Woke Is . . . A - Thabiti Anyabwile

Yesterday a dear brother asked me, “What do you think about woke church?” Seems these days all my blogging is answering questions of one sort or another. And this seems like a good question to answer publicly, since there’s so much talk about being “woke” or “wokeness” from both advocates an opponents.  I’m not sure this adds much to the discussion, but it’s the gist of my answer yesterday.

Woke: A Lineage

First, being “woke” isn’t at all new. I know Carl Ellis has been trying to help people understand that in some of his public talks. But it seems a lot of younger people think they’re experiencing something new. Solomon taught a long, long time ago, “there’s nothing new under the sun.”

What we call “woke” today is pretty close to the Afrocentricism of the 1980s. Afrocentricism, a word coined by Dr. Molefi Asante, professor of African-American studies at Temple University at the time, was about centering Africa and Africa-descended peoples in their worldview much the way Europe has always been at the center of the worldview of European peoples. Afrocentrism taught that Black people should see the world as Black people.

Of course, before Afrocentrism in the 1980s there was the Black Arts Movement and Black consciousness movement of the 1960s—a movement that both inspired and also drew strength from Pan-Africanism and its connections with independence movements in Africa and the Caribbean. That period gave us “Black” as an ethnic identifier. People don’t realize it today, but calling ourselves “Black” was not so much motivated by describing skin color as much as it was a political statement about what is beautiful and valiant, re-appropriating what had been a slur in the mouth of others and refusing to be erased in the world. The discovery of this “consciousness” was the discovery of a certain pleasure. “The pleasure of being black was a core part of the cultural revolution staged during the Black Power movement” (Margo Natalie Crawford, “What Was Is“: The Time and Space of Entanglement Erased by Post-Blackness, in Houston A. Baker and K. Merinda Simmons, The Trouble with Post-Blackness, p. 36). To be “woke,” then, builds on this discovery: that being “Black” is something to take pleasure in.

But we can go back even further. Before the Black Arts, Black Power, and Black Consciousness movements there was in the 1920s the New Negro movement of the Harlem Renaissance and the Négritude Movement in Africa. Alain Locke in Harlem with Aimé Césaire in Martinique and Leopold Senghor in West Africa were among the leading thinkers of these movements. Following the defeats of counter-Reconstruction and Plessy v. Ferguson, Negro artists and intellectuals began to give a more strident voice to the complaints, complexity, and beauty of Negro life and thought. This phase of the identity project featured an international awareness and exchange, and gave rise to a number of publications and outlets. The movement, like all historical iterations of what we call “woke,” sought to forge an identity both independent of white determinants and accepted by the wider world. In a 1923 essay entitled “The New Negro Faces America,” West Indian writer Eric D. Walrond described the New Negro thus:

He does not want . . . to be like the white man. He is coming to realize the great possibilities within himself. The New Negro, who does not want to go back to Africa, is fondly cherishing an ideal—and that is, that the time will come when America will look upon the Negro not as a savage with an inferior mentality, but as a civilized man.

Before the New Negro movement, there was Ethiopianism (1880s-1920s). On the African continent, African Christians broke away from the control of white Anglican and Methodist churches who would not share leadership of the church even on African soil. That church movement took place at the same time as a wider literary and political movement in British colonies and territories sprouted. The wider movement reclaimed Ethiopia as one of the oldest continuous great civilizations in the world. From the Bible, they drew inspiration from Psalm 68:31, “Princes shall come of Egypt; Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God.” You would find allusions to this text in everything from slave narratives to sermons to political speeches.

We could perhaps go further back. I think an essential thing to note is this: to be Ethiopian, Negro, Black, or African-American (choose your descriptor and time period) has always involved a massive project in self-definition, self-determination and self-affirmation in a national and world context characterized by anti-Black racism and oppression. That’s the one thing these periods have in common. That’s why some version of “woke” appears in nearly every generation. Each generation has to forge and reclaim a sense of self that’s healthy, affirming, and productive in order to withstand and resist the identity-twisting and person-debasing ideologies launched against us.

Woke Church?

This has massive implications for local church ministries in communities of color. Churches must understand the need to reconstitute the whole person with biblical teaching responsive to the lived realities of those communities. In simpler words, our approach to discipleship must simultaneously repair the psychic and social destruction done to the identities/personhood of Black people while recognizing and equipping them to counter the social and political realities that contribute to that destruction in the first place. We have to teach people how to be their ethnic selves in a way that’s consistent with the Bible and how to live fruitfully in contexts that don’t affirm their ethnic selves. Hence, we need a “woke church.”

But it’s not just African Americans who need a “woke church.” All people need it. Even the cursory history sketched above reveals that we “are tied together in a single garment of destiny,” as Dr. King put it. There’s a mutuality to our existence. The only way for us to lower the necessity for a “woke church” is for the people and forces making “wokeness” necessary to wake up to their part in the dynamic. As long as there are racist forces at work in the world, the sufferers of that racism are right to find ways to express and affirm their identity and will need tools (spiritual, cultural, economic, and so on) to fight back against those forces.

We may need to find biblically richer and more careful ways of doing the work, but that the work needs to be done seems evident to me. Keep on Dr. Mason! There’s a world of difference between people who want you to be better and people who want you to quit.

From where I sit, “woke church” continues in the tradition of Martin Delaney, Edward W. Blyden, Henry McNeal Turner, Alexander Crummell, and a great cloud of other witnesses who in the Spirit of God sought a more faithful way to live the faith as African Americans when the rest of the world despised them. The mockers mock. The haters hate. That’s what they’ve been doing for the entire sojourn of Black people in contact with the West. By their mockery, scoffing, and hatred they make some form of being “woke” necessary. So may the church get woke and stay woke.

Preachers on Preaching - Nathan Busenitz

Here are ten reminders for those who preach and teach the Word of God, as articulated by some of history’s greatest preachers.

