Body and Spirit: Christianity and the Importance of Exercise
I recently read David Mathis’ book, A Little Theology of Exercise. It is good and reminded me to finish writing something I started in 2023…
I have been exercising religiously and consistently for the past five years or so.[1] I use both “religiously” and “consistently” purposely here. I don’t primarily exercise for aesthetics or athleticism. But because “exercise is of some value,” as the Apostle Paul says (1 Timothy 4:8).
Some of the values I have seen in my own life: mental clarity, more patience and less anger, self-discipline, less stress (and fewer stress-related canker sores), and less back and knee pain. But that’s not it. My exercise has been religious too.
Exercise can actually be a type of spiritual discipline and an act of worship when done for the right reasons. Christians need to reject lazy and sedentary lives while also avoiding obsession with fitness and body image. Exercise is to serve the higher purpose of loving God and others well.
Christians know the body is not evil or unimportant; it is a precious part of what it means to be human. So, our bodies are to be stewarded to God’s glory. By working to keep our bodies healthy, we position ourselves to better serve God and others.[2] Exercise can help us better steward our time on earth.
Jonathan Edwards, the 18th-century theologian and philosopher, saw the benefit of regular exercise, although he didn’t have a gym to go to. In the winter, when he couldn’t ride his horse and walk, he would “chop wood, moderately, for the space of half an hour or more.”[3] I don’t think what we do is as important as doing something. We all have things we gravitate towards. Physical activity is helpful for us.
John J. Ratey’s book, Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain, was also helpful. He shows that exercise…
- helps with stress
- is especially helpful for those with ADHD
- is very beneficial for recovering addicts; it can assist the fight for sobriety because of how the reward system works in our brains
- helps with mental agility
- helps spur the growth of new brain cells
- helps combat anxiety and depression
- helps prevent and heal neurodegenerative disorders
Exercise is important. I love what the Apostle Paul says: “Physical training is good, but training for godliness is much better, promising benefits in this life and in the life to come” (1 Timothy 4:8). Of course, the Apostle Paul did not live a sedentary lifestyle.
Paul walked some 10,000 miles on his missionary journeys. So, Paul, although bookish, was also active. Jesus also did not live a sedentary lifestyle. Jesus was a carpenter/masonry craftsman, several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen, and Paul was a tentmaker.
“Regular human movement has been assumed throughout history.” But now, as David Mathis said, “We have cars, and we walk far less. We have machines and other labor-saving devices, and so we use our hands less. We have screens, and we move less. Added to that, in our prosperity and decadence, food and (sugar-saturated) drinks are available to us like never before.”
We definitely need to hear “godliness is much better,” but I think we also need to hear, “physical training is good.” This is especially the case because we drive, we don’t walk. We order fish, we don’t hoist them in from a ship. We build more things on Minecraft than with our hands.
It does make sense that our spiritual lives are more important than our physical fitness. But I don’t believe there is some huge separation between the two. Activity helps activate our minds. And the Bible says we are supposed to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength, and we are to glorify God in whatever we do. The Bible also says that Christians are temples of the living God; that doesn’t mean that our bodies must be marble, but it does mean that we shouldn’t treat our bodies like latrines.
We are embodied beings, not disembodied souls. Our bodies, it is true, are not glorified yet; they are battered and broken, but they’re not inherently bad. So, let’s exercise for effectiveness and longevity, not self-worth or selfies. God is the one who instills our self-worth (and gave Jesus for us), and being obsessed with selfies is silly.
Notes
[1] Exercise has been a part of my life since about as long as I can remember. I started playing soccer when I was five and remember first being allowed to jog to Fleets Fitness when I was thirteen.
[2] Scripture says to do good to people as you have opportunity (Gal. 6:7), but more and more, if it is difficult to get off the couch, it will also be increasingly difficult to help people. So, I think disciplining ourselves for the sake of godliness (1 Timothy 4:7) can and even should include physical exercise.
[3] The Works of President Edwards.
*Photo by Mike Cox
What’s Keeping Churches from Making Disciples?
Most churches know that discipleship is the main mission of the church. It’s in most mission statements. Yet, what kind of person does the church produce? The Christ-commanded product is a disciple who makes disciples.[1]
Disciples trust Jesus as Lord and Boss, and follow Him by imitating His life and obeying His teachings.[2] Jesus calls disciples to deny themselves, take up their cross daily, and follow Him. This means disciples have repented of sin, forsaken the world, and committed their lives to follow Him. Historically, being a disciple involved learning, studying, and passing along the master’s teachings.[3]
Is this what the church is making? Many would say no. To a great extent, I agree. Even back in 1988, Bill Hull said,
The evangelical church has become weak, flabby, and too dependent on artificial means that can only simulate real spiritual power. Churches are too little like training centers to shape up the saints and too much like cardiopulmonary wards at the local hospital. We have proliferated self-indulgent consumer religion, the what-can-the-church-do-for-me syndrome. We are too easily satisfied with conventional success: bodies, bucks, and buildings. The average Christian resides in the comfort zone of “I pay the pastor to preach, administrate, and counsel. I pay him, he ministers to me… I am the consumer, he is the retailer.”[4]
While churches are biblically mandated and should be structured to make disciples, many churches prioritize attendance and attractive programs over discipleship, which results in discipleship deficiencies. Discipleship involves more than mere head knowledge; it involves intentionally instructing Jesus’ followers to “observe all that Jesus commanded” and to become disciple-makers themselves.
So, Hull says, “The crisis at the heart of the church is that we give disciple-making lip service, but do not practice it.”[5] If that’s the case, what are some of the issues keeping churches from making disciples?
1. Cultural Values
The cultural air that we breathe has an imperceptible impact. Christian Smith does a good job explaining some of the cultural values that we can easily unknowingly imbibe in his book, Why Religion Went Obsolete.
David Foster Wallace once told this story:
There are these two young fish swimming along, and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way. The older fish nods at them: “Morning, boys, how’s the water?” The two young fish swim on for a bit, and then one of them looks over at the other. “What the heck is water?”
It can be very difficult to be aware of our own culture and the impact that it is having on us.[6]
Our culture of consumerism and materialism is a big factor. So, Soong-Chan Rah, for example, has said,
Market-driven church that appeals to the materialistic desires of the individual consumer has resulted in a comfortable church, but not a biblical church. The church’s captivity to materialism has resulted in the unwillingness to confront sins such as economic and racial injustice and has produced consumers of religion rather than followers of Jesus.[7]
My point here is that our culture, even our church culture, does not place high value on discipleship. Although we may say we do. Our actions, or inaction, speak louder than our words.
We must let the Bible dictate our church culture, not culture.
2. Budgetary and Building Needs
Related to number one above, we have a church culture in America that is very dependent on buildings and budgets. We often think that for the church to continue, it has to “pack the pews” so the doors can stay open and the lights can stay on. Thus, the budgetary concerns can easily take precedence over all other concerns.
Here’s our thinking: What good can the church do if the church closes? Sunday comes quickly, and we need to have good sermons and programs if we hope to bring in the tithe or at least some form of giving.
Discipleship can easily take a back seat. Discipleship can be slow. Jesus walked, talked, and trained His disciples. This took time. Lots of time. Actual years. Yet, a movement of multiplication can happen when we make disciples.
We have conditioned ourselves for a type of fast-food or industrial revolution discipleship mentality. We want disciples quick, right off the express line. But that’s not how disciples have ever been made. But perhaps, especially now in our increasingly post-Christian, Bible-illiterate world.
We must care more about building up the actual body of Christ and not prioritize the church building (and budget).
3. Pastoral Identity Issues
Sadly, having been in pastoral ministry for 17 years and worked in various church contexts, sometimes there are pastoral identity issues that prevent pastors from investing in discipleship. It doesn’t feed a pastor’s ego if a lot of people don’t show up (however, “a lot of people” is defined). But Jesus didn’t always have a lot of people around Him. And sometimes when He did, He would say some very controversial things, and then many would leave. Christ’s goal was not a crowd, but “little Christs.”
A pastor’s ego is not fed when he equips others to do the work of the ministry, when he gives away ministry, helps others faithfully lead, shrugs out of the limelight, and pushes others towards success. But Christian ministry was never supposed to be about anyone’s ego.
But you know what is fed when a pastor doesn’t feed his ego? The church is fed, and it thus grows in both size and maturity because it is functioning as Jesus always intended it to function. Not as a one-person show, but as the church body being loving light wheresoever the church body finds itself throughout the week.
The church is an immaterial reality, and it was never meant to be bound by a material building; it was always meant to find physical expression in the living and breathing, walking and talking (incarnate), temples of God that Jesus’ people are. Just as the word of God was not bound, although Paul was bound in prison, God’s church is not bound to a building.
It is most healthy when it’s out loving in the wild world. That’s what it was always meant for. The telos or purpose of a candle is to be a source of light in darkness. It’s the same with the church. The church is called to be light in darkness and salt in a world of rot and decay. Notice, Jesus did not give the church something aspirational when He said, “You are the light of the world.” Jesus said something ontological. He said what we are.
I’m concerned that many pastors’ call to serve the church is self-serving. Pastors are often concerned about “their” church, not the Church. Pastors, sad to say, can be more concerned about their building being full rather than heaven being full.
The church is to make much of Jesus the Good Shepherd and not exalt any human.
4. Lack of Leadership Diversity (APEST)
“APEST” stands for apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, and teachers. The Lord of the church has given these varied gifts to the church so that it will be balanced and mature (see Ephesians 4). Sadly, however, these gifts often find expression disconnected from the other gifts.
(It’s important to note that when I talk about APEST, I am talking about gifting. Not office or authority.)
Churches with certain types of leaders will move in certain directions. Teacher types tend to be thinkers, writers, researchers, and theologians. Shepherds tend to be carers, counselors, and community builders. Evangelists tend to be recruiters to the cause, apologists, and networkers. Prophets tend to call people to change, have holy criticism, and care deeply about social issues. Apostles pioneer, innovate, and create new approaches and structures.[8]
It seems the most common type of church, at least in the West, is the shepherd/teacher church.[9] This often results in a “knowledge-based community where right doctrine is seen to be more important than rightdoing.”[10] There is often an overemphasis on the sermon and Sunday service, and community, discipleship, and evangelism are an afterthought.
