Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God by J.I. Packer

Recently republished as part of the ‘IVP Classics’ series, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God by J.I. Packer remains as relevant today as when first published in 1961. Actually that statement is kind of misleading as I wasn’t born until 1985. But assuming it was relevant when first published, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God* remains relevant today.

Phillip Jensen regularly describes books from J.I. Packer as “Packer by name, Packer by nature” and it’s true of this particular volume as well. There is plenty of content, and yet seeing as there is a single question being addressed the new edition comes in at around 130 pages and is easily digestible in a couple of hours.

The question in question is pretty much contained within the title. If God is sovereign and in control and will save whom he has predestined to save, then why would we bother evangelising? It’s a common question, and the answer is both satisfying and unsatisfying at the same time.

I had really high expectations for this book, and to be brutally honest I was a bit disappointed. Not in the sense of the book being of poor quality (e.g. the Matrix sequels type disappointment) but more of a general dissatisfaction that my ideals were not met (e.g. the feeling six months after your wedding when you realise that getting married didn’t solve all your problems.) That is, the quality was great just not what I expected and hoped for. It all sounds a bit glass half empty at the moment, but let me spoil the end of the review now; you should definitely read this book! But Evangelism was disappointing because it was really so biblical. I had particular questions that I was expecting a magic bullet answer to. I wanted the tensions that existed in my head regarding God’s sovereignty and my evangelistic effort to be clearly dealt with. I wanted Packer to succinctly draw all my queries together into a combined simple proposition, that answered all my questions and then placed it in a tight box, tied it up with a nice little bow, that I could sit on the shelf to admire. The answer as it turns out wasn’t that succinct, and it wasn’t that simple. But it was biblical.

We cannot know all of God’s ways and so we must assume that within our understanding of God there will be areas of mystery. This is especially true when it comes to God’s sovereign will and our work on earth. Packer explains clearly that we mustn’t place distinctions where the Bible does not. When we come across what we assume to be a contradiction, namely that 1. God will save whomever he chooses and 2. We are called to evangelise people in order for them to be saved, rather than a contradiction between these statements we are left with an antinomy; a seeming contradiction between two conclusions which both seem logical.

As we humbly submit to scripture, we must acknowledge that there are areas of our understanding that will be insufficient. We can’t fit everything into a nice little box. This was a disappointing discovery.

Yet in the next breath I found Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God to be inherently satisfying. The truths contained here are profound, and yet made simple. This is evident even from the introductory words, which calmly argue that if you pray at all, then you believe God is sovereign (even if you like to argue with Calvinists in the debating chamber). It may come as a shock to you to find that Packer is so persuasive that even the fiercest Arminian would no doubt be agreeing that because they pray they really are Calvinist (though Packer is careful to avoid these terms as much as possible.)

Packer argues well. And if he wasn’t right, this could be a real problem. The great strength of this style is the end result, as the truths of Scripture are put forward you are convinced by the sheer reasonableness of the argument. It really is so simple. Divine sovereignty and human responsibility are not enemies but friends. You have no need to reconcile them because you can’t reconcile friends. The argument of the book is unveiled in a logical manner, with the conclusion that far from divine sovereignty excluding the need for evangelism it is this sovereignty which drives it.

As a general rule, I dislike it when people start off a book or sermon by telling me what it is not. Maybe this is simply because Don Carson does this all the time, and by about the fifth description of what “this is not…” I’m just thinking to myself, “Come on Don, I know this keeps your academic conscience clear but no one is actually worried about point six through 13 of what this is not, except yourself.” Though Evangelism begins with a few this-is-nots, Packer clears his academic conscience with brevity before launching into what it actually is. And like the Don, what-it-is is pure gold.

One of the more unintended outcomes of reading this book for me has been the manner in which it addresses evangelism. I know it shouldn’t surprise me considering the title, but Packer provides the fundamental framework for analysing the “success” of all evangelistic endeavour. Included in this is consistent analysis of current evangelistic frameworks which the modern reader soon realises are still current today.

Another benefit I found from reading this book has been the way it has again reframed my attitude to prayer. At a number of points as attention is drawn to the theological understanding required for this topic, Packer points out things we should be praying for. The language of “should” is often dangerous, and yet the only conclusion I could draw when faced with the theology and argument is that I really should be praying for those specific things. So I did. This book helped me to pray.

Unlike Packer’s most famous book Knowing God, which began life as a series of journal articles, Evangelism started life as a series of sermons. This is evident throughout as the readability, theology, application and illustration are perfectly balanced. But don’t be fooled, for most average Joe’s out there Packer remains a +2kg author (for the dictionary you need to carry around with the book). So be prepared to still need to look up the occasional word.

In summary, if you’re looking for easy answers to the relationship between God’s sovereignty and human responsibility, perhaps you’d be better off thinking about the word TULIP. No not as an acronym for the five points of Calvinism, just the flowers. This is to distract you from thinking about anything meaningful because were you to engage your brain by thinking about the five points, you’d realise there are no easy answers. If instead you want an easy to read treatise on this issue which seeks to clarify what the Bible teaches in a brief and accessible manner, then Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God is for you.

I give this book 4.5 out of 5 (points of Calvinism)

*I have chosen to abbreviate the title to Evangelism rather than the more obvious but kind of gross sounding EatSoG.

Getting Things Done by David Allen

Subtitled 'The Art of Stress-free Productivity', Getting Things Done* by David Allen came very highly recommended to me by a number of people in ministry. My introduction to this productivity program was from Bathgates.net who as introduction to his overview stated;

According to Luke, (Getting Things Done) was invented by Jesus and was kept secretly in the Vatican archives until a man named David Allen discovered it and published it in his book... I'm pretty sure David Allen invented it though.