1. Effective ministry consists not of fads or gimicks, but of faithfully preaching the truth.

Charles Spurgeon: Ah, my dear friends, we want nothing in these times for revival in the world but the simple preaching of the gospel. This is the great battering ram that shall dash down the bulwarks of iniquity. This is the great light that shall scatter the darkness. We need not that men should be adopting new schemes and new plans. We are glad of the agencies and assistances which are continually arising; but after all, the true Jerusalem blade, the sword that can cut to the piercing asunder of the joints and marrow, is preaching the Word of God. We must never neglect it, never despise it. The age in which the pulpit it despised, will be an age in which gospel truth will cease to be honored. . . . God forbid that we should begin to depreciate preaching. Let us still honor it; let us look to it as God’s ordained instrumentality, and we shall yet see in the world a repetition of great wonders wrought by the preaching in the name of Jesus Christ.

Source: Charles Spurgeon, “Preaching! Man’s Privilege and God’s Power,” Sermon (Nov. 25, 1860).

2. Preaching is a far more serious task than most preachers realize.

Richard Baxter: And for myself, as I am ashamed of my dull and careless heart, and of my slow and unprofitable course of life, so, the Lord knows, I am ashamed of every sermon I preach; when I think what I have been speaking of, and who sent me, and that men’s salvation or damnation is so much concerned in it, I am ready to tremble lest God should judge me as a slighter of His truths and the souls of men, and lest in the best sermon I should be guilty of their blood. Me thinks we should not speak a word to men in matters of such consequence without tears, or the greatest earnestness that possibly we can; were not we too much guilty of the sin which we reprove, it would be so.

Source: Richard Baxter, “The Need for Personal Revival.” Cited from Historical Collections Relating to Remarkable Periods of the Success of the Gospel, ed. John Gillies (Kelso: John Rutherfurd, 1845), 147.

3. Faithfulness in the pulpit begins with the pursuit of personal holiness.

Robert Murray M’Cheyne: Take heed to thyself. Your own soul is your first and greatest care. You know a sound body alone can work with power; much more a healthy soul. Keep a clear conscience through the blood of the Lamb. Keep up close communion with God. Study likeness to Him in all things. Read the Bible for your own growth first, then for your people. Expound much; it is through the truth that souls are to be sanctified, not through essays upon the truth.

Source: Robert Murray M’Cheyne, letter dated March 22, 1839, to Rev W.C. Burns, who had been named to take M’Cheyne’s pulpit during the latter’s trip to Palestine. Andrew Bonar, ed, Memoir and Remains of Robert Murray M’Cheyne(Banner of Truth, 1966), 273-74.

4. Powerful preaching flows from powerful prayer.

E.M. Bounds: The real sermon is made in the closet. The man – God’s man – is made in the closet. His life and his profoundest convictions were born in his secret communion with God. The burdened and tearful agony of his spirit, his weightiest and sweetest messages were got when alone with God. Prayer makes the man; prayer makes the preacher; prayer makes the pastor. . . . Every preacher who does not make prayer a mighty factor in his own life and ministry is weak as a factor in God’s work and is powerless to project God’s cause in this world.

Source: E.M. Bounds, Power Through Prayer. From chapter 1, “Men of Prayer Needed.”

5. Passionate preaching starts with one’s passion for Christ

Phillip Brooks: Nothing but fire kindles fire. To know in one’s whole nature what it is to live by Christ; to be His, not our own; to be so occupied with gratitude for what He did for us and for what He continually is to us that His will and His glory shall be the sole desires of our life . . . that is the first necessity of the preacher.

Source: Phillips Brooks, Lectures on Preaching, originally published in 1877. Republished in 1989 by Kregel under the title The Joy of Preaching. As cited in “The Priority of Prayer in Preaching” by James Rosscup, The Masters Seminary Journal, Spring 1991.

6. The preacher is a herald, not an innovator.

R.L. Dabney: The preacher is a herald; his work is heralding the King’s message. . . . Now the herald does not invent his message; he merely transmits and explains it. It is not his to criticize its wisdom or fitness; this belongs to his sovereign alone. On the one hand, . . . he is an intelligent medium of communication with the king’s enemies; he has brains as well as a tongue; and he is expected so to deliver and explain his master’s mind, that the other party shall receive not only the mechanical sounds, but the true meaning of the message. On the other hand, it wholly transcends his office to presume to correct the tenor of the propositions he conveys, by either additions or change. . . . The preacher’s business is to take what is given him in the Scriptures, as it is given to him, and to endeavor to imprint it on the souls of men. All else is God’s work.

Source: R.L. Dabney, Evangelical Eloquence: A Course of Lectures on Preaching(Banner of Truth, 1999; originally published as Sacred Rhetoric, 1870), 36-37.

7. The faithful preacher stays focused on what matters.

G. Campbell Morgan: Nothing is more needed among preachers today than that we should have the courage to shake ourselves free from the thousand and one trivialities in which we are asked to waste our time and strength, and resolutely return to the apostolic ideal which made necessary the office of the diaconate. [We must resolve that] “we will continue steadfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the Word.”

Source: G. Campbell Morgan, This Was His Faith: The Expository Letters of G. Campbell Morgan, edited by Jill Morgan (Fleming Revell, Westwood, NJ), 1952.

8. The preacher’s task is to make the text come alive for his hearers.

Martyn Lloyd-Jones: As preachers we must not forget this. We are not merely imparters of information. We should tell our people to read certain books themselves and get the information there. The business of preaching is to make such knowledge live. The same applies to lecturers in Colleges. The tragedy is that many lecturers simply dictate notes and the wretched students take them down. That is not the business of a lecturer or a professor. The students can read the books for themselves; the business of the professor is to put that on fire, to enthuse, to stimulate, to enliven. And that is the primary business of preaching. Let us take this to heart. … What we need above everything else today is moving, passionate, powerful preaching. It must be ‘warm’ and it must be ‘earnest’.

Source: D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, “Jonathan Edwards and the Crucial Importance of Revival.” Lecture delivered at the Puritan and Westminster Conference (1976).