Again, diversity and balance are important. “The one-dimensional teaching church attracts people who love to be taught and tends to alienate other forms of spiritual expression. This is seldom a good thing because such churches simply become vulnerable to groupthink or even mass delusion. This has happened way too often… witness the many one-dimensional charismatic/vertical prophetic movements of the last century. Or consider the asymmetrical mega-church that markets religion and ends up producing consumptive, dependent, underdeveloped, cultural Christians with an exaggerated sense of entitlement.”[11]
The fact that “we have sought to negotiate our way in the world without three of the five functions (by elevating teaching and shepherding and neglecting evangelism, the prophetic, and the apostolic) accounts for so many of the problems we face in the church.”[12]
5. Lack of Commitment to the New Testament Ideal
Many times, we don’t know what we’re aiming for when it comes to disciples. We often lack a clear definition, or it’s a knowledge-based definition. Churches often emphasize orthodoxy (right belief) over orthopraxy (right practice). This results in many churchgoers who know a lot but don’t necessarily do a lot. But the great commission doesn’t just say “teach.” Its aim is practice. The Great Commission says, “teach them to observe everything I have commanded” (Matt. 28:20).
The church body is made up of individual members who together and separately worship, reflect, and share. The church is not an institution or an event. It is a living and moving organism. It is embodied all over every sector of society. So, we must ask, are disciples being made who make disciples who know, grow, and go?
The New Testament ideal is every believer practicing the missional mandate. It’s not just about knowing, but about going and doing all that Jesus commanded. The church must have growth goals or metrics that match the mission that Jesus has given to the church.
6. Lack of A Model to Emulate
The Apostle Paul said, “Imitate me as I imitate Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1). Jesus is the New Testament ideal. We are to imitate Him. And “Jesus poured His life into a few disciples and taught them to make other disciples.”[13]
So, we have an example to emulate in Jesus and Paul. Christian leaders must also provide examples and practice what they preach.[14] If pastors, for example, are—intentionally or unintentionally—held up as the Christian ideal, there are certain implications. If pastors mainly study and teach publicly or mainly function as CEOs, then that’s what is being modeled to people. And not lived everyday discipleship.
Conclusion
Good things often distract from the best things. And actually, some of the things churches do that they think are good only serve to create a culture of consumerism. Things must change. We must obey Jesus and make disciples who make disciples. We must make whatever structural and organizational changes are necessary to ensure we’re carrying out Jesus’ commission.[15]
I propose a new approach to “doing church” because, to a great extent, the way we’re currently doing church, at least in the West, is not working. We are not making disciples who make disciples in accordance with our Lord’s command. To a great extent, the church is making sitters. We must take our Boss’s words seriously and make structural and organizational changes.
Transformation happens less by argument and more by creating new rhythms and practices that shift not only people’s thinking but also their values and core commitments. We think, practice, and love our way into transformation. As Alan Hirsch has perceptively said, “The best way of making ideas have impact is to embed them into the very rhythms and habits of the community in the form of common tools and practices.”[16]
We need to stop just talking about discipleship and having programs for discipleship. We need something more radical. We need to scrap the old ways that allow for abstraction, and instead create regular rhythms that embody application.
Notes
[1] See Bill Hull, The Disciple-Making Pastor, 14.
[2] See Michael S. Heiser, What Does God Want? (Blind Spot Press, 2018), 94–95 and Ken Wilson, Finding God in the Bible: A Beginner’s Guide to Knowing God (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2005), 86.
[3] Robert B. Sloan Jr., “Disciple,” in Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, ed. Chad Brand et al. (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 425.
[4] Bill Hull, The Disciple-Making Pastor, 12.
[5] Hull, The Disciple-Making Pastor, 15.
[6] Alan Hirsch, 5Q: Reactivating the Original Intelligence and Capacity of the Body of Christ.
[7] Soong-Chan Rah, The Next Evangelicalism, 63.
[8] There are a few Johns who stick out as teachers. John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, and John MacArthur. Here are some other examples: George Whitefield (evangelist/apostle), John Piper (teacher/prophet), Charles Spurgeon (evangelist/prophet), Mother Teresa (shepherd) Richard Baxter (shepherd/teacher), Teresa of Avila (prophet/teacher), St. Patrick (apostle/shepherd) John Wimber (apostle/evangelist), David Platt (teacher/prophet), Hudson Taylor (apostle/evangelist), Catherine Booth (apostle), Dietrich Bonhoeffer (prophet/teacher), Billy Graham (evangelist), and Martin Luther King Jr. (prophet).
[9] “The church is actually perfectly designed by shepherds and teachers to produce shepherding and teaching outcomes. The organizational bias of the inherited form of church organization is in a real sense a reflection of the consciousness of the people who designed it in the first place!” (Alan Hirsch, 5Q).
[10] Hirsch, 5Q.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Spader, Four Chair Discipling, 36. “These few disciples, within two years after the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, went out and “filled Jerusalem” with Jesus’ teaching (Acts 5:28). Within four and a half years they had planted multiplying churches and equipped multiplying disciples (Acts 9:31). Within eighteen years it was said of them that they “turned the world upside down” (Acts 17;6 ESV). And in twenty-eight years it was said that the gospel is bearing fruit and growing throughout the whole world” (Col. 1:6). For four years Jesus lived out the values He championed in His Everyday Commission. He made disciples who could make disciples!” (Ibid.).
[14] Jesus had a specific method which we would be wise to observe and follow. See, for example, Matthew 9:35-39: “Jesus went throughout all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction. When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest.'” Jesus went, taught, proclaimed, healed, saw, and had compassion. He equipped disciples and sent them out into the harvest. He didn’t want them to sit in a building or do ministry in a building. What’s needed and what Jesus told us to pray for is laborers sent into the harvest.
[15] “Not much will change until we raise the issue and create controversy, until the American church is challenged to take the Great Commission seriously” (Hull, The Disciple-Making Pastor, 15).
[16] Hirsch, 5Q.
*Photo by Nellie Adamyan
What Is Success As A Church?
It can be easy to point out what is wrong in the church, but what are we even supposed to be aiming for? What does success look like? Church bloat is not the aim. Increasing the number of people who come to sit in a church building once a week is not the goal.
What is the Mission of the Church? by Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert is a helpful book. They say, “The mission of the church—as seen in the Great Commissions, the early church in Acts, and the life of the apostle Paul—is to win people to Christ and build them up in Christ. Making disciples—that’s our task.”[1]
Success looks like more people loving Jesus and loving and living like Jesus. So, as apprentices of Jesus, we want to be…
Going into our world with the good news of Jesus to make disciples.
How is this measured? Mature disciples will be regularly spending time with their neighbors, peers, and coworkers. Mature disciples don’t mainly spend their time in a church building, but being the church in the world. The goal is for Christians to obey the missional mandate. Faithful disciples don’t practice invitation; they practice evangelization.[2]
Instead of one person sharing the good news of Jesus from a stage once or twice a week, we’re working towards all people, all the time; everyone, everywhere. The goal of the church is to make disciples who, in turn, make disciples. Not fans. The goal is not getting more people into a building. The goal is sending more people out into the world.
Growing in maturity in word and deed.
How is this measured? Mature disciples will be regularly practicing the grace of the spiritual disciplines. It’s not just about sitting in a service but doing the things the Lord has called us to do. We can know a lot of things about Jesus and even say, “Jesus is Lord,” and yet contradict what we know and say by our lives.[3] If Jesus is Lord, we must listen and obey (Luke 6:46).
Maturity is not knowledge-based; it’s obedience-based. Knowing must lead to doing. Experientially loving God and tangibly loving our neighbors is vital. We don’t count consumers. We count disciples.
Giving of our time, talents, and treasure.
Mature disciples will regularly serve their local community and practice hospitality.[4] Notice, this is not church building centric. Mature disciples serve Christians and non-Christians (Gal. 6:10) where they work, live, and play.
Maturity is when you serve God in the way He has gifted and called you, not in the way that society expects you to. Taking ownership of your mission is a mark of maturity. The goal is not hoarders. The goal is giving away.
I believe we should encourage more service in the surrounding community and less in the church building. We should see that as more needed. May we be salt and light in our community and neighborhoods, and less about the industrial complex of the “church.” “Serving” does not equal serving in the church. I am over hearing pastors guilt people into serving in the church building. Pastors are sometimes guilty of telling people to essentially hide there light in a bushel. But, if you know the song, it says, “Hide it under a bushel? No!”
Serve and love the people where you are. We want people staying in their bowling league with their coworkers, neighbors, and friends even if it means not going to the second Bible study or being on the tech team. We would much rather people practice hospitality than be on a hospitality team.
Gathering together to encourage and be encouraged.
Mature disciples will be regularly gathering in community to practice the “one another passages.” Mature disciples—male and female, theologically trained or not—will be regularly using their spiritual gifts to build up the body of Christ.
Maturity is gathering and building up other believers and purposely scattering to bless the broken world that needs Jesus’ love. Maturity isn’t about attendance. It’s about intentionally spurring those in your life on towards love and good works (Heb. 10:24). The goal is incarnation, not isolation.[5]
Our Metrics Must Match Our Goals.
If the four practices above are our growth goals, there are various implications. We must create different structures to best reach those goals.
We all have things we value. If you walk into my house, you will see certain things that my family values. You will see that my wife and I value books. If you walk into my son’s room, you will see that he values Legos and books. We all have things where we live that show what we value.
What do we “see” at the gathering of the church? What does what we see communicate about what we value? Do we value real, lived-out, day-in, day-out, discipleship? Or do we value budgets, buildings, branding, platforms, programming, and pizzazz?
I believe we are perfectly designed to obtain our current results. But, sadly, I don’t think the things we do result in disciples who make disciples. I don’t think our metrics do a good job of measuring discipleship, let alone the 2 Timothy 2:2 commission.[6]
What success looks like must change if we are to resemble our Savior. Our aim must shift if we want the church to reflect Jesus’ intent. Jesus’ clear emphasis was on making disciples who make disciples. “Jesus poured His life into a few disciples and taught them to make other disciples. Seventeen times we find Jesus with the masses, but forty-six times we see Him with His disciples.”[7]
Notes
[1] Kevin DeYoung & Greg Gilbert, What is the Mission of the Church?, 63.