The fact this book was joyfully purchased for me by my wife may give some indication as to my current level of organisation and productivity. There's no doubt I have improved since my Year 12 parent-teacher interview at Maclean High School in 2002, when my Maths teacher Mr Muir eloquently observed to my mother, "Izaac works well under pressure. When he's not under pressure, he doesn't work." My productivity has definitely been on a gentle upward curve since. I purchased my first real diary in 2003. Unfortunately I didn't start using a diary until 2008 (a current diary, not the one from 2003). I'm not what you would call lazy but perhaps "inefficient" and "sporadic" would be more accurate descriptors. Getting Things Done (helpfully abbreviated to GTD) is a complete system of organisation that is exhaustive and profound and if it works, has great potential to affect my general organisation exponentially.

The GTD system is driven by a number of principles, none of which are that revolutionary. Yet somehow as each of these basics work together the end result is greater than the sum of its parts, creating a relatively unique concept of personal organisation.

I'm a lists man. I have them everywhere. My list obsession goes far beyond the usual shopping variety and covers a multitude of areas, assignments, responsibilities, dates, details, errands. You name it, I've got it on a bit of paper, or more accurately a few pieces of paper somewhere. My current "system" means that I don't really know where everything is. I usually have an idea of the general area or pile, but it's only a vague sense which occasionally turns out to be nothing more than indigestion. Though not everything is in lists. This unreliable 'system' means I'm also carrying lots of information around in my head. A well utilised diary has meant this has decreased but it isn't uncommon for me to lay in bed at night trying to force myself to remember all the things I need to remember for the next few days. It's not always practical to get up and write these thoughts down on another list. They might get typed into my phone, but there's no guarantee they'll be seen again. I even sometimes resort to trying to create an acronym with all the things I need to do, so that hopefully I remember just the single word which in turn will trigger the items to be done (for example Tax, Optus bill, Apple juice on shopping list, Dave to call - leaving me with TOAD). Suffice to say, my current system could use a little polishing.

By far the biggest driving principle behind GTD is getting everything out of your head into a trusted system. On one level it's quite simple. Everything you carry around in your head or that you store in a variety of locations where you need to remember where it's stored, is an open loop. You've got to constantly try and keep track of this information and the result is it fills up the RAM in your mind and causes stress. Even if this stress isn't felt, your mind is still always working away to make sure you don't lose something you need to. Because the content is not in a trusted system, you are more likely to hold on to more information. The goal of the GTD is to capture everything that's on your mind; goals, plans, dreams, projects, errands, details - absolutely everything. And it's not just getting it out, but storing it in a location where you can trust yourself to look at it and review and know you'll be able to retrieve it at the appropriate time WITHOUT having to remember it. Part of having a trusted system is being able to constantly input more content out of your head and into the system at all times. These are all processed through an "in-box" which is aimed to be emptied every day.

The next biggest principle is that of processing. Once the information is captured and been placed into a trusted system, you must know what to do with it. Each of the inputs that requires more than one action is called a 'project' (vertical axis). One of the biggest roadblocks to effectiveness is knowing what to do next at any point in time with each project. Consequently, every project is processed after being captured to find the next action. What stops you from "Getting car registered"? The next action isn't "get registered" but something like "call mechanic" or "search internet for cheapest insurance". Once all of these next actions are decided upon they are accumulated in lists with similar actions so that you end up with a number of contexts with related activities (horizontal axis). When you have a spare 5 minutes while on hold on the phone, you could look at your @Internet list and quickly knock off a few actions.

As I type more and more I realise how little I am doing justice to the content of the book and so I'll stop my explanation there. However "capturing" and "processing" are two of the big ideas to getting you "doing". Others have summarised GTD more succinctly and betterer. For a helpful overview of the whole system I would recommend you check out bathgates.net.

At the moment, I'm not quite ready to convince you to submit to the saviour that is GTD. The best recommendation on systems of organisation come from converts who have successfully implemented the program. I am not yet converted to Getting Things Done simply because I'm yet to attempt to put it into practise. At this time all my stuff is currently in boxes as I'm in the process of moving house. I've just read the theory. But the potential is enormous. Unfortunately, organisation is no quick fix, and as GTD aims to be exhaustive in its content, the book suggests it takes upwards of 20 hours work (2 days) to fully get the program started. But I think it will work, so it's scheduled in. No one is more excited than Sarah at the prospect of the piles of paperwork that have been gradually moved about our house since we got married 4 years ago finally being both useful and eradicated.

As a follower of Jesus, these types of self-help books can be both helpful and unhelpful. For the most part they are simply helpful. They fall into the category of wisdom. We should always seek to be effective in how we do what we do, and the way we spend our time. What these programs fail to do is ensure our priorities are correct; that what we are spending our time doing is a good use of our time. The other potential problem is that of workaholism. Some people like me are helped greatly by self-help books to work smarter, not harder. But it would be an awful shame if the end result was to cause more work to fall on an already overworked person. Perhaps my greatest concern as I get this part of my life in order is that while the categories are not mutually exclusive, being organised and effective can be a sure fire way to trust God less.


*Earlier additions are sold under the title How to get things done.

Right Side Up by Paul Grimmond

"I refuse to buy any more books from Matthias Media" I complained to Anna, who was one of the trainee staff at uni and worked part-time in the Matthias office. "They're all the same" I snorted in the type of upturned lip sneer that could only possibly come from a male second year uni student. "What do you mean?" Anna replied. "Well, firstly they introduce the book by listing off the sort of questions you have about the particular topic of the book. The following eight chapters just retell the gospel. And then the final chapter informs you, that you were asking the wrong questions. Predictable."

As it turns out, Anna wore this comment with a badge of pride and swiftly recounted my "complaint" at the Matthias staff meeting that week.

