By Matthew Arbo

We tend to think of courage as a bold leap toward danger. But a truly Christian courage is primarily an enduring trust in Christ. Matthew Arbo explains why perseverance is the heart of Christian fortitude.

The earliest Christian communities were widely and ruthlessly persecuted.  

To be Christian required courage. To bear witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ was to risk everything. 

The Cost of Belief 

The apex of Christian courage is martyrdom. All persons die, but some die for the sake of something ultimate that transcends them. Many Christians have been put to death for their allegiance to Jesus Christ. Through martyrdom, the greatest depth of Christian commitment is displayed. 

Courage requires reckoning with death. As Josef Pieper explains, “Fortitude that does not reach down into the depths of the willingness to die is spoiled at its root and devoid of effective power.” A courage that stops short of a willingness to die is no real courage at all. This willingness is announced and repeated by Christ himself, who commands disciples to take up the cross to follow him. Suffering, scorn, rejection, and death—these his disciples may expect to receive from the world for their faithfulness. 

Courage points to the transcendent. It isn’t enough to be courageous for its own sake. Any display of genuine courage points beyond itself to some superior good. Courage consists in resoluteness toward the good and is thus a commitment requiring confrontation with something “dreadful.” The courageous person suffers yet endures. 

Endurance Is the Essence of Courage 

Endurance, or perseverance, is a principal feature of courage. Thinking of courage narrowly as the heroic act, the boldest step toward danger, misses the more common “passive” sense of courage; “passive” in the sense of it happening to us or coming upon us.  

Clinging to the good requires endurance. The terminally ill patient, for example, suffers from the disease racking their body but, rather than take their own life prematurely, courageously forbears until their natural passing. This capacity for endurance is closely associated with patience. This patient endurance is the essence of courage. 

As the essence of courage, endurance is antithetical to wrathful aggression. The Christian conception of courage underscores the duty to endure, through which the moral substance and strength of the soul is manifest. It also happens that worldly power so much structures the world that endurance, as Pieper puts it, “is the ultimate decisive test of actual fortitude, which essentially is nothing else than to love and realize the good, in the face of injury and death, and undeterred by any spirit of compromise.” That strength comes through weakness is among the deepest truths of Christian faith. The meaning of “weakness” is turned inside out. 

Weakness Turned Inside Out 

Strength through weakness is revealed first and foremost in Jesus Christ.  

Jesus apprises his followers that they will suffer for his sake. It is an inevitability. To be human is to struggle against corrupting powers set against humanity—envy, malice, hatred—and Christians in particular are subject to still greater sufferings because of their identification with Christ. He can ask his disciples to endure suffering as one who is himself subjected to abuse, betrayal, torture, and execution. From the beginning of his ministry, he is ready to die. He endures even the cross and forsakenness. 

Thus Christian discipleship supposes courage: Courage to obey, to witness, to persevere, and ultimately to be crucified with Christ. This is courage to believe and to keep on believing; Christian courage is persevering.  

Those of us who take up the cross to follow Jesus are sustained by the Holy Spirit and supplied all the grace needed to stay the course set before us.  

This article has been adapted from Matthew Arbo’s book The Pursuit of Character: Recovering the Virtues, published by Baker Books. In it, he argues that we can learn how to live a good life by recovering the virtues that have guided Christians before us. Arbo reintroduces readers to the seven cardinal and theological virtues of prudence, temperance, fortitude, justice, faith, hope, and love. 

Get the book from Baker Book House

Get the book from Amazon

Matthew Arbo is an ethicist and policy advisor in Washington, D.C. He is the author of Walking through Infertility and Political Vanity. 

The post What is Christian Courage? appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By Gerald Bray

After the original disciples had died, a new generation took on the responsibility to preach, teach, and interpret the Scriptures. Who were these early church fathers and what can we learn from them?

Who were the church fathers? The term “church fathers” describes the men who led the church in the first few centuries after the death of the apostles. Jesus entrusted the mission of preaching the gospel to his disciples, most of whom became missionaries (or apostles, as we call them) after he ascended into heaven. 

Not all the New Testament writers were apostles, but the others worked in close association with them and transmitted their message. By AD 100, the apostles and their associates had passed away, and a new generation had taken over the leadership of the church. 

They carried on the teaching of the apostles, guarding it and interpreting it to the growing number of people who were becoming Christians. Today these men are grouped together as church fathers: those who interpreted the Bible and formulated the main doctrines of Christianity as we know it today.  

What Did the Church Fathers Do? 

The first and most important thing that the church fathers did was collect and codify Christian teaching as it had been handed down to them by the apostles. The New Testament writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit, but they were not conscious of the fact that they were writing canonical Scripture. Their Bible was the Old Testament, which they had inherited from the Jews and which Jesus had used as the authority for his teaching and mission. It was only later that the Gospels and Epistles that they wrote and that we now regard as Scripture were acknowledged as having the same level of authority in the church as the Hebrew Bible had. This did not happen because anybody decreed it but because the books that form our New Testament virtually imposed themselves on Christian congregations that heard God speaking in and through them. 