9. The preacher is to be Christ-exalting, not self-promoting.

R.B. Kuiper: The minister must always remember that the dignity of his office adheres not in his person but in his office itself. He is not at all important, but his office is extremely important. Therefore he should take his work most seriously without taking himself seriously. He should preach the Word in season and out of season in forgetfulness of self. He should ever have an eye single to the glory of Christ, whom he preaches, and count himself out. It should be his constant aim that Christ, whom he represents, may increase while he himself decreases. Remembering that minister means nothing butservant, he should humbly, yet passionately, serve the Lord Christ and His church.

Source: R.B. Kuiper, The Glorious Body of Christ (Banner of Truth, 1966), 140-42.

10. Faithful preaching requires great personal discipline and sacrifice.

Arthur W. Pink: The great work of the pulpit is to press the authoritative claims of the Creator and Judge of all the earth—to show how short we have come of meeting God’s just requirements, to announce His imperative demand of repentance. . . . It requires a “workman” and not a lazy man—a student and not a slothful one—who studies to “show himself approved unto God” (2 Tim. 9:15) and not one who seeks the applause and the shekels of men.

Source: A. W. Pink, “Preaching False and True,” 

GENERATIONS X,Y, Z AND THE OTHERS -WJ Schroer

We often use phrases or words that we don’t fully understand. Sometimes we even use words or phrases the meanings of which we are totally clueless. As people with a passion for words and language, that is generally not viewed as a desirable trait. Yet, the plain fact is we can’t have a detailed understanding of every word or phrase…particularly when the word belongs to the jargon of a larger body of knowledge.

However, when that jargon is in use as often and frequently as the phrases“Gen X” or “Baby Boomer”, it seems especially important we have some reasonably good idea of what these terms actually mean. Although these phrases, as jargon, stem from the larger discipline of demographics, and are used most frequently by market researchers, the fact is everybody uses these words and phrases. In effect, these cue words or phrases for the subcomponents of society demarcated by age are not only useful but are generally the language used by non-demographers and society as a whole when discussing the current spectrum of population cohorts.

Our goal, this month, then, is to provide a primer on the identification and description of the population cohorts in America as currently widely (but not universally) agreed upon by demographers and market researchers.

A generation is a group of people born around the same time and raised around the same place. People in this “birth cohort” exhibit similar characteristics, preferences, and values over their lifetimes

The Depression Era

Born: 1912-1921
Coming of Age: 1930-1939
Age in 2019: 98 to 107
Current Population: 11-12 million (and declining rapidly)

Depression era individuals tend to be conservative, compulsive savers,
maintain low debt and use more secure financial products like CDs versus stocks. These individuals tend to feel a responsibility to leave a legacy to their children. Tend to be patriotic, oriented toward work before pleasure, respect for authority, have a sense of moral obligation.

World War II

Born: 1922 to 1927
Coming of Age: 1940-1945
Age in 2019: 92-97
Current Population: 11 million (in quickening decline)

People in this cohort shared in a common goal of defeating the Axis
powers. There was an accepted sense of “deferment” among this group,
contrasted with the emphasis on “me” in more recent (i.e. Gen X)
cohorts.

Post-War Cohort

Born: 1928-1945
Coming of Age: 1946-1963
Age in 2019: 74 to 91
Current Population: 41 million (declining)

This generation had significant opportunities in jobs and education as the War ended and a post-war economic boom struck America. However, the growth in Cold War tensions, the potential for nuclear war and other never before seen threats led to levels of discomfort and uncertainty throughout the generation. Members of this group
value security, comfort, and familiar, known activities and environments.

Boomers I or The Baby Boomers

Born: 1946-1954
Coming of Age: 1963-1972
Age in 2019: 65-73
Current Population: 33 million

For a long time the Baby Boomers were defined as those born between 1945 and 1964. That would make the generation huge (71 million) and encompass people who were 20 years apart in age. It didn’t compute to have those born in 1964 compared with those born in 1946. Life experiences were completely different. Attitudes, behaviors and society were vastly different. In effect, all the elements that help to define a cohort were violated by the broad span of years originally included in the concept of the Baby Boomers. The first Boomer segment is bounded by the Kennedy and Martin Luther King assassinations, the Civil Rights movements and the Vietnam War. Boomers I were in or protested the War. Boomers 2 or the Jones Generation missed the whole thing.

Boomers I had good economic opportunities and were largely optimistic about the potential for America and their own lives, the Vietnam War notwithstanding.

Boomers II or Generation Jones

Born: 1955-1965
Coming of Age: 1973-1983
Age in 2019: 54 to 64
Current Population: 49 million

This first post-Watergate generation lost much of its trust in government and optimistic views the Boomers I maintained. Economic struggles including the oil embargo of 1979 reinforced a sense of “I’m out for me” and narcissism and a focus on self-help and skepticism over media and institutions is representative of attitudes of this cohort. While Boomers I had Vietnam, Boomers II had AIDS as part of their rites of passage. The youngest members of the Boomer II generation in fact did not have the benefits of the Boomer I class as many of the best jobs, opportunities, housing etc. were taken by the larger and earlier group. Both Gen X and Boomer II s suffer from this long shadow cast by Boomers I.

Generation X

Born: 1966-1976
Coming of Age: 1988-1994
Age in 2019: 43 to 53
Current Population: 41 million

Sometimes referred to as the “lost” generation, this was the first
generation of “latchkey” kids, exposed to lots of daycare and divorce. Known as the generation with the lowest voting participation rate of any generation, Gen Xers were quoted by Newsweek as “the generation that dropped out without ever turning on the news or tuning in to the social issues around them.”  Gen X is often characterized by high levels of skepticism, “what’s in it for me” attitudes and a reputation for some of the worst music to ever gain popularity. Now, moving into adulthood William Morrow (Generations) cited the childhood divorce of many Gen Xers as “one of the most decisive experiences influencing how Gen Xers will shape their own families”. Gen Xers are arguably the best educated generation with 29% obtaining a bachelor’s degree or higher (6% higher than the previous cohort). And, with that education and a growing maturity they are starting to form families with a higher level of caution and pragmatism than their parents demonstrated. Concerns run high over avoiding broken homes, kids growing up without a parent around and financial planning.