Right Side Up by Paul Grimmond, one of the latest releases from Matthias could not have that claim leveled against it. Grimmo doesn't even bother with listing the types of questions you might be asking, and instead launches quickly and lengthily into a retelling of the gospel message. In fact he never really stops, as the unfolding message of biblical theology culminating in the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus is developed over the vast majority of chapters. The book is largely successful as it seeks to focus on what life should be like as a new Christian. This is achieved by using the big picture of the Bible as a launching pad into the big Christian doctrines and various aspects of righteous living.

Grimmo is a nice guy. He's kind of like the anti-Mark Driscoll. I mean, both men love Jesus and I'm sure if they were aware of each other would be supportive of the others ministry, but where Mark Driscoll is known for his bluntness and abrasiveness, Grimmo is the kind of guy who with both his preaching and writing almost reaches out to give you a warm hug. He takes you alongside and gently informs you where you are deficient in your thinking and ultimately points you to the solution in Jesus. He certainly doesn't hold back from the difficult truths of scripture, but rather than punching them out in a verbal assault instead seeks to calmly put forward the truth in as unoffensive a way as possible. It's good stuff. His tone, his words and his illustrations are very pastorally aware. Paul Grimmond is the kind of guy who I imagine would nurse a sick kitten back to health. This tone of the book which is reflective of its author I believe is one of its great strengths.

Grimmo's history as chaplain at the University of NSW is also evident in much of the content. Many of the chapters contain the executive summary of the many Mid Year Conference topics that Paul preached on during his time at UNSW. This includes the church, the Holy Spirit and the resurrection, each of which are examined in a brief form of systematic theology.

One interesting editorial decision was the lack of Bible references within the text. This is not to say the Bible is not central because the truth is that the study of the Bible is the driving force of the whole book. But a large chunk of scriptural explanation is given in unreferenced summary form. I would like to point out that this is not a criticism. Being familiar with Matthias resources means I am certain this was a deliberate choice as a result of the intended reader being the new Christian. There is enough Bible referenced and quoted to be certain where the authority is from, without being overrun with thousands of footnotes or bracketed verse references to distract from the reading. And I say thousands quite deliberately because it is clear were they all to be referenced the number of footnotes may well have reached this point. It is clear that Paul's summaries are extrememly thorough and absolutely bathed in scriptural reflection.

In his own words Paul "set out to write a book for new Christians, to explain what it means to be a Christian and what the lifelong adventure of following Jesus is like." Though the remainder of the blurb on the back cover suggests that the discovery during writing was that the seasoned saint needs to hear exactly the same thing, I would temper this statement with the disclaimer that this is true only in the very broad sense that we must never tire of hearing the gospel and the call each day to live with Jesus as Lord. The content of the book however is not necessarily of the greatest benefit to seasoned saints apart from this broad sense of practicality. There would perhaps be better books on the market to encourage older Christians.

My verdict on the book is that it is a great read. Paul has a friendly writing style which I look forward to digesting more of in the future. Theologically it is to the same high standard that we have come to expect from all Matthias releases. My only hesitation before a blanket recommendation is that I am concerned there may be just too much content for the new Christian taking their first few steps in walking in faith. However there is an inherent self-awareness of this potential within the book where Grimmo warns the reader they may need to re-read some chapters. At other times (with another warm hug) Grimmo ensures he stops to recap once a lot of content has been covered.

Right Side Up is a good read with sound theology and is well targeted towards its focus audience.

David Broughton Knox: An Enigmatic Life by Marcia Cameron

I'm not quite certain that I like reading biographies. They are a strange beast, because someone else is telling your story. It's really the question of when it comes to analysing a life, which viewpoint is the most accurate? Some would say the individuual who is being studied, as they were the only one present all the time. Though we know if we analyse ourselves that self-analysis is not always the most balanced. Therefore is a life best studied from the perspective of those closest to the person and events? Everyone has bias and just because you happen to get supposed balanced perspectives from a good ratio of critics and admirers there is no guarantee you will necessarily get the truth. Is it best then to attempt an independent analysis of the cold hard facts or the fruitfulness of the individuals efforts? Again, this approach is also lacking in that achievements rarely give a holistic view of a man. Biographies are a strange beast.

Subtitled "The Father of Contemporary Sydney Anglicanism", I have just finished reading Marcia Cameron's biography of D.Broughton Knox. Broughton Knox was principal of Moore Theological College for 26 years from 1959-1984. His impact in the Anglican Diocese of Sydney has been enormous. During his time at Moore College, Broughton helped educate over two-thirds of the total number of students since the College's inception. During his leadership over a thousand students had graduated from the college, most of whom took up positions within the diocese, the number of faculty had increased threefold, the academic standards raised, a 50% increase in student enrolments from the beginning of his tenure to the end, the expansion of the college library to today be the largest in Australia, and the purhcasing of many properties to house the increasing size of the college and incorporate married students. While no man is an island, Broughton Knox's impact has been dramatic. His life story based purely on achievement is enough to keep you entertained, and entertain it did.

Of added benefit is that next year my wife Sarah and I will begin studying at Moore College, and it is fascinating to know and understand more of the history. Having spent the last 7 years involved with Sydney Anglicans, it is quite astonishing to see how the people who have shaped me theologically fit into the story of the life of Broughton Knox, and at numerous times they are either mentioned by name or I can clearly locate some of their history within the book.

And yet as Marcia Cameron herself points out, one of the problems of a posthumous biography is that it does not allow the subject the right of reply. For Broughton Knox, holding a position as influential as principal of Moore, combined with some potentially alienating foibles meant that the potential for criticism was great. Throughout the book there is a continuous stream of criticism towards Knox. While this is both necessary and in probability largely true, I could not help but feel as I read through that particularly with some of the more critical comments, perhaps the end result was not a balanced view. There is no doubt we all have our faults and shortcomings. When analysing a life through biography it is important to include these failures to give an accurate view of a man. Yet my feeling was that much of the negative comment towards Knox was theological rather than personal. That is, really Broughton Knox is not the 'Father of Contemporary Sydney Anglicanism' but more accurately the 'Father of Contemporary Sydney Evangelicalism'. And being such a prominent conservative evangelical ensured there were many who disagreed with his theological position on a host of issues.

