BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ENTRY
Fay, William and Linda Shepherd. Share Jesus Without Fear. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 1999.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
The most significant thing about William Fay, author of Share Jesus Without Fear, is the fact that God saved him while he was the president and CEO of an unnamed, international multimillion-dollar corporation. He writes “I owned one of the largest houses of prostitution” and “was involved in racketeering, bookmaking and gambling…and I mocked anyone who dare share his faith in God with me” (p. 1). Fay left all that to follow Jesus into full-time ministry. Fay graduated from Denver Seminary where he credits Gordon Lewis for giving him a firm foundation in God’s sovereign work. Fay served as the senior pastor of a church for many years until he went into full-time evangelism. He speaks on the radio and all over the world encouraging believers to share their faith confidently with others.
CONTENT SUMMARY
Share Jesus Without Fear is a comprehensive attempt to motivate, teach, and fully equip Christians to effectively share the gospel by presenting God’s vision for evangelism, plan of salvation, and information on how to start conversations and overcome objections. Fay divides his work into eleven chapters and five appendixes. He opens with a gripping introduction concerning his own salvation experience and a call for Christians to begin sharing the gospel. He makes the point that success with evangelism is not defined by bringing someone to a point of conversion; instead, it is simply sharing the gospel and trusting God to do the rest. He stresses that God is sovereign. (Fay contends that the greatest sin is the sin of silence-that is-not sharing one’s faith in Christ )(p. 6). He deals with how Christians can overcome their fear of witnessing in chapter three. In chapter four, Fay is still introducing the idea of witnessing with what he calls “share Jesus questions” (p. 29).
Two chapters are devoted to teaching the reader how to explain to someone how he can be saved. Chapter five presents the scripture that should be used and memorized as a possible presentation of the gospel. Fay emphasizes the importance of having the person read the scripture out loud and provides a script for the soul winner to memorize. Chapter six focuses upon bringing the person to a point of decision. Fay presents five questions that he believes should be asked in succession to bring a person to the point of a decision (p. 61). The last question culminates in a call to ask the person to invite Jesus into his heart.
Chapters seven through eleven are independent of each other, each focusing on an important point of instruction from Fay’s perspective. In this section of the book, Fay begins with a chapter devoted to following up on the new believer. Then he devotes much attention to providing responses to a person’s objection to receiving Christ. Fay presents thirty-six objections to receiving Christ and answers each objection. The principle message of chapter nine is that Christians must have and maintain friendships with unbelievers. Next, a short chapter explains how Christians should pray for unbelievers. Finally, Fay offers a final push to motivate believers to be better witnesses for Christ with a description of the final judgment.
Five appendixes are used to complement, summarize, and provide supplementary information to what has already been presented. Those who desire to memorize Fay’s “share Jesus” questions verbatim can reference appendix one very quickly. Appendix two is very practical with detailed instructions on how Fay would mark his soul winning New Testament. Appendix three is the longest with a detailed summarization of the thirty-six objections and answers. Appendix four is a commitment to becoming a witnesses for Christ, and the last appendix is the completion of Fay’s testimony from chapter one.
EVALUATION
Several substantial issues that Fay presents in Share Jesus Without Fear make it impossible to recommend his work to other believers without caution. Of all the issues, the most significant is the fact that Fay suggests people get saved by inviting Jesus into their heart through prayer. On numerous occasions thoughout the book, Fay indicates that people pray to receive Christ (p. 39). This is theologically upside down. (The truth is that people believe and the Spirit of Christ indwells them, not because they articulate words, because of their repentant faith in the gospel.) John writes, “But to all who receive him, who believed in his name” (John 1:12). He does not say who prayed to Him. Fay consistently presents prayer as that which one does in order to secure salvation. In example after example, Fay uses the words so and so prayed to receive Christ (p. 58). Fay says God will only enter in if He is invited (p. 59). However, in Acts 2:37 men were cut to the heart and cried out “‘what shall we do?’ And Peter said to them ‘repent…and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit’” (Acts 2:28).
The reader should take note that Peter did not suggest that the men had to invite Jesus in to their heart. The only appropriate response to the call for salvation is repentant faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 17:30, Acts 20:21). Yet, Fay’s fifth question teaches the soul winner to ask the potential convert if they are ready to “invite Jesus into their life and into your heart?” (p. 63). Then two pages later, he contradicts himself when he explains that one is saved when he puts his faith in Christ, not when he prays the sinner’s prayer. Yet Fay still leads potential converts to pray the sinner’s prayer because in his words that is “dessert!” (p. 65). Moreover, he instructs the soul winner to add to the canon of scripture by writing in their Bible the model prayer sinners need to pray. He calls “asking Jesus into your heart” the first step to getting saved (p. 90). The problem with this interpretation is that it is not based upon an apostolic example. There is not a single sinner’s prayer modeled in the Bible. “Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” is hardly an example of a model sinner’s prayer for all to follow (Romans 10:13).
Fay believes that Revelation 3:20 teaches that Jesus is standing at the door of every unbeliever’s heart—just standing there waiting—for the unbeliever to open the door to his heart and then Gentlemen Jesus will come in (p. 51). The problem with Fay’s interpretation of Christ on the outside of an unbeliever’s heart is that it is contextually wrong. Revelation 3:14-22 is written to the church at Laodicea, not lost people in America. Verse 22 states, “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.” John does not give any indication that these words are written to unbelievers.
Fay presents a substantially elementary understanding of the indwelling of God in the life of the believer. He teaches that Jesus lives in the heart of the new convert (p. 58). This could become exceptionally confusing when the believer learns that Jesus is on the right hand of the Father interceding for all who believe—when he was told Jesus lives in his heart (Mark 16:19). Fay should be much more faithful to the Word of God and introduce the new believer to the Comforter whom Jesus sent to fill the void of His absence (John 14). Although Paul does make reference to Christ living in the believer in Galatians 2:20 and Colossians 1:27, Christ does this through the presence of the Holy Spirit. This may appear to be theological nit-picking, but it is not.
The soul winner needs to lay a strong foundation in the life of the new believer. If what is initially presented as true is later refined and corrected over and over again, unnecessary questions may arise. For example, when the believer is told to pray a prayer to receive Christ into their hearts and be saved, and then later learns faith in the promise of God-not a prayer-saves him, he may be left wondering what else he now believes that will later be corrected. Surely most men and women can understand that Christ lives in them through His Spirit, not in their heart but in their life, without being confined to any specific location. He lives as much in their thoughts and actions as they submit to His leadership and guidance. Moreover, suggesting that Christ lives in the heart of the believer calls into question the (permanence) of the incarnation of Christ who will return the same way He left the earth in a glorified body (Acts 1:11).
Another significant shortcoming of Fay’s work is his failure to properly explain repentance and how it is related to a person’s conversion. There is a noticeable absence of the word “repent” in Fay’s gospel presentation. Moreover, substitutionary words like “turn” are also absent. Jesus said, “Except you repent you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3). The plain understanding of this text requires the soul winner to address repentance in the gospel presentation. Fay’s presentation does not address repentance toward God (Acts 20:21).