Generation Y, Echo Boomers or Millennials

Born: 1977-1994
Coming of Age: 1998-2006
Age in 2019: 25 to 37
Current Population: 71 million

The largest cohort since the Baby Boomers, their high numbers reflect their births as that of their parent generation. The last of the Boomer Is and most of the Boomer II s. Gen Y kids are known as incredibly sophisticated, technology wise, immune to most traditional marketing and sales pitches…as they not only grew up with it all, they’ve seen it all and been exposed to it all since early childhood. Gen Y members are much more racially and ethnically diverse and they are much more segmented as an audience aided by the rapid expansion in Cable TV channels, satellite radio, the Internet, e-zines, etc. Gen Y are less brand loyal and the speed of the Internet has led the cohort to be similarly flexible and changing in its fashion, style consciousness and where and how it is communicated with. Gen Y kids often raised in dual income or single parent families have been more involved in family purchases…everything from groceries to new cars. One in nine Gen Yers has a credit card co-signed by a parent.

Generation Z or IGEN

Born: 1995-2012
Coming of Age: 2013-2030
Age in 2019: 7-24
Current Population: 23 million and growing rapidly

While we don’t know much about Gen Z yet…we know a lot about the environment they are growing up in. This highly diverse environment will make the grade schools of the next generation the most diverse ever. Higher levels of technology will make significant inroads in academics allowing for customized instruction, data mining of student histories to enable pinpoint diagnostics and remediation or accelerated achievement opportunities. Gen Z kids will grow up with a highly sophisticated media and computer environment and will be more Internet savvy and expert than their Gen Y forerunners. More to come on Gen Z…stay tuned.

Half of Millennial Christians Say It’s Wrong to Evangelize - Kate Shellnutt

Millennials used to be the group that churches and ministries were angling to evangelize. Now, all grown up and poised to overtake Baby Boomers as the largest generation, they’re the ones doing the evangelizing.

But new research from Barna Group and the creators of the Alpha course offers some disappointing news regarding the 20-somethings and 30-somethings now on deck to carry on the faith: nearly half (47%) of practicing Christian millennials—churchgoers who consider religion an important part of their lives—believe that evangelism is wrong.At least they should be.

They’re more than twice as likely as their parents and grandparents—Boomers and Elders, respectively—to say that it’s “wrong to share one’s personal beliefs with someone of a different faith in hopes that they will one day share the same faith.”

While this statistic could easily bolster stereotypes of a lazy, distracted, and increasingly unaffiliated generation, the minority of millennials who have stayed active in their churches also show higher markers of commitment in other areas, as well as a savvier sense of the religious pluralism and diversity they were raised around.

The recent Barna release found that, despite the reticence around the practice, millennials consider themselves good evangelists and still see themselves as representatives for their faith.

Nearly all practicing Christian millennials (96%) said witnessing for Jesus is part of being a Christian, and they were more likely than any other generation to say they were gifted at sharing their faith (73%).

And Barna previously found that millennials who identify as born-again were the most likely age group to share their faith—and that their evangelism habits were growing while other generations’ were dropping. In 2013, two-thirds of millennials said they had presented the gospel to someone within the past year, compared to half of born-again Christians in general.

Additionally, practicing Christian millennials have the strongest beliefs in the Bible and read it more than any other generation: 87 percent do so multiple times a week, according to a 2016 Barna survey on behalf of the American Bible Society (ABS).

So what’s behind their beliefs that evangelism is “wrong”?

Barna president David Kinnaman points to the rising cultural expectation against judging personal choices. Practicing Christian millennials were twice as likely as Gen X and four times as likely as Boomers and Elders to agree with the statement, “If someone disagrees with you, it means they’re judging you.”

“Cultivating deep, steady, resilient Christian conviction is difficult in a world of ‘you do you’ and ‘don’t criticize anyone’s life choices’ and emotivism, the feelings-first priority that our culture makes a way of life,” Kinnaman said. “As much as ever, evangelism isn’t just about saving the unsaved, but reminding ourselves that this stuff matters, that the Bible is trustworthy, and that Jesus changes everything.”

Several evangelicals’ reactions to the Barna release pointed to the need for better Christian formation for younger churchgoers.

“I’m a Millennial, and this is pure evidence of the failure of the church to prepare youths to understand faith/speak out,” tweeted author Billy Hallowell. “Beyond that, it’s also a result of the cultural crisis of secularism bombarding us at every turn.”

“You can’t pin the belief that evangelism is wrong on Facebook, distraction, disenchantment, or recession,” wrote Samuel James, a writer at First Things, on Twitter. “The data here strongly suggests that Christian millennials are being catechized by their colleges, not churches.”

In her book Reciprocal Church, Sharon Galgay Ketcham, a practical theologian at Gordon College, challenged Christian elders to give younger generations a chance to actively engage their faith in the church context rather than receive the traditions “passed on” to them. Two-thirds of churchgoing Christians will stop attending at some point in the years after turning 18—some returning regularly, some occasionally, and some not at all.

The rise of the religiously unaffiliated “nones,” now roughly a quarter of the population, has taken away the expectation for younger generations to identify as Christian just for the sake of it. Without the pull of “cultural Christianity,” leaders see the millennials who do stay involved in their churches as particularly committed and faithful.

“Though the Christian population of this generation is likely no higher than 15 percent, these young people may well turn the world upside down with their commitments and causes,” wrote LifeWay Christian Resources CEO Thom S. Rainer and son Jess R. Rainer in their book, The Millennials. “Millennial Christians are not content with business-as-usual churches. To the contrary, they will connect with churches on if those churches are wiling to sell out for the sake of the gospel.”

Millennial leaders have begun assuming the mantle at major churches and ministries. More than two dozen millennials now hold senior pastor positions at congregations with more than 1,000 attendees, with some megachurch pastors as young as 32, according to Leadership Network.

But evangelism remains a sticking point among a 21st-century crowd which sees tent revivals and tracts as a thing of the past. “Evangelism is often presented as an old school, out-of-style idea with little value or relevance in our fast-paced, urban world,” wrote Hannah Gronowski, the founder and director of Generation Distinct, for The Exchange last year.

