Presbyterian divisiveness

One thing that bugs me about us Presbyterians. We seem able to split over the most trivial things - like whether we sing hymns & songs in church, or only metric psalms. It's the dark side of our doctrinal robustness & willingness to speak up.
John Frame has written an excellent article on the divisions in the Presbyterian churches in the USA. He catalogues twenty-two - twenty-two...! - sources of conflict from 1936 to 2003. He argues that many of them stem from different perspectives. The sad result is that instead of rejoicing in what they agree on, people end up end up acrimoniously arguing about what they disagree over - even if it's a relatively minor matter. Ironically, the matter of different "perspectives" on the truth is itself the twenty-second item of contention (*sigh*...).
I'm all for loving the truth. But let's have some truth in love.
"Machen's Warrior Children". http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/2003Machen.htm

Yeah - uh - what he said...

I've been working on how what my last post re church & evangelism means in practice, but one of my Moore College buddies has beaten me to it.
http://jeltzz.blogspot.com/2008/04/points-of-contact.html
I wanted to say that...

Evangelism and Church part 1

Sometimes we get into debates about where we should do evangelism - in church, or outside. By "in church" we mean during the Sunday service. Should we have "seeker services", and reserve "teaching" to Bible studies? Or should we "teach" during the Sunday service, and do evangelism in Bible studies, men's group, women's group etc?

I think the whole debate is misguided.

Mission is intrinsic to the identity of the church. The church itself is essentially outward focused. Evangelism is not the church’s second nature; it is the church’s nature, full stop.

Christianity is an experience of community. The New Testament terms it “fellowship” – koinonia. God, through Christ’s death and resurrection, brings us into fellowship with his triune self (Matt 11:27; John 17:3, 10-11). Those who have been redeemed by Christ also have fellowship with one another. Christ did not redeem solitary individuals; he redeemed the church, a community, a people for himself (Eph 2:11-22; 1 Peter 2:9-10).
This fellowship is not passive. It is not a synonym for socialising – what we do after the church service, over a cup of tea. Fellowship is active, and outsider-focused. This is because the God with whom we have fellowship is active, and outsider-focused. The persons of the Trinity are essentially focused on each other, and have been rejoicing in each other from all eternity. The gospel of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection is an expression of that mutual joy. Jesus was the first missionary. He came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10). The Father rejoiced to plan to save sinners; the Son rejoiced to put that plan into action; the Spirit rejoiced to empower the Son to do so, and continues to rejoice in applying that salvation to sinners. So to say “God is love” (1 John 4:8, 16) is not an abstract philosophical statement, but a deep statement as to the nature of God himself. The triune God really is love, and has shown it in the cross of Christ.
So, the church that God brings into being must also be outsider-focused – or else it is not Christ’s church (Matt 5:13-16; Romans 5:6-8). As Christians, we should naturally want to share what we have – our relationship with God – with others. We must, with John, “proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us” (1 John 1:3) as we enjoy “fellowship… with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ” (ibid). As we do so, we “make our joy complete” (1 John 1:4). The normal Christian, and the normal church, should desperately want to expand its community, so that more people share the fellowship with God that we enjoy.

This active, missionary fellowship is not reserved for authorised “priests”. All Christians have been gifted to build up the body of Christ in some way (1 Cor ch 12; Eph 4:1-16; Php 2:25; 1 Peter 1:5). Indeed, in one sense, the way the church evangelises is simply by being itself. As we share community with each other, that community, because it is founded and brought into being by the gospel of Christ, testifies to Christ – or else it is not a Christian community (Romans ch 12; Titus ch 2; 1 Peter 2:12).

So how does this actually work itself out in local churches? I'll address that in part 2...

John Frame & Vern Poythress

Hey, check this out:
http://www.frame-poythress.org/
Articles & even free downloadable books by John Frame & Vern Poythress, two excellent Reformed theologians.

K-Bomb's Angels

Well, whaddya know. New threads = instant chick magnet.
So, if anyone out there wants some hints on finding that special someone, feel free to contact da Bomb...

Do not love the world

My Grand-Uncle George died yesterday. He was the last of that generation - my "grands". He had prostate cancer.
Extended families tend to be much closer knit in Sri Lanka. So I used to see uncle George reasonably regularly. I used to call him Uncle Furry, 'coz he had a beard. He was relatively wealthy - built an expensive house in the outskirts of Colombo. I liked visiting there - lotsa fun places to play, in the house and gardens. It got burned down in the race riots of 1983.
Uncle George attended church all his life. But on his deathbed, he had no confidence that he was going to see his saviour. Over the 'phone, he kept saying he was frightened of death. My Mum, and the rest of his extended family (he was never married - no wife, no kids), tried to comfort him. They spoke to him of Christ's sacrifice, of the confident hope we can have of glory, of seeing Christ face-to-face.
Didn't seem to work.
Uncle George was too much in love with this world. He loved material possessions, and social status. He was very pleased that he was going to have an ordained minister among his grand-nephews (me...). In fact, in his obituary, he made me a Rev...! I'm not gonna get revved up for two more years...!
It was this love of the world that stopped him from dying well. He had all his treasure on earth, he didn't have anything to look forward to in heaven. No wonder he wanted to stay here, and not go there! He held this world in a strong grip, and help loosely to the next world. No wonder he didn't want to let go!
Uncle George knew the basic message of Christ. I hope to see him in glory. But the fact remains - he was too much in love with this world.