The church fathers also worked out what the basic teaching of the Bible was and how it should be presented to the church at large. Their legacy is known to us today mainly through the creeds. The most well-known of them is the Apostles’ Creed, so called not because it was written by the apostles but because it reflects apostolic teaching as the church fathers understood it. 

The second major creed is usually called the Nicene Creed. It is more detailed than the Apostles’ Creed and was composed by church fathers and defended by them against all challengers, making it the most widely accepted confession of faith in the Christian world today. If you want to know what orthodoxy is (as opposed to heresy), this is the place to start—and we have the church fathers to thank for it. 

Why Do the Church Fathers Matter? 

The church fathers were not directly inspired by God, as the writers of the New Testament were, and so they do not enjoy the same authority. They occasionally contradict each other (and even themselves!), they are sometimes mistaken in what they say, and there are a lot of questions that they never addressed in the way we would expect a modern theologian to do. While they may not have understood the Scriptures completely, chances are they had a better perspective than we have today because they shared much the same mentality and assumptions. 

The fathers are also responsible for the broad outline of Christian doctrine that we teach and preach today. The line between orthodoxy and heresy is drawn according to the way the church fathers defined it. 

How Should We Approach the Church Fathers Today? 

We do not share their culture, we do not speak their languages, and we often do not appreciate their priorities. But we do share their principles, we speak (and listen!) to the same God they did, and we agree with them that our preaching and teaching should be determined and directed by the Word of God. 

Ultimately this is why the church fathers matter to us and why we have to be ready to hear their voices. We may disagree with them on many things, just as we disagree among ourselves, but they are our brothers in the faith that we share, and we believe that they have gone before us to a place where we all shall spend eternity. We should therefore get acquainted with at least some of them as we wait to join them around the throne of glory in praise of the one God who is the Lord and Savior of us all. 

This article has been adapted from Gerald Bray’s book Reading the Bible with Ten Church Fathers, published by Baker Books. It’s a compelling and readable introduction to how these early Christians read, preached, and understood the Bible. 

Get the book from Baker Book House

Get the book from Amazon

Gerald Bray (MLitt, DLitt, University of Paris-Sorbonne) is research professor of divinity at Beeson Divinity School. He has authored or edited numerous books, including A History of Christian Theology, Augustine on the Christian Life, and The History of Christianity in Britain and Ireland. 

The post Who Were the Church Fathers? appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By J. Gary Millar

Long before the New Testament, grace was always the driving force of God’s relationship with his people. Deuteronomy reveals God’s unrelenting grace: from choosing an undeserving people to promising a future transformed heart.

It was in a theology lecture at the University of Aberdeen in 1990 that I was first blown away by the words of Deuteronomy 7:6–8: 

“For you are a holy people belonging to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you to be his own possession out of all the peoples on the face of the earth. The Lord had his heart set on you and chose you, not because you were more numerous than all peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But because the Lord loved you and kept the oath he swore to your ancestors, he brought you out with a strong hand and redeemed you from the place of slavery, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt. “

Up to this point, I had operated with a misguided and reductionist view of the Old Testament as a rather long, pharisaical injunction to be good, before the gospel of grace exploded in the New Testament. At a stroke, Moses shattered my perceptions and sparked an interest in this book that has persisted for most of my life. Since then, when people have asked the question (as they often have) “Why write a commentary on Deuteronomy?” my answer has always begun with the glorious truth that it is a book that is saturated with the grace of God. 

God’s Gracious Commitment to His People 

This grace only becomes clearer in chapter 4. In one of the key statements in the book in Deuteronomy 4:6–8, Moses explains that because God has spoken, they should listen and obey, 

This provision is clearly undeserved. It flows from the fact that the God of grace has drawn near to them, has spoken to them at Horeb, and will continue to do so, making his presence with them obvious. 

Grace on Every Page 

This divine grace continues to play a dominant note at every stage of the book. In 4:25–32, the idea of exile is introduced — losing the land and being scattered among the nations. No sooner, however, is this terrible prospect introduced than God announces his intention to bring them back home. “He will not leave you, destroy you, or forget the covenant with your ancestors that he swore to them by oath, because the Lord your God is a compassionate God” (Deut 4:30–31).  

This is God’s grace in action. 

In 6:10–12, Moses urges the people not to take God’s grace for granted, but to remember that all that they have is ultimately a gift from Yahweh: 

“And when the Lord your God brings you into the land he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that he would give you—a land with large and beautiful cities that you did not build, houses full of every good thing that you did not fill them with, cisterns that you did not dig, and vineyards and olive groves that you did not plant—and when you eat and are satisfied, be careful not to forget the Lord who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the place of slavery.” (Deut 6:10–12) 

Grace Still to Come 

It is no surprise that the past and present grace is augmented by the future grace of chapter 30, which looks ahead to the day when God will finally resolve the most basic problem faced by God’s people: that they are incapable of consistent obedience, and that they desperately need God himself to circumcise their hearts (30:6). 

All of this leads eventually to Moses’s final words at the end of the blessing in chapter 33, which provides a fitting climax to a book that, unlike any other, has set the trajectory of the Old Testament firmly on an arc of grace: 

How happy you are, Israel! 

Who is like you, 

a people saved by the Lord? 

He is the shield that protects you, 

the sword you boast in. 

Your enemies will cringe before you, 

and you will tread on their backs. 