Younger folks are tempted to believe instead, “if we just live good enough lives, we can forgo the conversation entirely, and people around us will almost magically come to know Jesus through our good actions and selfless character,” she said. “This style of evangelism is becoming more and more prevalent in a culture constantly looking for the fast track and simple fix.”

Evangelism 101 - Todd McCauley

It's that time again, time to read through the New Testament. I absolutely love reading about the life of Christ.  I now find myself in John chapter three. Jesus and a few of his followers accompanied Him to Jerusalem to attend the annual Passover celebration (cf. John 2:13ff). John 3:1-2 states that a Pharisee named Nicodemus, a Ruler of the Jews came to Jesus at night. When Nick (let's call him Nick) meets Jesus he begins to lavish on the Christ compliments, "Rabbi (i.e. Teacher) we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him".  Jesus responds in an interesting way, instead of Him entertaining the compliments which many of us WOULD do, he cuts to the chase and addresses the question that Nick doesn't ask with his lips but is in his heart. "Nicodemus, unless you are born again, you CAN NOT see the Kingdom of God".

The rest of John 3 then records Jesus's evangelistic conversation with this LOST Pharisee (Jewish religious leader).  This Chapter as well as John Chapter 4 reminds me of our own evangelistic responsibility.  Let me write this as plainly as possible, EVANGELISM ought to be one of our highest priorities as followers of Christ.  You say, "I know that Todd, I just find evangelism difficult and awkward". Also, "If I'm being honest, it scares the living be-jeebies out of me", and "Yes, evangelism intimidates the heck out of me".  You know what?  I get it. Evangelism is NOT the most comfortable activity.  But, be that as it may, it is NOT an activity that we can ignore or put on the back burner because of how it makes us feel.  Here is the good news, Jesus promised us that when we obediently engage in Disciple-Making (of which Evangelism is part) He promises to give us everything we need to be successful (cf. Matt 28:18-20).

Evangelism is NOT something that you should OVER THINK, it's something that you just do and trust God for the results. Our job is NOT to put people in Heaven, Our Job is NOT to make or force people to believe. Our job is NOT to argue people into believing, or Scare people into believing, Our job is NOT to manipulate or TRICK people into praying a prayer, our job is NOT to get people to join the church.  Our Job is to simply share the GOOD NEWS.  Our job is simply that of seed planting (cf. John 4:35-38).

I want to give you a simple four-step process for sharing your faith effectively.

Step one: PRE-EVANGELISM (Here is where you ask the two Diagnostic questions. These questions help you determine where a person is spiritual)

1. If you died today, where would you go?

2.  Suppose you were to die today and you stand before God and He asks you, "Why should I let you into MY Heaven", how would you answer?




Step Two: PERMISSION (Ask for Permission to continue the discussion)

"May I talk to you about someone who changed my life and is STILL in the life-changing business?

(At this point he/she will tell you "Yes or No".  If they answer "No" then you shake their hand and move on.  If they say "Yes" then you're free to proceed to Step Three)

Step Three: PRESENTATION (This step utilizes the excellent tool called, "The Four Spiritual Laws" a little yellow Gospel Booklet produced by Campus Crusade for Christ.  Just start with the cover of the booklet and begin reading it to him/her.  "Have you ever heard of the 4 spiritual laws"?  Toward the end of the booklet you will read and ask this important question, "Does this prayer express the desire of your heart? If it does, I invite you to pray this prayer right now, and Christ will come into your life, as He promised.  The person will answer either "Yes or No".  If "No" then close the conversation and leave them the booklet with your contact info.  If  "Yes" then pray with them to receive Christ).








Step Four:  POST-EVANGELISM (Another name for Post-Evangelism is Follow-up. Follow-up means that we don't leave people hanging.  Receiving Christ is just the first step in a life-long journey.  Read to him/her the remainder of the booklet that read, "Now that you have received Christ".  Write your contact info on the back of the Booklet and contact them within

48 hours.  Listen, Discipleship is meant to be a TEAM sport, so get your church involved in helping this new convert grow).

I told you this process would be simple.  The toughest thing facing you right now is your own fear and insecurity. Go for it.  Jesus said in John 4:35, "Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are ALREADY white (i.e., ready) for harvest". Jesus has got you back.

Soli Deo Gloria

Todd

The Feast of Unleavened Bread... Wait - Isn't it Passover? by Mia Kashat

.

The Feast of Unleavened Bread is a feast that is generally mistaken for Passover. Passover however is only one 24 hour period while Feast of Unleavened Bread lasts for seven days.

On the evening after Passover God told the Hebrew people exiting Egypt not to allow their bread to rise, but to grab everything and leave. The ancient peoples used to gather yeast on grape leaves to leaven their bread if they needed to speed up the process, but God said "Don't even let any leavening touch the dough. Just bake it and go."

In their haste they grabbed the necessities and fled toward the land God was preparing for them.

God then told them that in the future they were to commemorate this feast by getting all yeast out of the house for seven days.

On a normal Passover eve a family that celebrates the Biblical feasts will leave a bit of bread in their home in hidden places for the children to find. The children will search out the yeasty creations till they "eradicate" the yeast from the house. The family then takes what is found and burns it outside.

If you are trying to clean your house of all yeast you will realize just how tediously impossible that idea is, on your own. No matter how I sweep or dust, yeast is in the air , hence how it lands on grape leaves, it always finds it's way back into the home.

God even told us what the yeast represented. Yeast represents sin.

When you put a little yeast in flour and water it grows – multiplies with each warm second they remain together. For anyone who has worked with whole wheat, they can attest to the fact they once the yeast is added, there is no way to get it back out.

Because of our ancestors, Adam and Eve, sin had the chance to enter the originally perfect world. We are now born into a sinful world and no matter what we do growing up, there isn't a thing we can do to get all of the sin out of us. We may be able to convince other humans we are "squeaky-clean", but not God. He knows our born-in-sin-nature, completely.

So as we clean out our homes of the yeast and eat Matzo, yeastless bread, we are reminded that it is a hopeless case. Just like our inability to clean out the junk in our souls/spirits. We need someone perfect to do it for us.