This is not to discount the personal disagreements and personality issues, or where Knox failed in his family or ministry roles, but the melding of the boundaries between philosophical differences and personality differences seems almost unfair. Much criticism comes from the view that Broughton was overly intellectual and not practical enough in theological education. Also that in many ways he was Christian first and Anglican second and this affected many of his decisions regarding the college. Similarly that he was a complementarian and held seemingly outdated views on divorce and remarriage. It appears many of the criticisms were at this theological/philosophical level, which then became attacks on the person.

Another difficulty of the posthumous biography is that of attributing motivation. How does the predisposition of one's father affect the son? Or how much can you make of the incidental situational context? For example it came as no surprise that Broughton Knox's view of women in ministry was attacked for being inconsistent in the later chapters when comments like this come from one of the chapters detailing the early years;

Another potential influence [of university] was the presence of women undergraduates in all his classes. In Latin there were 34, in Greek two, in English and history a minimum of 60 each year. Every year some women performed extremely well in their examinations. For instance, in Latin I, when Broughton gained a pass, one woman gained a High Distinction and two others gained Distinctions. He was competing with women on equal terms and they sometimes outclassed him. For one who set a high value upon intellect, he could not but recognise that women were not necessarily fitted only for domesticity.

Now it becomes clear later on that Broughton held a conservative view of male headship (shown in service not dominance) and female submission in the home as well as the church. The way this particular paragraph is written suggests that the base position from which Broughton came was that women were fitted only for domesticity and that he needed to broaden his mind. Now this may well be true, but it seems quite a strech to infer this from the fact three women beat him in Latin I at university.

All in all I enjoyed this book. I havn't read enough biographies to compare the writing with that of others, but one criticism I had is that my attention was assumed, not won. After a brief amusing anecdote, the earlier chapters read a bit more like an essay than a biography as the extended family history of the Knox-Young families are shared. There is a host of interesting stories here, but for the most part it's too dry and long for so early within the story. However what shines through the writing is the priorities that Broughton Knox had. He was a principled man who stood firm in those convictions. It seems this almost abject stubbornness could have proven problematic had it not been for one of these principles being that everything should be tested against the Bible for its truth to be accepted. I have been encouraged to read of the way God worked through this weak vessel to protect the gospel of the Lord Jesus and to train many of the proclaimers of that gospel. I am incredibly indebted to the faithfulness of Broughton Knox for the way he helped shape the men and women who have shaped me and my beliefs.

Twilight by Stephenie Meyer

I would try to laugh along. But I think people could tell I didn't really get it. Whenever the punchline was "Muggles" or "Hogwarts" or "Hedwig" I just didn't understand at all. I simply gave a polite smile and tried to avoid eye contact as the rest of the group guffawed. Thus was the life of a late Harry Potter adopter. It was an excruciating existence. I must admit, my ignorance was driven by stubbornness and pride. I remember saying to Nathan's Mum, "I just can't understand how a book that can be enjoyed by a 12 year old could possibly entertain me." How very wrong I was. Like most people, I eventually became hooked. I gobbled up the first 5 books in a matter of weeks. Finally I got the jokes.

And so, while again not a trendsetter I was hopeful that a book series as well received as Twilight by Stephenie Meyer would likewise hook me in. How very wrong I was. Okay, the storyline was fine. Vampires are fascinating. The idea of a vampire romance, while a bit freaky is an interesting concept. For me, my problem was with the writing. I don't know enough to criticise the writing from a technical standpoint - it was purely that Twilight was written in the first person. This is not a problem in itself - I loved Gilead by Marilynne Robinson for this very reason. It was the gag factor. For a number of years I have thought to myself, "I really don't want to know what's going on in the mind of 17 year old  girls." And after reading Twilight, this conviction has never been more certain. Get. Me. Out. Of. Here.

Here endeth my review.

My next late-comer book is Pride and Prejudice. On tape. I plan to listen to them during our long car trips this Christmas. Finally I won't be the one who doesn't get the jokes about Mr Darcy.

The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell

J.R.R. Tolkien in a letter to his son Christopher writes;

Sermons. They are bad, aren't they! Most of them from any point of view. The answer to the mystery is probably not simple... good (sermons) require some art, some virtue and some knowledge.

Sermons must be balanced in each of these three areas.

On the art of sermon writing, of late I have been incredibly influenced by the book I have recently finished called The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. Gladwell is a staff writer for The New Yorker and has written a number of other books (none of which I have read, in case Sarah is reading and thinking about Christmas presents).

Malcolm Gladwell is known for his tendency to combine seemingly disparate (social) research and combine the parts to form larger theories. The concept of The Tipping Point is the question - what makes a movement tip? What is that indefinable aspect of a product or mindset or fashion that inbues it in the consciousness of the masses, and takes off? What social aspects need to be at play for a trend to become an epidemic. And more, can the success of iPods for example, be part of a wider theory of how all movements exponentially expand.

In one sense, Gladwell's writing has nothing to do with the art of sermon writing. But in the area of example and illustration he has broadened my mind to the possibilities that are out there. Particularly, as I think hard on the Scriptures, there are so many ways in which the truths contained within have very real implications on many aspects of life. How is the art of crafting a sermon able to bring the surplus of meaning alive? I think the answer lies in part through analysing why Gladwell is so readable and persuasive, and above all interesting.