The Old Testament’s Gospel Shape 

After Deuteronomy, it should be crystal clear that any careful and faithful reading of the Old Testament will be a grace-shaped reading. The sinfulness of the people has been well established, and we should not be surprised to see it repeatedly raising its ugly head in the books that follow, whether in the history books from Joshua to 2 Kings that are so shaped by Deuteronomy or the preaching of the prophets who provide God’s real-time commentary on that history. 

Already in Deuteronomy, the basic “gospel-shape,” to use an anachronistic term, of the Old Testament has crystalized: God rescues sinful people, speaking to them, tracing out the shape of the life they must live, finding a way to forgive them when they find they cannot live in this way, and promising the resources they will need to do so. All this and more flows from the Deuteronomic doctrine of grace. 

This article has been adapted from J. Gary Millar’s commentary on Deuteronomy in the Evangelical Biblical Theology series, published by Lexham Academic.

Get the book from Baker Book House 

Get the book from Amazon

J. Gary Millar is principal of Queensland Theological College, Brisbane, Australia. 

The post God’s Grace in Deuteronomy appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By Reed S. Dunn

When we pray the psalms that curse our enemies, we coax the darkest emotions out of us and display them to God while we are welcomed into his presence exactly how we are.

How Praying the Imprecatory Psalms Frees Us to Love Our Enemies 

When Jesus tells us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us, we may wonder whether praying curses upon others is appropriate (Matthew 5:44). In other words, are the imprecatory psalms congruent with the New Testament command to love our enemies? Also, when the gospel teaches us that we are as guilty as anyone, is it right to throw imprecatory stones? 

Jesus’s command to love our enemies is not only compatible with the imprecatory psalms, it makes them all the more necessary. These psalms of vengeance and justice have the unique ability to unburden our hearts from the grudges and resentment that makes loving others so difficult. As an example, we need only to look at the author of many of these fiery psalms. 

How David Prayed Imprecatory Psalms While Loving His Enemies 

David exemplified the harmony between love and imprecatory prayers.  

By comparing his prayers to real-world events, we see how his prayers freed him from bitterness and control. For instance, Psalm 59 describes a scene where wicked men prowl like wild dogs hunting for food. Whenever I pray Psalm 59, I have to spiritualize the threat, but it was David’s real-world experience. Those dogs were bloodthirsty men, and the food they hunted was David. When he had the chance to speak to God about them, he vented his anger freely. 

These men were as evil in real life as they appear in the psalm, yet David had a different attitude in real life than he does in the psalm. David gloated over his enemies in prayer but felt pangs of guilt for taunting Saul in real life (1 Samuel 24:5). 

David’s deep respect for Saul didn’t keep him from praying aggressively against him and his men. Instead, imprecatory prayers gave direction to his angry thoughts. They enabled David to honestly name the evil and entrust himself to the justice of God. Anger only becomes sinful when we let it poison our hearts or we act on it against others. David did neither because David prayed. He spoke his mind in prayer so he could return to life as God’s child and Saul’s embattled servant. 

David articulated this perfectly while speaking to Saul at the end of the cave incident: “May the Lord judge between me and you, may the Lord avenge me against you, but my hand shall not be against you” (1 Samuel 24:13). David didn’t have to judge because David prayed. He entrusted himself to the judge and contented himself with whatever vengeance God deemed appropriate. Praying imprecatory psalms took all of this out of David’s hands, and it can do the same for us. David loved his enemies even though he cursed them in prayer. Or, perhaps, David was able to love his enemies because he first cursed them in prayer. 

Imprecations Give Our Entire Selves to God 

David’s faith in God’s justice meant that he could say anything to God and know that God would do what was good and just. He did not have to tell God what to do, he could simply open his heart to God. Some of the imprecatory psalms may seem like overreactions, but David was free to overreact in prayer because he knew God wouldn’t overreact in real life. That is the epitome of a safe space. 

These psalms free us by giving us the chance to experience God’s acceptance at the deepest level. No one would ever pray these prayers if they were trying to earn God’s favor. Instead, we speak freely to him and are fully known. The imprecatory psalms coax the darkest emotions out of us and display them to God, yet we are welcomed into his presence exactly how we are. We have nothing to hide and there is nothing we can say that would change his love for us. That is why these imprecatory psalms can show us gospel truth in the deepest corners of our heart. 

Imprecatory Psalms for Now 

The evil that troubles our world is temporary. Christ triumphed over the principalities of this world through his death and resurrection (Colossians 2:15). Yet, for now, war rages in Christ’s absence.  

Psalm after psalm wrestles with the evil of this world and its assault on the believing community. Yet the Psalter points beyond the evil that prowls about this world. The imprecatory psalms strike a note of optimism, because they work off the assumption that good triumphs over evil, that God is willing and powerful enough to judge this world.  

War ends in the final line of the final psalm: “Let everything that has breath praise the Lord” (Psalm 150:6). 

We keep praying these psalms until the day comes when prayers like these are no longer needed. 

This article has been adapted from Reed S. Dunn’s book When You Don’t Have the Words: Praying the Psalms, published by Lexham Press. 