Matzo has a special way it is made now. It has stripes that look like bruises and is pierced thru. The Rabbi's reason for this is to make the bread cook fast, from start to finish in 18 minutes actually. Eighteen minutes is supposedly the amount of time it takes to prepare and cook it in a manor that will keep all yeast out. What they don't seem to realize is that they have created the perfect symbolism that God initiated long ago.

Jesus was beaten and bruised and pierced for our sins. He was and is the only sinless person on this planet and His body is represented by the matzo. Even in modern day Judaism they can't get away from God's plan of redemption.

We need Jesus' atoning blood to cleanse us of those sins. We have to let Him come in to live inside of us, in the form of the Holy Spirit, where He can slowly find all that yeast and "burn it up". He burns up the sin just like the families burn up the left-over yeast before these two feasts.

We need God to live this "yeastless" lifestyle. But even then it will be a daily process, because yeast/sin permeates this world.

This feast is the perfect celebration of our Savior whose body was broken for our sins. Come celebrate Him with me.

10 Ways to Read the Bible

Would you like to get more from your Bible reading and study time? Perhaps you’re new to the Bible and not sure where to begin? Perhaps you’ve been reading the Word for years yet still not comfortable with studying God’s Word for yourself. It all begins with learning to really read the Scriptures.

There are three basic steps to studying God’s Word.

• Observation —what does the text say?
• Interpretation—what does the text mean?
• Application—how does it work?

Although many of us may be familiar with these steps, the tendency can be to quickly read a passage of Scripture and then jump right to application—tell me what to “do”! Perhaps we employ the “skimmer” method, skimming the passage looking for the “good stuff” that can help make sense of our situation.

In order to accurately interpret and apply the Bible, we must first do the hard work of observing—training ourselves to “see” what the text says.

“Before you understand you have to see.” —Howard Hendricks

Here are ten reading strategies you can use when studying the Bible to help you to slow down and spend more time observing so that you can rightly interpret and then apply the timeless truth contained in the passage.

TEN BIBLE READING STRATEGIES

# 1 Read Patiently:

• Be patient with the text.
• Be patient with yourself.

# 2 Read Prayerfully:

• Pray before, during, and after reading.
• When you’re stuck on a passage, having trouble understanding it, stop and pray.
• Pray the Scriptures for yourself and for others.

# 3 Read Repeatedly:

• Read it over and over and over and over…
• And just when you’re tired of it, read it again.

# 4 Read Imaginatively:

• Vary the Bible translation you normally read. Consider reading a paraphrase.
• Read it aloud.
• Listen to an audio version passage. The You Version and Dwell Bible apps will read a text to you.
• Rewrite the passage in your own words.

# 5 Read Thoughtfully:

• Look for the structure of the passage. How has the author organized the content of the text?
• Print out the text and use to mark up as you read looking for repeated words/phrases, contrasts and comparisons, linking words/phrases, verbs, cause and effect and lists in the text.
• Ask questions of the text.
• Think about the text throughout your day.

# 6 Read Purposefully:

• Look for the aim of the author. Every word contributes to the intended meaning. Structure (above) helps us see intent.
• Look for keywords and repeated words/phrases.
• Look for the purpose expressed through literary style: key people, key places, key events, key times and key ideas.
• Look for the purpose expressed through the grammar (more on this in future posts).

# 7 Read Acquisitively:

• Look for creative ways to retain what you’ve read and “make the passage your own”.
• Write a paraphrase.
• Draw the passage.
• Outline the passage.
• Story the passage. (More on Storying a Bible passage, here.)

# 8 Read Selectively:

• Ask the “Big Six” questions and answer from the text.
• Who—Who are the people in the text? What is said about the person or people? What does the person say?
• What—What is happening in the text? What are the events? What happens to the characters? What is the argument or point being made?
• When—When did the events in the text take place? When did they occur in relation to other events in Scripture? When was the writer writing?
• Where—Where is the narrative taking place? Where are the people in the story? Where are they coming from? Where are they going? Where is the writer? Where were the original readers of this text? If there is a journey taking place, trace it on a map.
• Why—Why is this included? Why is it placed here? Why does this follow that? Why does this person say that? There are an infinity of “why” questions.
• Wherefore (So What?)—What difference would it make if I were to apply this truth to my life?

# 9 Read Telescopically:

• How do the parts relate to the whole of the passage?
• How does this book fit into the Old or New Testament?
• How does the book fit into the whole story of the Bible?
• Pay attention to context.
• Look at the historical context.

# 10 Read Meditatively:

• Ponder, reflect, and think about text throughout the day.
• There’s a close connection between meditating on truth and applying it (Joshua 1:8, Proverbs 23:7, Psalm 1:1-2, Psalm 119:97
• Allow the truth to filter and percolate through your mind and into your life.

Don’t allow the list to overwhelm you! Try using just one new strategy at a time. Over time you will find your observation skills honed and you’ll find you’re “seeing” more in the text that you thought possible! Over time, you will find these strategies becoming habits in your Bible reading. Consider keeping a notebook or journal and recording your observations as you employ each reading strategy.

Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law. —Psalm 119:18 ESV

(Adapted from Living by the Book, Howard Hendricks)

This post first appeared on the blog, susancady.com, ©2018.

"I signed the Nashville Statement - Albert Mohler Jr.

This past week (Aug of 2017) I was part of an effort that put America’s theological and moral fault lines fully in view. I was a signer of something called the Nashville Statement, a document adopted by a group of evangelical Christians seeking to reaffirm traditional Christian values on sexuality.

Within hours, the vitriol in response to our document showed why such clarification is necessary.

One of the most intense lines of criticism was that we, signers of the document, dismiss the pain and suffering of those who live outside those historic Biblical sexual norms. That we weren’t acknowledging the rejection they feel in the church and were making their sins appear more significant than our own.

To be clear: Christians understand the brokenness of the world. We signers know ourselves, like all humanity, to be broken by sin. We have no right to face the world from a claim of moral superiority. We know and confess that Christians have often failed to speak the truth in love.