This is in no way to subtract from the exegesis of reading the Scriptures (knowledge), nor from the life changes that should be produced (virtue), but hopefully the craft (art) will be improved to produce teaching which is not just faithful in some abstract sense but inherently productive.

Blogging during the break

I may be a bit sporadic with blogging over the next three weeks during the Christmas break.

I will however endeavour to post on what I'm reading over this time to make sure I'm taking in what I'm reading. My attitude for the past few years has been (outside of required reading) one theological book then one secular book. This keeps reading fresh.

Godcasting

No one can question the dramatic rise in the use of sermon podcasts amongst Christians. It is a peculiar epidemic which has swept through the Christian world at an astonishing speed. The access to the most gifted preachers the western world has to offer is a great blessing to the church and no doubt for the cause of the gospel.

And yet there remains an undercurrent of negativity from many quarters towards such rampant use of podcasts. It has brought into question the relationship between the preaching of the word and the local congregation. It questions the way that the Bible is brought to bear on the lives of individuals. In one of the great ironies of the whole movement, preachers such as Mark Driscoll are lauded for their relevance to the hearers, despite preaching from a completely different context. Is this because if your hearers can put up with you speaking for an hour, you are able to say more things and thus appear to be more cued in to the listeners lives? Is it because most local preachers aren't thinking deeply on the context in which they are explaining the scriptures, and thus are preaching dry, dull sermons distant from the local situation and concerns? Is it simply a matter of giftedness, that if I could have Eric Clapton as my guitar teacher for free online, I probably would look less favourably upon the balding middle-aged failed rock musician down the road who charges $22.50 for a half hour lesson?

Should it concern me when I read blogs and notice that some people reflect deeply and often on what they have heard from Keller, Piper, and Driscoll and yet rarely mention their local minister? I understand why this happens. These men are great preachers. Personally, I learn a lot from these guys and they are inherently quotable. And it's not just because bloggers are particularly internet savvy and so more likely to listen to sermons online, the phenomenon of quoting from podcasts is common in conversations after church and in weekly small groups.

The jury is still out in my mind on how to approach the rise in Godcasting. Perhaps like so many things it is equal parts good and bad. Maybe it is an inherently good thing, and simply used unhelpfully.

Will it be long before we begin to hear public warnings as the word of God is preached in my local gathering, to beware of listening to too many online podcasts? No one wants to go there at the moment, because it looks as if the preacher is protecting his own little empire. And yet it might just be time to start reflecting upon the potential negative aspects of being overly pastored online. Then again, you might already be thinking "Unlikely. My minister is so culturally detached he wouldn't even be aware this might be a problem."

On the marriage contract

Paul (my mate, not the apostle) thinks I'm cold and heartless because I have boiled down marriage to little more than the exchanging of your word - a contract. "Where's the joy?" he says.

Am I really cold? Am I really heartless?

Sacrificing a sermon

Humility comes in many forms and I saw a new expression this week at NTE. Andrew Reid was speaking topically on the Kingdom Of God to a crowd of about 1300 people. I thought the first two talks were pretty top notch, but I realise this is coming from me having a reasonable understanding of the Bible. For those who are a bit newer to the whole Bible reading thing and sermons of that depth, it pretty much went straight over their heads. Andrew's other issue was time. The dark cloud of "the program" hung menacingly over his head. He really needed probably another 1/3 of his time on top, to allow more pausing between sentences to let the great truths being brought to life some air to hang in. It was brilliant content with limited effectiveness.

The talks were faithful but not working. And so Andrew did what I have never before experienced on such a big platform - he scrapped his next talk. Okay, so I did see Mark Driscoll do it at Engage 08, but I think this was because it was about his 30th sermon in a fortnight and he just ran out of energy so decided to take questions instead. But here at NTE, Andrew knew he wanted to mainly use the content of Daniel 7 in his sermon, he knew what he had been saying was going over peoples heads, and recognised the systematic sermon form was a much less comfortable fit for him than exegesis. So rather than deliver his fully scripted third sermon, he spoke to us mostly from an old talk on Daniel 7.

It wasn't bowing to the pressure of the crowds.
It was humility at its absolute best.
Praise God.

I have a question (please raise your hands)

Occasionally an opportunity comes up after hearing the word of God powerfully brought to life through faithful preaching, to post something so trivial that it borders on embarrassing. Tonight is that night. I will get to the challenge in a later post, however what caught my attention this evening, indeed nearly took my eye out, was the phenomenon of hand-raising during singing. Particularly the best combination of words that is guaranteed to get the closeted charismatics to burst forth in the exposing of the underarms. Even those who have secretly attached strips of velcro to their tops from pit to wrist to prevent them from the practice, are guaranteed to be ripping those hands to the heavens with the benefit of some choice words.

Tonight it was the line from one of the new songs

When I rise, into the air.

Up they shot.

So here is my challenge; What are the other sure-fire words to almost magnetically raise the arms? I havn't paid attention before, but I would anitcipate the words 'lift' and 'exalt' would be particularly effective. Some words with more syllables can also be provocative, such as 'indescribable'. Another variation is the old fashioned use of 'power' to inevitably induce the greatly underrated fist clench.

Is it possible to write the ultimate hand-raising song? Perhaps entitled Lord, I rise to praise your indescribable power?

The glass half full

There has been a lot of talk recently surrounding the right skills and personality for church planting. In one sense I want to rally against there being a special "type". And yet in the next breath I can see this as a clear example of godly wisdom (though it's a bit of a Catch 22 in that they don't want you to be crazy, and yet you need to be just a little crazy to do it!)


The idea is nothing new as most cross-cultural mission organisations insist on just this practice of 'type' recognition. The realisation that some 'types' are more able to handle the drain of intense ministries such as cross-cultural ministry and church planting appears exceedingly wise.