[2] Christians are called to share the good news of Jesus with people. The Bible never tells us to invite people to church (e.g., Matt. 5:16; 10:32-33; 28:18-20; Mark 8:38; 16:15; Romans 1:16; 10:14-17; 15:18; 1 Cor. 9:19-23; 1 Cor. 4:1-2; 10:33; 2 Cor. 5:20; 1 Peter 2:12).
[3] The Lord desires that Christians (who are followers of Christ, after all) be agents of peace (Matt. 5:9), partiers with the poor (Lk. 14:13-14) and helpers of the poor (Gal. 2:9-10), ministers of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:18-19), protectors of orphans and widows (Is. 1:17; James 1:27), fighters of injustice (Is. 58:6), and people of mercy (Matt. 5:7).
[4] Hospitality is important because it’s been a Christian value throughout Christian history, and it’s a strategic way to be the church on mission. This value is demonstrated by regularly sharing meals with others (including those who are different and needy), intentionality in connecting with our neighbors, and prayerful pursuit of loving friendships where God has planted us.
[5] I believe a few pivots are needed. Here are a few examples: The criteria of faithfulness and maturity should not be going to a building on Sunday and sitting in a hour/hour-and-a-half service. And for the “super Christian” serving the church by watching the kids, being a greeter, or giving some money to the church. Instead, being the salt and light church of God on Monday and throughout the week is the criteria. No bifurcation in life. We are the church. We don’t go to church. Church is not on Sundays.
[6] 2 Tim. 2:2 says, “And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others.”
[7] Dann Spader, Four Chair Discipling, 36. “These few disciples, within two years after the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, went out and “filled Jerusalem” with Jesus’ teaching (Acts 5:28). Within four and a half years they had planted multiplying churches and equipped multiplying disciples (Acts 9:31). Within eighteen years it was said of them that they “turned the world upside down” (Acts 17;6 ESV). And in twenty-eight years it was said that the gospel is bearing fruit and growing throughout the whole world” (Col. 1:6). For four years Jesus lived out the values He championed in His Everyday Commission. He made disciples who could make disciples!” (Dann Spader, Four Chair Discipling, 36). Also, “Jesus gives more than 400 commands in the Gospels and more than half of them are disciple-making commands.” (Ibid., 37).
*Photo by Helena Lopes
The Solution for Church Decline is Getting Back to the Simple Center
The solution for church decline is not more of the same, and it’s not mega church. The solution, first and foremost, is a work of the Spirit, but the Spirit uses means. One of the means the Spirit has used in the past is reformation. I don’t quite have 95 Theses, but I do have some serious concerns and believe there’s a need for reformation.
The Spirit worked and brought reformation through Martin Luther at the time of the Reformation. And John Wesley worked by the power of the Spirit to bring about the reformation of the church of England. In both cases, something new was the result: a formation rather than a reformation, because in those two instances, the church would not reform.
I think the church has been missing the main thing for a long time. As the song “The Heart of Worship” by Matt Redman says,
I’m comin’ back to the heart of worship
And it’s all about You
It’s all about You, Jesus…
I’m sorry, Lord, for the thing I’ve made it
When it’s all about You
It’s all about You, Jesus
Evaluation & Examination
We need to evaluate what we see as success and examine what Scripture says on this matter. What is our aim and why? If our desire is for our church to become a bigger and bigger name-brand church and for success for “our” church, we’re missing it.[1] Many churches’ articulation of their mission is very similar—something like, “To lead people to become fully devoted followers of Christ.”However, their pathway to practicing their own priorities is often hindered by the very structures they’ve built and the goals they strive for in practice.
Most churches base their mission statements around the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20). Which is great. “Go,” however, is often translated as “come” or “bring people to church.” And “Make disciples” is translated to mean “have classes within the confines of the church.” “Observe everything I have commanded you” is often translated “know everything about everything.”
So, what is the solution to church decline? First, we must have a healthy evaluation of what the goal is or what we’re aiming for. Is our desire to be the biggest and baddest (in the slang positive sense) church? The world’s most theologically astute, correct, and pure church? What is our aim? Is our goal really to make disciples? If so, are we doing it?
Disciples are not like widgets on an assembly line. They can’t be mass-produced or microwaved.[2] They need to be walked with and experience lived discipleship. Many times in church, we’re content with the equivalent of Jar Jar Binks, but Jesus wants to build an army of Jedi. As has been said, “Slow is the new fast.” Jedi’s may take lots of time to develop, but they’re a lot more effective at defeating the dark side.
The prevailing discipleship model reminds me of “meat chickens.” They’re bred to grow extremely fast. They’re engineered to reach full size in just a few weeks. On the outside, they look a lot like normal chickens. But there’s a cost—most of them can’t stand on their legs. They’re not what they were designed to be and can’t do what they were designed to do. They just consume and get consumed. Disciples were never meant to be just consumers. Disciples were meant to be lovingly deployed in the places where they work, live, and play.
We must examine Scripture and evaluate if our current practices are best in line with the values of Scripture. For example, elsewhere in looking at the “one another” passages in the Bible, I propose we make changes and make it incredibly difficult for people to be passive observers of church. I also propose we shift from a “come and see” church model to a “go and tell” church model.
I believe the very structure of church that has become sacrosanct is liable to suffocate the very soul of the church. Church is not a building. Church is not a business. Church is not something you go to for one hour once a week for a service or “worship experience.”
Church is a body of people who are called and commanded to be allegiant to Jesus with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength. Church is not about going to a service. It’s more about serving Jesus in a world that needs to know Him. It’s about loving Jesus and loving like Jesus and regularly gathering with the saints to be better equipped and better able to do what Jesus has called us to do.
Sometimes the structure, amenities, entertainment, and desire for and near perfection of the church service, communicate church is a lot more about people being comfortable, than about following the crucified and reigning Christ. The saying, “The medium is the message,” emphasizes that the characteristics of the communication channel play a significant role in shaping how a message is perceived and understood compared to its specific content. This concept was popularized by media theorist Marshall McLuhan. He argued that the medium by which the message is delivered influences our perceptions, thoughts, and social structures more profoundly than the information it conveys.
The medium isn’t just a neutral container for information; it actively shapes the message and its impact. McLuhan argued that the medium’s effects on our society, culture, and individual psyches are more significant than the specific content it transmits. The medium by which something is communicated is not neutral. The medium itself has an impact beyond the specific content it conveys.
So, when the church gathers in a near-perfect setting with amazing music and speaking, it has an impact beyond the message that is shared in the service. The setting, structure, and the whole of the service (the medium) can often contradict the very message that is shared. When everything is structured to serve and cater to the spectators, it contradicts what Scripture says; that we are to “offer our bodies as living sacrifices” (Rom. 12:1). Is it then any wonder that we have 10% of people in the church doing 100% of the work of the church?
Deconstruction & Reformation
Like it or not, as leaders responsible for our times, we simply have to be willing to submit the inherited ecclesial system to a thoroughgoing audit. We have to accept that what has got us to this point in history—which is now long-term trended decline in every setting in the West—will simply not get us to a viable future. We can no longer allow ourselves to act as if more of the same thinking and doing is going to bring about fundamentally different results. As the ever-insightful Albert Einstein noted, the problems of the world cannot be resolved by the same kind of thinking that created those problems in the first place.[3]
There is a need for the deconstruction of some things within the church and reformation by the Spirit. I believe it is for good reason that many people find the prevailing church model irrelevant. Of course, we should never bow to culture, but culture can give insights into things that we may be blind to. The sheer number of people who have deconstructed should perhaps make us consider whether there are things in church that should be deconstructed. Unnecessary things in church are unnecessary, and sometimes those things have been exalted to near-sacred status.[4]
The church is still and always in need of reformation (Semper Reformanda). “We must learn to be suspicious of our cultural assumptions and be willing to take a scalpel to the cultural forms that have built up around our Christian beliefs.”[5] As Francis Asbury said, “At the Reformation, the reformers only beat off part of the rubbish.”[6]
Semper Reformanda is not just for the 1500s. It’s something for now. And as Asbury and others have pointed out, the previous reformations didn’t take things quite far enough. We need an ecclesiological and missiological reformation. We must look at the mirror of God’s word and see the church for what it is and make the needed adjustments. This is not idealism, it’s sacrificial faithfulness.
Much of the trellis needs to be trimmed for us to have a healthy vine. For too long, the trellis—the structures and systems, buildings and branding—has been what we have given our attention to. And it is becoming unwieldy. If we are to put the attention on the fruit of the vine, we need to give up much of the trellis. The branches themselves need pruning, but many are not even willing to trim any part of the trellis. Some of our physical buildings and organizational structures should be considered for the chopping block.
As Alan Hirsch often says, “‘We are perfectly designed to produce what we are currently producing.’ What we are seeing should not surprise us. Rather, we should redesign the system to produce different outcomes.”[7]
Implementation & Demonstration
We need the implementation of different healthy church structures and the demonstration that these new structures work to form faithful followers of Jesus. A new trellis for a new and healthier vine. There are already faithful “tests of concept.”[8]
The explosive early church is the first successful test of concept, but we see various modern examples. We see it in the underground church in China, North Korea, and parts of the Middle East. We’re also seeing the beginning of microchurch movements in parts of the USA.[9]
If the current model is not the answer, where is the counter model? Who will pick up the shovel and build with me? Who will reconstruct from the wreckage? Who will sacrifice and even step off staff, if necessary? If the ship is sinking, who is going to swim and salvage what you can?
What if churches had deep instead of surface relationships, discipled instead of entertained, and emphasized the church body instead of the building? What if we were intergenerational instead of isolating, cared about character instead of charisma, and emphasized the ministry of people instead of “superpastors”? What if pastors deeply knew people, we were authentic instead of artificial, and simple instead of complex?
What if churches were co-laborers instead of competitors? What if every person used their gifts where they work, live, and play, and it wasn’t just about the “professionals” standing on the stage?
The desire and what we strive for is to activate every disciple’s latent potential and produce healthy disciples, multiplying microchurches, hubs, and networks. Is this happening? It is in places, and the seed is sprouting in mid-Ohio. Farming, like Christian leadership, takes time, lots of work, and lots of reliance on God.