In releasing the Nashville Statement, we in fact are acting out of love and concern for people who are increasingly confused about what God has clarified in Holy Scripture.

Evangelical Christians believe that God has spoken in the Bible, and that obedience to what he has spoken is both true and essential for human wholeness, freedom, and fulfillment — for human flourishing.

We fully understand that our culture is increasingly influenced by the promise that human flourishing can come by what is styled as sexual liberation and the overthrowing of historic Christianity’s witness to God’s purpose in making us as sexual beings — even making us as male and female.

The statement was carefully written. Love of neighbor requires us to speak clearly and very specifically to the truths affirmed and the errors denied in the document.

It would be much easier to be quiet, to let the moral revolution proceed unanswered, and to seek some kind of refuge in silence or ambiguity. For the sake of same-sex attracted people and others, we did not believe we could remain silent — or unclear — and be faithful.

The backlash to the document shows why it is so needed: While the Christian church has held to a normative understanding of biblical sexuality for over two millennia, we now face challenges to biblical teaching that require an unprecedented level of specificity. It affirmed what would have been universally acknowledged as the historic Christian faith without question or controversy until just the last several years.

We understand that we live in an increasingly post-Christian world, and that a vast revolution in sexual morality is now fundamentally reshaping the landscape. Churches and pastors, Christian institutions and individual Christians, are now under intense pressure to adopt this new sexual morality, along with its redefinition of marriage and gender.

The “Nashville Statement,” like many other doctrinal declarations common to Christian history, seeks to summarize, clarify, and affirm what Holy Scripture reveals. In this case, we find ourselves clarifying what no previous generation of Christians has been called upon to clarify. We must now clarify and specify what the Bible teaches about human sexuality, marriage, and what it means to be made male and female.

The Nashville Statement affirms God’s design for marriage as “a covenantal, sexual, procreative, lifelong union of one man and one woman.” Those are the very purposes of marriage affirmed, for example, in the historic Book of Common Prayer. Chastity outside of marriage and fidelity within marriage are affirmed as the clear teaching of the Bible. We deny that God designed marriage “to be a homosexual, polygamous, or polyamorous relationship.” The Christian church — in all of its major branches — has joined in this denial for 2,000 years.

We affirm that God created Adam and Eve as the first human beings, as the statement says, “in his own image, equal before God as persons, and distinct as male and female.” Further, we affirm that God calls his human creatures “to accept the God-ordained link between one’s biological sex and one’s self-conception as male or female.”

The statement denies that same-sex attraction “is part of the natural goodness of God’s original creation, or that it puts a person outside the hope of the gospel.”

Pastors, parents, and individual Christians are asking for clear answers to what they see as new questions. We have attempted to provide them. Churches and Christian institutions have asked for a statement to which they can point for reference and affirmation. We have sought to assist them.

Many of the responses to the “Nashville Statement” have underlined the urgency and the necessity of the document. One response, offered as the “Denver Statement,” released by a church in Colorado, specifically affirms “that the glorious variety of gender and sexual expression is a reflection of God’s original creation design and are aspects of human flourishing.”

That affirmation is certainly in keeping with the moral revolution, but intellectual honesty requires the admission that it cannot be squared with the Bible’s account of creation. The “Denver Statement” denies “that sexual attraction for the same sex is outside the natural goodness of God’s original creation.” That fits the new sexual morality quite well, but runs counter to the consistent teaching of Scripture in both the Old and New Testaments.

Several of the responses have been quite candid in celebrating the overthrow of two thousand years of Christian moral teaching. Fair enough, but such a celebration acknowledges a severe break with historic Christianity. The “Denver Statement” makes this point clearly: “Christians at the dawn of the twenty-first century find themselves living in an exciting, beautiful, liberating, and holy period of historic transition.”

In less than one week, the “Nashville Statement” has marked an ironic achievement. It has incited those who would replace Christianity with a new religion teaching a new morality to be explicit in their rejection of the historic Christian faith.

The main goal of the “Nashville Statement” is to point all persons, regardless of the form of our struggles over sexuality or self-identity, to salvation and wholeness in Christ. With all our hearts, we believe that the sexual revolution cannot deliver on its promises, but that Christ always delivers on his.

The very fact that the statement made headlines and was greeted with shock and surprise in some quarters underlines why it was needed. We believe that human dignity, human flourishing, and true human freedom are at stake. We know that two rival visions of what it means to be human are now fully apparent. We stand by the vision affirmed in the historic Christian faith.


Albert Mohler Jr. is president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

The Nashville Statement

Preamble

Evangelical Christians at the dawn of the twenty-first century find themselves living in a period of historic transition. As Western culture has become increasingly post-Christian, it has embarked upon a massive revision of what it means to be a human being. By and large the spirit of our age no longer discerns or delights in the beauty of God’s design for human life. Many deny that God created human beings for his glory, and that his good purposes for us include our personal and physical design as male and female. It is common to think that human identity as male and female is not part of God’s beautiful plan, but is, rather, an expression of an individual’s autonomous preferences. The pathway to full and lasting joy through God’s good design for his creatures is thus replaced by the path of shortsighted alternatives that, sooner or later, ruin human life and dishonor God.

This secular spirit of our age presents a great challenge to the Christian church. Will the church
of the Lord Jesus Christ lose her biblical conviction, clarity, and courage, and blend into the
spirit of the age? Or will she hold fast to the word of life, draw courage from Jesus, and
unashamedly proclaim his way as the way of life? Will she maintain her clear, counter-cultural
witness to a world that seems bent on ruin?

We are persuaded that faithfulness in our generation means declaring once again the true story of
the world and of our place in it—particularly as male and female. Christian Scripture teaches that
there is but one God who alone is Creator and Lord of all. To him alone, every person owes glad-
hearted thanksgiving, heart-felt praise, and total allegiance. This is the path not only of glorifying God,
but of knowing ourselves. To forget our Creator is to forget who we are, for he made us for
himself. And we cannot know ourselves truly without truly knowing him who made us. We did
not make ourselves. We are not our own. Our true identity, as male and female persons, is given
by God. It is not only foolish, but hopeless, to try to make ourselves what God did not create us
to be.

