pursuing faithfulness to the Word of God and fullness of the Spirit of God
Archive for March, 2008
The Gospel-Driven Church
Mar 26th
Just a quick post to say that I’ve added Jared Wilson’s blog “The Gospel-Driven Church” to my list of recommended blogs. I’ve been following it for a year, and he consistently puts out some great stuff. His influences range from John Piper to Mark Driscoll to N T Wright to Dallas Willard. You can also listen to the sermons he preaches at “Element“, a teaching and worship ministry for young adults.
If you’re not already subscribed to his blog, you should do so now.
I Do Not Know Rob Bell
Mar 21st
As part of my research for the ecclesiology course I have been teaching, I have been trying to listen to some sermons by those involved in the "emerging church". In particular, I have subscribed to the weekly sermon feed from Mars Hill Bible Church, where Rob Bell’s sermons can be heard (not to be confused with Mars Hill Church in Seattle where Mark Driscoll is the pastor, and whose sermons are also on my subscription list).
I have been hoping to catch Rob Bell explaining clearly what he believes "the gospel" is, and what it means to become a Christian, yet despite listening for several months I am still waiting. With time running out before I do my talk on the emerging church, I fear I will not manage to get an authoritative quote. If you know of one, perhaps from one of his books, do let me know.
Anyway, the sermon of his I listened to today was entitled "I Do Not Know", and was the latest in a series of sermons on Philippians. One of the good things about Rob Bell, unlike in many evangelical and emerging churches, is that he can often be found doing an expository series working his way through a section or book of the Bible.
His sermon title comes from chapter 1:22, where Paul says
If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labour for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know!
From this, he draws out some points about the real pressure that Paul was under, so much so that at one point he confessed to being at the point of giving up (2 Cor 1:8). He talks about the need to admit to our doubts and struggles.
Of course, this is a recurring emphasis in the emerging church – the need for openness about the issues and battles we are facing, rather than keeping up appearances and pretending never to struggle with doubt or sin.
And what Rob Bell goes on to say about the need to "doubt your doubts" rather than just giving in to them without challenging them is excellent. However, I did think it slightly revealing that while preaching a whole sermon entitled "I do not know", he somehow managed to avoid telling the congregation that merely three verses later, Paul says
Convinced of this, I know that I will remain…
So while we should not minimise the reality of his doubts and struggles, the fact is that Paul moved past them, and arrived at a place of real certainty. It is this type of certainty that borders on being a sin in the minds of some emerging thinkers. And yet it characterises all the New Testament writers.
In what was on the whole a good sermon, Rob Bell concluded in what I thought was a disappointing manner. If you have doubts about the existence of God or the resurrection, the answer is just to do good deeds of kindness, and in so doing you become "the resurrection" or "divine" to those people around you. At this point, he was repeatedly asking his audience, "are we tracking?". No, I wasn’t tracking.
Why not? Well simply, its back to what Rob thinks the gospel is. I honestly don’t know what he believes. Sometimes he hints that he is very clear on the message of salvation by grace alone, and then out pop these statements that sound very much as though he considers beliefs irrelevant so long as you are doing good deeds. Which may be a popular sentiment, but its not the gospel.
Ecclesiology Course
Mar 21st
Things have been a bit quiet on this blog at the moment, mainly due to a Saturday Morning Theology course I am running at the moment, on the subject of Ecclesiology – the doctrine of the church. If you are interested in seeing our notes and PowerPoint presentations, have a look here. Unfortunately, we have not been able to record any of the sessions so far.
Marks of the Church
Mar 1st
As some of you know, I have recently started running a Saturday morning theology course at my church, which will run for five sessions over the next few months. We’ve had the first already, and I am currently working on my talk for the next session.
We will be looking at the "Marks of the Church". The way I am planning to tackle it is to start off by looking at some important historical formulations of what the marks of a true church are. The two main ones I have come up with are:
1. The Nicene Creed
The Nicene creed simply states "We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church". These four points or marks of the church seem to be the main focus of Roman Catholic attempts to define the church. They emphasise its oneness, so that churches not part of Roman Catholicism are not considered true churches. Also under the term "apostolic" they include the concept of apostolic succession as well as apostolic doctrine. So while the Nicene creed is an "ecumenical creed" in that Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant Christians will all assent to it, their interpretations of this statement can vary.
2. The Reformers
When I looked through Calvin’s Institutes to see what he said about the church, I was surprised by the simplicity of his answer. He simply defined the marks of a true church as right preaching of the word and right administration of the sacraments. Having spoken to various other people, it has become clear that the reformers did in fact have more to say on the nature of the church than just those two things (e.g. worship, biblical discipline/order, compassionate ministry of deacons, mission etc), but still I find it interesting that those two are picked out as the key marks. The high place of the "sacraments" in their ecclesiology is not matched by most of the modern books on church I have read.
Modern Marks of the Church
Most modern discussions of the marks of the church seem to be more interested in answering the question "what is a healthy church", than "what is a true church". I guess we all take it for granted that our church is indeed a true church.
I have some notes gathered from various sources on what modern church leaders have identified as the marks of the church, but I thought perhaps that some of my blog readers might like to suggest some answers.
If you could list up to five marks of the church, what would they be?
Feel free to give your own answer, or suggest an answer representative of different groups of churches (e.g. charismatic, emerging, reformed, mainline protestant etc).