Showing posts with label Jesus Christ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jesus Christ. Show all posts

August 13, 2022

Transformation into the Image of God

The Spirit of God is transforming the people of God into the image of the Son of God:

“We all, with unveiled faces, are looking as in a mirror at the glory of the Lord and are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory; this is from the Lord who is the Spirit.” (2 Cor 3:18)

Notes regarding Christian transformation from this passage:

1) Divine glory is the entire context

2) The Spirit is manifestly divine

3) God the Trinity is the agent

4) Human beings are brought into the presence of God

5) The end of humanity is Christlikeness

#BeLikeJesus

April 7, 2022

The Man with Jesus on His Chest

Suppressing my emotions as our daughter was disappearing, we turned our minds to this man’s needs.

Yesterday, as Karen and I sent our daughter from DFW airport to work with Afghan refugee children, a man came up asking for bus fare from the airport to Cleburne to see his mother.

We don’t really carry cash any more, so we were at a loss. He kindly walked away.

Another man walked up and gave us two waters as he couldn’t take them through security.

We watched our girl go.

Then I remembered someone recently gave me a $50 bill, which I stuck in my phone.

I chased the poor man down as he walked away. I gave him the bill. He started rejoicing, saying he could now see his mother and get a good meal, too.

I blessed him in the name of Jesus.

He stopped and said, “I believe in Jesus. I have Him with me, too.” Then he raised his shirt.

As several passersby stared in shock, the poor man revealed this large, intricate, and well-drawn tattoo of Jesus crowned and hanging on the cross emblazoned on his chest and side.

It was a light-hearted moment for me in the midst of a difficult time as I mourned my daughter.

I hope this poor man’s mother was glad to see her son. She is sick, and they had not seen each other for awhile. I know we will be glad to see our daughter again. In that, we were the same.

I will never forget the poor man with Jesus emblazoned all over his chest.

March 5, 2022

The Ontology of Jesus Christ: A Lament for Modernity

The widespread effort in modern biblical scholarship to downplay the ontological and metaphysical claims of the New Testament terms, and thus their Trinitarian and Christological implications, is particularly frustrating and damaging to orthodoxy, in the academy and the church.

Take, for instance, Jesus’s self-referential uses of ἥκω (“I have come”) and of ἐγώ εἰμι (“I am”) in John’s Gospel. The first “denotes the coming of the deity to men” in the Greek world (Schneider), while the second explicates the Hebrew Tetragrammaton. Both invariably reveal Jesus is the eternal God.

However, because of the downgrade in modern commentary on John in particular, as seen for instance in the highly influential New Testament Theology of Rudolf Bultmann, scholars are checked in their full-throated affirmation and inhibited from a deep appreciation of Christ as God.

Instead, the modern commentaries focus upon the function of Jesus rather than the ontology and metaphysics of Jesus. Let us be clear: Jesus was pursued to death by the Israelite religious leaders precisely because of his ontological claims, his theological self-identification.

And if Jesus was willing to state his deity so clearly, then his followers must state his deity clearly, not merely as a datum but as a thoroughgoing identification.

Christ does not merely function as the means to our salvation. Christ is God, the theological end of salvation!

December 8, 2020

The Holy Spirit is God Intimate

II. Intimate

At the deepest place in every single human heart is the need for intimacy with a person totally safe, entirely powerful, incredibly close—A confidant, a protector, a hero. Alas, many of us carry indescribable wounds, because we trusted a friend, a relative, a lover—We gave somebody our heart, and we were betrayed. We need intimacy; we fear treachery.


When men and women became friends with Jesus, they found one upon whom they could really rely. He was trustworthy in his intentions, and he had the power to meet their every need. John, the artistic apostle, knew Jesus as beauty itself. He self-identified as “the one whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23). He also leaned against his very breast. Mary Magdalene knew Jesus as the only man who ever spoke to her with purity. He also healed her soul with power. Lazarus was the friend for whom Jesus wept. And Jesus also raised Lazarus from death. Jesus healed people, fed people, gave them the all-fulfilling words of life.

The powerful, faithful intimacy of Jesus is why his disciples, his friends, were distraught when he told them he must leave. He encouraged them in John 14, “Let not your heart be troubled” (v 1). Christ promised them that he was going to prepare a place for them in God the Father’s eternal mansion. And, at some point, he was coming back to get them. He also told them he would soon be with them in a way they never imagined.

True friendship is deep intimacy, oneness with another which cannot let go. Sometimes, when Karen is out of my sight, even if only feet away in another room, I miss her terribly. Jesus frankly told them he was leaving the world, leaving their sight. He was leaving them in one way, but coming to them in another way. 

Indeed, he promised that he would come in a way not unlike the relationship God the Father has with his Son. The Father and the Son are so intertwined that to see one is to see the other. “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me” (John 14:11). The words and the works of the Son are the words and works of the Father! “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father!” (John 14:9).

And there is a third Person just as intimately bound with the Godhead as the Father and the Son. Jesus promised his distraught disciples, “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you” (John 14:16-18).

In Romans 8, Paul used the same language to describe the union of Christ with the believer and the union of the Spirit with the believer. If the Spirit of God is in you, then Christ also is in you. The indwelling of Christ and the indwelling of the Spirit are coterminous personal relationships. To have “Christ in you” (Rom 8:10) is to be “in the Spirit” (Rom 8:9) and to have the Spirit reside “in you” (Rom 8:11). The Holy Spirit who indwells us is “the Spirit of Christ” (Rom 8:9). 

The Spirit is distinct from Christ; but the Spirit is also one with Christ. “The Lord is the Spirit” (2 Cor 3:17). Therefore, although Jesus departed in body, he came through the presence of his Spirit to be, in an even more intimate way, present to his followers: To John, the apostle whom he loved, Jesus came in the Spirit. To Mary, who could not let go of him when she saw he had risen from death itself, Jesus dwelt in the Spirit. To Peter, the one friend who had horribly betrayed him in his hour of greatest need, not once but three times, Jesus resided by the Spirit.

Through the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ came to live “in” and “with” John and Mary and Peter. But this promise of intimacy with the divine is not only for them then. For even now the all-powerful Spirit of God offers to live in us, to heal us of every affliction, to feed us forever, to ensure us of eternal life. The Spirit offers you intimacy with the eternal Christ himself. If Christ is “God incarnate,” then the Spirit is “God intimate.” Have you been born again by faith in Christ? If so, the Spirit desires to fill your life with his immediate, powerful, saving presence.

(This is the second in a four-part short series on the person and work of the Holy Spirit. For part one, concerning the Spirit as Love, click here. For part three, concerning the Spirt as the Giver of Life, click here.)

November 22, 2020

The Holy Spirit is the God of Love

In the Bible, three persons are revealed to be God—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. There is no difference whatsoever in the divine attributes, in the divine will, and in the divine working, as well as in the divine worship due to each person, for the three are the one God. Each person is fully God, yet the three persons remain distinct from one another.

The Father is the person from whom the Son of God is eternally begotten, begotten not in a flat carnal way, but in an analogically beautiful way from the very being of the Father. The Son always has been “in the bosom of the Father” (John 1:18). The Son of God possesses all the Father possesses (John 16:14-15), does whatever the Father does (John 14:10), and speaks whatever the Father speaks (John 12:49-50). The persons of the Father and the Son are united not only in act but in being. The two may thus be described, according to Jesus, as “in” one another (John 14:11). The Son is one with God (John 10:30).

And both the Father and the Son in turn send the Holy Spirit from eternity into the world to work the will of God declared by the eternal Word. “Sending” speaks to the economy or work of the Spirit, while “proceeding” speaks to the ontology or essence of the Spirit. The Holy Spirit proceeds from God eternally. The language used to describe the eternal procession from the Father in John 15:26 is both fascinating and instructive. The Greek term is ἐκπορεύομαι, which the Bauer lexicon says can be used in two closely related ways. It can either mean “to be in motion from” or “to come forth from.” Bauer classifies John 15:26 under the first to mean the Spirit “proceeds from someone.” And this someone is God.