Some of Fay’s suggestions are a bit difficult to imagine putting into practice during soul winning. Fay suggests that when someone does not understand what is being read, just ask them to read it out loud again and again until they get it. While it may be difficult to argue with the 25,000 people Fay has witnessed to using this technique, it is also difficult to imagine telling someone to read something again when they express a question about the text. 1 Peter 3:15 directs believers to be able to give an answer to every man that asks a Christian about his faith. What is the point of studying apologetics if the Christian’s trained response is to read the verse again? In response to common objections offered by those who do not believe, Fay suggests that the soul winner needs to follow the example of a modern psychologist by just responding to the unbeliever’s questions with the single word “why?” In the chapter on building relationships with unbelievers, Fay suggests that one attend the local neighborhood watch program and shift to the gospel by pointing out that the thief comes to steal, but Jesus brings eternal life (p. 117). Perhaps this would work somewhere in the world, but it is difficult to imagine where.
Lastly, everyone in Fay’s stories receives Christ. They all receive Christ eventually. So, while the book teaches that God is sovereign and just the sharing of the gospel is all God expects, Fay sets up the reader with a false expection by only sharing stories about people who “get saved.” Moreover, Fay does not know if these people are saved. He does not know if their faith was genuine or superficial (John 2:23-25, 1 John 2:19). He presents a statistic that people are brought to Christ after an average of 7.6 gospel presentations, but this theory is based upon the false assumption that everyone who prays the sinner’s prayer receives Christ (p. 30). The apostle John writes about people who “went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us” (1 John 2:19). Jesus warned about people who will describe the wonderful works they did in His name, but He never knew them (Matt 7:22-23; Luke 13:26-27). Fay leaves no room for the possibility that people who are led to Christ with his plan may not be genuinely converted.
CONCLUSION
Fay’s book has limited value in the fundamental and evangelical church whose primary concern must be authentic conversions and the discipleship of those who are born again (Matt 28:19-20). Only those who subscribe to the theory that one must pray to be saved would find Fay’s work helpful in equipping Christians, with a plan of salvation, to share their faith. Others would find it necessary to provide clarifying instruction. Share Jesus Without Fear has its greatest value in the amazing way one is motivated to share his faith through the stories of conversion-despite the fact that the book does not contain a single story of Fay not bringing the person to a point of a favorable decision. Fear of providing a person with a false assurance of their conversion from a “pray to receive” understanding of conversion should be of great concern to the church. The warning passages in Matthew, Luke, John, Hebrews, and 1 John concerning those who believe they are converted, but are not authentic Christians require a more careful approach to “closing the deal” and providing assurance of salvation. Tell the Truth: The Whole Gospel to the Whole Person by the Whole People by Will Metzer (Intervarsity Press, 2002) is a much better alternative to Share Jesus Without Fear.
Showing posts with label Book Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Book Review. Show all posts
Spiritual LIfe: The Foundation of Preaching by Westerhoff
The purpose of this short paper is to provide the reader with background information about John H Westerhoff, author of Spiritual Life: The Foundation for Preaching and Teaching, a short summary of the book, and an evaluation of his work.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ENTRY
Westerhoff, John H. Spiritual Life: The Foundation for Preaching and Teaching. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Westerhoff can best be described as a theologically liberal religious educator and Episcopalian priest who really loves God, his parish and all of creation. His early life and education significantly contributed to who Westerhoff is as a professor and author. Westerhoff graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in psychology in 1955 from a liberal arts college. During Westerhoff’s time in college, he organized and led a small group of skeptics seeking to know religious truth. Sensing God’s call in his life for vocational ministry, Westerhoff attended Harvard Divinity School and received a Masters of Divinity degree. Concerning this time at Harvard, Paul Bramer writes:
There he was exposed to influential professors from a broad spectrum of the Christian faith and theological disciplines. From Paul Tillich in particular he learned a dialectical approach to thinking and he reconciled his internal civil wars between faith and doubt, commitment and openness, reasoning and intuiting, practice and theory, by affirming the paradoxical and complex nature of much of truth and life.
There is no question that this “broad spectrum” has continued to influence Westerhoff through his life.
After graduating from Harvard, Westerhoff worked within the United Church of Christ (UCC) for several years in various positions. On staff with the UCC, he traveled around the world interviewing people in religious and secular education while writing articles on how the church could improve spiritual formation in its parishioners. Bramer states that “Ivan Illich reinforced Westerhoff’s skepticism about traditional schooling” and “Paulo Freire persuaded him of the need for liberation theology and pedagogy.” Westerhoff went on to serve at Duke University’s Divinity School. After a twenty year career and numerous books, he retired as Professor of Theology and Christian Nurture. In 1978, he became an Episcopalian priest where, according to Westerhoff, he could embrace both the "Catholic substance and the Protestant principle." He then went on to found an institute for pastoral studies at St. John’s Episcopalian Church and presently serves as an associate priest and theologian in residence at St. Anne’s Church in Atlanta Georgia.
CONTENT SUMMARY
Westerhoff is convinced that pastors, lay preachers, and church-school teachers can take their preaching and discipleship ministry to a level of excellence they have never experienced before by significantly increasing their focus on the development of their spiritual life through certain spiritual disciplines involving themselves, all people, and most importantly—God (Westerhoff 1994, xi, 1). After a brief introduction as to why Westerhoff felt the need to write Spiritual Life: The Foundation for Preaching and Teaching, he goes into a chapter discussion of the spiritual life. Then he goes into a presentation as to why this is a new day in preaching and teaching and follows this with two chapters on spirituality in preaching and teaching. Finally, he closes with application.
In “Exploring the Spiritual Life,” Westerhoff explains the relationship between one’s relationship with God, others and themselves. For example, he writes about the ridiculousness of saying my relationship with God is fine while one is displaying behavior that is prejudicial or another is refusing to be reconciled to a brother in Christ (Ibid., 2). He stresses that all of life must be viewed as spiritual, but that spiritual life has two dimensions…a physical dimension and a nonphysical dimension (Ibid., 3). The importance of one’s view of God is presented with an emphasis on the intimacy Christians should be experiencing with God. Then in chapter 2, Westerhoff presents his case that spiritual life is the basis or “foundation” for preaching and teaching (Ibid., 15). He argues that in the past, unpacking a biblical passage from a historical-critical method may have been acceptable, but it will not work in this new day and age. He argues that the Christian tradition is not just about doctrine, but about life—all of life—calling for a balance between the intellectual and intuitional aspects of life (Ibid., 21). He says that the imagination is the basis for one’s spiritual life and calls for preaching and teaching to engage the imagination (lbid., 25).
Two chapters are packed with the importance of the spiritual life for anyone who holds up the Bible and speaks for God. Westerhoff tells a lot of stories to make his case. He emphasizes the importance of silence, solitude, paying attention to the restlessness of life, and stresses the importance of living in a community that views its members as a reflection of God (Ibid., 37). He puts weight upon continuing to be a learner and challenges his reader to consider if anyone is really learning anything when they preach or teach, or are they merely regurgitating information (Ibid., 42-43). He closes the chapter with the importance of modeling.