1 John 2:15-17
15 Do not love the world or anything in the world.... 16 For everything in the world — the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does — comes not from the Father but from the world. 17 The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.

ROBERTS - GEORGE RATNAM (former Browns Group Director). Beloved son of late R.M. Roberts and Grace Roberts, affectionate brother of late Samuel, Flora, Victor, Daniel and Edward, brother-in-law of late Anne, Beatrice and of Anula, loving uncle of late Dr Godwin and Sunetha (Australia) and of Dr Godfrey and Rene (US), Dr Patricia and Vasantha Weerakoon (Australia), Dushan and Sharmila, Dushanthi, Rev. Kamal (Australia), Dr Gehan and Amey (Australia). Cortege leaves residence No. 48, Second Lane, Ratmalana at 2.00 p.m. on Saturday 19th April cremation at General Cemetery, Borella at 3.00 p.m.

What is love, John?

This post is a response to a comment on my previous post, "The problem with Liberal Theology". John raises some perfectly reasonable challenges. I'm not going to respond to all of them - just one.
John said: "you neglect that principally God loves the most rotten scoundrel and is Himself love."
What is love, John? A powerful act that reaches out to identify, judge, and destroy, that which is truly, objectively, morally wrong – wrong because it insults the good character of the creator God, to whom we are all accountable? Or a polite permission that avoids any moral assessment, that is fundamentally powerless to discern good from evil?
God’s love is revealed on the cross of Christ. No, more – God’s love is enacted upon the cross; it is established in the cross of Christ. And the Biblical testimony to that act is that is an act of judgment. The cross is the triune God taking into his triune self the consequences of our rebellion against him.
My experience of that love makes me speak the way I do. I have been brought to the foot of that cross, shown the error of my ways, and had no choice but to confess that I am wrong, he is right. The blog that you respond to is simply my continued confession.
It’d be much easier for me to be a univeralist. Or an agnostic. Or a Buddhist. Or whatever. It’s hard to be an Evangelical. It's so unpopular, sounds so closed-minded. But if what Christ achieved on the cross is real – if it the enactment, the establishment of God’s love towards sinners – then I have no choice. I must testify to that reality. It’d be unloving for me not to.

The problem with Liberal theology is...

I'm just back from the Presy College mission in the southern highlands of NSW - Bowral, Mittagong, Moss Vale. Had an interesting time. And my evangelistic talk last Sunday went very well - thanks for your prayers.
Steve North, the minister for these churches (yep - one guy, three churches - busy man!) loves Jesus, loves the Bible, and is totally clear about calling all people to follow Christ. That’s why he invited a Presy college mission in the first place.
But some parts of the southern highlands are still in the shadow of Liberal theology. As in so-called "Christian" theology that doesn't believe the Bible. Therefore, it doesn't believe the unique divinity of Christ, doesn't believe that humanity, by our wickedness, have alienated ourselves from God (“sin”), doesn't believe that God is personally affronted by that alienation (“God’s wrath”), doesn't believe that Jesus, by his death & resurrection, has achieved a unique, perfect reconciliation of humanity and God (“the atonement”), doesn’t believe in the need to abandon other belief-systems – including belief in yourself – to receive the benefits of this reconciliation (“repentance”), and everything else that Christians have historically believed.
Therefore, I don’t think Liberals have the right to call themselves Christians. They certainly have a theology – they have an understanding of God – just not a Christian one.
The result is… Liberal theology becomes boring! Yes, that’s right – boring!
Since Liberals don’t believe the Bible, they instinctively fill the void with something else. In the southern highlands, some church members – who have grown up under the influence of Liberal theology – view church the same as a gathering of friends. They’re not outsider-focused at all. Newcomers disrupt the comfortable gathering of old friends, you see. They really do wish newcomers would go away and leave them alone. They’re not interested in spending money to reach out to the community. They want to spend money to make the church building look nice.
That is so boring…!
I also met some teenagers, who’ve been taught by Liberals. These teenagers see church as totally irrelevant to modern society. And no wonder! What they’ve been taught is so… boring! It’s vague stuff about finding meaning for yourself in life, and some sort of “spirituality” or something. I couldn’t actually pin down what they’d been taught about God. It was really vague. I’m not surprised. Liberals aren’t sure what they do believe. All they know what they don’t believe – all that narrow-minded fundamentalist Biblical stuff. So these teenagers were really hardened against God, the church, the Bible, Jesus, and Christians. Because to them, they were all really, really boring.
The gospel of Christ crucified is so-o-o-o-o-o-o much more exciting. Don’t you think?