Did you catch that? The Holy Spirit does not proceed from a creature. He is not like you and me or any other creature. Nor is the Holy Spirit sent by any mere creature. The Holy Spirit proceeds, like the Son, directly from God. The Son and the Spirit are uniquely related to the Father in that both participate by nature in the Godhead. The Son is the eternally begotten God. The Holy Spirit is the eternally proceeding God.

The Spirit’s deity is why, throughout Scripture, we find the Holy Spirit described with divine attributes, working with the divine will, doing things only God can do. Over the next several weeks we must speak of the Holy Spirit in his person and his work. And the first thing we must consider about the Holy Spirit is that He is Love.

I. Love

One of the divine perfections, alongside the attributes of sovereignty, knowledge, holiness, and so on, understood simply, is love. But be careful about your definition of love. When we run up against the Bible’s definition of love, we soon discover God the Trinity’s love is totally beyond our love. God’s love is perfect love.

John writes that “God is love,” not once but twice (1 John 4:8, 16). God the Father is ontologically love and practically love. From the internal perfection of the dynamic, eternal, and unitary love of the Three, the Father sends His Son into the world (1 John 4:9; John 3:16).

And from the internal perfection of the dynamic, eternal, and unitary love of the Three, God the Son demonstrates perfect love in the supreme loving act of becoming the God-Man. He is the One who was crucified for his unworthy friends. “Greater love has no man than this, that He lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). The Son showed his love toward us by giving his life for us, even while we were yet sinners.

So, the Father is love, the Son is love, and the Holy Spirit, too, is love. Another apostle, Paul, wrote, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit” (Rom 5:5). The Spirit as God brings the love of the Trinity to us, working with the dynamic Word to encounter us from without (Romans 10:9-10, 17) and within, engaging our minds, convicting our hearts, and loosening our tongues (Romans 8:26-27). The Spirit wants to unite you with Himself and with the Son, so that you become indwelt by the Son and the Spirit (Romans 8:9-11).

Did you catch that? The Father loves us by sending his Son as a propitiation for our sins. The Son loves us by dying so we might be reconciled to God and by arising from death so we will be justified before the eternal throne of judgment (Romans 4:25). The Triune God works from the perfection of his love so that we may be saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. And the Spirit presents to our hearts that perfect love, pulling us majestically and gently into the very heart of God.

And God’s love is perfect, pure, for: “Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends” (1 Cor 13:4-8a).

Why is the Holy Spirit so humble, so focused upon glorifying the other persons of the Godhead, especially the Son? Why does the Holy Spirit appear at first to recede into the background in our mind as He makes sure we clearly see Jesus Christ, the Son of God who was crucified and died for our sin, and who arose for our justification?

The Holy Spirit is humble, because humility is the perfect expression of pure love. The Holy Spirit is love. He humbly loves both the Son and the Father, and He humbly loves you. He is gently knocking on the door of your heart. As your pastor preaches the Word, will you let the Holy Spirit into your heart and confess the truth of the Gospel with your tongue?

(This is the first part in a four-part short series on the person and work of the Holy Spirit. For part two, concerning the Spirit as Intimate, click here. For part three, concerning the Spirit as the Giver of Life, click here.)

October 27, 2020

A Primer in Political Theology for this Election

Many conscientious pastors, along with other Christian teachers in the churches, are trying to help our sisters and brothers in Christ discern how to act politically in good conscience. Our goal is to help the flock of God to act righteously in the voting booth and responsibly in the public square during this tumultuous and fractious election season. Believers in our churches are struggling with how to cast their votes in a way that is true in this context and right before God. And we need each other’s help to discern the mind of Christ.

Two Important Questions

In order to function properly, the conscience must first be attuned to God’s will. Second, the conscience must also be provided with adequate knowledge regarding the political options available in our context. Our problem is, therefore, twofold. The flock of Christ needs help answering two important questions. 

The first is the pragmatic question, the question to which many theologians too often immediately proceed, assuming the conscience will function properly, if we only give it the right information. The second is the judicial question, concerning the equipping of the consciences of the saints to make proper decisions, but this is more difficult and requires personal transformation as well as continuing theological maturation:

  1. The Pragmatic Question: What are the political options before me? 
  2. The Judicial Question: How would God have me address these options with a good conscience?

Dealing Honestly with the Pragmatic Question

Pursuing the first question almost entirely, many Christian leaders now seek to sway the flock of Jesus one way or another by pointing out the promises and the problems with the persons and/or policies among which we have to choose. While pursuing the pragmatic question is important, indeed necessary for moral decision making, answering the question about political personality and party policy will never be enough on its own. 

It is inadequate merely to point out the promises and problems available with the various political options, much less to focus simplistically on the problems of one side alone. If Christian teachers speak to politics, and we should, we must ensure the people of God have adequate information about important contemporary options. But to be trusted as genuine truth tellers, we must also speak with adequacy and clarity about those options. Pastors should not merely point out the problems in one party and the promises of the other, nor must we accuse one politician for his or her problems while we silently excuse or even vocally defend the other. 

However, even were we to provide full disclosure about the various political options, this alone would still prove deficient. While we must help the flock learn to discern the morals of the various political persons and party platforms, this activity is woefully insufficient on its own. Moreover, as soon as we begin wading into the weeds of the contemporary political swamp, we find that even if we have adequate information about the various options, mere knowledge of the contemporary options is not enough.

In order to help believers exercise their choices properly, we must train our people in the proper conduct of their consciences. Developing a properly formed conscience is both a grace from God and a continual work within the human being. And, within the church community, this requires more than a simple appeal to one or two favored issues that currently prick our consciences about the social context in which we live. Certain important issues may be exceptionally critical by reason of their deadly effect, but no threat to human flourishing should be dismissed as inconsequential. Every human being is created in the divine image and deserves to be treated with utmost dignity. And the ways we choose to pursue this end must be thoroughly informed by the best practical data through the theologically-informed conscience.

Dealing Adequately with the Judicial Question

How can we develop our consciences properly? We develop good consciences as we listen to the whole counsel of God and consider the various problems we face today. For those of us who are Christians, we must be careful to place ourselves theologically as well as socially. Our social location is important, for it reminds us of who we are and of the limits we face. But our theological location is also incredibly important. Because our current conversation has assumed the theological and majored on the practical, please allow me first to offer a few rules from Scripture that may help you form your own conscience properly and help your people form theirs, too.

Following are seven key theological truths from Scripture, doctrines which must be kept in mind as we who are pastors and teachers speak to our people about the political crises in our day and time. If we do this well enough, our people will be better equipped to make wise decisions not only today but in future years, and not only in the grand political crises but in all the moral crises, large or small, which we face in our ongoing social conversation. After reviewing these seven key scriptural doctrines, we must also summarily consider matters of general revelation.

Seven Key Political Doctrines

First, we are all creatures and not the Creator. God is eternal. He knows everything. He is righteous. He knows human hearts. He will always make the perfect judgment at the perfect time. Human beings were created by God, and we all have severe temporal and spatial limits as creatures. We must constantly recognize our limits of knowledge. We don’t know all the facts, and we cannot read human hearts, though we can see human actions. We are utterly dependent upon God in order to make a right judgment. Prayer toward God and integrity toward other people is our only proper response.

Second, we are all sinners and remain works in progress. There is not one perfect politician or political party on this planet. Realistically, we cannot demand perfection out of those who are manifestly imperfect. We become hypocrites the moment we demand perfection in one character while dismissing that requirement for our own character or for the character of our favored candidate. This does not mean we should turn a blind eye to flaws in persons and polities. It does mean we should be slow to judge and quick to forgive. Moreover, we must remember that evil is rooted in the heart of every person. No party has a monopoly on wickedness, and no politician is thoroughly righteous.

