Evangelism

Glen Scrivener – Incarnation: The True Turning Point

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Glen-321A-300x267Glen Scrivener is an evangelist with Revival Media.  He writes about evangelism and theology at ChristTheTruth.net and his evangelistic book, 321, comes out in the autumn: three-two-one.org  Glen visits us at Cor Deo for a day during each season of the programme to talk gospel together with us and it is always a real help.  As we continue this series to mark the release of Pleased to Dwell, here is Glen on the significance of the Incarnation for the Gospel and how we communicate it to others.

_________________________________

The centre of evangelicalism is the believer’s “choice for God” – that’s Diarmaid MacCullogh’s opinion, Oxford’s Professor of Church History. When he made this claim during his “History of Christianity” on the BBC, I howled in protest, throwing pillows, shoes, the cat – anything – at the TV screen. Surely the professor has it backwards. It’s God’s choice for us, right? Surely it’s Jesus – the Chosen One – coming down, not us – the mighty decision makers – choosing upwards.

But as the episode unfolded I realised that it wasn’t the Professor who had gotten it backwards – it was evangelicalism. MacCullogh was just being honest. He was describing the movement as it is – not as it ought to be. And who can deny that, on the ground, the actual centre of gravity for global evangelicalism is “our choice for God”?

Think of sermons on Luke 15 and ask where our attention lies today. If an evangelist preaches a “message of salvation”, where will the emphasis be? More often than not, we focus on the prodigal in the pigsty. The sinner must make “a choice for God.” Compare this with the theology of the early church. Where would they see salvation in Luke 15? Primarily they would speak of Christ’s opening parable. God the Son is the Good Shepherd seeking out His lost sheep. Through His incarnation, He takes up our humanity, through His death He takes responsibility for our sins, through His exaltation He marches us – now perfected – home to the Father.

We must learn from the incarnation that salvation is a case of “God coming down.” Therefore, where is the turning point in our relationship with God? Is it our turn to God – praying the sinner’s prayer, for instance? Surely, more profoundly, it’s God’s turn to us in Jesus. Where is the renovation of our human nature? Is it our decision to get right with God? Surely it’s Christ’s decision to hoist us on His shoulders and carry us home. If this is true, what kind of evangelists ought we to be?

Saturday’s Thought: Preaching for Response

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

No preacher would admit to preaching in order to fill time, or to fulfill an obligation, or to fill a pulpit.  We say we preach for response.  After all, what other motivation could we cite?  I know, some will quickly rush to language of glorifying God.  But God isn’t pleased by time filling or untouched listeners.  So what do we mean?

Do we mean that preaching should get more than a polite thank you from the gathered listeners?  Sure.  Do we mean that preaching should get a positive or exuberant statement of reception from the listeners?  I don’t think so.  The Lord’s preaching certainly seemed to polarize rather than please all.  Some will be stirred and drawn, others will be offended and withdraw.

This is where it gets interesting for me, and here’s the thought for the day.  What is the division or polarization created by our preaching?  Simplistically we might assume that it is a sorting of sinners and saints.  You know, those in sin pushed away by how seriously we address sin and the godly encouraged; the culture upset and absent while the churchy folks pleased and present.  But that didn’t seem to be the result of Jesus’ preaching, did it?

What if we realize that the gospel is not about preaching a message of pressuring responsibility?  That is, what if we preach the glorious loving grace of God that stirs and warms and draws hearts to Christ?  Instead of whipping our listeners with burdens, what if we preach the One who was whipped for them?

This kind of preaching typically offends the religious who feel responsible for their own goodness.  These are the people who don’t see their own efforts and diligence and pride and self-centredness as being at all sin-stained.  This kind of preaching typically draws the broken and hurting and weak.

When we switch from preaching responsibility to actually preaching for a response we may find that the polarization both switches and increases.  When we recognize the difference between responsibility and response, then certainly our preaching will change.  It is so easy to preach to pressure people to be good.  It takes something more to preach how good Christ is, so that listeners might be drawn to Him.  What is the something more?

I suppose it comes down to me on my own with my Bible and my Lord.  Is it all about me?  Or about Him?  Is it about what I must do (responsibility)?  Or about what He is like (response)?

Preaching for response requires clarity on the distinction between response and responsibility.

Saturday Short Thought: Glorious Gospel

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

In a little while I’m heading to London to speak at a Cor Deo Delighted by God conference.  Our subtitle for the day is Glorious Gospel.  I am excited to hear the other sessions and to ponder together just how glorious the gospel really is.

What it comes down to, I suppose, is how glorious our God is, and what kind of gospel He has given us.  Too often the presentation of the gospel I hear is less than glorious.

It seems like a negotiation between a willing sinner and a reticent God.  The sinner is willing to say some words in order to gain a significant package of benefits.  And God is open to some sort of a contractual deal, but really is essentially resistant without the intervention of a kind lawyer working for us.

This is such a corruption of the truth.  God’s initiative is critical, and the extent to which He has gone to overcome the resistance of the human heart is stunning.  And as for the language of contracts, let’s dump that in the grip of His fatherly embrace!