Then Westerhoff focuses on the practical development of the spiritual life in two chapters devoted toward application. He puts a premium on the spiritual balance between schools of spirituality, religious orders, and denominations—for they are all part of the entire body of Christ (Ibid., 63). Westerhoff believes that a combination of prayer, reading scholarly works, and exercise is an excellent balance. He provides some very encouraging words of advice on how to start small and move into a more significant regiment of spiritual disciplines balancing prayer, study, work and leisure. He stresses worship, community, and simplicity of life with deep compassion for others (Ibid., 74). Then in a short conclusion, he pleads for revival in the church through the spiritual renewal of those who teach and preach to all the people of God.
EVALUATION
What one’s worldview is will determine whether or not Westerhoff made his case that the spiritual life of the man is the foundation of his preaching or teaching ministry. If one subscribes to the existence of absolute truth and verbal inspiration of the Word of God as the supreme authority in the life of the believer, then he may struggle with Westerhoff’s theological liberalism and argue with his failure to make his case from a biblical perspective. However, if a reader is open to the Bible as another good piece of literature, then he will most likely embrace Westerhoff’s perspective as an appropriate alternative to the Bible being the foundation for preaching and teaching.
In so much as theological liberals love God and desire to reflect his love to all of creation, Westerhoff’s work is full of great points of value to any disciple seeking to grow in their relationship with Christ. Westerhoff properly stresses the importance of reflecting the vertical relationship with God in the horizontal plane we live upon with other humans also made in the image of God. He rightly stresses the importance of not living in a state of hypocrisy and duplicity. It would be hard to deny that the importance of being real, as a spiritual being, is of critical importance to the effectiveness of one’s pulpit ministry, but that is not what Westerhoff says—he takes it a step further. He makes one’s spiritual life of greater importance than doctrine. In fact, he struggles greatly with what he classifies as dogmatism and states that “a heresy is a truth taken too far” (Ibid., 54). In this definition, Westerhoff gives away his liberal bias. For example, one could easily wonder how you could take the exclusivity of Christ, as the only way to God the Father too far. However, if the Word of God is not the foundation for preaching and teaching, then the foundation becomes a moving target.
By Westerhoff’s tremendous reliance upon establishing the authority for his position from non-biblical sources, one should not be surprised by the absence of scripture references through a book that is supposed to improve the preacher’s spiritual life. Instead, Westerhoff suggests that reading scholarly books for one hour a day is a vital component to spiritual development, but he does not mention or give a particular time to reading the Bible (Ibid., 66). He does not mention a daily reading plan. While he does stress the importance of journaling, a very valuable discipline, he states that it is more important to record one’s conversation with God than what one got out of his reading of the Word of God. While respecting his position on the importance of not reading the Bible like a textbook, one may wonder what makes his position different from a charismatic perspective in which experience trumps everything else.
Westerhoff rejects the idea that there is only one correct interpretation with multiple applications in every text. He suggests that a singular perspective is a relatively new thing—post nineteenth century. He is more than willing to take parables and change what the symbols represent contrary to the Word of God. He suggests the seeds that Jesus spoke about could be a Christian’s life, but he does not explain the legitimacy of such a position (Ibid., 70-71). Yet Jesus is very specific in identifying the seed as the Word of God (Matthew 13). If the spiritual life is the foundation for preaching, one can be very free to change what the text says to support the objective of the sermon, but if one is committed to exegeting the text, it will be very hard to make the spiritual life “king” with the text subordinate to the experience. Or, in another example of this upside down perspective, Westerhoff suggests that the usual understanding of the Song of Solomon can be reversed and God can be made the bride and the believer the groom. Then he writes, “imagine …God is about to enter into intimate lovemaking with you” (73). This is in fact, one of the effects of not having the Bible as the foundation to preaching and teaching. The author reveals the freedom to alter the text during the sermon from the willingness he presents in a work about setting the conditions for improving one’s preaching ministry.
While Westerhoff’s work is packed full of valuable and important points that can be sifted through when viewed with the lens of a biblical worldview, the book has limited value to anyone other than those already bent on rejecting the supremacy of the Bible in preaching or those whose worldview cannot be altered by a cleverly written book full of quotes from scholars. This book could really confuse a young Bible college student who does not understand that the biblical text must be “king” when preaching or teaching, or a Pandora’s Box of anything and everything is opened every time one says, “thus says the Lord.” One has only to examine the Word Faith Movement of Copeland, Hagin, Osteen etc. to see what happens when any preacher can say, “The Lord gave me a word for you.” Yet, even the most conservative pastors can benefit from some of Westerhoff’s points about the importance of having a partner to grow with in one’s walk with the Lord (Ibid., 69). His recommendation of establishing a routine and sticking to the routine, including turning the phone off for an hour of prayer, is a suggestion that both conservatives and liberals can agree upon (Ibid.,66). Likewise, his insistence upon finding a balance between daily prayer, study, work and leisure is a reminder that every vocational pastor/teacher should be reminded of often (Ibid., 74). Finally, who can argue with the premium Westerhoff puts upon God and one’s relationship with God, yet one may wonder why references to Christ were so absent. Could it be that Westerhoff is not that insistent upon the exclusivity of Christ?
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bramer, Paul. Talbots School of Theology. “Listing of Christian Educators,” http://www.talbot.edu/ce20/educators/view.cfm?n=john_westerhoff [accessed March 28, 2010].
Westerhoff, John H. Spiritual Life: The Foundation for Preaching and Teaching. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.
Westerhoff, John H., III. “A Journey into Self-understanding.” In Marlene Mayr (Ed.), Modern masters of religious education. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press, 1983.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ENTRY
Westerhoff, John H. Spiritual Life: The Foundation for Preaching and Teaching. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Westerhoff can best be described as a theologically liberal religious educator and Episcopalian priest who really loves God, his parish and all of creation. His early life and education significantly contributed to who Westerhoff is as a professor and author. Westerhoff graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in psychology in 1955 from a liberal arts college. During Westerhoff’s time in college, he organized and led a small group of skeptics seeking to know religious truth. Sensing God’s call in his life for vocational ministry, Westerhoff attended Harvard Divinity School and received a Masters of Divinity degree. Concerning this time at Harvard, Paul Bramer writes:
There he was exposed to influential professors from a broad spectrum of the Christian faith and theological disciplines. From Paul Tillich in particular he learned a dialectical approach to thinking and he reconciled his internal civil wars between faith and doubt, commitment and openness, reasoning and intuiting, practice and theory, by affirming the paradoxical and complex nature of much of truth and life.
There is no question that this “broad spectrum” has continued to influence Westerhoff through his life.
After graduating from Harvard, Westerhoff worked within the United Church of Christ (UCC) for several years in various positions. On staff with the UCC, he traveled around the world interviewing people in religious and secular education while writing articles on how the church could improve spiritual formation in its parishioners. Bramer states that “Ivan Illich reinforced Westerhoff’s skepticism about traditional schooling” and “Paulo Freire persuaded him of the need for liberation theology and pedagogy.” Westerhoff went on to serve at Duke University’s Divinity School. After a twenty year career and numerous books, he retired as Professor of Theology and Christian Nurture. In 1978, he became an Episcopalian priest where, according to Westerhoff, he could embrace both the "Catholic substance and the Protestant principle." He then went on to found an institute for pastoral studies at St. John’s Episcopalian Church and presently serves as an associate priest and theologian in residence at St. Anne’s Church in Atlanta Georgia.
