preaching is not enough. I've been getting the distinct impression that people who sit exclusively under expository sermons have a very difficult time with synthesis and in understanding the meta-narrative of Scripture. This approach tends to chop the Bible up into pericopes, or in some cases smaller than that, which the preacher can preach as a unit. It fails, however to put it all together. Texts, even pericopes are meaningless outside of their context within the larger argument of the book at hand or even the whole of Scripture. I also think exclusive expository preaching tends to weaken people's ability to think theologically, but I won't go into that for now. I also feel as if the vast majority of Christians have no concept of our historical-theological context. Again, not now. I may post on this at some later time. I'm not sure I agree with any of Johnny Mac's above points, but I do, at least, respect them and I think I understand where he's coming from.

What do you think?

2) & 3) Do we tell people "what" too much? Do we tell them "how" enough?

We tell people to read their Bibles, but do people really know how? We tell people to share the gospel but are they really equipped to do so? We tell parents to raise their children for the Lord, but do they even have a clue what that means or how to go about it? We tell the laity that being a Christian on Sunday is not enough, but do we help them understand what it means to be a Christian in their workplace, in their home, in school?

4) We tell people that they need to use their spiritual gifts and/or contribute to the church's ministry, but how well do we facilitate this? I get the feeling that a lot of people would be willing to serve in some capacity but aren't sure how or feel like they aren't "good enough Christians." I've run into this attitude among mature Christians that certain people aren't really "qualified" to be involved in the church's ministry because they aren't mature enough spiritually. Although it is certainly true that some level of spiritual maturity is needed for certain roles, I have found that people often grow in spades when they become involved within their church's ministry. If they feel like they aren't good enough yet, they won't become involved, however.

5) Have we become too soft on our own sins and too hard on the sins of others? 99% of all church discipline that I've seen or heard of has been in regards to sexual sin. Is this appropriate? Is this the only sin Christians struggle with that can ever be confronted? What about greed? Or idolatry (depending upon how you define this)? How about not loving your wife? I'm not trying to be funny, it just seems as if we've singled out a certain sin area because it's easier to quantify, more "black and white" if you will. But if we single out this sin I'm afraid it's far too easy to become self-righteous if you've never committed adultery. I also feel like the way church discipline is applied is rather unfair to women, but I won't go into that right now.

5) How confidently should we preach difficult passages or theological concepts?

6) How guilty are we of syncretism? Is singing patriotic american songs idolatrous? I think so. Have we put our concept of "family" in too high a place (see Jesus' statements about the family...)? Have we become too republican? Have we idolized a culture in which we were comfortable instead of learning how to live in the culture in which we find ourselves?

7) Have we been tickling people's ears because we don't want to sound judgmental or legalistic?


Tackle or respond to whichever ones you feel like.

I'll have a Baptist Distinctive post up soon.

Biblical Data: Genesis 1-11

Faith and Politics

To begin, I feel I must once again emphasize the importance of both separating and integrating faith and politics. It is very easy for us, as evidenced by the so called Christian Right and Christian Left, to allow politics to dictate the way we look at Scripture and apply our Christian faith. It is also easy for us to see the political extremes in our society and react against our "political enemies" or stand with our "political allies" instead of reacting to Scripture and allowing it to dictate where we stand on a political issue. I want to emphasize that I do not believe it is wrong for a Christian to be involved or informed politically. Politics is important and our faith should be integrated into every area of our lives. But we need to be careful that we are Christians who are republicans or democrats (or whatever else), not republicans or democrats who happen to be Christians.

I say this because some of the issues that I will be addressing are very much related to politics. On the left, we have some animal rights activists who would have us treat animals as equals. On the right, we have some who have an "animal rights are not important, let's just eat them because they taste good" attitude. It is important to allow Scripture to inform our politics and I think there are wrong headed attitudes and beliefs on both sides of the political spectrum.

With that out of the way...

The Bible as our Framework for Thinking

Merely looking at the Biblical data will not decide or close the book on the issue. For better and for worse, the Bible is not a theology handbook, or really even a theology book. WHAAT!? You protest. No, the Bible is not a science book, or a history book, or a philosophy book, it is not even a theology book. It does speak to all of these, and other, disciples however. The Bible provides us a framework from which to approach information, knowledge, and life but it does not provide a systematic index for every theological question we have and understanding what it says is essential for approaching varying topics. So before we work out a theology of animals, lets examine the data and make some observations. Next time we will examine data from other sources and evaluate it in light of the Biblical data and begin to make some conclusions.

The Biblical Data

Genesis 1-3

Genesis 1 is a very structured passage. It's structure is significant and there is much we could say but I'm not trying to publish a book here. But a basic structure of the days of creation can be helpful.

A Day 1: Separation of light and darkness. Heavens prepared for population.
B Day 2: Separation of clouds and sea; and of sea from land. Skies and waters prepared for population.
C Day 3: Plants planted. Land prepared for population.
A' Day 4: Heavens populated with sun, moon, and stars. Rulership granted to sun and moon over day and night.
B' Day 5: Sea and land populated with sea creatures and birds.
C' Day 6: Land populated with animals. Humans created in God's image and granted rulership over the land, sea, sky, and creatures therein.
D Day 7: God rests and the day is set aside as holy.

Okay a couple things can be noted here.
1) God carefully prepares the heavens, skies, seas, and land for their inhabitants. I think it is fair to say that all of his creation is important to him. At the end of each day, he declares it "good", which demonstrates that he is both pleased with his creation and that it is how he wanted it to be.