Now as for these types, I wonder how much our preference for optimism or pessimism comes into these considerations. The optimist may not dwell on their negative experience, but one often questions their grasp of reality. The pessimist while perhaps being realistic, will ultimately be brought down by their ability to see the shadow of even the most beautiful rainbow.


One of the guest missionaries at the National Training Event is leading a team doing university evangelism in a challenging part of the world. The optimism of the team leader must certainly be a benefit in an oftentimes difficult ministry. When asked if they ever had problems working in this country;

80% of our team have never been to prison.

Now that's an optimist.

Before you get up to preach...

In an all too common episode of procrastination, I was recently updating my Facebook personal information. Curiously I had in a weak moment of feigned Christian piety listed the book of the Bible, Philippians in my list of "Favourite books". To be perfectly honest with you, at this present time I couldn't with any great deal of ease tell you too much about the letter to the Philippians. So why did I list it in my favourite books? It was not to to appear super godly, it was not a token gesture as "something a follower of Jesus should probably include", nor was it a typographic error while attempting to write the name of the author Philip P. Ians. No it was because I was reading Philippians at the time I created my profile. It seems that no matter what I'm studying in the Bible at the moment, it automatically becomes my "Favourite book".

Tonight at the National Training Event I had the great pleasure of hearing the great truths of 1 and 2 Samuel explained clearly and passionately by Andrew Reid. But as amazing as it is to see the almost incomprehensible gracious love of God which longs to bless his people by keeping his promises to them, the faithfulness of God to his promises that will not be overcome by our frailty; and this is indeed mind-blowing. And yet as great as this is, there was one more unintended lesson which I learned from Andrew. He absolutely loves the books of 1 and 2 Samuel. I could hear it in the way he spoke of how the eternal truth contained within comes to bear on our lives today. Indeed came to bear on his own life. His energy and passion were contagious. Now Andrew has obviously spent a great deal of time studying these books as he's written a commentary on them, and yet this in-depth study has brought forth in him an almost child-like enthusiasm. And man, it really helped bring 1 and 2 Samuel to life.

So my advice to preachers is this; Before you get up to preach, ask yourself is this your favourite book of the Bible? It might not be, but at the very least what is it that excites you about this book or this passage? What speaks to you in your desires and frailties and your life? It's really an extension of applying the word of God first to ourselves as teachers. If the word of God isn't moving deep within you as the preacher, how can you expect to communicate to the hearers that this word of the Lord is to be treasured and desired and read in order to bring forth change in our lives?

A bad case of gematria

I’m currently in Canberra for the AFES National Training Event. John Dickson this morning was preaching on “The pedigree of Jesus” from the genealogy in Matthew 1. We learnt how the purpose of the genealogy in Matthew is to connect Jesus to the promise of the great son of David; the messiah who would come to be the saviour of Israel and the world.

According to John (that's Dickson, not the apostle), Matthew shows this connection between Jesus and David in four interesting ways:

1. He just says it straight up. 1:1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David

2. Jesus is shown to be a direct descendent through the family tree.

3. The person mentioned most in Jesus’ genealogy is not Jesus but David who is mentioned five times. 1:1, 6, 6, 17, 17

4. And finally, the special use of the number fourteen. There is no doubt the number fourteen is significant – Matthew leaves out entire generations (an acceptable practice at the time) so that both sections of the genealogy number 14 generations. He then specifically draws attention to this in 1:17. Furthermore, David’s name is the 14^th mentioned in the genealogy.

Now all this makes perfect sense to me, but it’s the next bit that leaves me a tad quizzical.

John then went on to describe gematria. No it’s not a sexually transmitted disease but “the artful use of the numerical values of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet.” There is a secret code in the genealogy just waiting to be unlocked. So get this – when you take the name David and translate it into Hebrew, and then take these letters and attribute to each letter the corresponding value from “the Hebrew and Aramaic alphabet system” the sum adds up to, you guessed it (Cue spooky music); 14.

Artful indeed.

John knows his stuff so I’m willing to take his word at this point. But to be honest, it sounds like a bit of codswallop to me. A bit too much Da Vinci Code for my liking.

In the end, it was a bit of a geek out moment especially for those into the whole number thing. To me, it just made me feel like a bit of an idiot for not knowing Hebrew. And really points 1-3 were kind of enough. Actually in reflection point one, that Matthew just comes out and says that Jesus is the son of David is probably sufficient.

Then again, maybe it's just more proof that the geeks shall inherit the earth.

The Geneva Push

I was approached by Mark from The Geneva Push to have some articles from my blog posted on their website. The first one went up today. I'm a big fan of what the guys from The Geneva Push are on about and I'd encourage you to check them out.

It was my pleasure to give them free reign to republish anything they believe will be beneficial, so there may be more articles in the future if they can sort the wheat from the chaff.

It's a bizarre feeling seeing something I posted back when about 4 people read my blog (thanks Mum) being reproduced elsewhere. I had a bit of a chuckle as I realised it was written not long after I discovered how to do links.

A history of Cumberland Uni Church through chairs #4

This is the fourth post in a series. #1 Grey chairs. #2 Orange chairs. #3 Red chairs.

This post served as inspiration for the series and contains helpful background information.

A history of Cumberland Uni Church through chairs #4

I don't normally appreciate when people speak from a position of ignorance on any given subject. And as I am not a parent you can dismiss my misgivings which are about to follow. There's a curious trend that has emerged over the past few years which I really struggle to get my head around: putting children on leashes. Have you seen these chained children? Of course, no one goes so far as to put an actual collar on the child, rather they are generally disguised in the form of a soft animal toy "backpack" with the "tail" forming the leash. Excuse my ignorance, but to me a furry chain is still a chain. I can see in this activity at its heart is a loving exercise of a parent to keep their child from harm. But I also see in the furry leash an extension perhaps of the umbilical cord, which was never severed quite as well as it should have been - and perhaps never will.