CONTENT SUMMARY
Westerhoff is convinced that pastors, lay preachers, and church-school teachers can take their preaching and discipleship ministry to a level of excellence they have never experienced before by significantly increasing their focus on the development of their spiritual life through certain spiritual disciplines involving themselves, all people, and most importantly—God (Westerhoff 1994, xi, 1). After a brief introduction as to why Westerhoff felt the need to write Spiritual Life: The Foundation for Preaching and Teaching, he goes into a chapter discussion of the spiritual life. Then he goes into a presentation as to why this is a new day in preaching and teaching and follows this with two chapters on spirituality in preaching and teaching. Finally, he closes with application.
In “Exploring the Spiritual Life,” Westerhoff explains the relationship between one’s relationship with God, others and themselves. For example, he writes about the ridiculousness of saying my relationship with God is fine while one is displaying behavior that is prejudicial or another is refusing to be reconciled to a brother in Christ (Ibid., 2). He stresses that all of life must be viewed as spiritual, but that spiritual life has two dimensions…a physical dimension and a nonphysical dimension (Ibid., 3). The importance of one’s view of God is presented with an emphasis on the intimacy Christians should be experiencing with God. Then in chapter 2, Westerhoff presents his case that spiritual life is the basis or “foundation” for preaching and teaching (Ibid., 15). He argues that in the past, unpacking a biblical passage from a historical-critical method may have been acceptable, but it will not work in this new day and age. He argues that the Christian tradition is not just about doctrine, but about life—all of life—calling for a balance between the intellectual and intuitional aspects of life (Ibid., 21). He says that the imagination is the basis for one’s spiritual life and calls for preaching and teaching to engage the imagination (lbid., 25).
Two chapters are packed with the importance of the spiritual life for anyone who holds up the Bible and speaks for God. Westerhoff tells a lot of stories to make his case. He emphasizes the importance of silence, solitude, paying attention to the restlessness of life, and stresses the importance of living in a community that views its members as a reflection of God (Ibid., 37). He puts weight upon continuing to be a learner and challenges his reader to consider if anyone is really learning anything when they preach or teach, or are they merely regurgitating information (Ibid., 42-43). He closes the chapter with the importance of modeling.
Then Westerhoff focuses on the practical development of the spiritual life in two chapters devoted toward application. He puts a premium on the spiritual balance between schools of spirituality, religious orders, and denominations—for they are all part of the entire body of Christ (Ibid., 63). Westerhoff believes that a combination of prayer, reading scholarly works, and exercise is an excellent balance. He provides some very encouraging words of advice on how to start small and move into a more significant regiment of spiritual disciplines balancing prayer, study, work and leisure. He stresses worship, community, and simplicity of life with deep compassion for others (Ibid., 74). Then in a short conclusion, he pleads for revival in the church through the spiritual renewal of those who teach and preach to all the people of God.
EVALUATION
What one’s worldview is will determine whether or not Westerhoff made his case that the spiritual life of the man is the foundation of his preaching or teaching ministry. If one subscribes to the existence of absolute truth and verbal inspiration of the Word of God as the supreme authority in the life of the believer, then he may struggle with Westerhoff’s theological liberalism and argue with his failure to make his case from a biblical perspective. However, if a reader is open to the Bible as another good piece of literature, then he will most likely embrace Westerhoff’s perspective as an appropriate alternative to the Bible being the foundation for preaching and teaching.
In so much as theological liberals love God and desire to reflect his love to all of creation, Westerhoff’s work is full of great points of value to any disciple seeking to grow in their relationship with Christ. Westerhoff properly stresses the importance of reflecting the vertical relationship with God in the horizontal plane we live upon with other humans also made in the image of God. He rightly stresses the importance of not living in a state of hypocrisy and duplicity. It would be hard to deny that the importance of being real, as a spiritual being, is of critical importance to the effectiveness of one’s pulpit ministry, but that is not what Westerhoff says—he takes it a step further. He makes one’s spiritual life of greater importance than doctrine. In fact, he struggles greatly with what he classifies as dogmatism and states that “a heresy is a truth taken too far” (Ibid., 54). In this definition, Westerhoff gives away his liberal bias. For example, one could easily wonder how you could take the exclusivity of Christ, as the only way to God the Father too far. However, if the Word of God is not the foundation for preaching and teaching, then the foundation becomes a moving target.
By Westerhoff’s tremendous reliance upon establishing the authority for his position from non-biblical sources, one should not be surprised by the absence of scripture references through a book that is supposed to improve the preacher’s spiritual life. Instead, Westerhoff suggests that reading scholarly books for one hour a day is a vital component to spiritual development, but he does not mention or give a particular time to reading the Bible (Ibid., 66). He does not mention a daily reading plan. While he does stress the importance of journaling, a very valuable discipline, he states that it is more important to record one’s conversation with God than what one got out of his reading of the Word of God. While respecting his position on the importance of not reading the Bible like a textbook, one may wonder what makes his position different from a charismatic perspective in which experience trumps everything else.
Westerhoff rejects the idea that there is only one correct interpretation with multiple applications in every text. He suggests that a singular perspective is a relatively new thing—post nineteenth century. He is more than willing to take parables and change what the symbols represent contrary to the Word of God. He suggests the seeds that Jesus spoke about could be a Christian’s life, but he does not explain the legitimacy of such a position (Ibid., 70-71). Yet Jesus is very specific in identifying the seed as the Word of God (Matthew 13). If the spiritual life is the foundation for preaching, one can be very free to change what the text says to support the objective of the sermon, but if one is committed to exegeting the text, it will be very hard to make the spiritual life “king” with the text subordinate to the experience. Or, in another example of this upside down perspective, Westerhoff suggests that the usual understanding of the Song of Solomon can be reversed and God can be made the bride and the believer the groom. Then he writes, “imagine …God is about to enter into intimate lovemaking with you” (73). This is in fact, one of the effects of not having the Bible as the foundation to preaching and teaching. The author reveals the freedom to alter the text during the sermon from the willingness he presents in a work about setting the conditions for improving one’s preaching ministry.
While Westerhoff’s work is packed full of valuable and important points that can be sifted through when viewed with the lens of a biblical worldview, the book has limited value to anyone other than those already bent on rejecting the supremacy of the Bible in preaching or those whose worldview cannot be altered by a cleverly written book full of quotes from scholars. This book could really confuse a young Bible college student who does not understand that the biblical text must be “king” when preaching or teaching, or a Pandora’s Box of anything and everything is opened every time one says, “thus says the Lord.” One has only to examine the Word Faith Movement of Copeland, Hagin, Osteen etc. to see what happens when any preacher can say, “The Lord gave me a word for you.” Yet, even the most conservative pastors can benefit from some of Westerhoff’s points about the importance of having a partner to grow with in one’s walk with the Lord (Ibid., 69). His recommendation of establishing a routine and sticking to the routine, including turning the phone off for an hour of prayer, is a suggestion that both conservatives and liberals can agree upon (Ibid.,66). Likewise, his insistence upon finding a balance between daily prayer, study, work and leisure is a reminder that every vocational pastor/teacher should be reminded of often (Ibid., 74). Finally, who can argue with the premium Westerhoff puts upon God and one’s relationship with God, yet one may wonder why references to Christ were so absent. Could it be that Westerhoff is not that insistent upon the exclusivity of Christ?