Get the book from Baker Book House 

Get the book from Amazon

Reed S. Dunn  

Is the pastor of Redeemer Hudson, New Jersey. He cares deeply about pastoral care and spiritual formation. 

The post How Praying the Imprecatory Psalms Frees Us to Love Our Enemies  appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By Matthew D. Kim

Most churches believe they are welcoming but research shows that over 80% of first-time guests disagree. Is your church as friendly as you think?

Crisis.  

It’s a word that can be overused. Nevertheless, there are some things that do warrant being called a crisis. 

I want to draw attention to a crisis in congregations that may not be on many people’s radars: too many churches are less friendly than they realize.  

As Thom Rainer reports, 

Most church members really do think their church is very friendly. … But, more times than not, they are wrong.… Volumes of survey data from church guests indicate that very few churches are really friendly. 

The Church That Thinks It’s Friendly (But Isn’t) 

I have worshiped the Lord with many churches across North America and abroad. Most of the churches I’ve visited have been lacking in friendliness.  

As Rainer pointed out, most churchgoers would say, “But that’s not my church!” After all, which person or congregation wants to be labeled as unfriendly? Yet a common issue plaguing many churches is that established members of a congregation don’t truly see their guests. Oftentimes, we are unknowingly or unintentionally unfriendly.  

What Does a Friendly Church Look Like?  

A friendly church is a congregation in which members and regular attenders intentionally seek out church guests and are trained to welcome them and disciple them while finding a sense of belonging and Christian community.  

This is a long view of friendliness focused on more than the initial visit. 

How can you tell if you’re being unfriendly? Put yourself in the shoes of someone who is visiting your church. We all know the feeling of being ignored when we visit on a Sunday morning. The trick is to remember what it feels like when you are not currently being ignored. 

Friendliness Is a Discipleship Issue 

The phrase “unfriendly church” should be an oxymoron.  

The reality, though, is that there are many less-than-friendly congregations that are unintentionally driving visitors and even regular attenders away. I know and believe that we can do better and, in certain cases, much better. We should want to demonstrate a warm, friendly, inviting, welcoming, and hospitable church atmosphere from the very moment a guest enters the building to the time they step out the door to go home. Friendliness cannot be assumed. We are not automatically friendly because we are a local church. Rather, it must be intentional, strategized, and sustained over time. 

Put simply, friendliness is a discipleship issue. Friendliness should be a core characteristic for the people of God. Friendliness flows from spiritual maturity. Therefore, it matters. 

Let’s together take on the mantle of ministry from Ephesians 4:12–13, paraphrasing the apostle Paul’s challenge: “Every member is a minister.”  

It Takes a Church 

The task of becoming a friendlier church cannot be left to pastors, paid staff, ordained elders, and deacons alone. It will take the entire churchly village to change the culture of any congregation. Don’t let another visitor sneak away never to return by exhibiting an unwelcome spirit toward them, whether intentional or not. The problem of unfriendly churches can be improved with intentionality, prayer, strategy, and unity. Even if you don’t think your church is unfriendly, you can probably admit that you could be friendlier. We can fulfill our part in building the kingdom by growing Christian communities where church guests turn into disciple-makers! 

We Might Have One Chance 

Our church is hopefully never just a person’s preference or a flavor of the month. It’s a potential oasis for friendship, community, support, gospel witness, testimony, healing, transformation, regeneration, and discipleship. You never know if a visitor will ever get a second chance to hear the gospel or encounter the love of Christ. It’s not a given that people will come to church or come back. Long gone are the days when we could presume our neighbors or church visitors are Christians.  

Based on one experience, the people courageous enough to enter your building the first time may or may not visit again.  

Are they worth the adjustments you can make to help them belong? 

This article has been adapted from Matthew D. Kim’s book Becoming a Friendlier Church: A Pathway to Genuine Community, published by Baker Books. In this book, Kim calls attention to the crisis of unfriendliness that prevents many churches from welcoming new people.  

Get the book from Baker Book House

Get the book from Amazon 

Matthew D. Kim (PhD, University of Edinburgh) is professor of preaching and pastoral leadership, holder of the George W. Truett Endowed Chair in Preaching and Evangelism, and director of the PhD in preaching program at Baylor University’s Truett Seminary in Waco, Texas. He is an award-winning author and editor of numerous books, including Ready to Preach and Preaching with Cultural Intelligence. 

The post Is Your Church as Friendly as You Think?  appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By Andrea Burke

The church isn’t just a hodgepodge of people singing songs together — it’s a weekly practice in refusing to cancel one another.

What Cancel Culture Demands of Us 

The overriding tone in our society today is to withhold forgiveness, define someone by their worst day or their most careless word, and refuse to show mercy.  

Cancel culture encourages one to cut off difficult people labeled “toxic”; to build a circle of humans who think like us, vote like us, and live like us.  

Cancel culture, in essence, tells us that people need to do some penance, earn their forgiveness, and work hard to deserve a place in our world. 