This is some of how we’re building authentic, simple, replicable, relational microchurches all built on the essential foundation of the Lord Jesus:
- Deep Relationships: Move beyond surface-level interactions to genuine, heartfelt connections where we know and care for one another. This includes practicing the “one another” passages of Scripture, such as bearing burdens, forgiving, encouraging, and praying for one another.
- Intergenerational Community: Integrate people of all ages to foster mutual learning, encouragement, and faith formation. Older Christians mentoring younger ones, while younger members bring fresh perspectives and energy.
- Shared Meals and Fellowship: Regularly gather for meals to cultivate hospitality, build relationships, and create a sense of family. This practice mirrors the early church’s “breaking of bread” and love feasts.
- Relational Evangelism: Focus on sharing the gospel through authentic relationships rather than relying solely on church invitations, programs, and church services. Christians are encouraged and equipped to live missionally in their daily lives.
- Hospitality: Open homes and hearts to welcome others, creating a culture of generosity and inclusion. Hospitality is seen as a vital expression of Christian love and a powerful evangelistic tool.
- Mutual Ministry: Empower all members of the church to use their spiritual gifts for the common good, rather than relying on a “superpastor” or professional clergy. This reflects the biblical concept of the priesthood of all believers.
- Authenticity Over Artificiality: Create space where people can be honest about their struggles and joys, avoiding curated or staged experiences. The church should be a “hospital” for the broken, not a “beauty pageant.”
- Unity and Collaboration: Foster unity within the church and across churches, focusing on Kingdom growth rather than competition. Members should work together to advance the gospel and support one another.
- Biblical Practices: Ground the community in Scripture, including regular prayer, teaching, singing, and celebrating the Lord’s Supper. These practices help the church remain spiritually rooted and focused on Christ.
- Missional Living: Encourage and equip the church to live out their faith in the places they work, live, and play. The church is seen as a body that gathers to be built up and scatters to bless.
These elements aim to create a church community that is relationally connected, spiritually vibrant, and missionally engaged, reflecting the biblical ideal of the body of Christ, house to house, city to city, and nation to nation.
Notes
[1] Paul’s consuming desire was that Jesus be preached. He wasn’t about his name in lights or about building a brand. Paul said, “Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice,” (Phil. 1:18). It often seems the desire of the church leadership is for the growth of the church, but not the growth of the disciples in the church. We make fans and spectators, not players on the field and soldiers (Contra 2 Tim.2:1-10). Jesus’ expectation, in contrast, is that people would stop following Him because it was so hard (Jn. 6:67). Jesus didn’t pamper or pander to people, Jesus laid out the bare excruciating reality of what it means to follow Him (Matt. 16:24). Jesus also knew the high cost of following Him was abundantly worth it (Matt. 16:25).
[2] Brad Brisco shares about repeatedly seeing an ad on his social media feed titled “Double Your Church in 90 Days.” Here’s Brisco’s reflection: “While it may sound appealing, it reflects a very problematic mindset. It reduces the church to numbers, promotes short-term thinking, and pressures leaders with unrealistic expectations. Kingdom growth is Spirit-led, highly contextual, and often slow; measured not simply by attendance, but by transformed lives and faithful presence. Discipleship can’t be microwaved.”
[3] Alan Hirsch, 5Q: Reactivating the Original Intelligence and Capacity of the Body of Christ.
[4] I do believe there is an ecclesiological minimum and that churches must at least obtain that minimum. Qualified leadership, preaching/teaching, scripture, singing, sacraments, for example.
[5] My friend, who wisely and faithfully pastors in England and who shares a lot of that wise faithfulness here, wrote this article from which I take his quote (Stephen Kneale, “Assumptions Without Reflection: Assessing Cultural Values in Light of Biblical Values“).
[6] https://seedbed.com/methodism-as-a-revivalistic-movement/
[7] Alan Hirsch, Lance Ford, Rob Wegner, The Starfish and the Spirit: Unleashing the Leadership Potential of Churches and Organizations.
[8] “Test of concept” is often used to refer to the market research used to evaluate the potential success of a new product, service, or idea.
[9] Here are some websites to look at: noplaceleft, 1body.church, l1achurchfortmyers, and churchinnorthcentralohio.
The “One Another” Passages Are Commands, Not Options
Online church and spectator church don’t prioritize the practice of the “one another” commands. They make the “one another” passages optional add-ons, but Scripture doesn’t. A handshake and even a weekly hug is not the same as taking these commands seriously. But what if the practice of these commands is vital for the maturity of Christians? What if these commands are in Scripture to be practiced and prioritized?
The phrase “one another” is derived from the Greek word allelon, which means “one another, each other; mutually, reciprocally.” It occurs 100 times in the New Testament. Approximately 59 of those occurrences are specific commands teaching us how (and how not) to relate to one another. Obedience to those commands is imperative. It forms the basis for all true Christian community, and has a direct impact on our witness to the world (John 13:35). The following list is not exhaustive:
Positive Commands (how to treat one another)
- Love one another (John 13:34 – This command occurs at least 16 times)
- Be devoted to one another (Romans 12:10)
- Welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you (Romans 15:7)
- Honor one another above yourselves (Romans 12:10)
- Live in harmony with one another (Romans 12:16)
- Build up one another (Romans 14:19; 1 Thessalonians 5:11)
- Be like-minded towards one another (Romans 15:5)
- Accept one another (Romans 15:7)
- Admonish one another (Romans 15:14; Colossians 3:16)
- Greet one another (Romans 16:16)
- Care for one another (1 Corinthians 12:25)
- Serve one another (Galatians 5:13)
- Bear one another’s burdens (Galatians 6:2)
- Forgive one another (Ephesians 4:2, 32; Colossians 3:13)
- Be patient with one another (Ephesians 4:2; Colossians 3:13)
- Speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15, 25)
- Be kind and compassionate to one another (Ephesians 4:32)
- Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19)
- Submit to one another (Ephesians 5:21, 1 Peter 5:5)
- Consider others better than yourselves (Philippians 2:3)
- Look to the interests of one another (Philippians 2:4)
- Bear with one another (Colossians 3:13)
- Teach one another (Colossians 3:16)
- Comfort one another (1 Thessalonians 4:18)
- Encourage one another (1 Thessalonians 5:11)
- Exhort one another (Hebrews 3:13)
- Stir up [provoke, stimulate] one another to love and good works (Hebrews 10:24)
- Show hospitality to one another (1 Peter 4:9)
- Employ the gifts that God has given us for the benefit of one another (1 Peter 4:10)
- Clothe yourselves with humility towards one another (1 Peter 5:5)
- Pray for one another (James 5:16)
- Confess your faults to one another (James 5:16)
Negative Commands (how not to treat one another)
- Do not lie to one another (Colossians 3:9)
- Stop passing judgment on one another (Romans 14:13)
- If you keep on biting and devouring each other… you’ll be destroyed by each other (Galatians 5:15)
- Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other (Galatians 5:26)
- Do not slander one another (James 4:11)
- Don’t grumble against each other (James 5:9)
All of these passages assume a deep relational connection. As Christians, we are in a real sense “members of one another” (Romans 12:5; Ephesians 4:25) and very much need one another.
These “one another” commands cannot be practiced one Sunday a week, sitting in a church service. To truly practice the exhortations in these passages requires a type of “living together.” I think the whole Western American church structure needs a redo. I think the paradigm is sick. Perhaps church was never supposed to be structured with a stage and an audience to entertain? Perhaps the church was never meant to be something we merely attend? Perhaps “we are family” was never meant to be a church tagline, but a reality?
Perhaps it’s utterly vital that we prioritize practicing the one another passages? What if we need to restructure the church to ensure the practice of these passages? What if we need to make time, maybe even have a meal together at least once a week, to help ensure we’re complying with the commands of God’s word? Big adjustments would make sense if the “one another” passages are commands, not options.
I propose we make the changes and make it incredibly difficult for people to be passive observers of church. Jesus has said we are the church, His body. We need to be allegiant to Him as the Lord and do the things He has called us to do. I don’t want to make it easy for people to disobey the Lord.[1]
Notes
[1] I appreciate that a lot of churches have Sunday School or Community Groups but sadly a lot of people opt out of these. And sometimes churches make it to easy to opt out.
*Photo by Tegan Mierle
The Solution for Church Decline is Not Mega Church
In a previous post, I wrote that “The Solution for Church Decline is Not More of the Same.” However, the church in America, for the most part, operates with the Christendom paradigm. We are attempting to navigate the post-Christian, postmodern, late capitalist challenges of the twenty-first century with a pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment, 1700-year-old European template of the church. It’s like we are trying to negotiate New York City using a map of Los Angeles.[1] “The maps don’t fit the territories, and more importantly it does not fully square with the New Testament.”[2]
[I should probably say here that I was “inside the belly of the beast” of a mega church. I served on staff as a youth pastor, care pastor, and campus pastor. I have seen it from the inside with really good, faithful people, and I don’t think it’s the solution. Which is part of the reason why I’m not there anymore.]
Mega Churches Tend to Breed Consumerism
As churches grow, “there is a decline among churchgoers in per capita giving, willingness to volunteer, and a lower overall level of participation within the congregation. This lends credence to the stereotype that some attendees of larger churches are looking for a place to spectate but not serve.”[3] Whereas “Smaller churches (those with 100 or fewer each week) have high levels of member commitment. The congregations have greater percentage of member participation in weekly worship. Participants give more money per person and are more likely to volunteer. These churches spend less on staffing and give the highest percentage of their budget toward missions and charity.”[4]
Mega church tends to breed consumers and spectators instead of servants; fans instead of sold-out followers. The very structure of many churches’ “service” communicates that people are there to sit and be served. It seems people increasingly go to bigger churches for a good experience.[5]
The gathering of the church was always intended to build up the church body so that the church is better equipped and encouraged to be the church. But experience and entertainment-oriented gatherings mainly atrophy the ministerial muscles of the church. Putting on a show only severs the nerve to service.
Living in relationship and serving in our communities where we work, live, and play takes sacrifice and often the reordering of our schedules. It’s not convenient. We often make church convenient—online church, community on your terms when you want to make time for it, and a “worship experience”—but following Jesus has never been convenient. Jesus is the Lord, the boss of the universe for whom ever being will bow, we are to be allegiant to Him, whether it’s convenient or not.
