grace is crazy.
i’ve been reading the book preaching and preachers by dr. d. martyn lloyd-jones (which, if you are a preacher, you would greatly benefit from reading).
the following is a story about charles spurgeon that i found inspiring.
“there is another very good story which i repeat for the comfort of any preacher in need, or any man in a state of desperation – lay preachers particularly. it is another story about spurgeon who, as is known, was given to fits of depression. he suffered from gout, and that condition is often accompanied by an element of depression. during one of these attacks spurgeon was so depressed that he felt he could not preach, indeed that he was not fit to preach. so he refused to preach in the tabernacle the following sunday and went off to the country to his old home in essex. on the sunday morning he slipped into a seat at the back of the little chapel where he had attended as a boy. a lay-preacher was preaching that morning, and the poor man proceeded to preach one of mr. spurgeon’s printed sermons. the moment the good man had finished spurgeon rushed on to him with tears streaming down his face, and thanked him profusely. the poor man said, ‘mr. spurgeon i don’t know how to face you, i have just been preaching one of your sermons.’ ‘i don’t care whose sermon it is,’ said spurgeon, ‘all i know is that your preaching this morning has convinced me that i am a child of God, that i am saved by grace, that all my sins are forgiven, that i am called to the ministry, and i am ready to go back to preach again.'”
crazy.
mark
Filed under: books, reading | Leave a Comment
“as explained in the previous book, it is by the faith in the Gospel that Christ becomes ours and we are made partakers of the salvation and eternal blessedness brought by him. since, however, in our ignorance and sloth (to which i add fickleness of disposition) we need outward helps to beget and increase faith within us, and advance it to its goal, God has also added these aids that he may provide for our weakness. and in order that the preaching of the Gospel might flourish, he deposited this treasure in the church. he instituted “pastors and teachers” (Eph. 4:11) through whose lips he might teach his own; he furnished them with authority; finally, he omitted nothing that might make for holy agreement of faith and for right order. first of all, he instituted sacraments, which we who have experienced them feel to be highly useful aids to foster and strengthen faith. shut up as we are in the prison house of our flesh, we have not yet attained angelic rank. God therefore, in his wonderful providence accommodating himself to our capacity, has prescribed a way for us, though still far off, to draw near to him.”
– john calvin, institutes of the Christian religion
Filed under: books, reading | Leave a Comment
on education and ministry.
this is the second question that i was asked to answer for my modern and contemporary Christian history discussion board:
“in the wake of the liberal/fundamentalist tensions that began after the civil war and continued until the 1920s, the older divinity schools such as harvard and yale, and even princeton theological seminary, were being lost to liberalism. a new network of conservative educational institutions arose beginning with the bible institute movement whose emphasis was more theological and ministry-oriented than in the arts and sciences. reflect on the relationship between faith and education. do you think higher education is detrimental to your faith? reflect on the spiritual and theological challenges faced by the Christian student who is seeking a higher education.”
my response:
“i love education. the theological training that i have received has impacted my spirituality greatly. i believe that the more you learn about God and Jesus (theological training) the more you fall in love with Him and are better able to minister in the church and bring people to know Him. there is also no substitute for good, faithful, biblical, accurate teaching and preaching. such means are the most beneficial for Christians attending church as well as for people that Jesus has not yet saved. there is no substitute.
that being said, there is a dangerous overcompensation that can come from isolated theological training. such training can separate the minister from those he should be reaching out to. he can end up speaking in a language that they don’t understand (and i don’t just mean greek and hebrew). it’s possible to get caught up in the affairs of academia and to lose sight of those perishing on the margins of society with needles in their arms and knives at their throats.
higher education needs to be done in closer association with the local church. it is extremely valuable for pastors and elders and deacons and anyone else in authority in Christian ministry to participate in higher education. it will help them to know God better and to teach more accurately about Him. this will help the people to know God for who He really is. it will enable them to transmit what they have learned to their congreagations so that the laity is able to devote their energies to studying more about theology on their own. being more closely connected to with the local church helps to keep the student from becoming isolated and keeps him a part of the work God is doing in people’s lives. he can then see the relationship between the participle and the drug addict, the history books and the single mom.