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bramer, Paul. Talbots School of Theology. “Listing of Christian Educators,” http://www.talbot.edu/ce20/educators/view.cfm?n=john_westerhoff [accessed March 28, 2010].
Westerhoff, John H. Spiritual Life: The Foundation for Preaching and Teaching. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.
Westerhoff, John H., III. “A Journey into Self-understanding.” In Marlene Mayr (Ed.), Modern masters of religious education. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press, 1983.
Prophets and Pastors: A Change Agent
There are innumerable examples of why positive change is an absolute necessity of life. Throughout the Bible, God continually calls upon people to effect positive change both individually and corporately. The word repent is a call for change. When God called Abram to relocate and become a follower of the one true God, Abraham had to make effect positive change in his life. On a continual basis, prophets call upon God’s people to change. Jesus called upon the Jews to radically change in their understanding of the law and the prophets. The Apostle Peter had to change his way of thinking about Gentiles and the gospel. Each of Paul’s epistles is a call for change. In fact, it is fair to say that pastors continually call upon their people to change; and the pastor who does not learn how to effect positive change in the church he is called to lead will greatly struggle at accomplishing God’s will. Therefore, it is critical that all leaders, including and especially pastors, understand the dynamics associated with creating an environment for change in their own life and the life of an organization.
In Developing the Leader within You, John C. Maxwell, presents twelve characteristics of a leader in trouble. Characteristics like, “fights change, stays inflexible, will not take a risk, lacks imagination, and is insecure and defensive” and others will significantly hinder a pastor’s effectiveness as the leader of the church (Maxwell 1993, 56-57). Change individually or corporately is not natural. Maxwell presents several pointed case studies which illustrate the negative consequences of a business man’s lack of ability to change. For example, Ford’s unwillingness to change the model T put case market shares at stake, which is significant in the corporate world (Ibid.). The Lord Jesus pointedly reminded his followers that gaining the world is nothing if a man loses his soul (Mk. 8:36). When souls are at stake, it is critical that spiritual leaders understand the importance of being willing to change themselves or the organization when the Spirit of God calls for change. Once Paul personally changed His view on the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth, he was then able to become God’s agent of change in a very significant way to most of the known world of the first century.
Maxwell presents a quote from the chairman of Deere Company as a means of being willing to change. Hewitt states, “To be a leader, you must preserve all through your life the attitude of being receptive to new ideas” (Maxwell 1993, 52). With the exception of receptiveness to heretic doctrine, every pastor would do well to embrace a positive receptivity to new ideas. Far too many churches are empty, not making budget, struggling for existence, void of male leadership and overall failing to engage the next generation with the gospel because the congregation is not willing to change and the pastor is not willing to be an agent of change. Because the pastor is often the single significant leader in the church, it is critical that he at a minimum understand “the attitude and motivational demands for bringing about” change (Maxwell 1993, 52). In Pastor Ministry: How to Shepherd Biblically, John MacArthur advises pastors to “relentlessly force your ministry to conform to the Word” (MacArthur 2005, 299). Essentially, MacArthur is suggesting that the pastor must be an agent of change anytime the ministry he leads has a facet that is not aligned with the will of God as revealed in His Word.
People resist change because man is fallen and is inherently a selfish being that has a significant propensity to rebel against all forms of authority. Maxwell suggests that change is hard because “the leader has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions and only lukewarm defenders in those who do well with change” (Maxwell 1993, 53). Although not mentioned by Maxwell, his premise is best illustrated by the resistance Christ received by the Jewish leaders who were doing well under the old system when He hinted at the need for change. When anyone suggests the need to change something, they are putting themselves in a position of authority. This may not sit well with most people. Independent Baptists still use a Bible translation that is 250 years old because the vast majority of God’s people are just as generally resistant to change as unbelievers.
Maxwell presents fourteen reasons why people resist change. Each of these reasons is reflective of just how fallen man is. Maxwell appeals to the natural man and writes to the leader who cannot appeal to the spiritual side of man. For example, in Maxwell’s fourteen reasons the discussion concerning God’s will in change is not even mentioned. Again, this may be fine for effecting change at McDonalds, but the local church is substantially different from a fast-food enterprise whose bottom line drives the need for change. Therefore, when Maxwell discusses the difference between changes that are self-initiated or not—this is a partially reasonable consideration in building an environment for change. If the pastor does not teach his people the necessity of change when God is leading or conformity to the Word of God is required, all change in his church will be an uphill battle for the duration. When Maxwell states that “change creates fear of the unknown,” he is right; therefore, there is a necessity to trust God. God’s people need to be taught to trust in His Sovereignty.
Spiritual leaders desiring to be agents of change must examine each of Maxwell’s points carefully to ensure that they are appealing to a biblical worldview and not appealing to the flesh. When Maxwell presents the necessity to motivate people to change using rewards, the pastor needs to appeal to eternal rewards for Kingdom work. Concerning being satisfied with status quo, Maxwell presents an interesting story about the Swiss watch company and their failure to adapt to change. Every pastor should give serious consideration to examining if the church they lead is identical in its perspective to the Swiss watch company which refused to go digital in its watch production. Christ has promised that His Church will not die, but the local church that refuses to change may very well die (Maxwell 1993, 58-59). “Change may mean personal loss” (Ibid.) Correction- change does mean personal loss. Jesus told His followers to deny themselves. Change requires additional commitment; again, yes it does. This is the message of the gospel. The gospel requires change. Spiritual leaders should not allow their people to create compartments for change where they refuse to allow spiritual influence to affect their behavior. Although it is critical that spiritual leaders lead in such a manner that they are respected, it should not be necessary to effect change because the spiritual leader needs to appeal to Jesus as the Head of the Body of Christ. Now, in those cases where the change is not clearly established as Biblical, the leader must be open to the reality that his change may not be necessary.
Finally, Maxwell’s creating a climate of change contains many practical solutions, but all of it must be shrouded in a commitment to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and His Revelation to the church. Within the section on creating a climate for change, Maxwell presents ten tasks/ questions the leader must ask about making change. For example he writes: “1. List the major influencers of the major groups within your organization. 2. How many will be affected directly by this change? 6. Which group is the majority?” (Maxwell 1993, 69). Maxwell’s questions are good questions, but certainly the goal of any pastor is not to create an environment where God lead and God necessary change requires working through “which group is the majority, which group is most influential?” etc. Although there is a significant degree of practicality in Maxwell’s advice to leaders, clearly the goal is to change the environment within the church to the point that the influencers are not asking who is stronger but what is God’s will. All this is not to say that the spiritual leader should not follow the advice Maxwell gives. For example, the eight ways in offering “ownership of change to others” but this must be tempered, at all times, with a continual call to ask: “What would God have us to do? Is this something that I can live with or without? Can I trust in God’s Sovereignty through the leadership of the church?” and other similar questions.
Change is necessary because change is expected by the Sovereign God of the Universe. The pastor who does not learn to be a change agent will not be an effective pastor. When the church is taught that it must be continually conforming itself to the leadership of the Christ through the God-ordained officers of the church, change will not be difficult. When Jesus is Lord of the church, instead of tradition, a matriarch or the chairman of the deacon board, the environment will begin to be set to accept change well. This does not mean that wisdom will not be necessary when implementing positive change, but Spirit-lead change will more readily be accepted by Spirit-filled followers of Christ. Paul instructed others to follow him as he followed Christ (1 Cor. 11:1). If the church is filled with followers of Christ, they will willingly embrace change by God’s Grace, once they are fully convinced that the agent of change is following Christ. Then the agent of change can seek to know how he should implement the practical guidance Maxwell provides within the framework of a biblical worldview.