Third, we have one King and no other. We must worship and praise Christ publicly and privately, and we must worship him alone. There have been isolated moments in the last 13 years where I was genuinely concerned for proponents of major political parties and leaders. When churches turn their hymns and songs of praise toward politicians, parties, and nations, they dally with idolatry. It is often said that we are not voting for a pastor but for a president. Very true, but remember also we are not voting for a messiah. That role is already taken. No mere president, senator, or congressman, nor even the might and wisdom of a whole nation, will solve our real problems with full justice. We have one Lord, and his name is Jesus. Our hearts must be enthusiastic for Christ alone, as we pursue righteousness in this world.

Fourth, we must seek the welfare of our society and its inhabitants. Jeremiah reminded the exiles from Jerusalem that they must seek the welfare of the city in which they currently resided, Babylon. Babylon was not a perfect city, as no human city is perfect. Indeed, it was full of vile and vice. But so are all human cities. We might construct measures of wickedness with regard to various cities, as long as we remember that every human culture is a conglomeration of human beings and that we are all sinners deserving of death. But this is no reason for fight or flight. Rather, Jeremiah calls the people of God to advance the flourishing of those human beings who inhabit the same place they do. The Old Testament also made it clear that the weakest inhabitant must become a matter of priority for the people of God. These include the immigrant, the widow, and the abandoned child, the weak ones who have little or no voice and little or no power. Remember them when you exercise your judicial power on the ballot and in the courtroom.

Fifth, the Kingdom of Heaven is not yet here. No matter whether your favored political choice wins or not, the current political crisis is not absolute but relative. This too shall pass. Nations rise and fall. God has set their boundaries and times. This world is not our ultimate home. The author of Hebrews reminds us that Abraham was a sojourner who looked ultimately not for a city in this world but for a city whose builder and maker is God. Peter developed the metaphor of a resident alien to describe the place of the Christian in this world. This world is a passing point for us. We are responsible for helping the people we meet here to see the glorious and coming city of God rather than only the corrupted and failing cities of men. Remember to keep a proper eschatology and a proper hope. Recognize that the United States of America is not heaven.

Sixth, our primary responsibility in this age is presenting the really good news for sinners. Too often, even the most responsible Christian voice may become a wag for one politician or the other in the heated debates of our day. We can dress up our practical position as a matter of absolute political crisis or as a matter of studied principle. But, eventually, even the most principled voice risks coming off as too beholden to one political party or another. We may slip either by what we are saying explicitly, or by a change in tone when we speak of one option, or by our unwillingness to criticize the obvious evil in our preferred candidate or party. Alas, those who, by reason of conscience, disagree with our assessments, will be less likely to listen to us as we try to turn back to our primary conversation. Remember that the good news that Jesus Christ died for all sinners, which includes every political actor, is too important to get shunted to the side by our political passions. 

Seventh, whatever else, exercise grace toward everyone. As important as this election may be, nothing is as important as the one who is made in the image of God. Even if a person has done great evil, he or she still possesses an inherent dignity. Please, please, please refrain from diminishing their humanity in any form or fashion. Yes, speak truth, but speak it with grace. As my friend, Bruce Ashford, has said, “Truth without grace makes us political bullies and jerks. Grace without truth makes us political wimps and non-entities. Truth and grace together allows us to exhibit that great strength and witness that Christ himself exhibited.” And, as another friend, Bart Barber, recently pledged, we should pray for the winner of the election, no matter who that person is. And we should speak with civility at all times about him or her and about their opponents.

The Way of Jesus vs. The Way of the World

Let’s conclude this very short primer in political theology with a reminder that the way of Christ is not the way of the world. Though we must participate in a real world rather than an ideal world, Christ calls us to exhibit an ideal behavior which will catch the attention of a watching and soul-starving world. Our world’s rulers dominate people and exercise tyranny over them. However, as my senior pastor, Mark Forrest, recently reminded our church, Jesus also said, “it shall not be this way among you.” We are not called to exercise dominion over others but to serve others, with towels about our waists, ready to give our own blood in loving service to other precious image bearers, following the example and command of our Lord Jesus.

Serving also requires listening. Human consciences are formed best by Scripture, but they are also formed through listening to God’s general revelation, by common grace in and through nature and human logic. The conscience reflects divine law adequately enough to hold us accountable before God. However, the conscience may be misinformed, even seared. This is as true with regard to cultures as with individuals. Sadly, horrific sins like abortion and racism can become accepted cultural norms through custom and/or law. 

Happily, the misinformed conscience may be corrected in part through careful listening to others. Listening well takes a humble heart. Mutual and respectful listening can open doors which should never have been shut, doors others may not see in their own hearts, doors we may not see in our own hearts. So, listen to the other side of the political divide. Listen with genuine attention. Listen with gracious spiritual discernment. Listen to truth with love before you speak truth with love.

Finally, when you have to do so, make your political choice the best you can. Follow your conscience, but make sure your conscience hears God well. Listen to Scripture first and foremost, but also listen to one another. “Conscience” (Greek syneidesis, Latin conscientia) means “to think with,” and we must think with God first, but we also learn to think with one another. After all, Paul said, “We have the mind of Christ.” Paul did not say, “I,” but “we.” The plural is significant.

Whoever you think you should vote for, Christian leader, remember these several truths from Scripture. If you will keep Christ's Kingdom priorities and Kingdom ways as your own, your people will have better developed consciences. And you will have a more dynamic and successful ministry where it really counts, in lives changed by the good news that Jesus loves sinners. This is the real good news for every last single one of us, no matter what our politics.

October 13, 2020

Councils, Christlikeness, and a Christological Glossary: Further Reflections on the 2020 Drummond-Bush Lecture

The Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina, recently granted a signal honor by inviting me to present the 2020 Drummond-Bush Lecture. That Lecture is entitled Christology without Christlikeness. The Drummond-Bush Lectures memorialize the academic ministries of Lewis Drummond, the fourth President of Southeastern Seminary and author of a key biography of Billy Graham, and Russ Bush, a leading evangelical apologist and philosopher as well as a personal friend and administrative mentor.

The event video, originally presented on Friday, the 2nd of October 2020, will be available online through the L. Russ Bush Center for Faith and Culture. Because the event was oversold, the Bush Center kindly made it available on Facebook Live, too. The Question and Answer period moderated by Dr. Ken Keathley, Director of the Bush Center, was enjoyable and may be particularly helpful to the uninitiated. A Christological Glossary is provided below as a quick reference guide for the important technical terms. (The Lecture alone, originally recorded by Adam Covington of The Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in the Truett Auditorium, may be found here.)

The Lecture is a shorter version of an essay written at the request of Dr. Walter Strickland, Associate Vice President for Kingdom Diversity Initiatives and Assistant Professor of Systematic and Contextual Theology at Southeastern Seminary. The Essay, entitled “Christology in Chalcedon: Creed and Contextualization,” has since been published in the Southeastern Theological Review. The Essay may be found here.

While the shorter Lecture and the longer Essay explore the pristine theology of Chalcedon and the difficult history of the various Christian churches, both Miaphysite and Duophysite, from Ethiopia to Armenia and Rome to Persia, the most important aspect for the contemporary Christian leader will appear toward the end. The persecuting legacy of Constantinianism is challenged through an appeal to obey consistently the supremely authoritative teaching of Jesus Christ himself.