There is a principle in the military that I think is instructive—“Train as we fight.” When I was in the army, we didn’t train with Nerf guns, and we didn’t throw tennis balls and act like they were grenades. Nope, we used real weapons and we did real pushups. I think the church sometimes gets this backward. Church training is the equivalent of “Duck Hunt.” It’s fun, it’s easy, and sometimes laughable. Jesus said, “If you’re going to follow Me you will need to take up your cross and be willing to give up everything.” Pastors often say that with their lips but the very structure of the church contradicts the teaching.
Mega Churches Can’t Grow Fast Enough
A mega church can’t grow fast enough to keep up with the rate of decline. Think of the quick and nibble multiplication of “rabbit churches” in contrast to the plodding, slow, and expensive “elephant churches.” The apostle Paul’s missionary method was not to plant elephant churches, but rabbit churches.[6]
We should intentionally pursue what makes for the rapid multiplication of healthy disciples. This will call for us to be collaborators, not competitors, and care about actual growth, not transfer growth. Buildings, budgets, and even butts in seats are not necessarily an indicator of health or faithfulness to Jesus’ commands.
With over four billion people without Jesus, it’s prudent to devise plans, strategies, and methods that facilitate the healthy growth of disciples, leaders, and churches. While there’s biblical freedom that allows for culturally influenced approaches, not all such expressions are conducive to healthy church multiplication.[7]
Mega Churches aren’t Set Up Well To Prepare the Next Generation of Leaders
Mega church isn’t set up well to prepare the next generation of leaders for the challenges of the future. “Most future pastors will come from larger churches, since that’s where the majority of churchgoers attend. But most of the pastoral jobs will be in small churches, since that’s the majority of congregations.”[8]
Most future pastors will not be prepared for the realities they will face at these small churches. They may need to be willing to work an additional job outside the church or accept substantially less money than they ever expected to live on.[9] These pastors’ philosophy of ministry and their conception of what it means to serve as a pastor will also need a redo.
Many people preparing for the pastorate have preconceived notions of what it’s like to be a pastor. Many see pastors as the equivalent of local rock stars. They see the lives of pastors as glamorous. Some want-to-be-pastors think pastors sit in their study, leave to speak to the masses, and after the applause return to their cloistered repose. Seminary often prepares pastors for the study and not the flock. The mega church, it would seem, often prepares pastors for social media, and not the flock. Disillusionment is the result.
Mega Churches Tend to Constrict the Full Functioning of the Church Body
Churches often implicitly communicate that the pastor is the professional who does the ministry. This was never supposed to be the case. Rather, every member of the church body is to be equipped for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ (Eph. 4:12). There is a concept in Christianity called “the priesthood of all believers” (see 1 Peter 2:4-9). It teaches that there is no special class of Christian. Jesus is the sole person who gives access to God (Jn. 14:6; 1 Tim. 2:5), and no other special office is needed for that role. Jesus makes all of His people part of the “priesthood” (1 Pet. 2:5, 9). So, all Christians are to be active participants. The church is a body with many parts and many different giftings; it is vital that each part does its part (1 Corinthians 12:1-27, Romans 12:4-8, Ephesians 1:1-23). Let’s cast off any garb that could constrict the full functioning of Christ’s body.
Mega Churches Consolidate Resources
Mega churches consolidate resources. It is similar to what happens in a siege. It is a “game of attrition.” Mega churches have a type of efficiency that results from gathered resources and the ability to have fewer pastors per attendee, due to the potential for repeating church services and live streaming at other campuses. Higher-paying pastoral positions can be supplemented with lower-paying positions. Mega churches have found a way to get the “most bang for their buck.” But what are the unseen downsides to all the pizzazz of a mega church? Here are a few: superstar pastor culture,[10] less pastoral care, less connection and community, and a consumeristic mentality.
We should see it for what it is, a consolidation of resources and growth in one church, which is not necessarily growth in the Church. Also, mega churches are typically competitively consolidating and “taking over” other churches. Consolidation in partnership in mission is a praiseworthy goal. More often, however, the goal is much more partisan.
Here’s another way of saying it, a mega church may have a bigger slice of the pie but that doesn’t mean there is more pie. If mega churches are better stewards of the church flock and are more faithful in making disciples this is a positive thing. I, however, am not convinced this is the case (for reasons I have articulated here and elsewhere).
Mega Churches Attract Some but Repel Others
Mega church tends to not be for people on the margins. But Jesus was about people on the margins of society. At least in 2009, Myev Rees said, “The majority of megachurch-goers are white, middle-class or affluent suburbanites.” The numbers may have changed some but this seems to still tend to be the case. Regardless, large churches that seem to have it all together will only attract a specific demographic. What about all the people who find big polished churches plastic, overly institutional, and annoying?
These churches may attract a certain type of demographic, but there is a whole host of people it repels. So, if all the other negative aspects of mega church can be dealt with then they have their place but they’re not the solution to church decline.
Mega Churches Tend To Be About Brand Building and Less About Kingdom Building
Discipleship and evangelism have given way to branding and marketing. The net result is some churches are growing and the pastors reputation is booming. But sometimes the name of Jesus and His Church suffers as a result.
I recently read a newsletter from a church. It gave the number of people in the city and then said “We want every single person to know about ______ church.” They even hired a marketing company. The big asks in the email were (1) give more money and (2) leave a good Google review to help SEO/search results. I get it and I know the pastor who composed the email is genuine and loves Jesus and wants to see people continue to come to Jesus for salvation. But when did brand building become the emphasis and main strategy?
It’s about Jesus and His Name—the name that is about all other names—and not any name brand church. Buildings, brands, and institutions will fall but Jesus is the Lord forever. He deserves our eternal allegiance.
What Is the Solution?
The solution for church decline is not more of the same, and I don’t believe the solution is mega church[11] either. I think the solution is Christians getting back to the simple center of Christ and Christ-formed communities without all the unnecessary clutter, consumerism, and cultural-Christian baggage.
(I plan to lay out my thoughts on the solution in a future post.)
Notes
[1] Alan Hirsch, 5Q:Reactivating the Original Intelligence and Capacity of the Body of Christ.
[2] Hirsch, 5Q.
[3] https://research.lifeway.com/2021/10/20/small-churches-continue-growing-but-in-number-not-size/
[4] Ibid.
[5] “U.S. congregations are increasingly small, while U.S. churchgoers are increasingly headed toward larger churches.” So, “The larger a church is, the more likely it is to be growing.” (https://research.lifeway.com/2021/10/20/small-churches-continue-growing-but-in-number-not-size/) Is this because bigger churches are able to offer more amenities and a better experience?
[6] Of course, Paul would revisit the churches and write them letters encouraging them to pursue gospel health.
[7] See J.D. Payne’s helpful book, Pressure Points.
[9] Many, probably most, of the pastors I went to seminary with are not serving in ministry. This is for multiple reasons but one of the main reasons is most churches do not pay enough to reasonably live on.
[10] Mega churches can easily become a breeding ground for toxic leadership and lack of accountability.
[11] I, of course, realize that mega church is not the only alternative to decline. But the statistics show that smaller churches are growing smaller and larger churches are growing larger. Offhand, I’m not sure where the scales tip from “small” to “large” but I do believe we would do well to consider these trends and ask are they good? Is there anything we should or can do? What are the implications for more large churches and fewer small churches? Does this reflect Kingdom growth or primarily transfer growth? Does this lead to further fracturing of society, more disconnection, and more consumerism? What if any, are the alternatives?
*Photo by Paul Volkmer
The Solution for Church Decline is Not More of the Same
In his book Why Religion Went Obsolete, Christian Smith argues that a significant cultural shift has made traditional American religion increasingly irrelevant and unattractive. He argues that “Religion has not merely declined; it has become culturally obsolete.”[1] The irrelevance of religion is different than just decline or secularization.
The cultural air we unknowingly imbibe essentially contains pollutants that subtly shape people to not care about or have time or attention for religion. We may not like it but we can’t change reality by ignoring it. But it’s not just the surrounding culture that is at fault for the decline of church in the West. The church itself is liable. One of Smith’s chapter titles, “Religious Self-Destructions,” is spot-on.
Many Christian leaders don’t realize the extent of the problem or would rather stick to the same old ways. But if we keep doing the same thing, we’ll get the same results, but with less success. If Christian leaders don’t change course, they’ll burn out and become discouraged. They might think the answer is to do more of everything and make everything better, but that’s not the answer. If the problem is misunderstood we will not be able to come up with the correct solution.
Imagine someone buying a brand-new electric car. But when it starts acting up, they open the hood and start looking for the carburetor. They look around for spark plugs and try to change the oil. They’re frustrated because they don’t know what to do and nothing looks familiar. But they just keep trying to do the same old thing.
What’s the problem? They’re treating an electric car like it’s a gas-powered one. Same idea on the outside—four wheels, steering wheel, gets you from point A to B—but a completely different system under the hood. To fix it, they need a new kind of knowledge, a new toolset, and probably a whole new way of thinking.
Sometimes we try to fix new challenges in the church using recycled methodology. We assume what worked before will work again, without realizing the extent of change that has taken place and the challenges ahead.
We aren’t in Christendom anymore. Christians are speaking a dying language. Church buildings and institutions are increasingly seen as out of touch.
American religion’s demise has not been due to its farfetched belief contents—as most atheists and some secularization theorists would have it—but because of its own fossilized cultural forms that it was unable to shake. Religion in the Millennial zeitgeist felt alien and disconnected from what mattered in life—in short, badly culturally mismatched. The vibes were off.[2]
Christian Smith suggests getting down to the core. What are Jesus’ followers trying to do and why? What are the essential core traditions, identities, and missions—without which we would not exist—versus cultural positions that may seem non-negotiable but are actually liabilities? We can’t be satisfied with just trying to keep the status quo intact. A whole new paradigm is needed.[3]
The solution for church decline is not more of the same, and I don’t believe the solution is mega church either. I think the solution is Christians getting back to the simple center of Christ and Christ-formed communities without all the unnecessary clutter and cultural-Christian baggage.