this connection to the local church could look like elders and pastors being able to take cheaper or even free classes at seminary. there could be extended and specialized programs of study by which a pastor can acquire a master’s degree or even a doctorate while still devoting sufficient time to his congreation. these programs may take more time in order to meet the educational standards of the respective institutions, but they offer a way for the church and higher ed. to be more closely connected.”
thoughts?
mark
Filed under: meaningless jabber, school | 1 Comment
on protestants to catholics
i was asked to provide an answer to the following question in my modern and contemporary Christian history class:
“one of the hallmarks of the second vatican council of the catholic church was its change in attitude towards Protestans. after the council, catholics no longer considered Protestants as heretics but rather “separated brethren.” comment on how evangelicals should respond. should evangelicals be as conciliatory towards catholics? to what extent should we be concerned and work for Christian unity?”
this was my response:
I think that the attitude of Catholics to Protestants at the Second Vatican Council is a great step. It is absolutely important that there is mutual respect between people who hold to the Christian faith. Among Protestants there is much diversity of opinion on doctrinal issues hence, a large number of different denominations. This shows that there are a variety of interpretations that can be held by people who still glorify God and will spend eternity with us enjoying Him forever. Because of this insight there are two things that must be clarified: issues that are to be held in a closed hand and issues that are to be held in an open hand.
Closed handed issues are those that are central to Christianity that there can be no compromise on. Open handed issues are those doctrinal issues that are debatable and by which we stand but are not issues to die over. Closed handed issues are things like Scripture, God (Trinity), humanity’s sinful nature, salvation by faith in Jesus Christ, and heaven and hell. On these Christianity stands. God gave His word (Scripture) and by that word we understand the nature of God, He is holy. In light of God’s holiness we see humanity’s unholiness and how we deserve punishment. In light of our sinfulness we see the grace of God in Christ who saves us not by our own merit but by His choice to eternal joy in heaven with Him. Those are to be held in a closed hand. Those I will die by.
Open handed issues divide us into denominations. The eschatological doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture is an issue to be held in an open hand. Because someone may not see this in Scripture does not mean that they should be cast out of the faith. It is not an issue of salvation. The distinctive doctrine of Initial Physical Evidence of Spirit Baptism (speaking in tongues) that defines the Assemblies of God to which I belong is an issue that I hold in an open hand. I believe it and I defend it but if someone does not I can respect them and love them as I expect I will still see them in heaven with Jesus.
How do we respond to challenges in open handed issues? With grace. I see the Catholic church to be centered on Jesus. I do not believe that it gives the best opportunity for people to come to faith in Christ, but it still tries to. There are people in the Catholic church who love Jesus and want to see him glorified in the lives of people and the church. I respect these people and trust that I will worship Jesus beside them in heaven one day.
On the other hand, there are difficult issues to reconcile because Catholics differ, to a certain degree, on what are closed handed issues. I hold to inspired Scriptures, but to that the Catholics add several passages that they call deuterocanonical (belonging to the second canon). This is a challenge to a closed handed issue. We cannot waver on our Scriptures. We can respect the writings and look to them for insight but we do not hold to them as inspired the way we hold to our Bible. The Bible is different. This is a challenge.
I think that there can be mutual respect and even cooperation between Protestants and Catholics. At the same time, there must be an effort made to hold to the things that distinguish us from them. This is different from the relationship between other Protestants as long as there is not a challenge to topics like Scripture, God, Christ and sin.
Mark Santistevan
Filed under: meaningless jabber, school | 4 Comments
senior research project outline.
the first draft of the outline for my senior research project. it is as incomplete as i could possibly make it. look like something you’d be interested in reading?
I. church
a. what is the church?
i. what constitutes the church?
1. the Gospel
2. people – community
3. Gospel-driven community
ii. what are the necessary elements of a church
1. explicit Gospel
2. the scriptures – preaching
3. community
a. large gatherings
b. small gatherings
4. missional
a. ministry in culture
b. church planting
i. the larger focus of this Senior Research Project
ii. “why” church planting?
5. world missions
a. world missions as distinct from “missional”
b. world missions as “unreached peoples”
iii. what are the unnecessary elements of a church?