When Culture Decides Who Belongs 

The world around us doesn’t have a category for spending time with people who are difficult, sinful, and extra complicated, other than jokes about awkward family Thanksgiving tables. During the last election, there were all-out demands to cut people off if they voted differently from us. Facebook was full of status posts that suggested if you voted for a certain candidate, you were no longer welcome as someone’s friend, in their house, or in their life. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, when the hot topic was vaccines and people were drawing lines in the sand about who was allowed to socialize and who wasn’t, we found ourselves in a mixed group of friends who had different views on the vaccine. There was one evening when we stood around our kitchen island and I listened as each friend declared how they weren’t getting the vaccine and why. Little did they know, I had made an appointment that morning to get vaccinated later that week at a pharmacy down the road. I had my reasons and they had theirs, and at some point I blurted out, “Well, I’m getting mine on Thursday!” For a moment, the room was heavy with silence. 

“Great!” someone replied, and we were able to continue to talk about the “why” for someone like me and the “why not” for someone else. In that moment, we all chose our friendships over the political drama. This wasn’t about policies and protests; this was about our love for one another and our understanding of one another.  

Without true community, conversations like this don’t happen. 

Such Were Some of Us 

In the church, we get weekly and sometimes daily opportunities to practice working out love for our neighbor because they are not just our neighbor but a brother or sister! When those who don’t know Jesus suggest cutting off those toxic people, we admit that such were some of us. When unbelievers say that forgiveness shouldn’t be given freely, we know that we ought to forgive as Christ has forgiven us (Eph. 4:32). When someone says we don’t need anyone else, we know that we do need one another to help carry burdens and to walk this road of life (Gal. 6:2). When someone says they are just fine without the local church, we know that the only way we can spur one another on is by actually showing up with our real bodies for one another, in person if possible, as often as possible (Heb. 10:24–25). 

Where Sinners Hear the Gospel Again 

This weekly inoculation against the vices of this world is how we help one another. We notice when someone hasn’t shown up for weeks. Community groups and circles of friendship provide places for confession, prayer, and accountability. The church calls us out of the darkness and into the light. When we are known, it is a lot harder to hide. And there in the light we find we are among others, in good company with brothers and sisters who also stumbled out of the darkness only because of the mercy of God. 

It is here at church where sinners saved by grace can hear weekly reminders of how much we need the gospel. The Sunday reminder of the communion table, singing the words of truth, listening to the Word preached—these things are like water in a desert for parched souls. 

This article has been adapted from Andrea Burke’s book The Quiet Resistance: An Invitation to Slow Down and Find a Richer Life, published by Baker Books. This book is a compassionate guide to a slower, fuller, and more intentional life characterized by striking beauty, true friendship, tangible quiet, and deep contentment. 

Get the book from Baker Book House

Get the book from Amazon

Andrea Burke is a podcaster, Bible teacher, and women’s ministry leader. The author of A Bit of Earth, Andrea is married to Jedediah. They are raising their two kids, dogs, a few stray cats, six ducks, and a lot of chickens in an old farmhouse near Rochester, New York. 

The post Resisting Cancel Culture with Forgiveness appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By Mark W. Graham

Justin Martyr wrote the first defense of the Christian faith. His surprising conclusion: the best argument isn’t an argument at all.

How Justin Martyr Invented Christian Apologetics 

In 153, a Christian convert named Justin made his way to the office of the imperial secretary in Rome and hand delivered a petition addressed to the emperor Antoninus Pius, his sons, the “Sacred Senate,” and the whole Roman people.  

In it, Justin energetically rebutted a series of accusations that had been circulating about Christians. Using traditional Roman petition language and format, Justin also boldly presented the gospel throughout the work.  

We know this piece today as Justin Martyr’s First Apology.  

It was the first ever work of Christian apology, and this moment marks the birth of Christian apologetics. 

By the middle of the second century, the Romans were not simply criticizing those who identified as Christians but were beginning to level serious accusations against them. Among these were atheism (for rejecting known gods) and various types of sexual debauchery (for imagined goings-on at their secret gatherings and “love feasts”).  

Justin sought to defend not only himself but all Christians from the circulating accusations. Paradoxically, he did so by a real innovative achievement of his own: the Christian apology.  

The Argument of Justin’s First Apology 

In his petition Justin appealed to the reason and justice for which Romans prided themselves. He also responded directly to all the popular accusations against Christians. He began by dismissing the charge of atheism at some length. He also argued that true Christians were not sexually deviant but counterculturally chaste, citing Christ’s teaching about lust and adultery in explicit detail.  

But Justin added a new dimension to a regular procedure of legal and administrative appeals: a powerful presentation of the gospel in terms that Romans would recognize and, he hoped, appreciate. Justin wanted Romans to see the very deep history of the Christian faith as it was laid out through all of Scripture—no innovation or novelty here! Jesus and Christianity clearly fulfilled the old Hebrew prophecies. Christianity was not newfangled, and thus Romans should not dismiss it as such. 

Justin concluded his piece by explaining Christian worship practices, one of the earliest such descriptions available. He argued that rituals in worship were anything but contrived or “meaningless”; what’s more, they helped produce truly virtuous citizens. Christians gathered on Sundays for extensive reading of the Scriptures—both ancient prophets and more recent apostles. They heard expositions on how to apply the Scriptures to their lives. They celebrated the Eucharist. They took up mercy offerings. A “president” led their gatherings. Contra the lurid accusations circulating about them, Christians gathered in decency, something the Romans should have appreciated. 