(I plan to layout more of my thoughts in a few posts to follow)
Notes
[1] Christian Smith, Why Religion Went Obsolete, 2. “The decline of traditional American religion is a massive social change, the kind that doesn’t happen often, and it can be difficult to wrap one’s head around how such a massive change can occur.” (Smith, Why Religion Went Obsolete, 60) “In 2000, the median number of attendees at a worship service was 137 people. By 2020, that number was reduced to 65—a 52% loss in size in 20 years.” (Ibid., 32-33).
[2] Ibid., 338.
[3] Ibid., 372.
*Photo by Paul Volkmer
The Explosive Potential of Discipleship
The Explosive Potential of Discipleship
Not only did Jesus disciple and tell us to disciple,[1] there is potential for explosive Kingdom growth when we focus on discipleship. If we want to be about the work King Jesus has called us to, we must not be about brand building, but discipleship building; we must be about discipleship, not entertainment.
Jesus had just three years to launch a global movement, the length of His public ministry. Just three years to reach people that would eventually reach the ends of the earth.[2] What would He do? There was no social media, no radio, no television, and public transportation was nothing like what we know. How would God’s plan to bless all nations through Messiah Jesus ever happen?
Jesus chose to invest heavily in just a few people and help them to become like Himself. That was His big cosmic plan. And it was utterly time-consuming. “But within seventy years, the cadre of people around Jesus had taken His good news into every corner of the Roman world. Do we have better efficiencies in mind?”[3] (If so, we’re foolishly not following the One who is Wisdom incarnate).
Westerners are in love with well-packaged mass marketing of the gospel. In church, as in advertising, growth is a numbers game about getting as many impressions as possible out to the masses. Mass communication and evangelism may have their place, but they show no signs of dramatically transforming the world. But Jesus gave almost all of His attention to intentionally discipling just twelve men, especially focusing on four of them. The results speak for themselves. Can we do better, investing in Christian mass messaging and once-a-week preaching services?[4]
What did Jesus’ discipleship look like?
Dann Spader identifies the major discipleship methods in Jesus’ life and ministry. Jesus tells us to make disciples and He shows us how to make disciples.
- Jesus was deeply committed to relational ministry.
“Every aspect of Jesus’ ministry was relational. To Jesus, relationships were not a strategy; they were part of being full human.”[5]
- Jesus invested early in a few.
He started slow to go fast.
- Jesus often slipped away to pray.
“More than forty-five times in the Gospels, Jesus escaped the crowds to pray.”[6]
- Jesus loved sinners profoundly.
- Jesus balanced His efforts to win the lost, build believers, and equip a few workers.
“Jesus poured His life into a few disciples and taught them to make other disciples. Seventeen times we find Jesus with the masses, but forty-six times we see Him with His disciples.”[7]
Discipleship is about Obedience, Not Knowledge Acquisition
The Great Commission says, “teaching them to obey everything I have commanded,” not “teaching them to know a bunch biblical data.” Knowledge certainly has it’s place but it’s condemning if not applied (see Matt. 28:20). Knowledge should have its effect, for one, it should humble us. We must be mindful of our minds. Yet, sadly, “There is a misconception that if people know what is right, they will do what is right. Experience tells us that this is not the case, yet we function as if it is.”[8] We need more apprenticeships and less classrooms.
The Discipleship of a Few Led to the Discipleship of Many
Jesus did not just choose the educated and the especially gifted to be His apprentices. He chose common people like you and me. Yet within two years after the Spirit was given at Pentecost this ragtag group “went out and ‘filled Jerusalem’ with Jesus’ teaching (Acts 5:28). Within four and a half years they had planted multiplying churches and equipped multiplying disciples (Acts 9:31). Within eighteen years it was said of them that they ‘turned the world upside down’ (Acts 17:6 ESV). And in twenty-eight years it was said that ‘the gospel is bearing fruit and growing throughout the whole world’ (Col. 1:6). For four years Jesus lived out the values He championed in His Everyday Commission. He made disciples who could make disciples!”[9]
Despite the harassment and persecution the Church faced across the decades the movement continued to grow to some “1000 Christians in 40 AD, about 7 to 10,000 in 100 A.D., about 200,000 or a bit more by 200 A.D., and by 300 A.D. perhaps 5 to 6,000,000.”[10] People were discipled to follow Jesus and they did and the Jesus movement spread like wildfire.[11]
As Michael Green in his classic book, Evangelism in the Early Church, says,
It was a small group of eleven men whom Jesus commissioned to carry on his work, and bring the gospel to the whole world. They were not distinguished; they were not well educated; they had no influential backers. In their own nation they were nobodies and, in any case, their own nation was a mere second-class province on the eastern extremity of the Roman map. If they had stopped to weigh up the probabilities of succeeding in their mission, even granted their conviction that Jesus was alive and that his Spirit went with them to equip them for their task, their hearts must surely have sunk, so heavily were the odds weighted against them. How could they possibly succeed? And yet they did.[12]
How did they succeed? Well, it was clearly through the power of the Holy Spirit. He empowered these early Jesus followers to practice passionate discipleship.
If we make disciples as Jesus told us and showed us it may not look “sexy” or effective but at times Jesus’ ministry didn’t look successful either.[13] “A lot of disciple-makers feel successful when they have a large crowd of people listening to their teaching and following their lead. Catalyzing Disciple-Making Movements, however, requires disciplemakers to give up the spotlight.”[14] It’s about Jesus’ fame, not ours. It’s about making disciples, not fans.
We need to change our perception of success. We need to measure the number of leaders we train, the number of leaders those leaders identify and train, the number of people who are sent out to start groups, and the number of groups that replicate.[15] We need to be about building the Kingdom, not our kingdom.
Simple church structures that facilitate discipleship our essential. We need to do away with as much of the trappings of religion as we can. We must not sell Christianity as “cool.” If we make Christianity simply “cool,” what happens when and where it’s not “cool”? Cuddling Christians must also go. Jesus said, “If you lose your life, you will find it” (see Matt. 16:25; Lk. 9:24; Jn. 12:25). He didn’t say, “Following Me is a cool bonus.” Jesus is life and loving and following Him is what life is about.
Notes
[1] And note that the “going” Jesus is talking about in the Great Commission (Matt. 28:16-20) is not a special event, such as a mission trip. Instead, we are to make disciples as we go to work, as we go to school, as we go out into our neighborhood” (Dann Spader, 4 Chair Discipling, 36-37).
[2] Jerry Trousdale, Miraculous Movements, 40.
[3] Trousdale, Miraculous Movements, 40.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Dann Spader, 4 Chair Discipling, 30.
[6] Spader, 4 Chair Discipling, 14.
[7] Ibid., 36.
[8] Watson, Contagious Disciple Making, 204. “Transmitting information in the discipleship process is imperative, but it is not the most important aspect of the disciple-making process. Disciples do not just know what the Master requires; they do what the Master requires in every situation regardless of the consequences.” (Watson, Contagious Disciple Making, 204)
[9] Dann Spader, 4 Chair Discipling, 36.
[10] Larry W. Hurtado, Destroyer of the gods: early Christian distinctiveness in the Roman world, 3.
[11] Rapid Church growth is still possible. J.D. Payne notes in his book, Discovering Church Planting, that when Francis Asbury, the Methodist minister, began his work in America there were some 600 Methodists in America, but at the time of his death there were over 200,000. Here’s a summary of some of what can be gleaned from early Methodism: 1) Abundant Gospel Sowing, 2) Evangelistic Zeal, 3) Contextualization, 4) Sacrifice, and 5) Simple Organization.
[12] Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, 13.
[13] Jesus didn’t have a building or apparently much of a budget and He would often say things to disturb the masses to the point that they would leave. Yet, now reportedly 31.6% of the world’s population affiliates with Christianity.
[14] Watson, Contagious Disciple Making, 112.
[15] Ibid., 113.
We Must Love Others as Jesus Has Shown Us
In this article we’re looking at love. But to quote the singer Haddaway, “What Is Love”? The band Foreigner must not have known what love is because they said, “I Want to Know What Love Is.” Tina Turner was confused about love too, sheasked, “What’s Love Got to Do with It”? I’m not sure what Elvis Presley thought about love but he “Can’t Help Falling In Love.” And Taylor Swift has a whole “Love Story.”
Others aren’t so favorable on the topic of love. Khalid’s opinion is that “Love Lies” and Lady Gaga just says, “Stupid Love.” But the Backstreet Boys don’t care, “As Long As You Love Me.” Justin Bieber’s advice, however, is “Love Yourself.”
But the Beatles have a very favorable view of love. They say, “All You Need Is Love.” Lastly, I would be remiss if I didn’t encourage you by sharing Whitney Houston’s pledge: “I Will Always Love You.”
Okay, I said a lot of things but I didn’t answer my question. What is love? We can talk a lot about love and even sing about it but that doesn’t mean we know what ‘love’ is. This points us to the importance of defining love. It seems especially important to understand what it means if it’s ‘all we need,’ as the Beatles said.
So, what even is love? In the movie 10 Things I Hate About You, we see an explanation of the difference between ‘like’ and ‘love.’
Bianca says: ‘See, there’s a difference between like and love, because I like my Skechers, but I love my Prada backpack.’
Chastity says: ‘But I love my Skechers.’
Bianca says: ‘That’s because you don’t have a Prada backpack.’
I think Bianca is correct. There is a difference between ‘like’ and ‘love.’ We intuitively know there are differences, but we’re still very often confused. In English, there’s just one word for love: love. In Greek, there are four.[1] The very short Bible passage we’re looking at has two Greek words for “love” (philadelphia and agapaó).
Sometimes a spelled-out definition is helpful but sometimes seeing an example is more powerful. The Bible shows us what love is. Actually, from the beginning to the end, it recites a better love story than Taylor Swift’s (the song or all the hype about her and Travis Kelce).
Paul, one of the first Christian leaders, wrote to a group of Jesus followers who lived in the city of Thessaloniki: “Now concerning brotherly love you have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another, 10for that indeed is what you are doing to all the brothers throughout Macedonia. But we urge you, brothers, to do this more and more” (1 Thess. 4:9–10).
Paul says, “You have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another.” Paul is saying that the Jesus followers know what love is. And they are loving one another. Why? How can our culture be so confused about love and yet they were so proficient at loving others?