————

Christological Glossary: 

  • “Miaphysitism” is characterized by the worship of the unitary nature of Jesus Christ, while retaining both the humanity and the deity of the incarnate Lord. This is a common position for Christians in Armenia, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Syria.
  • “Duophysitism” also worships the one Lord Jesus Christ, while explicitly affirming both his human and divine natures. This is the position advanced by the Council of Chalcedon.
  • “Monophysitism” differs from both Miaphysitism and Duophysitism, in that it compromises the humanity of Christ. Monos indicates “only” or “alone.” Miaphysites such as Didymus the Blind of Alexandria should not be identified as Monophysite, because they worship Christ under one nature even while maintaining the two natures conceptually.
  • “Nestorianism,” which is not to be confused either with the person, Nestorius, nor with many of those who later became known as “Nestorians,” compromises the unity of the Lord’s person. In particular, Nestorianism denies the Virgin Mary is the Theotokos, “God-bearer.” 
  • “Heresy” is a term reserved for a church body’s declaration that a teaching requires repentance or excommunication. Note that heresy is determined not by individual theologians but by churches, whose one head remains the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt 18:15-20; Col 1:18). Nestorianism was formally condemned as a heresy at the Council of Ephesus (431), while Monophysitism was formally condemned as a heresy at the Council of Chalcedon (451). 
  • “Orthodoxy” technically means “right glory,” with reference to the liturgy of worship, but it has come to be intellectualized as “right doctrine.” Although they differ in their terminology, many Miaphysite and Duophysite churches have in recent decades affirmed one another’s theological orthodoxy, even while retaining their distinct terminologies.
  • “Constantinianism” is that form of Christianity which combines ecclesiology with human power structures, proposing to advance the interests of the church with the coercive tools of the state. Its authority to pursue this program and its practical results have been heavily disputed both by non-Christians and by those Christian traditions affiliated with the Free Churches.

May 25, 2019

You Must Die, If You Want to Live

At the center of the Gospel of Matthew, God the Father revealed to Peter, a man like you and me, the way to a victorious life. That way is through the faithful confession that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matt 16:13-20). A little later, after Peter demonstrated that he did not fully understand how this victory would be achieved (Matt 16:21-22), Jesus the Christ offered a lesson about how we must go about living the victorious life that He freely offers to believers.

In Matthew 16:23-27, it is written that Jesus told his disciples,
“If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?
For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done.”
With these poignant, even piercing, words, Jesus totally reorients the lives of his listeners. Through years of trying to live, at first without the Word of God, but afterward with the Word of God ever before my eyes and in my ears and on my tongue, I have learned that the Word of God challenges us, changes us, compels us. His words have power, life-altering authority, and in this text He speaks to you today.

Jesus sets out a command for how to conduct your life, and then He offers one compelling reason, expressed in three increasingly demonstrative terms, as to why we should take his command with utmost seriousness. Let us look quickly at “the cost of discipleship,” which is death, and “the cause for discipleship,” which is life:

I. The Cost of Discipleship: Death


If you want to be Jesus’s disciple, then you are required to deny yourself and take up your cross and follow him. The Germans use the term Nachfolge to convey the Greek mathetes. It means, literally, “to follow after.” A disciple is one who follows after a master. He or she fashions his life upon the life of his or her master.

Because Jesus denied himself in his needs and his desires in order to bless the other, so we must do likewise. In his profound book, Nachfolge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer famously cried out, “When God calls a man, He bids him come and die.” Every time I read those words, they challenge me to the core of my being. Will I really deny myself? Will I really die to this world, so that I might rise with Him? Again and again, I cry out, like Bonhoeffer, with my whole heart, “I am yours, Lord!”

Because Jesus embraced the calling of God to live and then to die in this way, so we must do likewise. This does not mean we carry a literal wooden cross and are nailed upon it. Nor does it mean that we may propitiate for the sins of others, for that is far beyond our capabilities. However, it means we are called to a life of suffering on behalf of the needs of other people in other ways.

Because the life of Christ is the exemplar for the life of the Christian, it means we are to adopt his humility, his way of life, his higher purpose. The high calling of Christ is a claim that our lives mean more than the mean goals to which we are prone to reduce ourselves.

If I have noticed one thing that is highly detrimental to Christian believers of whatever age, it is the short memory we have regarding the high calling that He has given to each of his children.

  • While God may bless you with a face of beauty, this is a mere means to the higher call. 
  • While God may gift you with a mind of acuity, this is only an intellectual instrument to strive toward the higher calling.
  • While God may grant you gifts of wealth and power and status, they are not what you really should be concerned about. Rather, see them as avenues toward a greater way of life.
Don’t let the little things, the lesser aspects, the mean moments become the purpose of your life.

Yes, develop your bodily beauty, your mental capacity, and your other talents and gifts to their utmost potential. However, keep the higher calling in mind. Your life is not about the things you own or the people with whom you cavort. Your life is about the One who owns you and who gave you all these things to use and all these people to love.

II. The Cause for Discipleship: Life


Why should you follow Christ? Why should you take up the cross God is laying upon your life? Why should you deny yourself and allow God to ensconce Himself exclusively upon the throne of your personal life?

Jesus offers three descriptions for the one reason for being his disciple:

  1. You must lose your life to save it.
  2. You must give your life to gain it.
  3. You must prepare for judgment or glory.

Behind each of these expressions lays the overwhelming truth that we must ultimately give an account to God for what we do with our lives.

You must lose your life to save it? It is admittedly counter-intuitive from a humanistic perspective. I must lose my life in order to save my life. It only makes sense in the light of the sovereignty of God. By “lose your life,” Jesus means that you must stop trying to “save your life.” Your sin has already brought to you the loss of life. The only way that it can be saved now is if God himself does that for you. He wants you to trust him with your life.

You must give your life to gain it? Again, this is counter-intuitive from a purely anthropological perspective. It only makes sense from the theological perspective. By “give your life,” Jesus means that, once you have begun the life of faith, you must entirely dedicate to living your life God’s way. We want to gain things in this life—family, friends, experiences, joys, adventure. And yet, God tells us that we must give it away to get it. The older I become, the more I am convinced that this life is a grand adventure, a progress, a pilgrimage, and I am an adventurer, a pilgrim, a temporary resident on my way through the vagaries of this world headed to the promised land. This is not my home yet, and if I must give everything I have and I am in order to go home, then I will give it away.

This brings us to the third cause for discipleship: The final judgment. Jesus made it very clear in the Gospel of Matthew that there is a judgment coming (Matt 24:29-25:46). And every single person shall give a personal account. The Son of God will divide humanity into two groups on the basis of their response to Him. There are only two possible categories, and the result of one's placement therein is ainios, “eternal.”

  1. Those who have turned away from him in disbelief shall be judged and condemned to “eternal punishment.”
  2. Those who have walked with him in faith shall be ushered into “eternal life.” 

The subject of hell is not exactly a popular subject these days, but these are the words of Jesus, and they stand at the center of his gospel. The subject of heaven, however, is very popular, but there is no eternal heaven without a life of discipleship, a cross of death, and a resurrection.

Conclusion


And, thanks be to God, Jesus has paved the way through death into eternal life by his cross. When life is understood through the paradigm of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, as well as the coming judgment, then our lives take on their ultimate meaning.

Life will give you so much, and you will have many choices to make. May I encourage you to keep the life, death, resurrection, and return of Jesus Christ at the center of your every consideration?

  • May I ask you to accept the adventurous life that He has for you? 
  • May I ask you to keep your faith in Christ first, your spouse second (if He grants you such), your children third (if He grants you such), and finally your diligence to work hard and to study hard in whatever particular vocation He grants you? 
  • May I ask you to leave the gifts of joy in this life—gifts that He will grant you, because He loves you and wants to bless you? Can you leave the gifts up to Him and focus on the life He wants you to lead? Leave the delights of this life to be divine surprises that He delights to give to you. 

Pursue the high calling He has laid upon you. You won’t ever regret it. Deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow your Creator, your Redeemer, your Consummator through this life, through the death at the end of it, and beyond that into eternity. You won’t ever regret following Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, fully God and fully Human.

August 30, 2018

What is Real Biblical Manhood?

Evangelicalism is undergoing a crisis of manhood. By turning our attention to the perfect man, Jesus of Nazareth, we can sort through the confusion and recall a compelling biblical anthropology at a time when men—and women for that matter—require a heroic model for life.