Godly Living Over Winning Arguments 

Modern Christian apologists and philosophers sometimes have missed Justin’s crucial point: Defending the faith is not really about careful rhetorical training and practice to win arguments. Nor is it a call to any species of heady elitism or rarefied intellectualism.  

The point of his apology was not the classical education, the polished defense, the clever turn of phrase, or the triumphant argument but rather true and godly wisdom lived out in front of the world. Justin was merely using the accepted means of his day to state his case directly; he was simply trying to talk to the authorities and citizens around him who had imbibed all those slanderously inaccurate portrayals of his fellow Christians. 

Justin’s argument was fairly straightforward: Christians are not crazy or criminally deviant or creatively innovative. Rather, following true Reason, “We imitate the excellences which reside in [God], temperance, and justice, and philanthropy,” and all the other virtues associated with him.¹ That particular calling—to live reasonable, just, and self-effacing lives in front of our neighbors and associates—is the most powerful defense of all for the Christian faith, at least according to the Father of Apologetics. 

(1) Justin Martyr, First Apology 10. 

This article has been adapted from Mark W. Graham’s book 30 Key Moments in the History of Christianity: Inspiring True Stories from the Early Church Around the World, published by Baker Books. In it, he tells the story of the church’s first millennium across three continents and fills the gap that many Christians miss between the New Testament and the Reformation.  

Get the book from Baker Book House 

Get the book from Amazon

Mark W. Graham is chair of the history department at Grove City College, where he has taught numerous classes on the premodern world for more than two decades. Graham has been an elder in his local Presbyterian church for over a decade and serves on several committees in his presbytery. 

The post What We Can Learn About Apologetics from Its Founder appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By R. C. Sproul 

The Infallibility of Scripture 

The principle of sola Scriptura was key to the Reformation era debates over justification and what authority can bind the consciences of believers. The Reformers were convinced that, because the Bible has its origin in God and was superintended by his inspiration, it is infallible. Infallibility refers to its indefectibility or the impossibility of its being in error. That which is infallible is incapable of failing. We attribute infallibility to God and his work because of his nature and character. With respect to God’s nature, he is deemed to be omniscient. With respect to his character, he is deemed to be holy and altogether righteous. 

Theoretically we can conceive of a being who is righteous but limited in his knowledge. Such a being could make mistakes in his utterances, not because of a desire to deceive or defraud but due to his lack of knowledge. His would be honest mistakes. At the human level we understand that persons may make false statements without telling a lie. The difference between a lie and a simple mistake is at the level of intent. On the other hand, we can conceive of a being who is omniscient but evil. This being could not make a mistake due to lack of knowledge, but could tell a lie. This would clearly involve evil or malicious intent. Since God is both omniscient and morally perfect, however, he is incapable of telling a lie or making an error. 

Let us examine briefly a formula that has had some currency in our day: “The Bible is the Word of God, which errs.” Now let us expunge some of these words. 

Remove “The Bible is” so that the formula reads: “The Word of God, which errs.” Now erase “The Word of” and “which.” The result is “God errs.” To say the Bible is the Word of God that errs is clearly to indulge in impious doublespeak. If it is the Word of God, it does not err. If it errs, it is not the Word of God. Surely we can have a word about God that errs, but we cannot have a word from God that errs. 

The Inerrancy of Scripture 

In addition to affirming the Bible’s infallibility, Reformed theology describes the Bible as inerrant. Infallibility means that something cannot err, while inerrancy means that it does not err. Infallibility describes ability or potential. It describes something that cannot happen. Inerrancy describes actuality. 

For example, I could score 100 percent on a spelling test. In this limited experience I was “inerrant”; I made no mistakes on the test. This would not warrant the conclusion that I am therefore infallible. Errant human beings do not always err. They sometimes, indeed often do, err because they are not infallible. An infallible person would never err simply because infallibility as such precludes the very possibility of error. 

Why the Infallibility of Scripture Matters to Us 

What does the Bible’s infallibility mean for the average Christian seeking to be guided by Scripture?  

Suppose two people read a portion of Scripture and cannot agree on its meaning. Obviously one or both of them misunderstand the text. The debate between them is a debate between fallible people. 

Suppose, however, that the text is clear and that neither person disputes its meaning. If one of them is convinced that the text is God’s infallible revelation, then the question of whether he should submit to it is answered. If the other person is persuaded that the text itself (in its original transmission) is fallible, then he is under no moral obligation to be bound by it. 

The Authority of Scripture 

The issue of Scripture’s inspiration and infallibility boils down to the issue of its authority. A famous bumper sticker reads as follows: “God says it. I believe it. That settles it.” 

What is wrong with this statement? It adds an element that is unsound. It suggests that the matter of biblical authority is not settled until the person believes the Bible. The slogan should read: “God says it. That settles it.” If God reveals something, that revelation carries the weight of his authority. There is no higher authority. Once God opens his holy mouth, the matter is settled. This is axiomatic for Reformed theology. 

The question of sola Scriptura is fundamentally one of authority. The Reformed doctrine of sola Scriptura, then, affirms that the Bible is the sole written authority for the faith and life of God’s people.  

We are always called to seek more and more to bring our faith and practice into conformity to the Word of God. 