They were “taught by God.” Not to geek out too much but this is one word in Greek—they were God-taught. This is the first time in Greek literature that this word appears. Paul made it up. Theodidaktos.[2] It’s kinda like “Bussin” or “Snatched,” it’s made up to communicate something. Except God-taught is amazingly profound and unexpected.
Think about what we learn about love from Greek mythology. Not a lot. Instead, we see gods at war and spreading mass chaos. Here’s a small sample:
- Kronos swallowed up his children as soon as they were born so they wouldn’t have the chance to overpower him as they grew older and stronger.
- Zeus turned his first wife into a fly and ate her, chained Prometheus to a rock so an eagle could eat his liver, was consistently unfaithful to his wife, and turned one of his lovers into a cow to hide her from his wife.
- Athena, known as the wisest of the gods, turned Medusa into a snake-headed monster whose gaze turns people to stone because she was raped by Poseidon.
- Marduk, the god of storms and justice, in the Babylonian creation myth, created the world by defeating Tiamat, the primordial sea goddess, and then used her body to form the heavens, earth, and other elements of the cosmos.
In contrast to Greek mythology, it is amazing that we are “taught by God to love one another.” Greek mythology taught snubbing and brutal subjugation, Jesus taught sacrificial service. Greek mythology taught rape, Jesus taught appropriate restraint. Greek mythology taught lust, Jesus taught true love.
In contrast to the mythology of the time:
Jesus teaches us to Love
Once again, the Bible says we are “taught by God to love one another” (v. 9). The Bible doesn’t just say that God is loving, though it does say that. The Bible says much more. It says, “God is love” (1 Jn. 4:8, 16). Love is deeply connected to God’s very being. This sets the Christian God apart from all other views of God. For love to truly exist there must be relationship. The Bible teaches that God is a relational being to His core. God is triune.
Very briefly, “Trinity” means God is one in relation to His ontological being yet exists in three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The Trinity is unparalleled in the entire universe but is not a logical contradiction. This, in a way, should not be surprising to us because God is beyond our full comprehension. Although we cannot fully grasp what this means, we do know that God has for all eternity been in loving relationship. This means that because God is love, He cares about love and teaches us to love (1 Jn. 4:7).
What Mark Howell says here is spot on:
“In reality, God is the only One fully qualified to teach on the subject of love, because love would not exist without Him. He is its author. He is its commentator, because you would not know how to love without His instruction. So then, God not only teaches you about love, but He also teaches you how to love. Therefore, to begin any discussion on the subject oflove, the logical starting point must be with God Himself.”[3]
God is love and teaches us what love is. God is love and He teaches us how to love. God being love and Himself teaching us to love is unprecedented. The three-in-one nature of God shows us that He is relational, loving, self-giving, and personal to His core. God is not just some distant, cosmic force. He has personhood. He has existed in all eternity past in loving relationship, odd to say, with Himself. God amazingly calls us to join Him in relationship (John 17:21-23). He recreates us in His image and welcomes us as His sons and daughters. God welcomes us to have communion with Himself.
I love how 1 John 4 says it:
“Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent His only Son into the world, so that we might live through Him. 10 In this is love, not that we have loved God but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us… 19 We love because He first loved us. 20 If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from Him: whoever loves God must also love his brother” (1 Jn. 4:7-12, 19-21).
Many of us were moved by seeing the sacrificial love of Tony Stark (Iron Man) in the Marvel movie, Avengers: Endgame, where he sacrifices himself to save the universe and his friends. Remember? After Thanos’s snap in Infinity War, the Avengers are devastated and the universe is in peril.
Despite Tony Stark’s initial reluctance, he chooses to use the Infinity Gauntlet to snap Thanos and the remaining half of the universe back, even though it means his own death. He utters the famous line, “I am Iron Man,” before snapping his fingers, saving the universe but giving up his own life.
There is a true story of overwhelming and powerful love, not in the Marvel universe, but in the real universe; and salvation comes not through Iron Man, but through Jesus, the God/man.
Tony Stark’s sacrifice is powerful but it’s not real. The thing is, Jesus and His sacrifice are real. The all-powerful, all-good, God who ruled the entire world, and upheld the very universe in which we live, move, and have our being, came into the world and was born in a pohick town, was mocked and ridiculed by His creation—like termites mocking the owner of the house—and Jesus died for those very same mocking termites. Of course, as Jesus’ biographies go on to say, Jesus didn’t stay dead, unlike Tony Stark. Jesus expressed His surpassing love through His sacrificial death and Heshowed His utter power by rising from the dead. So, Jesus beats both hate and death.
We started out by quoting the song, “What is love?” God not only knows the answer to that often confusing question and tells us the answer, but He Himself is the answer. This is love not that we loved God, but that He loved us and set His son to be the sacrifice to rescue us from the consequences of sin (1 John 4:10).
As the late great poets, DC Talk, said, “Love is a verb.” If you don’t remember what a verb is, I get it, but a verb is an action word. It doesn’t just sit on the couch. It doesn’t just talk. It gets up and does something. And God doesn’t just talk about His love for us. He demonstrates His love for us. God loves the world so much that He gave His Son. Because God is so loving He amazingly has made a way for us to be His friend. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).
But, the love of God does not stop with us. We are not to be a damn holding in God’s love. No. We are to be conduits through which God’s love flows freely. Jesus taught us how to love and He loves us, so we love.
Christian love turns the world upside down, it did in the first century and it will today. I don’t mean some undefined vague kind of love; I mean the Jesus kind of love. In this way, Christianity has always been subversive and disruptive.[4]
We must love
The Jesus followers Paul wrote to were already loving each other. Paul is sure that they had been God-taught. They practiced “brotherly love.” Again, not to ‘Greek out’ too much but the word for “brotherly love” here is philadelphia. It’s where the city, Philadelphia, gets it’s name. That’s why it’s known as “the city of brotherly love.” However, perhaps a better way to translate this word is “family affection.” The Jesus followers were God-taught and so clearly had healthy family affection for one another.
In the secular world of that time, the word for “family affection” (philadelphia) was only used for actual family relationships. It wasn’t used within religious groups. It was used to refer to love for one’s siblings. “In the New Testament, however, it is always used as it is here, of love between members of the Christian family (Rom 12:10; Heb 13:1; 1 Pet 1:22; 2 Pet 1:7).”[5]
As Jesus taught us in the model prayer, we are together to pray “our Father in heaven…” We don’t pray alone. We pray to our Father who we share. “The early Christians saw themselves as members of a family”[6] and we should too.
Paul told them, you are loving all the brothers and sisters throughout Macedonia. “But we urge you, brothers, to do this more and more.”
When our kids were young and not yet talking we taught them how to communicate with sign language. Our son, Uriah, was sitting in the highchair and wanted more food (it was probably tomatoes based on how much he enjoys them now). So, he excitedly and quickly did all the signs he knew. He didn’t just do the sign for “more.” He almost did every sign he knew simultaneously because he wanted more so much. It reminds me of what Paul is doing here. He’s really passionate about us loving each other more and more. Why? Because God is loving and God Himself showed us how to love. It’s important. It’s worth getting excited about.
Brothers and sisters, if you are reading this and you have turned to Jesus for rescue and you’re following Him as your Boss and Lord, you have been God-taught to love. You must love. What God is saying to us is brothers and sisters, love more and more. And don’t just love in name only.
A deacon in a church who taught the kid’s Sunday school class had poured some concrete for the church… the next day he saw footprints in the concrete. He was very angry and talking very loudly. A man who was standing by said, “I thought you loved kids.” The deacon said, “I love them in the abstract but not in the concrete!”[7] We, however, must love not just in the abstract, but in and through the concrete things of life. It won’t always or ever be easy.
One of the reasons I believe in simple church is because love shines best in relationship. Church is not a building, it’s a body of people, made up of rich and poor, black and white, Jew and Gentile, coffee drinker and tea drinker, democrat and republican. If we are in Jesus, He is our elder brother, God is our Father, and the Holy Spirit is our ever-present Helper.
Church isn’t about entertainment or coffee. Jesus calls us out, out of the boat, off the couch, chair, or pew. Church is about loving Jesus, loving like Jesus, and sharing the life-transforming news of Jesus.
Church isn’t about some super-pastor it’s about the called-out people of God being the church in coffee shops, factories, schools, and offices. Light shines best when it’s not hidden in a building, salt is no good if it’s stuck in the shaker.
Conclusion
Our world is lonely but we have the love of God to share. Our world is isolated and alone but Jesus came to be with us. And brothers and sisters, Jesus said, “As the Father sent Me, in the same way, I am sending you” (John 20:21). As Jesus loved the sometimes unlovely, He calls us to do likewise. As Jesus went to the destitute and distraught, He calls us to do the same. We have been God-taught; as Jesus loves, we are to love.
“God’s own expression of his love resulted in his total self-giving in the person and death of his son. Christian expression of the same love must have the same self-giving quality.”
If we as Christians are God’s adopted children through Jesus, we must resemble our Father, we must be loving. And if we are His children, we must love one another. Beloved, guess what‽ The reality is, in Jesus we are family. So, as Paul said, let’s have family affection for one another, let’s love more and more. Now, as 1 Thessalonians 3:12 says, “May the Lord make you increase and abound in love for one another and for all.”
Notes
[1] As C.S. Lewis explains. He says, “There are 4 kinds of love, all good in their proper place.” First, there is “affection love.” This is the type of love that one has for family or familiar relationships. Second, there is “friendship love.” Third, there is “charity love.” This type of love is sacrificial and puts the interests of others first. A fourth would be “like” or “desire.” As we think about love, it is important that we keep these different kinds of ‘love’ in mind. I would like for English to have more options. It doesn’t seem correct that I’ve said, “I love Cinnamon Toast Crunch” and “I love my wife.” Hopefully I don’t love cereal and my wife in the same sense. Yet, I think the fact that in English the four words have been conflated into one word, communicates something.
[2] “‘Taught by God’ translates a single compound word (theodidaktoi). This is the only occurrence of the word in the New Testament and the earliest known occurrence in any body of Greek literature. It may well have been coined by Paul himself. The closest biblical phrase is in the LXX text of Isa 54:13 (quoted in John 6:45). It predicts a day when ‘all your sons will be taught by the Lord.’ A hallmark of the new covenant in the New Testament is the presence of the Spirit with each believer (Acts 2:16–18; Gal 4:6) and the resultant internal witness to the will of God (cf. Jer 31:34; Heb 8:10–11).” (D. Michael Martin, 1, 2 Thessalonians: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture).