“Biblical manhood” is a term often bandied about today in the church as a foil to the inanities of secular liberalism. Secular liberalism lauds the perverse, excuses the obsequious, and demands fealty to the false gods of sexuality, socialism, and status. We correctly point out the problems with the world’s perversity, but is this ever an excuse for bringing in and exalting our own perversity in the guise of being “biblical”? Have too many looked at our representation of Godly manhood as involving gold, guns, and gross historical fallacies, and seen not healthy manhood but hypocritical mysticism?

In his novel, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn pointed out that the real problem we face as human beings is not in the communities who oppose and oppress us. The real problem we face is in the heart of every man. If you think your real enemy is out there, such that if you could only get that laser pointer on his chest and eliminate the threat, then you fundamentally misunderstand the true war in which we are engaged. The enemy is not on the political left or on the political right of you; your true enemy is right in the middle of yourself. Your true opponent is your own heart. Our real enemies are sin, Satan, and death.

In his famous commencement address before Harvard University in 1978, Solzhenitsyn stunned his audience, not by praising the West, but by pointing out its spiritual weakness and vulgar materialism. “The West should not preen at its victory in the Cold War,” he said, “for it lacks ‘manliness’ and courage.” (Never invite a prophet to give a panegyric!)

So, what is true “manliness”? What is biblical manhood? I think some have lauded biblical manhood but have substituted their own ideals and their own foibles for that which is biblical. Fallen Adam is not the exemplar of true manhood! Don’t take Abraham’s self-preserving lies, Judah’s perverse sexual escapades, or Saul’s proud death-dealing efforts as exemplary male virtue. Rather than looking to the First Adam, look to the Last Adam, Jesus Christ (1 Cor 15:45).

Real biblical manhood is not about demanding what you want, dominating over others, or dallying in selfish sensuality. Being a real man is about obeying God, leading others into excellence in Christ through hearing the Word, and being respectful to the leadership of the Spirit in others. A real man is like Jesus. He doesn’t put others to the sword like Mohammed. No, he climbs up with courage onto the cross that God gives him just like the Lord, Jesus Christ!

And when you look to the teaching of Jesus Christ for who he thinks is an exemplary leader in the faith, prepare to be shocked. Jesus does not laud a son of Israel, a choice man among the chosen people. No, he points out their problems—Even John the Baptist, whom he follows and adores, is classified as being among the “least in the kingdom of God” (Luke 7:28). Instead, Jesus praises one of the occupying soldiers, and a high-ranking one at that. It is this Gentile, this Centurion, who Jesus praises as an exemplar: “I tell you, not even in Israel have I found such faith” (Luke 7:9).

What does real biblical manhood look like? By the way, human beings were created by God to rule (Gen 1:26-28). Both men and women have been given real yet limited power and authority. And God will hold each one of us responsible for what we do with the gift of authority. So, what does male leadership, courageous manliness, entail?

Luke 7:1-10 gives us what Jesus, the only perfect Man, thought real manhood looked like. In this passage, the Centurion displays seven characteristics of true manhood, biblical manhood, redeemed manhood—the type of manhood of which Christ Jesus approved:


  1. The Centurion is a man characterized by great “faith” (Luke 7:9). Real manhood cannot be grasped except through faith in Jesus.
  2. This real man honors Jesus Christ. He does not see himself as a Messiah, for he sees Jesus as his superior (v. 6). There is no “Messianic complex” at work here.
  3. The Centurion uses power, but not for selfish ends. He does not abuse, misappropriate, or glorify self. He does not see himself as “worthy” even to be in the presence of Jesus (vv. 6-7).
  4. This real man “highly valued” those other human servants whom God gave him to lead and care about (v. 2). He seeks out Jesus to heal his servant (v. 3). He continually serves those who serve him by doing all he can for them.
  5. The Centurion leads a life of unparalleled virtue. He is “worthy,” as even his natural political enemies testified to Jesus (v. 4). (The significant Greek terms translated as “worthy” in this passage, axios and hikanos, indicate “fittingness” and “sufficiency,” respectively.)
  6. This real man, whom Jesus lauded as possessing unparalleled faith, loved those who were different from him. This Gentile loved the Jews (v. 5). This man showed no evidence whatsoever of racism. He had a deep appreciation for other human beings who were different.
  7. The Centurion built houses of worship (v. 5). His legacy was to build up the people of God, all of which was ultimately for the glory of God.
Why did the Centurion not want to be in Jesus’ presence? Because he did not feel “worthy” enough. It is not that this man of dignity, authority, and power possessed an inferiority complex. Far from it! He was not a wimpy wallflower. Rather, he understood where true authority lies. True authority, like true glory, begins and ends with God. The Centurion’s assessment was correct, for Jesus in his manhood is worthier than the Centurion ever could be.
If you want to see what a real man, the perfect man, looks like, don’t look to fallen men. Don’t gaze at the screen or the pulpit or the podium. Instead, look toward the Man of perfection—look to where He is. The real Man is there, on the cross, providing for and protecting others, and preaching and practicing love. Christ Jesus on the cross provides us not only with our salvation but with our definition of real biblical manhood.

(Republished from the Theological Matters blog of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary)

May 31, 2017

Defendere Propitiationis

In the life of the church, it is often necessary for those who are called to be pastors and theologians to rise up in defense of a central truth of the Christian faith. This is one of those times. A quick review of recent Christian history may set the background for an action that Owen Strachan and I recently took together for the sake of defending the atonement.

A Recent History of Violence: The horrific decades of the early twentieth century with its two world wars resulted in millions of deaths among combatants and noncombatants alike. These were followed by several decades of constant fear that a scenario of mutually assured destruction might be played out in the Cold War between the East led by the Soviet Union and the West led by the United States, wiping out human civilization altogether. These historical factors played upon the Western psyche, among Europeans in particular, stoking great regret about the past and great concern for the future.

A Theological Shift: As a result, many Christians began to question the violence that so characterizes the human race. They displayed a proper revulsion against wanton violence done by humans against humans. After all, all human beings are made in the image of God and are, therefore, precious. However, the revulsion went so far that many began to see violence itself as ipso facto sin. A proper revulsion against flippant human violence now became an improper revulsion, for some Christian theologians revolted against the idea that God may bring about death through violence. European history was now shaping Christian theology, even in contradiction to the apparent advocacy of certain acts of violence in Scripture itself.

This improper revulsion against violence, which began in a proper revulsion against violence, has extended to the point that many are now calling into question the central act of God in the redemption of humanity, the cross of Jesus Christ. Some have even rejected the idea that the cross involves removing the wrath of God, which is summarized in the biblical word, "propitiation," and codified in the theological language of "penal substitution." For these theologians and preachers, the ideas of penal substitution and propitiation are themselves anathema. They cannot see how a God who is love could possibly place his Son on the cross in order to satisfy the wrath of the Father.

Defending the Atonement: Owen Strachan, a leading Southern Baptist systematic theologian affiliated with Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, exercises a powerful voice for truth in the midst of today's culture. Recently, we discussed with a common friend the difficulty that orthodox Christians face in such an environment. A liberal Christian culture is crying out against wanton human violence (while largely and perversely ignoring the mass murder of the unborn), but it is also endangering the central act of Christian redemption and compromising the perfections of God. As a result of these and related challenges, we co-authored a resolution on the atonement and submitted it to the Resolutions Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Our hopes and prayers are that this demonstration of inter-seminary unity, which is also a demonstration of unity across Calvinist and Non-Calvinist lines, will prompt Southern Baptists to rally once again around the cross as the central doctrine of Christian redemption. We truly believe that a loving God has put his Son on the cross in order to satisfy his just demand for holiness. Without the cross of Jesus Christ, there is no hope for sinful humanity. This is why we believe it is time to defend the atonement (defendere propitiationis).