The gospel is wondrously glorious, but it’s the kind of glory that involves His being high and lifted up, in absolute self-giving humiliation.

Let’s be sure we don’t preach a watered down, or petty, or negotiated gospel.

PS We’d really appreciate your prayers for today’s conference to go well!

_______________________

Next Week: The 10 Biggest Big Ideas

In the classroom Haddon Robinson said more than once that there are basically eight to ten big big ideas in the Bible.  He never gave us a list, but I’ll offer mine starting on Monday.  What would you include?

The Challenge of Consistency

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

I tend to agree with the notion of there being a difference between small church and big church.  A small church, perhaps under 100 people, will tend to have strengths that can become weaknesses in a larger church, perhaps over 200 people.  For instance, in a small church, low standards of music and preaching will be smiled at since everyone knows the individual who is “trying their best.”  But once that church grows through the transitional stage and becomes bigger, such low standards become more counter productive.  Visitors (and there will probably be more now) don’t know the individual up front and the whole dynamic doesn’t work quite so well.  While fellowship is often a strength in smaller churches, it takes deliberate work to achieve that in a larger church.  The emphasis on “up-front” standards inevitably increases as a church grows.

This provides a challenge.  I suppose it is a challenge for all churches of all sizes.  It is especially a challenge for churches with some creative capacity (people, skills, people-hours, etc.).  When you have a guest service of a certain standard, then people will bring guests along.  If that service is done well, then some of those guests might return the next week.  There’s the problem.  If all the effort to be clear and relevant and engaging and effective in the music, the preaching, the presentation, etc., if all that effort is spent on one Sunday, what about the next?

The challenge is consistency.  If your church has a goal of bringing the unchurched to a particular service, then it is worth thinking through whether greater consistency could be achieved in that service 52 times each year.  At that point people would be much more inclined to risk their own relationships and bring people along to the guest events.

There has to be flexibility in this.  Different churches have different capacities for guest events.  The vast majority cannot live up to the standards seen in the small number of “megachurches.”  There also has to be balance in this.  The primary role of the church service may not be evangelism.  Nevertheless, taking into account the specific ethos of a church, it would be worth giving some thought to greater consistency between guest events and normal Sundays.

Listen to Jonathan Edwards

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I just listened to Max McLean’s performance of Jonathan Edwards’ sermon – “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” It is considered the most famous sermon ever preached in US history. The sermon is available as a free download here. Actually it has been edited down to about 20 minutes of actual sermon (rather than 43), with extra comments before and after – think radio show. Nonetheless, it’s free and worth hearing.

It is worth hearing both as a listener to be ministered to, and as a preacher to notice a few things. First and foremost, listen as a listener. Get a sense of why people trembled and cried out for mercy. Listen, not for rhetorical power (although I’ll come to that), but for the strong truth of the gospel itself – that’s where “power” is. Listen to stir your appreciation for God’s favor. Listen to stir a passion for the lost, to light afresh a flame for evangelism.

And you can listen as a preacher too. Even this shortened version allows us to hear a classic example of the power of a controlling idea. You will appreciate powerful and vivid sensory imagery conveyed in well-chosen words. Surely, this will stir prayer for your own preaching and those that will hear it.

Monday: Renewing Vision Day

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Monday is a good day to take stock, take a deep breath and recommit ourselves to God’s work.  That doesn’t just mean being willing to ever preach again, although for some that might be a good step on a Monday morning!  It means recommitting to really do the work of biblical preaching, rather than just going through the motions.  A couple of quotes from Philip Ryken’s chapter “Preaching that Reforms” in Preach the Word:

If we are living in an age of relativism and narcissism, what are the implications for preaching?  Obviously, Bible teaching will be out of favor.  As sinners, we generally do not like to have our selfishness exposed; but this is one of the primary purposes of preaching the Bible.  In a post-Christian culture, the last thing people want to hear is the truth about their self-centeredness.  What preaching there is, therefore, tends to be therapeutic rather than prophetic.  It aims to make people feel better about who they are rather than to challenge them to become, by God’s grace, what they are not. (p192)

How tempting it is to preach messages that are therapeutic, rather than prophetic.  It’s hard to choose to preach the Word when its message is uncomfortable, unpopular, “unsophisticated” or somehow might offend somebody.  Later in the chapter, Ryken addresses the issue of evangelism:

This kind of proclamation requires boldness, a virtue that is sadly lacking in the contemporary church.  One of the reasons evangelicalism is in decline is because Christians have lost their nerve.  In these post-Christian times, we tend to be a subculture rather than a counterculture. (p198 )

I am not encouraging insensitive brash proclamation, or unnecessarily offensive preaching.  I am just taking stock of my own ministry again this morning and renewing my vision to preach the Word.  It’s the greatest privilege, but it demands an appropriate level of boldness too.  Let’s set our sights on our Lord afresh in order to renew our vision of Him, His Word, His building of His church, His mission to the world … and our privilege of participation in that.