This article has been adapted from What Is Reformed Theology? Understanding the Basics by R. C. Sproul, published by Baker Books. This modern classic is an accessible introduction to the foundations of Reformed doctrines that have been immensely influential in the evangelical church. 

Get the book from Baker Book House 

Get the book from Amazon   

R. C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder of Ligonier Ministries, an international Christian discipleship organization located near Orlando, Florida. Dr. Sproul spoke at conferences, churches, colleges, and seminaries around the world and wrote more than 100 books, including The Holiness of God, Chosen by God, and Everyone’s a Theologian. He also served as general editor of the Reformation Study Bible

The post Is Scripture Infallible and Inerrant—and Does It Matter?  appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By Harold L. Senkbeil and Lucas V. Woodford

As Western Christianity continues to decline, two veteran pastors argue that the church’s real problem isn’t irrelevance but that we stopped trusting in God’s Word to do what he promises it will do.

Christians in the West stand at an uneasy crossroads.  

Christendom has ended. The church has lost her long-privileged place in society. Her boom years are over. The Christian morality that once guided the West is now but a vestige, seen as not only quaint and antiquated but inimical to human flourishing. The challenge is daunting. 

Wave after wave of innovative approaches were introduced in the twentieth century to grow the church. Many of these outmoded evangelistic efforts were labeled as “contextualization”—the idea that if the church wants to effectively reach out, it must contextualize its message so people find it familiar and attractive. In this approach, human culture sets the agenda for the word. 

Still the church continues to decline precipitously while the culture breeds an increasingly permissive society, not bound to any divinely established order. Contextualizing the gospel for successful evangelism in a secularized world of burgeoning paganism is a recipe for spiritual disaster. Shaping our missional efforts according to cultural trends only puts an expiration date on the church. 

Faithful Mission in a Shifting Culture 

We propose an entirely different model—one rooted in the Bible itself. The book of Acts is a practical guide to mission in every generation. It shows how the first Christians were driven not by their cultural context but by the word of Christ to change the hearts and lives of people living very much in the world, yet not of it. They weren’t seeking to convert cultures but people who lived in various cultures. 

Faithful mission in a chaotic world builds on this New Testament template; people in every context—every nation, tribe, and language—should be acculturated by the word of Christ. For two millennia Christians have held that the church cultivates its own transcendent culture in a rapidly shifting social context—the culture of the word. The field is the world. The seed is the word. The word grows and cultivates its own unique culture. You could put it this way: as the word is sown, the culture is grown. 

It’s time to reclaim that approach for the present uncertain moment. 

The vitality and growth of Christ’s church is not rooted in the shifting sands of cultural trends but the living and abiding word of God. The book of Acts provides a blueprint for confident mission in a shifting culture. The story of the growth of the church in that antagonistic setting is the story of the word of God in action. In fact, not once but three times in Acts we find explicit references to the growth of God’s word (Acts 6:7; 12:24; 19:20). 

All too often human ingenuity leads to something other than a culture of the word. While novelty may be well-intentioned, it too often robs Christ’s mission of the vitality he seeks to provide by his clear word. That word remains powerful enough to overcome opposition of all sorts, including the downtrend of the Western church. 

Leading a Church Without Panic or Paralysis 

The decline of the church in the West has caused a lot of hand-wringing. It manifests in two extreme reactions: anxiety and panic or immobilization and inaction. Trusting the power of the word gives us wisdom to act strategically and urgently given the facts and avoid unnecessary anxiety and panic, which leads to bad decisions. Like walking on a log over a river, we must keep our balance or we will fall off either into panic or inaction. These attitudes betray a distrust in God’s word, which declares the gates of hell will not prevail against Christ’s church (Matt 16:18), and it instructs the church and her pastors to “preach the word” and to “be ready in season and out of season” (2 Tim 4:2). 

Faith requires we act with urgency and decisiveness in the face of adversity. Like the word itself, faith is busy and active. It’s always in motion, clinging to Christ and loving others. A culture of the word instills in us the confidence to maintain a nonanxious presence as we navigate the challenges of our day. To develop the culture of the word in the church requires that the word be regularly sown in her midst.  

That’s why our mantra is as the word is sown, the culture is grown. 

This article has been adapted from Harold L. Senkbeil and Lucas V. Woodford’s book The Culture of God’s Word: Faithful Ministry in a Post-Christian Society, published by Lexham Press. In this book, they reclaim the biblical approach to transformation and social witness by returning to the apostles’ own example in the book of Acts. 

Get the book from Baker Book House 

Get the book from Amazon 

Harold L. Senkbeil is executive director emeritus of DOXOLOGY: The Lutheran Center for Spiritual Care and author of the award-winning titles The Care of Souls, Christ and Calamity, and Dying to Live. 

Lucas V. Woodford is president of the Minnesota South District of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod and associate pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church in Farmington, Minnesota. With Harold L. Senkbeil, he is the coauthor of Pastoral Leadership: For the Care of Souls.

The post Why Chasing Cultural Trends Is Killing Your Church’s Mission appeared first on Practicing Theology.

By Bryan Chapell

Just as families are formed through the influence of multiple generations, so it is in the church. Bryan Chapell shows from Scripture how churches must intentionally cultivate multigenerational faith communities, where everyone plays a role in passing faith forward.