June 11, 2014

The Evangelistic Seminary

 And he said unto them, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men."
Matthew 4:19

            Christianity is perhaps best described as a twofold following after the Lord Jesus Christ. On the one hand, Jesus' first and foremost rallying cry was, "Come, follow me!" On the other hand, our Lord taught His disciples to extend that call to the world. Likewise, expressing the theme of both the Lord's premiere sermon (Mark 1:14-15 and parallels) and His final sermon, now known as the Great Commission (Matt 28:16-20), the final chapter in the New Testament tells us that the Spirit and the church must entreat, "Come and drink freely of the water of life!" (Rev 22:17). From beginning to end, there is a twofold determination in the heart of the New Testament that ought not be quenched: it includes, first, a desire to follow Christ; it includes, second, a necessarily correlative passion to call other people to follow Christ.
            In establishing His roving school of wannabe theologians, Jesus called the disciples to quit their prior vocation of fishing for fish and to learn, instead, to fish for human beings. The first Christian seminary, the seminary of the Apostles, presided over by Jesus Christ, was thus dedicated to evangelism. And, oh, some of those disciples were not at first what they would become when Christ had completely ushered them through His curriculum. This was a motley student body: their leader, appointed by the Lord Himself, was an ill-educated, impetuous loudmouth who went on to deny his Lord in His hour of greatest human need; another was committed to armed rebellion, though his Master identified a different way; yet a third, a betrayer, was providentially allowed by Christ to enroll. When you can see inside and properly evaluate each human heart, as the Lord can, yet you still allow such students to enroll, perhaps you are seeing not who people currently are, but who they may become through the preaching and teaching of His Word.
            The Seminary of the Apostles was an evangelistic seminary that was itself the subject of the Lord's evangelism. That a seminary should be evangelistic, primarily outwardly but also inwardly, is a fact that was not lost upon the founders of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary; it is a fact that is still evident in the president and faculty of Southwestern Seminary; and it is a fact that must challenge any seminary that dares to claim that it follows the Lord's commandments and example. That a seminary, literally a "seedbed," should include seed bearers whose broadcast of the Word would yield a worldwide harvest was part of the Lord's plan. That a seminary might include the odd student who was not committed to the Lord's ways was also apparently part of the Lord's plan.
            Please allow me a moment of your time to explain why and how Southwestern Seminary became and remains, shall we say, "The Evangelistic Seminary."

1. Southwestern Seminary Was Founded with an Evangelistic Purpose

            When Texas Baptists began their cooperative pilgrimage, the first problem they faced was a controversy over missions and evangelism. The missionary Baptists who formed the Union Association in 1840 were opposed on the one side by the Predestinarian Baptists under Daniel Parker and on the other side by Arminian Campbellite-influenced Baptists under T.W. Cox. Both of these extremes opposed "the promissionary, proeducation, and proeffort leaders" among the eventually victorious traditional Baptists.[1] When the founding president of Southwestern Seminary, the esteemed Benajah Harvey Carroll, began to promote the idea of a Texas institution entirely dedicated to theological education, he emphasized the intended result as first the "stimulation" of "evangelism," followed by missions, then the harmony of the churches.[2] During the 1906 meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention, Carroll successfully proposed a new policy for the Home Mission Board, crying out, "Brethren, give me evangelists."[3]
            Soon after, before the Texas state convention, Carroll famously proposed, "There is great need to create and endow a chair of evangelism." His argument was based on the fact that this was "the mind and spirit of Jesus." According to Carroll, Jesus Christ's "school of the prophets was intensely practical. The wisdom he inculcated was the winning of souls."[4] This chair of evangelism, the first chair that Carroll wanted to be endowed,[5] and the first such chair in the United States, became known as the "Chair of Fire," and its first occupant was also Carroll's chosen successor as president of the seminary, Lee Rutland Scarborough. Indeed, Carroll was so passionate about evangelism that when he discovered that faculty leaders sought to diminish evangelism as a requirement and turn the school in a primarily academic direction, he summarily fired two of the very men he had hired.[6] Robert A. Baker noted that Carroll's godly character was so impressive that other leaders simply accepted such decisions as Carroll directed.[7]

2. Education Without Evangelism Is a Betrayal of Our Calling

            Carroll's decisive leadership in an evangelistic direction was furthered with the choice of the next president, L.R. Scarborough. Scarborough's foundational influence was as great upon Southwestern Seminary, if not greater, prompting the faculty to refer to him with reverence as their seminary's "father" and with fondness as their "brother." They also characterized Scarborough as "a flaming evangelist and a compassionate soul-winner."[8] This was, of course, part of Carroll's plan. He had written Scarborough to leave the pastorate and come to the seminary when it was first founded; he had appointed Scarborough to lead the committee that built the Fort Worth campus; and, after firing the errant faculty, he had requested the trustees to appoint Scarborough as his assistant. He had also given a discipleship-oriented deathbed commission to Scarborough to "keep the Seminary lashed to the cross," according to W.W. Barnes, the church historian who witnessed this event.[9] For Carroll, Scarborough was his necessary successor.
            When Scarborough took the reins of Southwestern's presidency, he delivered a masterful inaugural address entitled, "The Primal Test of Theological Education." In that address, delivered in May 1915, he declared, "Christian education in all lands finds its earliest motive and supreme passion in a desire to train men to be efficient preachers of the gospel."[10] By "efficient," Scarborough meant that Baptists need, more than anything, men who will make the winning of the lost the goal of their greatest and most effective efforts. And by "supreme passion," Scarborough meant that Baptist preachers must be fervent soul winners, in the public pulpit and in private conversations.
            Scarborough offered five marks for the type of preacher that Southwestern must generate, including character, spirituality, scholarship, doctrinal conviction, and denominational sympathy and co-operation. It is in his comments on the second mark that he becomes most pointed. By "spirituality," Scarborough did not mean some type of inward, quietist devotionalism. No, by "spirituality," he meant a white-hot passion for souls. For a minister to be truly "spiritual," he must be "evangelistic." Anything less is a false ministerial spirituality. Listen to Scarborough:
 Too many of our evangelists are unlearned, and too many of our scholars are unevangelistic. We will never win the world by the evangelists alone. We must train a strong group of scholarly pastors, who will go into the church with the soul-winning spirit and power and build evangelistic churches, and from them as centers win the regions round about. A seminary should not put a premium on ministerial stiffness, dryness, and starchiness, and turn out stilted clergymen. An unspiritual, unevangelistic ministry will never be an efficient ministry. The soul-winning spirit and compassion for lost men in our seminaries will enlarge their popularity and favor with the people, contribute to their spiritual life, keep them in vital touch with God and with the unseen realities of religion, and thus preserve our teachers and students from theological drift in doctrines and life, keep them close to the common suffering heart of a lost and ruined world, turn their energies constantly out of the uplifting movements among men, build in them the constructive spirit of missions, and thus make them power-plants, pulsating with the life of God. The final test of a preacher's efficiency is not found in what he knows about the deep things of God's Word, but in what he does with what he knows in bringing in Christ's kingdom among men.[11]
            There are so many passages in Scarborough's works that ring with such power. Was he interested in proper theology? Absolutely, and to read his declarations about orthodox dogma will encourage the heart of every biblicist. But even more, this "father" of Southwestern Seminary was interested in theology being demonstrated in the winning of the lost. For any Christian to refuse to go "with Christ after the lost" is unthinkable. Moreover, the "spiritual life and atmosphere of Christian schools should be kept distinctly and continuously evangelistic."[12] The profoundly appreciated Roy J. Fish summarized Scarborough's legacy, noting that our seminary's father held the line against the social gospel that was so prevalent in his day; that he was "passionate" about the lost; that he started the whole movement toward state evangelism conferences through the first such meeting in Cowden Hall on Southwestern's campus in 1936; that he defined the church as "a group of baptized believers going with Christ after the lost"; that he described personal evangelism as a "fine art," "the finest of fine arts." In summary, "One cannot understand L.R. Scarborough without seeing him primarily as a person of great passion for people who are lost. He not only preached it but he lived it."[13]