Happy Birthday Billy Graham

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Today is a great day in America.  I’m not referring to the election (every other blog on earth is writing about that, but I’ll keep my views in my prayers).  I’m referring to the 90th birthday of Billy Graham.  What a man of God he is!

I heard him live on two occasions in England when I was just eight.  Five years later they had the follow-up “crusade” with live satellite links around the country.  I remember sitting there as a whole family in our church party responded to the call and went forward.  In my short life I’ve seen leaders fall into disrepute, but not Billy Graham.  I have heard the criticisms coming from some quarters, but I have also enjoyed the benefit of being influenced by people saved under Billy Graham’s preaching.

His eyesight is failing, his hearing too, his body is growing weak, but he claims that although the body grows weaker, the spirit doesn’t have to as well.  He is writing another book.  He is still a man of prayer.  Perhaps in Billy Graham we see a great example of a man of God who has lived out an Acts 6:4 life – prioritizing prayer and the Word.  As his spokesman Larry Ross said, “The lion still has a roar!”

Let’s praise God for the privilege we have of seeing Billy Graham press on to the finish line.  Let’s pray that we will each be as faithful, as humble, and as prayerful as Billy Graham.  We may not preach the gospel live to 215million people, but let us give everything we can in the ministry God gives to us and try to finish as well as Billy Graham.

Evangelistic Preaching – A Flexibility Test?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I don’t think there is a definitive model for evangelistic preaching.  There are guidelines, certainly, but also a real need for flexibility.  You have to flex according to the kind of church you are in, the occasion on which you preach, the kind of people to whom you are preaching and so on.

I grew up in a church context where there was, in theory, an evangelistic sermon every Sunday night.  In many ways it was a remnant from an earlier generation in which people would attend church simply because a service was taking place.  By the time I came along (due to being in a Christian family), our culture had changed.  Week after week the meeting would take place, always to the same crowd of believers, usually without clear explanation of how to respond to the gospel, often without clear explanation of the meaning of the cross.  The format of the service was traditional and probably distinctly alien and uncomfortable for any outsider that might attend.  It certainly did not motivate me to invite non-believers.

I think many churches are more purposeful about evangelistic meetings now (at least in my circles).  More creativity, more “natural” communication, more effort to remove the “cringe” factors.  But one thing is clear – there is not one way to preach evangelistically.  Taking into account the people present, how the meeting has been promoted, the expectations of those who have invited friends, etc. all influences how to preach.  Sometimes a gentle introduction to Christianity that leaves people wanting more is ideal.  Other times it is critical to give a more complete gospel presentation.  Sometimes it is time to “shake the tree” and catch the already ripened fruit by overt calls to decision.

It takes sensitivity, wisdom, faith and courage to know which way to go on a particular occasion.  Generally it is best to present the way you informed the church that you would (because they bring guests according to what they are expecting you to do!)  Ultimately, there will probably be criticism coming from somewhere, but that is evangelistic preaching – never easy, always critical.  There is no simple formula, for there are so many variables.  But at its core the gospel doesn’t change, and the world needs it as much as ever.

Solid Solitary Converts

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

We’ve probably all heard about evangelistic preaching that has somehow manipulated the crowd.  I remember sitting in the back row of a meeting with a very famous preacher.  When it came to the evangelistic part of the evening, he presented the gospel.  Then when it was time for the altar call, somehow the gospel message morphed into “if you have done this before but still struggle with sin, come forward…”  Naturally the numbers swelled significantly!  It may look great on reports, but it is manipulative and dishonest if these people are counted as converts.

I’m not in any way suggesting altar calls are inappropriate.  In some situations they are highly appropriate.  But manipulation and dishonesty in preaching is always inappropriate.  The end does not justify the means.  Let’s be sure to preach the gospel and pray for thousands to respond, but rather than get clever with the call, let’s praise God for solid solitary converts!

Steps To Faith

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Coming to faith is a process.  I’ve been studying the early chapters of Daniel and the early chapters of John.  It’s not uncommon to find, in the Bible, that there is a process involved in understanding God for who He is and accepting His role and self-presentation.  Whether or not Nebuchadnezzar is truly “converted” in chapter 4, there are key incidents in the previous two chapters.  What might this all mean for us as preachers?

1. View each message as an opportunity to move people forward one step. It takes repeated exposure to the gospel for people to gradually be drawn closer to that point of heart-level understanding and response.  Even once people are saved, the process continues.  So let’s not have the mentality that says, “I’ve already told them this, they should get it now!”  Our listeners, just like us, are notoriously slow and gradual in responding to God.

2. Remember that the process happens apart from preaching too. While that visitor may be a first-time listener to your preaching, they may have already been through many steps on the journey (listening to preachers on the radio, reading books, interacting with believers, etc.)  So while we should view each message as an opportunity to prompt the next step, we should not underestimate the opportunity and fail to present an opportunity to fully respond.  Somehow we need a real sensitivity to God and to people in this aspect of ministry.