Preaching evangelistically Sunday April 13

Sunday's my biggest gig for the mission. I'm preaching at Moss Vale Presbyterian church. Eph 2:1-10. Trying to show people the dimensions of God's grace - how he takes us from being dead & damned (unresponsive to him, opposed to him, under his rightful judgment) to being raised & ruling (alive to God, and in a place of authority & privilege, alongside Christ). Crave your prayers.

Extremely made-over

Orright, might as well explain what happened last weekend. The photos are hitting facebook already.
As I mentioned previously, last week I was at our SBM weekend away. I said I was gonna be a walking parable.
Time to explain.
The topic was "extreme makeover". You all know I'm a dag. So a one of the SBM girls took me shopping a couple of weeks ago and got me a whole new outfit. And on the weekend away we unveiled the new, extremely made-over Kamal. Or, to be precise - da K-BOMB (*Westminsta*)...!
Want more? Look on facebook...

... and Presbyterian College mission

... and straight afer the SBM weekend away (see previous blog entry), I'm off on the Presbyterian College mission. The Presbyterian churches of Moss Vale, Mittagong and Bowral are combining to host us as we evangelise the area. We'll be there from 6-13 April. We're doing a lot of school ministry, visiting a couple of Bible study groups, and hosting a women's lunch and men's dinner. My biggest gig is to preach at Moss Vale Presy at their 9:30am service on the final Sunday. I value your prayers! Can't guarantee blogs of how it's going - depends on whether I can access the 'net - but shall tell all when I return to Sydney.

See ya'll then.

SBM Weekend away

This weekend (4-6 April) I'm at the SBM Weekend away. SBM (Subcontinental Bible Ministry) is the inter-church Bible study group I'm involved in. About 40 young Indians & Sri Lankans from various churches around Sydney gather on Thurs nights for Bible study, prayer & fellowship. And this weekend we're going on a weekend away, to look at the topic of "Extreme Makeover: The Difference Jesus Makes".

I'm not doing all the talks - for a change :) We have three different speakers: Sonny Singh, Isaac Kuruvilla & myself. Sonny's training for ministry with the student Christian group at Macquarie Uni. He'll be looking at why we need an extreme makeover. Isaac's one of the SBM leadership team. He'll be showing us how Jesus gives us that extreme makeover. And I'll be talking about living an extremely made-over life.

Incidentally - when I deliver my talk - living an extremely made-over life - I'm gonna be a walking parable. What do I mean? You'll have to wait & see...

Or you could come on the weekend - we've got the space - any last-minute attendees...?

P. T. Forsyth on Mission and Presbyterianism

Here's a couple more quotable quotes from P. T. Forsyth.
On Church and Mission:

[T]he minister’s effect upon missions will depend in the long run upon the kind of Gospel he preaches – not to his own people only, but, as the trustee and representative of his Church, to his age. After all it is not the missionaries, nor the ministers, nor the people that are to convert the world. It is the Gospel, and our certainty of it.

Revelation Old and New:53.

On Presbyterianism:

It was Calvinism alone, or that side of the Reformation, that mostly made the Puritans. And the unalloyed outcome of such Puritanism was Presbyterianism.

Faith, Freedom and the Future: 46-47

A Tale of Two Missions

We’re used to thinking of the Great Commission as the beginning of the international Christian mission. And it is.
But in context, there’s actually two missions. Each bent on contradicting the other, and winning people from the other mission to their own.

Matt 28:11:
While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened.

The women and the guards scurry away from the tomb at the same time. The soldiers meet with the chief priests. The women meet with the disciples.
The chief priests then set about denying the resurrection.

Matt 28:12-14:
12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13 telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ 14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.”

The disciples meet with Jesus, who commissions them to proclaim the implications of the resurrection.

Matt 28: 18-20:
18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Two different missions. One built on bribery and the irrational denial of the facts. Note that the chief priests & elders can’t deny the reality of the empty tomb. All they can do is cast aspersions on how it came to be empty. The other built not merely on the proclamation of the fact – the bare fact of an empty tomb won’t covert anyone – but on the explanation of the implications of the fact. The risen Christ is Lord of all, and calls everyone to follow him, as he leads us to the Triune God.
We’ve just been through Easter. Have you noticed how at Easter & Christmas time, the media feels the urge to broadcast programs that contradict the message of those two days? Interesting, isn’t it. Seems to be two different missions, each trying to convince the other.
But never mind those two days. Just mentioning Christ in conversation tends to invite a storm of mockery. I remember sitting with a group of friends – who knew I was a Christian – and somehow the conversation turned to Christ. One of the guys said “yeah but the Bible’s full of mistakes and contradictions”. Everyone nodded sagely. And the conversation moved on. Without a chance for discussion. I didn’t have a chance to even say “I’ve got a Bible in my room upstairs – could you show me one of those mistakes or contradictions, please?”
Funny, isn’t it. I’m trying to explain the implications of Christ’s death & resurrection. But someone else denies it – unreasonably, irrationally, without argument.
You’d think there were two different missions.