3. We Assume Lost People Are in Our Classrooms

            Southwestern Seminary has a legacy of winning lost people to Christ in the classroom. When B.H. Carroll was a young man, he first confessed Christ, but he soon denied our Lord and asked to be removed from his church's membership. He was "an avowed infidel" when he sought entrance to Baylor, but was nevertheless admitted by its president, Rufus C. Burleson, on the basis of Carroll's obvious intellectual attainments and debating skills.[14] Years later, after several crises, upon hearing an evangelistic sermon he went down the aisle to the front of a church, "casting myself unreservedly and for all time at Christ's feet, and in a moment the rest came, indescribable and unspeakable, and it has remained from that day until now."[15] He was subsequently baptized at the hands of W.W. "Spurgeon" Harris, a former Baylor schoolmate. Six years earlier, Harris had been an eloquent opponent of the infidel whom he was now baptizing. That infidel admitted by Burleson into Baylor would become the founder of Southwestern Seminary.
            Another young man was admitted into Baylor, this time in 1888, and he was not a baptized believer. His father sent him to the school with the understanding that the young man would attend all of Carroll's sermons at the First Baptist Church of Waco and send his father a summary. That young man's letters to his father started short but eventually reached sometimes fifty pages in length as he absorbed Carroll's preaching. That young man was baptized at the hands of B.H. Carroll during his first year as a student at Baylor. That young man would later go on to win thousands of people to Christ as a pastor. That young man would then receive letters from Carroll begging him to hear God's call to take up the chair of evangelism at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. That young man was Lee Rutland Scarborough, the "father" of Southwestern Seminary.[16]
            One of the surprises that many new faculty at Southwestern Seminary have when they come on board is that Paige Patterson, our current president, regularly proclaims the gospel evangelistically, not only as part of his public sermons outside the seminary and not only as a regular personal soul winner, but also in chapel. Patterson has consistently presented the gospel in his sermons and has issued altar calls and other invitations during the most public gatherings of the seminary, during both Convocation and Commencement.
            Paige Patterson once explained to me that he does not want to waste any opportunity to lead a lost person to salvation. With a gentle but firm spirit, after proclaiming the Word of God, after explaining about human sinfulness, divine wrath, and the offer of salvation in Jesus Christ, Patterson will invite any students at Convocation to come forward and receive counseling from professors who are ready and willing to lead them to a sure salvation in Christ. At the Commencement ceremony, which typically has people from all over and from every walk of life, many who may never otherwise hear the gospel, he will invite everybody to bow their heads and lift their hands if they wish to receive Christ. Then he will lead in a sinner's prayer of salvation, appealing to the Word of God externally and to the movement of the Spirit internally. President Patterson assumes that there are lost people at Southwestern Seminary and he issues invitations to all sinners to believe and be saved. And many are.
            I have discovered the same phenomenon in my own classroom. My systematic theology lectures are grounded in hours of consistent biblical exegesis and begin with a detailed and passionate scriptural exposition before proceeding to historical examples and concluding with systematic concerns. As a result of this teaching method, learned in part from my own mentor at Southwestern Seminary, James Leo Garrett, Jr., primary emphasis is placed upon biblical proclamation. Because I preach the Word when I teach systematic theology, students may be convicted, even converted. One day, to my surprise, a student stood in class and thanked me publicly for leading him to be born again during one of our systematic theology lectures. He explained that he could not keep silent. My first thought was not to expel the young man and ask him to reapply to seminary for admission, but to praise the Lord and help this man to complete his degree. That young man, formerly a Presbyterian, is now a successful Baptist pastor of a dynamic and growing large church in Texas. I no longer assume that every person in my classroom is truly born again. Indeed, I hope that some are not, for there is no greater privilege on this planet than being used by God to midwife a rebirth. Professors ought to be preachers, too.
            When I remember the history of Southwestern and how its founders made so much of evangelism, perhaps because school administrators and pastors had made so much of it in their lives, I am emboldened to make more of evangelism in my own life. Indeed, while L.R. Scarborough assumed most of his students would be believers (after all, this is a Southern Baptist seminary), he was under no illusions all his students would be. In his famous work, With Christ After the Lost, he has a chapter devoted to "Educational Evangelism." Therein, he discusses how students in Christian schools should meet together "to pray for their college friends" and thus "they have become burdened for those who are lost." "This burden has caused them to go out under the leadership of the Holy Spirit to witness personally to the lost and to lead them to the Lord."[17]
            In the same chapter, on "Educational Evangelism," he discusses "imperatives for denominational schools." Therein, he argues that the administration and trustees must be responsible to the churches and that the faculty must be faithful Christians and that it is best if they are also faithful to their denomination. What Scarborough never argues is that students themselves must subscribe to the denomination's confession, nor even that they must be Christians.[18] Similarly, when directly addressing the fundamentals of Southwestern Seminary, he again puts the emphasis on the fidelity of the faculty, by subscription, and of the trustees to their Christian and Baptist confession. Again, he does not presume to make such a requirement for students. To the contrary, he states bluntly, "No such requirement is made for students."[19] Why would the father of the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary make such a claim? Perhaps Scarborough understood by personal experience that the Christian school itself is a place for lost people to be evangelized and not a disconnected ivory tower for starched shirts. The seminary is a place where evangelism should be practiced by professors and students alike towards everybody they encounter, whether in the school or outside it.