One of the big challenges of the method of church-planting whereby one congregation acts as the mother church is how long before the umbilical cord must be severed. Generally there is no single rule which dictates the change of relationship between mother and child, but there are a number of principles at work. The hope is like with most children that eventually they'll be set out on their own. Tension usually comes in the form of either the mother not being completely satisfied with the obedience of her offspring or alternately the adolescent child being less than satisfied with the cumbersome interventions of a domineering parent. The saying attributed to Richard Bach comes to mind "If you love someone, set them free. If they come back they're yours; if they don't they never were." However as is often the case when it comes to setting free daughter churches, it turns out they were never yours, and simply take their (long overdue) surplus budget and run.

Cumberland University Church was the offspring of St Paul's Anglican Church Carlingford. While from the very beginning we felt quite separate from St Paul's, our stagnant growth meant we have never been in a position to be set free. In fact, that umbilical cord was our lifeblood, and we were holding on for dear life. It wasn't just about the money. I mean, it was mostly about the money, but also that with a large turnover of leadership it was St Paul's that were maintaining our drive and vision.

As we left off the last chapter of Uni Church's history the core was shrinking and exhausted. Our move to the local community centre's red chairs had physically and mentally drained the ever-shrinking core. The negative aspect of a congregation with a high proportion of non-Christians and new Christians meant the leadership and administration were increasingly performed by the few. And even though the non-Christians were more than willing to lend a hand with many of the jobs, the decision was made that though this would relieve the workload of the core, it created an unhelpful view of why you serve at church. We wanted them to become Christians. Furthermore we wanted them to not confuse church attendance with trusting Jesus. So we were always praying for God to raise up more workers to inject some new life into the leadership team. There was a brief injection of energy when one of the young men who had come to trust in Jesus in the early days of Uni Church was now matured to a point to be invited into the leadership group. However after six months he too needed to leave for family reasons.

We were pretty well had it. It seemed by this stage that every few months the conversation would be had, should we shut down Uni Church? That's a hard question to ask. Especially when deep down I think we all wanted to say yes, shut it down. But unfortunately God was still bringing new non-Christians most weeks. God was still bringing them to trust in Jesus death for their sins, and Christians moving into the area or who had become Christians were maturing and learning to submit to Jesus as Lord. If only God would put an end to all these people wanting to learn about Jesus, then we could have finally shut down and instead driven each week to a larger church where we could sneak in after the service had started and be relatively passive members.

Maybe we should have shut it down. Because the answer for some of the older members was to leave. But we were still convinced we were filling a need that would not be met were we to jump ship and God was still mightily at work. Was Cumberland Uni Church a failure? In so many ways I'm tempted to think it was. We had a planting team of 13 which was more than halved after the first two years, the number of people attending plateaued at a modest level after 3 years and has steadily declined ever since, the main student accommodation was bulldozed and our contacts at the other college moved out, meanwhile those who stayed committed were burnt out.

So was Uni Church a failure? As I think about individual people I'm forced to conclude that CUC was not a failure. As always, I think about myself first, and the way God has used the people and Bible teaching, and example of each other striving to live the gospel out, to greatly encourage and strengthen me in living out the gospel message. I think too of the way God has grown new followers of Jesus. I have sentimentally been looking at old photos and keep being surprised at the number of people who have become Christians and then moved on, that I had forgotten about. That's quite astounding really, that in a church whose weekly attendance over six years has rarely touched thirty, that I could actually lose count of the number of people God brought to faith in Jesus. Our goals that we set were at least in part being met: we were reaching Cumberland campus with the gospel, we were encouraging students to persevere and we were training men and women for long term ministry.

You see, I was wrong (and let's face it, a little bitter) when earlier in the series I wrote of the godly spin-doctoring we performed as each person chose to leave our congregation, we would inevitably rebadge this leaving as "being sent". But I've changed my mind. We did send them. God through our feeble efforts as a church had raised up people who were going out with the gospel. Furthermore, we didn't ask them to stay. We could have but we didn't. No, we sent them. And knowing the people they are, who were going to serve mightily in other long-term ministries, if we'd begged them to stay they probably would have. Though no doubt we needed them, Uni Church was a sending church.

But there is one more twist in our tale. Our final relocation came about through a partnership with St Paul's and a local Anglican church near where Uni Church met; St James Anglican Berala. Berala Anglican is a church that has many faithful saints, who were unable to afford a full-time minister. St Paul's agreed to a partnership with St James whereby they adopted them for a short period of ten years or so to help them get back on their feet. Part of this agreement involved CUC becoming the resident night church. Just as it looked like the exhaustion of the community centre was about to spell an end for Uni Church, our umbilical cord rescued us. Uni Church with another move had more new seats. Or more accurately, pews. Old pews. Old, wooden pews. Old, wooden, uncomfortable pews.

Though most people would view a move from stackable plastic chairs back to pews as a step backwards, for us the thought of no longer having the demands of the weekly set-up at the community centre was a welcome relief. And at the very least the preacher needn't now worry about the distraction of kindergarten art anymore. And there is little chance of us falling asleep due to the discomfort of the congregation as each week for an hour and a half our spines are realigned to the somewhat unconventional curve of the pews.

While new people continued to join us, overall our numbers maintained their decline (20~).