References
MacArthur, John. 2005. Pastoral Ministry: How to Shepherd Biblically. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Maxwell, John C. 1993. Developing the Leader within You. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
In Developing the Leader within You, John C. Maxwell, presents twelve characteristics of a leader in trouble. Characteristics like, “fights change, stays inflexible, will not take a risk, lacks imagination, and is insecure and defensive” and others will significantly hinder a pastor’s effectiveness as the leader of the church (Maxwell 1993, 56-57). Change individually or corporately is not natural. Maxwell presents several pointed case studies which illustrate the negative consequences of a business man’s lack of ability to change. For example, Ford’s unwillingness to change the model T put case market shares at stake, which is significant in the corporate world (Ibid.). The Lord Jesus pointedly reminded his followers that gaining the world is nothing if a man loses his soul (Mk. 8:36). When souls are at stake, it is critical that spiritual leaders understand the importance of being willing to change themselves or the organization when the Spirit of God calls for change. Once Paul personally changed His view on the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth, he was then able to become God’s agent of change in a very significant way to most of the known world of the first century.
Maxwell presents a quote from the chairman of Deere Company as a means of being willing to change. Hewitt states, “To be a leader, you must preserve all through your life the attitude of being receptive to new ideas” (Maxwell 1993, 52). With the exception of receptiveness to heretic doctrine, every pastor would do well to embrace a positive receptivity to new ideas. Far too many churches are empty, not making budget, struggling for existence, void of male leadership and overall failing to engage the next generation with the gospel because the congregation is not willing to change and the pastor is not willing to be an agent of change. Because the pastor is often the single significant leader in the church, it is critical that he at a minimum understand “the attitude and motivational demands for bringing about” change (Maxwell 1993, 52). In Pastor Ministry: How to Shepherd Biblically, John MacArthur advises pastors to “relentlessly force your ministry to conform to the Word” (MacArthur 2005, 299). Essentially, MacArthur is suggesting that the pastor must be an agent of change anytime the ministry he leads has a facet that is not aligned with the will of God as revealed in His Word.
People resist change because man is fallen and is inherently a selfish being that has a significant propensity to rebel against all forms of authority. Maxwell suggests that change is hard because “the leader has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions and only lukewarm defenders in those who do well with change” (Maxwell 1993, 53). Although not mentioned by Maxwell, his premise is best illustrated by the resistance Christ received by the Jewish leaders who were doing well under the old system when He hinted at the need for change. When anyone suggests the need to change something, they are putting themselves in a position of authority. This may not sit well with most people. Independent Baptists still use a Bible translation that is 250 years old because the vast majority of God’s people are just as generally resistant to change as unbelievers.
Maxwell presents fourteen reasons why people resist change. Each of these reasons is reflective of just how fallen man is. Maxwell appeals to the natural man and writes to the leader who cannot appeal to the spiritual side of man. For example, in Maxwell’s fourteen reasons the discussion concerning God’s will in change is not even mentioned. Again, this may be fine for effecting change at McDonalds, but the local church is substantially different from a fast-food enterprise whose bottom line drives the need for change. Therefore, when Maxwell discusses the difference between changes that are self-initiated or not—this is a partially reasonable consideration in building an environment for change. If the pastor does not teach his people the necessity of change when God is leading or conformity to the Word of God is required, all change in his church will be an uphill battle for the duration. When Maxwell states that “change creates fear of the unknown,” he is right; therefore, there is a necessity to trust God. God’s people need to be taught to trust in His Sovereignty.
Spiritual leaders desiring to be agents of change must examine each of Maxwell’s points carefully to ensure that they are appealing to a biblical worldview and not appealing to the flesh. When Maxwell presents the necessity to motivate people to change using rewards, the pastor needs to appeal to eternal rewards for Kingdom work. Concerning being satisfied with status quo, Maxwell presents an interesting story about the Swiss watch company and their failure to adapt to change. Every pastor should give serious consideration to examining if the church they lead is identical in its perspective to the Swiss watch company which refused to go digital in its watch production. Christ has promised that His Church will not die, but the local church that refuses to change may very well die (Maxwell 1993, 58-59). “Change may mean personal loss” (Ibid.) Correction- change does mean personal loss. Jesus told His followers to deny themselves. Change requires additional commitment; again, yes it does. This is the message of the gospel. The gospel requires change. Spiritual leaders should not allow their people to create compartments for change where they refuse to allow spiritual influence to affect their behavior. Although it is critical that spiritual leaders lead in such a manner that they are respected, it should not be necessary to effect change because the spiritual leader needs to appeal to Jesus as the Head of the Body of Christ. Now, in those cases where the change is not clearly established as Biblical, the leader must be open to the reality that his change may not be necessary.
Finally, Maxwell’s creating a climate of change contains many practical solutions, but all of it must be shrouded in a commitment to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and His Revelation to the church. Within the section on creating a climate for change, Maxwell presents ten tasks/ questions the leader must ask about making change. For example he writes: “1. List the major influencers of the major groups within your organization. 2. How many will be affected directly by this change? 6. Which group is the majority?” (Maxwell 1993, 69). Maxwell’s questions are good questions, but certainly the goal of any pastor is not to create an environment where God lead and God necessary change requires working through “which group is the majority, which group is most influential?” etc. Although there is a significant degree of practicality in Maxwell’s advice to leaders, clearly the goal is to change the environment within the church to the point that the influencers are not asking who is stronger but what is God’s will. All this is not to say that the spiritual leader should not follow the advice Maxwell gives. For example, the eight ways in offering “ownership of change to others” but this must be tempered, at all times, with a continual call to ask: “What would God have us to do? Is this something that I can live with or without? Can I trust in God’s Sovereignty through the leadership of the church?” and other similar questions.
Change is necessary because change is expected by the Sovereign God of the Universe. The pastor who does not learn to be a change agent will not be an effective pastor. When the church is taught that it must be continually conforming itself to the leadership of the Christ through the God-ordained officers of the church, change will not be difficult. When Jesus is Lord of the church, instead of tradition, a matriarch or the chairman of the deacon board, the environment will begin to be set to accept change well. This does not mean that wisdom will not be necessary when implementing positive change, but Spirit-lead change will more readily be accepted by Spirit-filled followers of Christ. Paul instructed others to follow him as he followed Christ (1 Cor. 11:1). If the church is filled with followers of Christ, they will willingly embrace change by God’s Grace, once they are fully convinced that the agent of change is following Christ. Then the agent of change can seek to know how he should implement the practical guidance Maxwell provides within the framework of a biblical worldview.
References
MacArthur, John. 2005. Pastoral Ministry: How to Shepherd Biblically. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Maxwell, John C. 1993. Developing the Leader within You. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
"Purpose Driven Church" Book Review
.jpg)
In 1995, Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Valley Community Church, wrote The Purpose Driven Church in an effort to help pastors and lay leaders see their churches grow. Warren believes that he can significantly help dying churches recover and church plants take off. It appears that his tremendous success has afforded him credibility from a pragmatic—consumer driven perspective.