[3] Mark Howell, Exalting Jesus in 1 & 2 Thessalonians.
[4] In his book Dominion, Tom Holland (not the Tom Holland from Spiderman) argues that the Christian concept of love, which he describes as a social practice rather than a feeling, has been a powerful force in shaping Western morality and the idea of universal human rights.
[5] D. Michael Martin, 1, 2 Thessalonians: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture. See alsoMichael W. Holmes, 1 and 2 Thessalonians.
[6] N. T. Wright, Paul for Everyone: Galatians and Thessalonians.
[7] J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible Vol. 49: The Epistles (1 and 2 Thessalonians).
*Photo by Ben Lambert
Biography As A Form of Discipleship: Edwards, Spurgeon, & Lloyd-Jones (pt. 2)
Different Levels of Gifting, Same Stewardship
Lloyd-Jones had a profound memory, “it was as if he was unraveling an endless ball of wool.”[1] Edwards had a keen intellect being the foremost of American thinkers. Spurgeon was “the Prince of Preachers.” As we can see by these small examples, these men were especially gifted by God but they were not merely gifted, they were also faithful with the gifts God entrusted to them. We will all be held accountable for what God has entrusted to us but praise God I am not held accountable for the intellect of Edwards. That, however, in no way clears me from being faithful. These men were not merely amazingly gifted but amazingly faithful. We may not be able to preach like Spurgeon but we can seek by God’s empowering to be faithful like him.
We are all stewards entrusted with different amounts, some 30, 60, and a 100 fold, but we must all be faithful (Matt. 13:8; 25:14-30; Luke 12:35-48; 1 Peter 4:10). I have not been entrusted with the same stewardship as the men of whom we are seeking to emulate, and it is highly unlikely that you have either. However, these men were not merely gifted, they were all entirely dedicated to the Lord (we will turn to this in more detail shortly). Michael Jordan, arguably the best basketball player of all time, still worked hard. What made him so great was that he was not just talented but also tough in his discipline. The men we are looking at were gifted, there is no doubt, but they were also incredibly faithful. So the first thing we see to emulate from them is their faithfulness.
They were Consumed with God’s Glory
All three of these men here were greatly concerned for the glory of God, even if this desire came to fruition differently in the lives of each man. They did not all, like Edwards, write The End for Which God Created the World, but they all would have agreed with what he wrote and desired, like him, to glorify God with their utmost ability.
It is said that though “Edwards was intellectually brilliant and theologically commanding, his true greatness lay in his indefatigable zeal for the glory of God.”[2] Likewise, “The chief element of Spurgeon’s entire career” was not his preaching, or anything else; it “was his walk with God.”[3] This was also central to Lloyd-Jones: “A God-centered theology was not an addition to his personal life, it was central to it… His jealousy for God’s glory… flowed from his knowing something of being in the presence of God.”[4] In fact, Lloyd-Jones’ concerned for God’s glory, told Iian H. Murray, his biographer, that the biography should be done “for God’s glory only.”[5]
We should, like these men, seek in whatever we do to glorify God. We must, however, remember that we are all gifted differently and thus the route we take may be different than that of these three men. We are all called to different things, but we are all called to seek to glorify God in whatever we do.
They had an All-Encompassing Commitment to Christ[6]
This section is one of the most significant sections. We must remember, however, that these men’s complete commitment to God was not something they mustered up on their own. God gave even that to them. He showed Himself glorious to them, more glorious than anything else, and their complete devotion followed.[7] These men invested all, their time and talent, indeed, their heart, soul mind, and strength because they had been granted eyes to see that God and His glory were worth it.
Their all-encompassing commitment to Christ flowed out of their understanding of the glory of Christ. Not only did these men see that God was glorious and thus worthy for themselves to entirely comment to but also that He was Lord of all. They understood the language in the New Testament that says that Jesus is our Master/Lord and we are slaves, which clearly implies that we do whatever He says, whenever He says it.[8]
Benjamin B. Warfield said that Edwards committed himself without reserve to God. His whole spirit panted to be in all its movement subjected to God’s government.[9] Edwards explained his reasoning for his total commitment. He said,
If God be truly loved, he is loved as God; and to love him as God, is to love him as the supreme good. But he that loves God as the supreme good, is ready to make all other good give place to that; or, which is the same thing, he is willing to suffer all for the sake of this good.[10]
Edwards was entirely committed to God because He is “the supreme good.”
Spurgeon commenting on first Kings 18:21 said, “If God be God, serve him, and do it thoroughly; but if the world be God, serve it, and make no profession of religion.” Later he goes on to tell us, “Either keep up your profession, or give it up… Let your conduct be consistent with your opinions.”[11] What Spurgeon was saying is, if the Bible and the gospel are true we must live as though they are. We must live in line with what we believe. As the scriptures say, “The LORD is God; there is no other… therefore be wholly true to the LORD our God, walking in His statutes and keeping His Commandments” (1 Kings 8:60-61).
Spurgeon lived out what he said. People told Spurgeon that he would break down his constitution by preaching ten times a week among all his other labors. But Spurgeon’s desire, like Paul’s, was to spend and be spent. Spurgeon could say, “If I had fifty constitutions I would rejoice to break them down in the service of the Lord Jesus Christ.”[12]
Spurgeon gave his money, time, and self completely to the Lord. God used Spurgeon greatly. He wrote over 140 books, penned around 500 letters a week, spoke to thousands of people each week, started an orphanage, started a pastor’s college, and led countless people to Christ among other things. That was all possible because he gave himself entirely to the Lord. One of Spurgeon’s biographers, Arnold Dallimore said, “Early in life he had lost all consideration of his own self, and his prayer that he might be hidden behind the cross, that Christ alone might be seen, had expressed his heart’s chief purpose.”[13] Dallimore also said, “Spurgeon was characterized by an earnestness that almost defies description.”[14]
Lloyd-Jones, too, saw that “our supreme duty is to submit ourselves unreservedly to Him.”[15] In fact, “Essential Puritanism,” Lloyd-Jones argued, “put its emphasis upon a life of spiritual, personal religion, an intense realization of the presence of God, a devotion of the entire being to Him.”[16] You can see that Lloyd-Jones did exactly that all over the place in his life, he gave himself to God and the work that He had for him. “When God calls us,” Lloyd-Jones said, “He is to be obeyed in spite of all natural feelings.”[17] Lloyd-Jones not only said this but practiced it himself because he was entirely commented to Christ.
God is looking for individuals in this generation who will rise above the status quo of contemporary Christianity and say with Lloyd-Jones, Spurgeon, and Edwards, “‘I am completely Yours.’”[18] We must resolve, as Edwards did, to be the jar of clay through which God will display his surpassing power. We must seek for pleasure in God above all things. We must seek to be so heavenly-minded that we can be of some earthly good. We must do all this with all the power that God so mightily works in us by His grace. “If one is to impact this world for Jesus Christ, he must live as Edwards did, with extraordinary purpose and firm determination.”[19]
Notes
[1] Murray, The Fight of Faith, 376 see also 406n1, 453, 759.
[2] Steven J. Lawson, The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards (Lake Mary, Florida: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2008), 4.
[3] Arnold Dallimore, Spurgeon: A New Biography, (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1999), 177.
[4] Murray, The Fight of Faith, 764-65.
[5] Ibid., 729 see also xxiv.
[6] See Deut. 6:5; 1 Kings 8:61; Matt. 8:22; 22:37-38; Mark 12:30 (heart, soul, mind and strength, i.e. total devotion); Luke 10:27; 14:25-33; 16:13; Rom. 14:7-8; 1 Cor. 7:35 (Paul wants to secure an “undivided devotion to the Lord”); 10:31; 2 Cor. 5:9; 14-15; Phil. 3:7-8; Col. 3:17, 23, and 1 John 2:3-6 for some examples of the all-inclusive nature of the call of Christ. Also in Romans 12:1, we are told to present our bodies as a living sacrifice because that is our reasonable (logical) worship. Thomas R. Schreiner says, “Paul used the term with the meaning ‘rational’ or ‘reasonable,’ as was common in the Greek language. His purpose in doing so was to emphasize that yielding one’s whole self to God is eminently reasonable. Since God has been so merciful, failure to dedicate one’s life to him is the height of folly and irrationality” (Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998], 645 [italics mine].). In addition, Schreiner points out that “the word ‘bodies’ here refers to the whole person and stresses that consecration to God involves the whole person… Genuine commitment to God embraces every area of life” (Ibid., 644. Italics mine). Christianity is all-encompassing.
[7] God often shows His glory to us before He calls us to comment to Him in unreserved obedience. Note, for example, in the Decalogue. God gives the commands but first He adds a relational and redemptive element, namely, “I am the LORD your God [relational], who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery [redemptive]” (Deut. 5:6). This same thing is seen throughout Scripture, both OT and NT.
[8] “Edwards would say that actions do reveal something about a man’s will and heart. Professing Christ implies being subject to him in practice, it entails the promise of universal obedience to him” (Iain H. Murray, Jonathon Edwards: A New Biography, (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2008), 336). Edwards understood that “none profess to be on Christ’s side, but they who profess to renounce his rivals” (Idem, Jonathon Edwards: A New Biography, 337). Lloyd-Jones clearly saw that one cannot “receive Christ as Saviour without receiving Him as Lord” (Idem, The Fight of Faith, 470).
[9] Murray, Edwards, 98.
[10] Jonathon Edwards, Charity and its Fruits, (Carlisle, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2005), 257.
[11] C. H. Spurgeon, sermon “Elijah’s Appeal to the Undecided” from 1 Kings 18:21 (italics mine).
[12] Dallimore, Spurgeon: A New Biography, 132.
[13] Ibid., 239.
[14] Ibid., 76.
[15] Murray, The Fight of Faith, 181 (italics mine).
[16] Ibid., 460n1 (italics mine).
[17] Ibid., 588.
[18] Lawson, The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards, 60.
[19] Ibid.
in X 