The blessing of being in the church building is coupled with some architectural challenges. It's not that the feng shui is all wrong, but rather what does it mean to be in a big church with few people? It means at the very least you are acutely aware of your smallness. Sure, we have various means of bunching people together - getting everyone to sit on the one side. And then to force people even closer together pushing the back pews together on that side so you are forced to sit up the front. But in the cavernous space we drown. And I discovered something. For the first time in the history of Uni Church I was looking at the empty seats. Not just in the general sense of them being vacant, but every week I am consciously going through every single person I know who isn't present. I also have the problem of history because I've seen a much healthier version of the congregation. Thus inevitably on occasions of particularly small attendance not only do I realise who isn't there this week, but my mind wanders to those who have left permanently. Try as I might, the empty seats continue to get me down. I cannot tell you how many times I've had to force myself to pray that I wouldn't let the empty seats distract me from the ones that have people sitting in them. It is a great sadness to let the people who aren't there prevent me from serving those who are. I feel at this point a great affinity with those who attend the morning congregation at St James who I've spoken to. These older saints speak with equal parts happiness and sadness as they think back to the days when their congregation was full and teeming with children, which today is just a shadow of its former glory. They too have the problem of history, and yet for them it must be even more acute because they've seen the actual building at Berala full, whereas my memory is of just a slightly healthier Uni Church. I've never seen St James full. But I see it empty every Sunday night.

I remain thankful for our umbilical cord that has taken us to Berala. It means for the first time in the history of Uni Church we have a full-time minister in Andy Chung. Andy is employed to look after both the Berala morning congregation as well as CUC. It has been of great benefit to have Andy thinking strategically about the church and what is best for its people. Though Andy now one year into this role is only just starting to understand the ministry and be better able to determine the future and a new direction. Sadly, the core has now completely flatlined. And consequently the regular energy sapping work of following up newcomers and pastoral care has suffered leading to the regular Sunday meeting now attracting around 15 people each week. Critical mass has always been a problem at Uni Church, and my prayer is that those who remain are able to reinvigorate the ministry with the backing of Andy and the morning congregation at Berala Anglican.

It has been six years since we started Cumberland University Church with thirteen founding members. In ten days time, myself and the other two remaining founding members of Uni Church are leaving to pursue other ministries. It's time to move on. So what will the future hold for Uni Church? Finally six years late, the design of Uni Church is changing to reflect what is appropriate for a church of 13 people. And I tell you what, I'm as excited as a simile. Sarah and I are leaving to take up a student minister position as part of Bible College and we are sad to not be able to be a part of the next chapter of Uni Church. The bottom line is CUC could not continue with the same program. Less people, same program means more exhaustion. Our hand is being forced, and this means there is great potential for the future.

With the move to Berala, and the passage of time it has become apparent that our mission to be a church for Cumberland campus has somewhat changed. Our links with the campus have gradually decreased and while we still hope to reach out to local students, our status as a community church has increased. So Cumberland Uni Church is now Berala Night Church. It's really an acceptance of the way that gospel growth usually occurs, through people. It's not build it and they will come (even though that has happened), instead it is visualising each individual member as having unique links into their various networks. The members of Uni Church are more linked into the local community than exclusively with the uni campus. As our members sought to bring their friends along to church, and these friendship networks were increasingly separate from Cumberland, the name became a barrier to these new contacts feeling an attachment to the church and our vision.

Berala Night Church is getting a complete overhaul. We've been forced to ask the question about the essentials of the church meeting. What is fluff? Are there aspects of the way we do what is essential, not essential? Yes we want the Scriptures read publicly, but do we need a roster that gives another specific job to the few? How are we going to sit? What format best suits us? What sort of chairs should we have? Lounge chairs and meet as a house church in the manse? Should we meet over a meal around tables down in the smaller lower level of the church? How is the public gathering best structured to free up the members to develop relationships and do the work of evangelism? Can a single Sunday gathering be formatted in a way that doesn't require a mid-week Bible Study group and instead free up a night each week for dedicated contact with non-Christians. The remaining members of the church are working through these questions for a relaunch in January.

Though I leave with great sadness, the future of Berala Night Church is full of potential. It's exciting to not know what the chairs will be.

So there you have it. A history of Cumberland Uni Church through chairs. There is no fairy tale ending to my church planting experience. Just a bizarre mixture of joy and sadness, excitement and exhaustion, potential and regret. Was Cumberland University Church a failure? No way. Would I do things differently? Absolutely. But as we proclaimed Christ crucified non-Christians have heard the gospel clearly explained, some of them have then realised they needed to sort things out with God and been saved, Christians have matured, and others have been sent out with the gospel message to the world. While Cumberland University Church is not very impressive to look at presently, in God's sovereignty the evidence of its success will only be seen when the Lord Jesus returns.

Samaria

It wasn't just 'some area'.

The Christian Brag-shelf

Attention all single Christian men. I'm about to do you a favour. I feel I need to let you in on a little secret. And to tell you the truth it's not that secretive as I've seen this time and time again. Really, if you don't know it already, you are at a distinct disadvantage. So listen in.

Every single Christian man seeking a godly wife needs to know the importance of a well-placed bookshelf. That's right. It's all about the bookshelf. It is of great benefit to your reputation and consequently your prospects, that within your college room/living area of your share house, a bookshelf must be present with an array of high calibre Christian books. Some people call it the Christian brag-shelf. Preferably at eye level, the specific titles are an expression of personal preference, but this shelf absolutely must contain a partly read copy of Knowing God and The Cross of Christ, plus at least 45% of Matthias Media's back catalogue. Having actually read the books is an added benefit but far from essential. However it's best not to let on that the closest you've got to reading C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity is watching the Chronicles of Narnia films (your copy of which is hidden away in your less than flattering DVD stash of Family Guy and Tarantino films).

Do yourself a favour. For women tomorrow, start your collection today.

To those with experience of the brag-shelf, have I missed any other essential titles?

By the way, here's my brag shelf.

And here's my brag-shelf after I've removed the titles I've never even opened.

And here's my brag-shelf after removing the books I've only read part of.