W.A. Criswell seems to make this exact point in the forward of the text with a statement that Saddleback’s tremendous growth is “sufficient evidence that Rick Warren knows whereof he speaks” (11). Churches that follow Warren’s model are called “Purpose Driven Churches,” somehow implying that churches that do not follow Saddleback’s model do not have a purpose. Moreover, Warren writes and thinks from a very business-oriented aspect. Warren avoids the tough issues and writes from a standpoint that is not always contextually accurate. The Purpose Driven Church deserves a mixed review. Furthermore, its use must be limited to discerning pastors who will not blindly apply Warren’s model without analysis.
The Purpose Driven Church is a manual of sorts written to teach one how to follow the Saddleback Valley Community Church model of growth. The text has five major sectional divisions beginning with a two chapter introduction, next is a substantial section on how to become a purpose-driven church, then a portion about reaching out to the community, followed by a section on how to attract a crowd, and finally the conclusion that deals with moving the crowd into membership. Each section is easy to follow along, and the text is certainly an easy read. There is not anything theological about Warren’s book. His work is an exciting read—everyone loves to read about success.
Warren is absolutely correct when he writes about God’s sovereignty being “overlooked in almost all current church-growth literature” (14). He wants his reader to understand that Saddleback did not instantly become a large church—Pastor Warren battled from scratch and made, by his own admission, lots of mistakes in developing a strategy for church grow.
Warren believes that a Baptist pastor may struggle a bit as he explains how he went about determining what type of church he would establish. Warren contends that his area already had many strong, Bible-believing churches, yet his list of names of the pastors of these large successful churches makes you wonder what Warren means. A reader with some knowledge of American pastors would know that there is a substantial difference between John MacArthur, Robert Schuller, and Greg Laurie. This insight should alert the reader into what one can expect of the text with regard to the depth of theological application.
In chapter two, Warren defends the development of mega-churches by presenting eight myths concerning things that are not true about large churches. Warren is trying to break through to small church pastors who have an unwarranted bias toward large churches.
Part two is the best section of the book and is a must read for all church pastors and lay leaders. Warren is right when he insists that every church needs a purpose—of course, the church needs a purpose. He writes, “Until you know what your church exists for, you have no foundation, no motivation, and no direction for ministry” (81). There is no real argument to this philosophy because it is clearly biblical. Every church has a purpose. The head of the church Jesus Christ has established the church’s purpose. Warren believes that the “first step in getting a church which is plateaued or declining is to redefine your purpose” (81). Using statistics to prove his point, Warren shows how there is a significant disconnect between what the members of the church and the pastors of that same church believe the purpose of the church to be. Pastors and members are exactly opposite in their understanding of the church—90 percent of pastors believe the church exists to win the lost while only ten percent of members believe this to be true; and then the reverse happens with regard to the purpose of the church being to care for its own (82-83).
In an attempt to guide pastors, the text presents five benefits to having a clearly defined purpose statement. First, Warren believes that the reason Saddleback people get along so well is that they all understand their purpose which promotes harmony and builds morale. Perhaps he is right, but that is a difficult point to prove in so much as Saddleback has had only one pastor and does not have the years of baggage that many other churches have acquired through years of existence. Baggage, which often brings frustration and friction, is supposed to be reduced by this purpose statement. Obviously the statement does reduce the frustration, but strong pastoral leadership must be insistent while leading the church through living in accordance with its agreed upon purpose statement. Next, he builds a strong case on how purpose statements can help the church cooperate and concentrate—which, again, is good. Lastly, the purpose statement assists in evaluating effectiveness. Warren asks “what is our business?” and then “How’s business?” (93). Again, this is a stretch—it is difficult to hear Jesus teaching the apostles to ask, “How is business?”
Based on his tremendous success, Warren presents Saddleback’s purpose statement as an example of what right looks like in the development of a statement. He is especially convinced of this because he believes that each of the five church purposes is articulated in his statement equally well. Warren suggests that Saddleback’s purpose statement is biblical, specific, transferable, and measurable which is the standard by which all statements should be measured. Measuring God’s work is especially difficult. “A great commitment to the great commandment and the great commission will grow a great church” is a true statement, but who measures great (102)? When the author of the text pastors a church of 10,000 members, great is measured numerically. Care must be exercised in measuring success by a non-biblical standard. Can a church of fifty be a great church? Of course it can, but when the author of the text says “great,” the reader is left to wonder how he can measure greatness with something other than numerical growth—especially when the title the book puts such a premium on growth.
Using the “Nehemiah Principle,” pastors learn to continually put before the people the purpose of the church in as many different ways as possible. According to Warren, “once you have defined the purposes of your church, you must continually clarify and communicate them to everyone in your congregation. It is not a task you do once and then forget about it” (112). Statements like this are so true that, in spite of the some of the less desirable parts of the text, The Purpose Driven Church should be read in conjunction with other church growth books by discerning leaders. Warren rightly suggests that vision and purpose can be communicated through scripture, symbols, slogans, and stories (112-3). The text is full of profitable examples.
About midway through the text, Warren moves to application of the purposes of the church. Overusing the word “purpose,” Warren gives ten ways to become a purpose driven church. First, churches are to consciously focus on assimilating new members into the church. Using the five purposes of the church: worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry and evangelism- Warren shows how Saddleback brings the unchurched (unsaved) to church, moves them into the congregation, then into a small group, then into a core group and then back out to the community for evangelism (136-8). The application of a purpose statement in a meaningful way is a solid message, but the reader must remember that this is only one model.
The value of Warren’s work is without question, but there are definite reasons why readers must be discerning as they work through the application of his purpose driven model. First, Warren is very loose in his uses of multiple paraphrases of the Word of God in order to make his point. Warren has no apparent conviction toward an essentially literal translation of the Word of God. Moving from paraphrase to paraphrase, the lack of continuity reveals perhaps a willingness to search for a proof text and then go with it. Warren gives advice about the translations and paraphrases as though there are no issues with different Bibles and the profitability of using a text that is not faithful to the original languages. Often moving a church from one translation to another can be an exceptionally hard task, and Warren offers no advice on how to make a transition like that happen. Furthermore, Warren tells pastors to “select Scripture readings with the unchurched in mind” (297). Warren uses a ridiculous example of what to read and what not to read but does not provide enough guidance to be of any real value. Certainly one wonders where the Scriptural support is for such guidance. How does one preach the gospel and not offend the unchurched? (Warren is careful not to refer to people as “sinners” or “lost” in his text.)
Pastor Warren believes that God does not have a preference with regard to felt-needs preaching and expository preaching. He writes, “I honestly don’t think God cares at all whether you teach the Bible book by book or topic by topic, as long as you teach the Bible. He doesn’t care whether you start with the text and move to applying it to people’s needs, or start with people’s needs and move to the text” (295). Warren adamantly defends his felt-needs technique; he suggests that the preacher should decide what the people need to hear and then find supporting verses from the Bible which justifies the truth. This is nearly the same thing he does with his purpose driven books. This technique is an exceptionally slippery slope that has the potential for theological disaster. The pastor of a church with a large homosexual contingent would never get to scriptures that condemn homosexuality in a seeker-sensitive perspective based on felt-needs. Yet the student of the Bible knows that God sent His prophets with messages that were anything but seeker-sensitive.