We believe that God’s design for his creation and his way of salvation serve to bring him the
greatest glory and bring us the greatest good. God’s good plan provides us with the greatest
freedom. Jesus said he came that we might have life and have it in overflowing measure. He is
for us and not against us. Therefore, in the hope of serving Christ’s church and witnessing
publicly to the good purposes of God for human sexuality revealed in Christian Scripture, we
offer the following affirmations and denials.


Article 1
WE AFFIRM that God has designed marriage to be a covenantal, sexual, procreative, lifelong
union of one man and one woman, as husband and wife, and is meant to signify the covenant
love between Christ and his bride the church.
WE DENY that God has designed marriage to be a homosexual, polygamous, or polyamorous
relationship. We also deny that marriage is a mere human contract rather than a covenant made
before God.

Article 2
WE AFFIRM that God’s revealed will for all people is chastity outside of marriage and fidelity
within marriage.
WE DENY that any affections, desires, or commitments ever justify sexual intercourse before or
outside marriage; nor do they justify any form of sexual immorality.

Article 3
WE AFFIRM that God created Adam and Eve, the first human beings, in his own image, equal
before God as persons, and distinct as male and female.
WE DENY that the divinely ordained differences between male and female render them unequal
in dignity or worth.

Article 4
WE AFFIRM that divinely ordained differences between male and female reflect God’s original
creation design and are meant for human good and human flourishing.
WE DENY that such differences are a result of the Fall or are a tragedy to be overcome.

Article 5
WE AFFIRM that the differences between male and female reproductive structures are integral
to God’s design for self-conception as male or female.
WE DENY that physical anomalies or psychological conditions nullify the God-appointed link
between biological sex and self-conception as male or female.

Article 6
WE AFFIRM that those born with a physical disorder of sex development are created in the
image of God and have dignity and worth equal to all other image-bearers. They are
acknowledged by our Lord Jesus in his words about “eunuchs who were born that way from their
mother's womb.” With all others they are welcome as faithful followers of Jesus Christ and
should embrace their biological sex insofar as it may be known.
WE DENY that ambiguities related to a person’s biological sex render one incapable of living a
fruitful life in joyful obedience to Christ.

Article 7
WE AFFIRM that self-conception as male or female should be defined by God’s holy purposes
in creation and redemption as revealed in Scripture.
WE DENY that adopting a homosexual or transgender self-conception is consistent with God’s
holy purposes in creation and redemption.

Article 8
WE AFFIRM that people who experience sexual attraction for the same sex may live a rich and
fruitful life pleasing to God through faith in Jesus Christ, as they, like all Christians, walk in
purity of life.
WE DENY that sexual attraction for the same sex is part of the natural goodness of God’s
original creation, or that it puts a person outside the hope of the gospel.

Article 9
WE AFFIRM that sin distorts sexual desires by directing them away from the marriage covenant
and toward sexual immorality— a distortion that includes both heterosexual and homosexual
immorality.
WE DENY that an enduring pattern of desire for sexual immorality justifies sexually immoral
behavior.

Article 10
WE AFFIRM that it is sinful to approve of homosexual immorality or transgenderism and that
such approval constitutes an essential departure from Christian faithfulness and witness.
WE DENY that the approval of homosexual immorality or transgenderism is a matter of moral
indifference about which otherwise faithful Christians should agree to disagree.

Article 11
WE AFFIRM our duty to speak the truth in love at all times, including when we speak to or
about one another as male or female.
WE DENY any obligation to speak in such ways that dishonor God’s design of his image bearers as male and female.

Article 12
WE AFFIRM that the grace of God in Christ gives both merciful pardon and transforming
power, and that this pardon and power enable a follower of Jesus to put to death sinful desires
and to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord.
WE DENY that the grace of God in Christ is insufficient to forgive all sexual sins and to give
power for holiness to every believer who feels drawn into sexual sin.

Article 13
WE AFFIRM that the grace of God in Christ enables sinners to forsake transgender self conceptions and by divine forbearance to accept the God-ordained link between one’s biological
sex and one’s self-conception as male or female.
WE DENY that the grace of God in Christ sanctions self-conceptions that are at odds with God’s
revealed will.

Article 14
WE AFFIRM that Christ Jesus has come into the world to save sinners and that through Christ’s
death and resurrection forgiveness of sins and eternal life are available to every person who
repents of sin and trusts in Christ alone as Savior, Lord, and supreme treasure.
WE DENY that the Lord’s arm is too short to save or that any sinner is beyond his reach.



Scripture References*
Gen. 1:26-28; 2:15-25; 3:1-24; Ex. 20:14; 20:17; Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Dt. 5:18, 21; 22:5; Jdg. 19:22; 2 Sam.11:1-12:15; Job 31:1; Ps. 51:1-19; Prov. 5:1-23; 6:20-35; 7:1-27; Isa. 59:1; Mal. 2:14; Matt. 5:27–30;19:4-6, 8-9, 12; Acts 15:20, 29; Rom. 1:26–27; 1:32; 1 Cor. 6:9–11, 18-20; 7:1-7; 2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 5:24; Eph. 4:15, 20–24; 5:31–32; Col. 3:5; 1 Thess. 4:3-8; 1 Tim. 1:9–10, 15; 2 Tim. 2:22; Titus 2:11-12; Heb.13:4; Jas. 1:14–15; 1 Pet. 2:11; Jude 7
* Scripture texts are not a part of the original document but have been added subsequently for reference


The Nashville Statement is an evangelical Christian statement of faith (drafted in August of 2017) relating to human sexuality and gender roles authored by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) in Nashville, Tennessee. The Statement expresses support for an opposite-sex definition of marriage, for faithfulness within marriage, for chastity outside marriage, and for a link between biological sex and "self-conception as male and female." The Statement sets forth the signatories' opposition to LGBT sexuality, same-sex marriage, polygamy, polyamory, adultery, and fornication. It was criticized by egalitarian Christians and LGBT campaigners, as well as by several conservative religious figures.(copied from Wikipedia)