1. something
2. something else
II. church planting (already covered the “why?” now to cover the “how?”)
a. models of church planting
i. launch model – nelson searcy
1. driven by systems
2. goal: large group, large service
3. primarily focused on pragmatics
ii. total church model – tim chester, steve timmis
1. Gospel driven
2. community driven
3. goal: faithful communities, more likely small
4. primarily focused on the Gospel to the marginalized
iii. other models…
III. church planting in West Philadelphia (boot camp material)
a. what does God want to do?
b. who am i?
c. what am i sent to do?
d. who will do it with me?
e. how will we do it?
f. how will we evaluate our progress?
what do you think?
mark
Filed under: books, school | 4 Comments
on young leaders.
— the following is a post that i wrote for my friend who is ben davis. last week was his infamous #leadershipweek where he had numerous leaders from different places author posts that he put up on his blog. you can check them out if you like. this was my small contribution. —
ben asked me to address the topic of what leadership in the church will be like when we (i am 21 so “we” are young leaders/pastors/whoevers) have become the old guys.
this is impossible to answer so instead i will give something that is more of what i “hope” it will be and what i pray it will be. things i want to address are problems i see in young leaders as well as particular advantages that they have. after that i hope to give ways that we can change the problems and capitalize on the advantages in order to provide the best opportunity for those who follow.
problems
1) young leaders can be rebellious. i think this is probably the most common problem and the one that most others flow from. we want to do things differently than the way they were done for us. it’s not even that we are actually thinking of “the best way” to do things as much as it is any way that’s different. sometimes we even want it to succeed just so we can shove it in our old leaders faces and say “see! i was right!” this is rebellion. rebellion is sin. sin is bad.
2) being young! i look back on who i was one year ago and sometimes i want to puke. wisdom comes with age. not all the time (there are some old people that are dumb), but it is a simple fact that people learn as the grow. if you are going in a maturing direction you will become more wise. we are not there yet. we are not yet as wise as we will be. we are still rebellious. we still have many dumb decisions to make that will make us become wiser.
3) ingratitude. very often young people are not grateful. we are proud and arrogant. we do not honor the people who have sacrificed for us. we think we are the stuff.
advantages
1) old people. there are people who have been there, they know there stuff and we can learn from them. there are mistakes before us that we can avoid thanks to them. there are also great ideas that we can use from them to do things better right away.
2) being freakin’ young! with this youth comes, at least for me, a drive that is different from older people. i’m still planning on changing the world. sometimes i don’t know what to do with the amount of ideas i have and i think i’ve probably forgotten some of my best ones because i didn’t write them down. there is a creativity that comes with being young. there is an ability to identify with a generation that needs to be reached for Jesus. i could go on.
i’m sure there is a lot more to all of that but those are just the pieces that i perceive to be the biggest. i think that capitalizing on the advantages and shutting down the problems go hand-in-hand.
the key for young leaders is humility. we need to chill. we need to slow down on our love-affair with rebellion and sit at the feet of our Savior. Jesus doesn’t give us room to be proud. we suck. that’s why he came. Jesus saved us and now is using us to do that same thing for other people so that he will look more awesome. it doesn’t get much more humbling than that. to borrow a phrase from my generation, we are not the s***. more accurately, we are s*** that Jesus changed and made new to the praise of his glorious grace.
we need to be grateful for and seek the wisdom of our elders. one time, they were young (believe it or not). there was a day when those guys were 21 like me. they made a lot of dumb decisions that they can keep me from making if i am smart enough to ask and listen. a big step towards humility is gratitude. take some time to thank the old people who have invested in your life. they may be parents, pastors, friends, whoever. it will go a long way in showing you your inadequacy.
finally we need to rely on Jesus. that’s what holds all this together. that’s what keeps us humble. this goes for everyone, old leaders, young leaders, people who are not leaders… Jesus is everything and it needs to stay that way. he needs to be our source of inspiration – not rebellion. he needs to be our source for wisdom – not our youth. he needs to be the source of our humility – not ingratitude. he is all of those things. more importantly, he is also God. and we need to not forget that. Jesus is God. he rules.
i hope that the leaders that come after us will be able to look at us and see a humble group of old men. that they will approach me with humility and that i will treat them with respect. i hope that i can show them the areas where i have failed so they won’t make the same mistakes. i hope that i can show them the awesome stuff i’ve done so they can do things that are almost as cool. what will it look like? God only knows. what do i hope it looks like? i hope it focuses on Jesus. because that’s all that will matter.
mark.
Filed under: friends, meaningless jabber, the blogroll | Leave a Comment
elder meetings that work
from the pure church blog:
1. plan on meeting together more often and for a longer period of time.