The god of church growth cannot become an idol that influences what one preaches. Certainly Warren is not suggesting anything like that, but it appears that this is not beyond the realm of possibilities when Paul predicates a latter day when people will accumulate to themselves preachers and teachers that suit their own passions (2 Timothy 4). While Rick Warren is writing about church growth, Dr. David F. Wells is writing just as prolifically about the decay of truth within the greater protestant community of believers with a book like No Place for Truth. Also, Wells is not alone, it appears; for every church growth book, there is a book encouraging pastor to not compromise on the truth of the Word of God. It takes a discerning pastor to read a church book with a seeker-sensitive model and not be influenced to compromise to build a “work for God.”
A third area where pastors will need to be discerning is whether they will choose to embrace Warren’s method of handling a call to repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Pastors should “be creative in inviting people to receive Christ” (304) is what Warren suggests. The pastor truly seeking to be as Biblically correct as possible struggles at determining exactly what Warren means by this guidance. Moreover, the purpose-driven pastor is instructed to lead people to Jesus with a model prayer (304). Once again Warren does not provide apostolic precedent for creative invitations or model prayers which teach people to “ask Jesus into [their] hearts.” This is very problematic because a Biblical message of “repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ” is not very creative—it is prescriptive not descriptive. Therefore, the apostles have tied the hands of pastors and evangelists seeking to follow their example.
The Purpose Driven Church is not the kind of book a pastor can wholeheartedly suggest to all the members of his church to read. Warren’s work must be examined and reexamined from a critical perspective. In light of the reality that Warren began his church in a substantially less postmodern perspective, church planters will have to critically examine whether they want to follow his model of surveying the unchurched, appealing to the crowd, and then turning the crowd into a church. While this model obviously worked, it remains to be seen whether Pastor Warren will remain committed to orthodox, uncompromising, evangelical Christian truth. Although clearly beyond the scope of this review the handwriting on the wall seems to suggest that Warren may not remain as committed to Biblical standards of morality as he once was, but this is not to suggest that there is not much that can be learned from Warren’s monumental work. However, in an age of doctrinal compromise and wavering on the exclusivity of Christ by pastors of mega-churches, it appears that now more than ever churches will need to know what their purpose is and what core Biblical values will guide them into the future.
Mandatory Reading: When Sinners Say "I Do"
If I could make every member and attender of Berean Baptist Church read one more book other than the Bible I would have them read the book:
When Sinner says “I do” Discovering the Power of the Gospel in the Marriage by Dale Harvey.
Dr. Harvey’s grasp and understanding of how the power of the gospel applies to marriage is remarkably on target.
This should be required reading for every premarital scenario—first marriage, second marriage, etc. If a couple refuses to dig into this book and exam what it has to say to them the preacher shouldn’t marry them.
In so much as Dale says it much than I could ever say it why don’t you go to:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=D956992DFBA1F049
And listen to him explain why he wrote the book.
We stock this book for a low price in our bookstore.
Book Review of In Pursuit of Purity American Fundamentalism Since 1850
Dr. David O. Beale, author of In Pursuit of Purity: American Fundamentalism Since 1850, is the pastor of Faith Baptist Church in Franklin, Virginia and a professor of church history at Bob Jones University. Beale is a Fundamental Baptist Pastor and professor, but he writes as a historian committed to preserving the record of the fundamentalist fight against the infiltration of liberalism in American Christianity in both the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century through articles and books like In Pursuit of Purity published by Bob Jones University Press, 1986. Beale begins by defining Fundamentalism and then progressively works through periods of time in a logical and well-defined manner with short well-documented chapters focused on specific issues and denominations. Beale’s work provides any evangelical Christian with a single volume resource to gain a clear appreciation of why Baptists, Presbyterians, Congregationalist and other Bible believing Christians united to fight those who sought to undermine and ultimately destroy a believer’s confidence in the Word of God and the person and work of the Son of God.
After defining a Christian Fundamentalist as “one who desires to reach out in love and compassion to people, believes and defends the whole Bible as the absolute inerrant, and authoritative Word of God, and stands committed to the doctrine and practice of holiness,” (3) Beale gets to work by establishing that fundamentalism is not some new phenomena in Chapter one but merely an extension and continuation of a long line of dissenting groups who have always stood strong for Orthodox Christianity. Beale assumes that his reader has very limited understanding of what fundamentalists were fighting for; therefore, he systematically explains the issues and communicates well-documented facts in short, easy-to-read chapters. Beale’s organization makes his work valuable as both a single read for clarity and a lifelong reference work for further information on specific topics like “The Fall of Princeton Theological Seminary.” (165) Beale’s opening sentence in chapter thirty-one provides a good flavor of his writing style and focus; he writes, “There have been several notable Fundamentalists who sounded a clarion warning of Methodism’s drift into modernism.” (309) Then Beale goes on to provide names, incidents, points of reference, articles and such all relating to fundamental Methodists and their either individual or collective impact.
At times, Beale writes with “rose colored glasses” as he opens his final chapter with “Fundamentalism has shown a desire to reach out in love and compassion to people.” (353) This is exceptionally difficult to completely substantiate. In fact, Beale seems to contradict himself as he presents men like J. Frank Norris as those who tremendously impacted fundamentalism in a positive manner. Although it was true that Norris impacted fundamentalism, he does not have a reputation of reaching out to people in love or compassion. Beale makes specific reference to Norris as the “Texas Tornado,” a Baptist that would use his pulpit to attack people and at one point shot a person in what was later determined to be “justifiable homicide” as self-defense. (235)
The greatest strength of Beale’s work is the manner in which it is trans-denominational. Beale’s Baptist association does not affect his ability to present an inclusive work showing that it was not just one particular denomination that was concerned about the fundamentals of the faith. Beale’s reader will gain a much greater understanding of the complexity and depth of the fundamental movement. He or she will learn of Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists and other denominations that were active in fighting against the negative effects of liberalism. Some chapters are exclusively dedicated to particular denominations while other chapters show how denominations came together in associations like the World’s Christian Fundamentals Association. (97)
Perhaps one weakness of Pursuit of Purity is Beale’s failure to help the reader understand the relationship between Evangelical and Fundamental churches and seminaries. Beale would have done well to address the differences and similarities between Evangelicals and Fundamentalists. He briefly mentions churches that include “evangelical” in their name but does not devote any time in educating his reader in what makes a person or a church evangelical or fundamental. Maybe the lines are not clear enough in Beale’s mind to identify a distinction, but he does not communicate that either. Evangelical churches are too large of a constituency in the body of Christ to ignore in a work whose readership is theologically conservative but not fundamentalist.
Pursuit of Purity needs to be mandatory reading for pastors, teachers, trustees, directors and any lay person involved in the leadership of an evangelical or fundamental Christian institution like a church, college or seminary. The manner in which Beale shows his reader the importance of five key fundamentals of the faith in a non-theological work is exceptionally compelling. Anyone who questions the importance of “earnestly contending for the faith once delivered” will be encouraged by the historical examples Beale provides in a well–written, easy-to-read record of over one hundred years of American Christian Fundamentalism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)