2) Humans are similar to animals in some important ways. a) Both have the breath of life (see 6:17); b) Both are created from dirt (see 2:19); c) Both are created on the sixth day (well, the land animals are anyway); d) Both are given some of the same instructions: be fruitful and multiply; e) Both are provided food from the same source, plants; f) God is apparently pleased with his work with both of them.

3) Humans are distinct from the animals in some important ways. a) Humans are made in God's image; b) Humans are given dominion over the land, skies, seas, and the animals therein; animals are not; c) Humans are given additional tasks reflective of their unique place: they are to name the animals and they are specially placed in the garden of Eden and are commanded to cultivate it; d) Humans are forbidden to eat from a particular tree, animals are not given any prohibitions (at least in the text); e) Human gender is different. Animals are apparently created from the beginning with sexual distinction but humans are not. The woman "comes from man", there is not apparent parallel with animals; f) From this we can also discern a greater need and longing for relationship which can be seen in Adam and Eve's relationship and their relationship with God.

4) Moving from #3, because of these distinctions, humans are held responsible in a way that animals are not. When humans sin, animals apparently suffer as well. Humans are held responsible for their dominion and their dominion suffers when they mess up.

5) Humans are given plants to eat originally. It is not until Genesis 9 that meat is allowed.

6) When humans fall, God covers their nakedness with animal skins (apparently).

Genesis 4-11

After the fall, we see some differences in animal-human relationships. Animals are not the focal point of the text anywhere in this section but they are mentioned and there are some significant observations to be made:

1) Animal sacrifices are seen immediately in the text post-fall. This is very interesting for various aspects of theology but lets stick with the animal aspect for now. But, despite animal sacrifices, animals are not yet given as food.

2) Cain's sacrifice of fruit is not accepted by God. There is some debate as to whether the content of the sacrifice even mattered, let's leave that for later.

3) When man gets really really evil, God expresses sorrow that he made man and then proceeds to threaten to blot out ALL life for MAN's sin.

4) When Noah is spared for his righteousness, animals are spared extinction as well.

5) Interestingly, there are already classifications of clean and unclean animals.

6) Noah makes animal sacrifices to God when he exits, apparently offering up a lot of animals (some of EVERY clean animal and EVERY clean bird).

7) After the flood, Animal-human relationships are fundamentally changed. Animals are now permissible for food. Animals are given an instinctive fear of humans. Animals are to be used as a substitute for humans when they sin.

8) I think this is an interesting observation. The Noahic covenant is made with all flesh, including animals.

Some closing remarks...

Genesis does not ignore the importance of animal life. Animals are not the focal point of the text but they play an important part in the opening chapters of the bible. This is not all of the Biblical data, but is, perhaps, the most important and definitely provides us with a foundation from which to build.

Next time I will make some observations from the rest of the Bible and will begin to move on to some observations from other sources. Finally, I will attempt to explicate principles for application in our contemporary context.

Reflecting on David's Failure

My introductions are always too long so here's a short one. Here's a poem I wrote a year or so ago as a reflection upon David's fall. As one trained by Dr. Vreeland, I feel compelled to point out that David's departure from godliness began much earlier than his sin with Bathsheba, but it was something of a culmination. I also want to make it clear that I do not mean to imply that David was one to be emulated prior to his sin with Bathsheba. This is more of a reflection of sin and its destructive nature, looking at David as an example of that.

Feedback welcomed as always. I'll get back to gender issues later.

Reflecting on Failure

My delight is in the presence of my God.
His faithfulness is abundant; His goodness is without end.
My soul rejoices in my God my Savior.
His friendship is precious to me; all else is vain, for He satisfies me completely
I will continue to find joy in my God and seek His face.
I find my purpose in serving Him; pleasing Him.
His approval will mark my life as worth living;
Stay true my soul; do not stray; stay true.

Who is that woman bathing yonder?
Her beauty has captured my heart; my lust is insatiable
I must know her, have her, kiss her lips; I must satisfy my longings
Ah, but she has a husband; but praise the gods, he is not here
Bring her here, I must have her. Bring her here, I am the king after all.
She should have been mine; she is too beautiful for a Hittite
Oh, but she is with child, my child. Her husband is still away.
Bring him here. He will not comply? Let him die! I am the king after all

She is all mine now. Her child will be my child and none will know.
How sweet it is to obtain the object of one’s desire!
A man sees what he wants and he acquires it- let no one hinder him.
Her beauty will satisfy me, our son will be a joy to me in my old age.
How good it is to take pleasure in the fruit of one’s labor!
I see what I want and I take hold of it. I am the king after all.
What can compare to the beauty of a woman? To the softness of her touch?
Her kisses will satisfy my longings all the days of my life.

The consequences of my sin overwhelm me. God have mercy on me!
Spare my son, do not let him die! My sin was great, but you are great in mercy!
I am overwhelmed. Is all lost? Has God turned His back on His servant?
What have I done? I have lost all I once held dear! All that mattered has left me.
My sons, my sons. Must they all die? Will you spare even one?
O God my God! I have cried out to you all the day long and you will not answer me!
My God My God! Why have you forsaken me? My enemies have surrounded me.
I cry to you, you still will not hear me? Against you alone oh God have I sinned.

Spare your servant. Do not take away your Spirit from me. Do not let me be as a Gentile.
Despite my failings, I am still your servant. Do not send me to Sheol as one rejected.
Your mercy and your lovingkindness never cease. They are new every morning.
I will trust in you alone for you alone are able to save one so wretched.
Deliver me O God. Do not let my house go to ruin.
My sin was great, but your punishment is unbearable.
In wrath remember mercy. In justice remember grace.
I have failed God, I have failed. Remember your people, remember your throne
For Your name’s sake if not mine…