2. challenge each other spiritually.
3. discuss the state of the flock.
4. have an agenda.
5. actually pray for individuals and issues being faced.
6. study together toward a unified position on difficult issues.
7. make these meetings non-optional.
sweet business.
mark.
Filed under: reading | Leave a Comment
from the introduction to total church (which you should purchase and read. period.):
“being both Gospel-centered and community-centered might mean…
– seeing church as an identity instead of a responsibility to be juggled alongside other commitments.
– celebrating ordinary life as the context in which the word of God is proclaimed with “God-talk” as a normal feature of everyday conversation.
– running fewer evangelistic events, youth clubs, and social projects and spending more time sharing our lives with unbelievers.
– starting new congregations instead of growing existing ones.
– preparing Bible talks with other people instead of just studying alone at a desk.
– adopting a 24-7 approach to mission and pastoral care instead of starting ministry programs.
– switching the emphasis from Bible teaching to Bible learning and action.
– spending more time with people on the margins of society.
– learning to disciple one another – and to be discipled – day by day.
– having churches that are messy instead of churches that pretend.”
sweet. get the book. read it. do it.
mark.
Filed under: books, reading | 1 Comment
i read this post and thought it was really good. it reviewed the movie briefly, remembered the book and why it was so awesome, gave great insight into the mindset of children and why this story would be great to them and why the movie fell short, and what it means for Christians. this post from the gospel coalition was fantastically insightful. read it.
mark
Filed under: reading | Leave a Comment
for my traditions of spirituality class i was assigned to read an essay called “toasters and God” and write a short reflection on it. i found this exercise to be particularly interesting and decided to post my response on here. because i can’t post the entire essay on here (it’s rather lengthy, you wouldn’t read it) i will briefly explain what it said:
the purpose of the essay is to understand how to select what religion or worldview to have. which one is TRUE and how do you figure that out.
there are two popular theories of discovering truth (discovering truth – basic definition for epistemology). they are the “foundational theory of truth” and the “coherence theory of truth.” in the beginning of the essay, the author ruled out the foundational theory of truth because it is too difficult to apply to choosing a religion. that theory must begin with a CERTAIN BASIS and then build a worldview from there. the reason it doesn’t work is that it requires leaps of logic and rather difficult presuppositions that will not be shared by everyone. it’s more complicated than that, but that’s the basics of the basics.
the coherence theory of truth is what we use when we select which toaster to buy. we compare prices, we look at quality, we check to see how long it will last, etc. when we find the toaster that MAKES THE MOST SENSE we purchase it. in the essay this approach is applied to religions. how does one discern which religion is true? by analyzing them. comparing them. seeing which one is most consistent. the analogy isn’t perfect, you SHOULDN’T select a religion because of how it will work for you. the point is to logically and honestly analyze them to see which one is the most consistent and then selecting the one that MAKES THE MOST SENSE.
i liked this article a lot. it helped me to understand some basic epistemology and really made sense as far as that goes. on the other hand, i don’t think this works for Christianity. my response was the following:
“i think the greatest weakness of this line of thought is brought up by the author at the conclusion. at a certain point, even the coherence theory of truth is incapable of proving anything and ultimately, if relied on too heavily, makes for a weak foundation. perhaps that sounds contradictory to the purpose of the article which is to help the reader to build a stronger foundation for their belief, but i think it is true. data and information will continue to change as long as people are around. on the other hand, hopefully, our Scriptures will remain the same as they have been. as information continues to to develop (and it will never stop), one who relies on the coherence theory of truth must be open to the idea that they may be proven wrong. while this may seen as a humble approach, when dealing with things like the Son of God becoming a man and dying for sins to have a relationship with people devoted to this theory of truth, it seems wholly inadequate and disrespectful. i do not choose Jesus because he makes the most sense consistently and if he stops (based on data that is not seeking to make sense of him) then i’ll drop him. i choose Jesus because he chose me. if he is willing to give his life for me, i am going to give my life to him. while i CAN use this theory to give myself a stronger foundation and learn better apologetics from it, it CANNOT be the basis for my relationship with God. as you say, i will take the kierkegaardian “leap of faith” and trust that the God who became a man will be there when i break my neck.”
thoughts?
mark
Filed under: reading, school | 3 Comments
-ms- 