4. Evangelism Suffuses Our Teaching

            Robert Baker writes movingly about how Southwestern Seminary has several ingredients that constitute its spirit. One of those concerns "the nature of a theological seminary." "Carroll, Scarborough, and the faculty did not conceive of Southwestern Seminary as an academic ivory tower in which to retire from the world for study but saw it as a front-line bunker where students participated in the contemporary spiritual battles." And the first example that Baker offered concerned evangelism: "The weekly memorization of many Scripture verses in the evangelism class of L.R. Scarborough was not an academic exercise; it was the loading of the students' weapons for regular use in winning people to Christ, after the example of their teacher."[20] As a student of Scarborough's successor in the Chair of Fire, Roy J. Fish, I can attest that the practice continued into the late twentieth century.
            The second example that Baker offered concerning the evangelistic ethos of Southwestern regards Walter Thomas Conner. In the historical hierarchy of Southwestern Seminary, Conner receives the honor of third place, after Carroll and Scarborough, as indicated in an authoritative collection of essays on the legacy of Southwestern.[21] When Carroll was putting together his plans for the future of the seminary during the seminal years of 1906 through 1908, the founder indicated to the young Conner that he "would be offered the position of teacher of theology in the seminary" if he "would make proper preparation."[22] Conner went on to study with A.H. Strong and Walter Rauschenbusch at Rochester Seminary and E.Y. Mullins at Southern Seminary. He was subsequently appointed as professor of theology at Southwestern in 1910 and retired in 1949. His theology shaped generations of preachers and his influence was profound among Southern Baptists. He declined a professorship at Baylor and the presidency of the Kansas City seminary in order to become the leading theologian at Southwestern Seminary during the first half of the twentieth century. It is said that his "recommendation of young men for the Southwestern faculty was tantamount to their election."[23] Providentially, Conner's student, James Leo Garrett, Jr., became Southwestern's leading theologian during the second half of the twentieth century.
            One of Conner's greatest contributions concerned his understanding of theology as a practical discipline. He argued, "the purpose of theology is to furnish us with a knowledge that is practical in its aim. It is not meant to give us a speculative knowledge that is all-comprehensive and logically complete. It aims rather to give us truth by which we are to live."[24] Through a series of brilliant responses to the acidic trends in his day, Conner concluded thus:
 Properly speaking, Christian theology is the statement of the meaning of the Gospel. A man does not have to have a complete philosophy of the whole universe in order to grasp and state the meaning of the Gospel of Christ. This is not to say that we should not, so far as we can, relate the truth of the Gospel to every other truth. But it is to say that one does need a theology that he can preach. And a theology that is not preachable is not good theology; there is something wrong with it. A good way to test your theology is on a sinner. The Gospel is good news. It is good news because it announces spiritual redemption for the whole world of lost sinners. Theology is the statement of the meaning of this good news in terms that will appeal to the people of our day. This is the thing that makes Christianity a preaching religion. When Christianity ceases to be a preaching religion, you may know that it has lost the passion that grows out of the experience of redemption; that is, it has ceased to be Christianity.[25]
With appreciation, James Leo Garrett, Jr., started his wonderful two-volume systematic theology by summarizing Conner's argument that theology must be evangelistic to be good theology.[26]
            In my own teaching and preaching, I have taken the assertion of Conner and the affirmation of Garrett to heart, both as a pastor and as a professor. (To be honest, I cannot teach without preaching, nor can I preach without teaching, just as I cannot evangelize without preaching, nor can I preach without evangelizing.) At the end of the second semester of the required course in systematic theology at Southwestern Seminary, I require my students to share the good news of Jesus Christ with a lost person. Their job is to be faithful to the Word of God and proclaim it to lost people. During the final examination, they are given an opportunity to reflect theologically on the witnessing event itself. This practice of correlating systematic theology with evangelism has yielded both evangelistic and disciplinary fruit.
            With regard to the first issue, of evangelistic impact, for example, during this last year alone, 146 of my 151 systematic students shared the gospel with a lost person to meet their class requirement. Of those 146 testimonies to Christ, 19 souls were won to profess personal faith in Jesus Christ![27] Nineteen new converts to Jesus from a systematic theology assignment at Southwestern Seminary: I cannot help but get excited about my students having the privilege of leading lost people to an eternal relationship with the living Triune God!
            With regard to the second issue, of personal discipline, the students benefit in profound ways. Some students have sheepishly admitted that their Reformed theology previously stood in the way of their witnessing, but now they were so happy that their systematic theology professor had "forced" them to overcome that. Others have talked about ingenious ways they have brought the gospel into a public classroom, or have been compelled to learn or relearn their Spanish in order to testify better to the growing Hispanic population, or have corrected a heretical teaching about the Trinity, or have led a Hindu to faith in the one true God, or have been led to become a fulltime missionary to Mormons, or have learned that the Holy Spirit is responsible for salvation while we are responsible for speaking the Word, and the list goes on.
            Moreover, systematic theology is not the only discipline that is suffused with evangelism. A New Testament professor, Dr. Terry Wilder, regularly joins Southwestern Seminary's students in order to reach the area around Seminary Hill. When asked why and how he incorporates evangelism into the New Testament course, he writes, "I incorporate evangelism into my discipline largely because (1) God commands us to evangelize/make disciples (Matt 28:19-20; 2 Tim 2:2), and (2) he wants everyone to be saved (2 Pet 3:9)." He accomplishes this goal "primarily by teaching it from biblical texts and by requiring my NT students to share their faith a certain number of times each semester, always being sure not to ask them to do something that I myself am not willing to do or model for them."[28] We have Old Testament, Missions, and Education professors and administrators who are just as adamant about evangelism as our New Testament and Theology professors, and we have not even mentioned the dynamic and vivacious current occupant of the Chair of Fire, Dr. Matthew Queen.
            Similarly, a professor in our Preaching and Pastoral Studies division, Dr. Thomas Kiker, writes, "If we don't train our pastors to be intentional evangelists we will continue to have plateaued and declining churches. The main role of the pastor is to make disciples and equip the saints to make disciples. Evangelism has got to be at the forefront if we are to do what God has called us to do."[29] In a day when our Southern Baptist Convention is forming task forces to examine why baptisms have been in decline, while other task forces seek to dampen arguments over divisive theological speculations, Dr. Kiker's words are especially convicting.
            Finally, Dr. Keith Eitel writes, "Theology without evangelism/missions is like a body without a soul. The one needs the other for human existence in this world. The soul lives on either in heaven or hell. Hence evangelism is the only basis to alter the destiny of anyone who is lost."[30] In a time when our seminary comes under scrutiny for making so much of evangelism, Dr. Wilder's claims about Scripture's demands upon Christians and Dr. Eitel's reminder about the eternal destinies of the human beings who are at stake—these take on even more relevance.

A Final Word

            Evangelism permeates the lives of the presidents, professors, and students of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. We exist to help the churches fulfill the Great Commission of our Lord Jesus Christ. Evangelism is, from a practical theological perspective, our raison d'être. If I may paraphrase W.T. Conner, our seminary's founding theologian, applying his words to the nature of our school, as revealed in its historical and contemporary character, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary is "The Evangelistic Seminary," and the day it ceases to be such is the day it ceases to be a Christian seminary. We are fishers of men making fishers of men and may nothing ever stand in the way of that overriding dominical policy.

Malcolm B. Yarnell III
Director, Center for Theological Research
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
Fort Worth, Texas
Written on the 487th Anniversary of the Anabaptist
Margarita Sattler's Drowning for Testifying to Christ





[1] Robert A. Baker, Tell the Generations Following: A History of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary 1908-1983 (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1983), 33.
[2] Baptist Standard (May 11, 1905), cited in Baker, Tell the Generations Following, 120.
[3] Carroll Papers, File 22, cited in ibid., 125.
[4] Proceedings, BGCT, 1906, cited in ibid., 125-26.
[5] Alan J. Lefever, Fighting the Good Fight: The Life and Work of Benajah Harvey Carroll (Austin, TX: Eakin Press, 1994), 101.
[6] Baker, Tell the Generations Following, 166.
[7] Ibid., 168.
[8] Faculty Minutes (May 14, 1942), cited in ibid., 278.
[9] James Spivey, "Benajah Harvey Carroll," in Theologians of the Baptist Tradition, ed. Timothy George and David S. Dockery (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 169.
[10] L.R. Scarborough, A Modern School of the Prophets: A History of the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, A Project of Christ, A Product of Prayer and Faith, Its First Thirty Years—1907-1937 (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1939), 165.
[11] Ibid., 176-77.
[12] Note the title of his most popular work. L.R. Scarborough, With Christ After the Lost: A Search for Souls (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1952), 98.
[13] Roy J. Fish, "Lee Rutland Scarborough, Evangelism," in The Legacy of Southwestern: Writings that Shaped a Tradition, ed. James Leo Garrett, Jr. (North Richland Hills, TX: Smithfield Press, 2002), 24-27.
[14] It is said that Carroll was such a profound debater as a young infidel that he could argue that the Campbellite doctrines were correct and win the debate, then he could turn around and argue the opposite and win again. Baker, Tell the Generations Following, 56-57.
[15] J.B. Cranfill, Sermons and Life Sketch of B.H. Carroll D.D. (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1908), 13-23.
[16] Baker, Tell the Generations Following, 139-40. H.E. Dana provides more detail regarding the drawn out process in Scarborough’s conversion, including his premature baptism, subsequent conversion, and proper baptism. H.E. Dana, Lee Rutland Scarborough: A Life of Service (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1942), 52-57. Cf. L.R. Scarborough, Prepare to Meet God: The Way Made Plain (Nashville: Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1922), 88-89.
[17] Scarborough, With Christ After the Lost, 98.
[18] Ibid., 97.
[19] Scarborough, A Modern School of the Prophets, 169.
[20] Baker, Tell the Generations Following, 286.
[21] Garrett, "Walter Thomas Conner, Theology," in The Legacy of Southwestern, ch. 3.
[22] Conner, "My Religious Experiences," 12, cited in James Leo Garrett, Jr., "Walter Thomas Conner," in Theologians of the Baptist Tradition, 205.
[23] Ibid., 207.
[24] W.T. Conner, "Theology, a Practical Discipline," Review & Expositor 41 (1944): 350.
[25] Ibid., 360.
[26] James Leo Garrett, Jr., Systematic Theology: Biblical, Historical, and Evangelical, 2 vols (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000-2001), 1:8.
[27] These were tallied by my graduate assistant, John Mann. Email, May 9, 2014.
[28] Email, May 21, 2014.
[29] Email, May 21, 2014.
[30] Email, May 22, 2014.