Multigenerational Faith 

When our children were small and we were learning what it meant to raise eternal souls in little bodies to love Jesus, we needed the experience and wisdom of other Christian parents. We had little understanding of how precious, powerful, and necessary the care and example of so many others in the church would be.  

In the church, we were blessed to have peer parents who shared our doubts about our capabilities, more seasoned parents to advise and console us, and spiritual grandparents who showed our children unconditional love.  

The reason was not so much that we believed “it takes a village” to raise a child; we believed that it takes a church. 

This belief was driven by instruction in Scripture about how God works to preserve his church and transfer Christ’s love from one generation to the next. Understanding of Scripture’s patterns is important not only for our children’s spiritual nurture, but so that we will depend upon the designs of the Holy Spirit that work beyond our wisdom and weaknesses to create multiple generations of faith. 

Multigenerational Mission 

The reason that churches ought to celebrate faith that passes from one generation to the next should be obvious: Any church that does not become multigenerational dies. God requires churches to honor the contributions of legacy generations and to care for the needs of the present generation, but his Word also instructs us to “tell to the coming generation the glorious deeds of the Lord” (Ps. 78:4). Disregarding the needs, contexts, and pressures of future generations is ultimately to sign the death warrant of a church.  

We do not need to guess how churches become multigenerational. The Bible carefully describes the patterns and practices that maintain the mission of God across generations. The principles are repeated in many passages. One key text is the first chapter of 2 Timothy, where the aging apostle Paul addresses what is probably the last letter of his ministry on earth to a young pastor named Timothy. How will Paul pass the baton of faith to a younger man? 

The Model of Paul and Timothy 

The apostle begins his instruction by identifying himself as the spiritual father of Timothy. He addresses Timothy as “my beloved child” (2 Tim. 1:2), and in doing so identifies his care with that of “God the Father” from whom we learn in this same verse come “grace, mercy, and peace.” Though he is not Timothy’s biological father, Paul uses fathering language to describe his spiritual responsibility to a young leader of the next generation in the church. 

Paul’s cross-generational care is not a new feature of church life. In this same passage, he says his own service to God is built on the foundation of the faithfulness of his “ancestors” (v. 3). Faith has been passed to him by other spiritual fathers in the ancient family of faith. In passing the principles of faith to Timothy, the apostle is following a pattern established long before either of these servants of God was in the church. 

A Community of Spiritual Parents 

Paul recognizes, however, that he is not solely responsible for nurturing the faith of Timothy—and that fathers are not the only ones responsible for spiritual parenting. He reminds Timothy that the faith that now dwells in the young pastor “dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice and now, I am sure, dwells in you as well” (v. 5). Multiple generations of mothers have passed the message of God’s care to this child who now prepares future generations to honor the Lord. 

Many generations, genders, and leaders contribute to the multigenerational mission and ministry of the church. So, in this passage, Paul also encourages Timothy “to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands” (v. 6). That “gift of God” was the enabling of Timothy to pastor his church. The gift was confirmed by the church as hands were laid on Timothy to commission him for this ministry. But Paul’s hands were not the only ones laid on Timothy. We learn from Paul’s earlier letter to Timothy that the older apostle was only one of a “council of elders” that laid hands on the young man to set him apart for the church’s leadership (1 Tim. 4:14). 

There is a picture being drawn through the pattern of intergenerational faith detailed by the apostle in these letters. The picture is one of human figures and families being coordinated with instruction from God’s Word and the power of the Holy Spirit (2 Tim. 1:13–14) to create a church that will remain faithful to God’s purposes for many generations. The implied caption under that picture is clear: The continuous health of the church requires celebration of all generations for the preservation and propagation of the gospel.  

Passing on the Faith 

No single generation can do all the work of the church. For the church to remain strong and for the witness of Christ to remain powerful, each generation must consider what is necessary to pass faith to the next one. This is not always easy. Generational contexts, cultures, and preferences change. Unless a church makes the nurture of the next generation a high priority of its mission, the preferences and priorities of the dominant generation will limit that church’s witness to the lifespan of those presently in charge. 

For churches to continue to participate in the mission of the gospel that has been Christ’s priority since his Great Commission, we must seek to understand the peculiar pressures, differences, and contributions of each generation.  

When we learn enough about one another that we can celebrate the generations, then we will rejoice in the gifts God gives to each so that the gospel of Jesus Christ can be spread by all believers in all times and contexts.  

This article has been adapted from Bryan Chapell’s book The Multigenerational Church Crisis: Why We Don’t Understand Each Other and How to Unite in Mission, published by Baker Books. In it, he equips pastors and ministry leaders to understand generational differences, appreciate the experiences that shaped each generation, and unite them together in one mission. 

Get the book from Baker Book House 

Get the book from Amazon  

Bryan Chapell, PhD, is a pastor and author known for presenting the heart of the gospel of Jesus Christ around the world. He is president of Unlimited Grace Media, daily broadcasting grace-filled messages in major US cities and streaming coursework for the training of future preachers in 1,500 cities across 90+ nations at BryanChapell.com.

The post The Multigenerational Mission of the Church Family appeared first on Practicing Theology.