So with respect to the gift card, conferees can also purchase items with Shepherd’s Conference insignias from the “Shepherd’s Shoppe.” So contrary to my initial concerns, it may prove a boon to be able to pick up “just the right” souvenir.

My fingers are tired from frantic typing. But I’m thankful to be able to serve those of you unable to come to this conference in person.

Lastly, I just learned that the Pulpit Magazine blog is also liveblogging the general sessions of the conference. Visit the official blog of the Shepherds’ Fellowship and see what I missed. =-)

Between the first seminar session and the evening session, the contingent from our church, Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley, went out to dinner at Macaroni Grill in Burbank and met up with a few college students who’ve attended our church during vacation breaks. Here’s a couple of photos of the dinner crowd:

and with the UCLA students (the three in forefront):

And then we took local streets back to the campus to get ready for the 7pm general session to get situated for the final session of the evening.

Okay, now I’m boring those of you who just came here for conference details. Suffer not the details shared for the sake of our beloved church members back at home. =-) That said, enough on the personal details, here comes the session blog…

The session commenced, after a short organ prelude, with an overwhelming musical call to worship from the Grace Community Church choir and orchestra.

This was then followed by an even more overwhelming congregational singing of “Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing,” “Praise My Soul, the King of Heaven,” and “All Hail the Power of Jesus’ Name.”

We were again then blessed by John Martin, Lisa Martin, and Christian Ebner singing the beautiful triune song, “Wonderful, Merciful Savior”:

Dr. MacArthur then invited the congregation to stand as he read Revelation 5 in its entirety, and and invited us to join him in prayer. The choir then again sang, this time singing an entire piece revolving around Christ’s willing sacrifice of himself on the cross, a meditation based on Philippians 2:5-11. Kory Welch, a young man with a terrific tenor voice (and Dr. MacArthur’s son-in-law), then presented us with a musical rendition of Psalm 23:

We then sang, as one voice, the beautiful hymn, “Great Is Thy Faithfulness,” just before Dr. MacArthur again took to the pulpit.

May I just say, I appreciated the previous seminar I attended, which helped me to remember to reflect on the truths expressed in these wonderful songs, and not merely the overwhelming experience of these gifted choirs, orchestras, and singers.

(The following is written from Dr. MacArthur’s perspective)

I have been asked in the evening session to address a few subjects that some of the men from Grace Church and the seminary feel that I should bring before you. I will be bringing two messages that I’ve preached before which are worth repeating, one tonight and one on Friday evening.

I’ve been preaching through Luke for 10 years, and plan to finish this year. It’s been an incredible experience. In the process I came to Luke 21:6, where Jesus makes a statement which really spells doom for the entire system of Judaism in his day. Looking at the temple, he said, “as for these things you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down.” The symbol of Judaism, the great temple built by Herod, 50 years in building, is going to come down to the ground and not one stone will be left on another. It was about 40 years later that actually happened. And it’s never been rebuilt. It was the end of a long, tragic history. It was the end of what had become an apostate, heretical, God-rejecting, Christ-rejecting religious system. And it was all coming down.

These in some ways are the most severe words Jesus ever said about Judaism. What in the world would bring it to this kind of severe devastating judgment? What kind of religion is it that is so cursed by Christ? What kind of religion does Christ seek to destroy? That’s a compelling question. For the answer, turn back with me to chapter 20:45-47:

And while all the people were listening, He said to the disciples, “Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and love respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers. These will receive greater condemnation.”

He said these words in the temple courtyard during the Wednesday of passion week, during his last week of public ministry. During the last speech he gave. The full text he preached is in Matthew 23 and occupies a whole chapter. You can read that for the whole sermon. After this, Jesus walked out of the temple for the last time, never to return again until his second coming, and the disciples followed him out. They spent that evening on the western slope of the Mt. of Olives looking at the temple. In Luke 21:5, it tells us they were looking at the beauty of the temple, overlaid with gold, covered with works of art. This was Wednesday, he left never to come back. Thursday, preparation for the passover, a very private passover. Even the disciples didn’t know where it was going to be, because Jesus didn’t want Judas to know where it was going to be, lest he interrupt all the necessary Lord’s Supper, and the following. The following day was his execution.

He ends his public ministry with a pronunciation of doom on Judaism. That follows symbolically on the smashing of the great edifice of the temple. his final words: “Beware of the scribes and pharisees.” I think it’s safe to say the last words of any man are significant, infinitely more so with Jesus. And he warned about the influence of false religious leaders.

I know the contemporary trend is to “have a conversation” with people. When I wrote The Truth War, I knew it would be criticzed. And I’ve heard that it’s condemning, strident; and that if I really cared about people, I’d engage myself in the “conversation.” I’m guilty of condemnation with conversation. So I’m going to answer that by writing a new book (!) and that book will be a treatment of all of Jesus’ conversations with the false religious leaders, because I just want to do what Jesus did. And I want to see if he looked for common ground, finding a way to converse… or something else.

The gospel is full of encounters between Jesus and religious leaders. The pattern is clear, he made no effort to find “common ground.” There is no discussion of common moral values for teh sake of culture. On that last day, he gives them a blistering diatribe in which he repeatedly calls them hypocrites and pronounces damanations with repeated use of the word “woe.” So on this last day of his public ministry he warns of the gatekeepers of public Judaism. Does this mean he is not sad? No, just a bit later, he wept over them. And he gave them many invitations to turn from their evil ways. But he condemns them not only for bad theology, but bad practice. It’s not their theology but their practice that brought Jesus to the point of public condemnation.

Look at the last few verses, the caution is clear: “beware.” They were the dominant religious influences of Israel. The Pharisees and scribes had developed a complex works-righteousness system. Religious Judaism was apostate. There were some areas of agreement. But if you are wrong on the way of salvation, there is no common ground. He said, “Guard against…” He goes from the warning to the characterization in this same text (v. 46) by these words, “who like to walk around in long robes, and love respectful greetings in the market places… and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers.”

First, he exposes them as hypocrites (as in the first half of Matthew 23). He pulls no punches, they are spiritual frauds. They walk around in fancy, expensive robes; they lengthen the tassels (Lev. 15) as they enlarge the phylacteries in order to parade a superficial spirituality. Jesus himself had tassels on his robe (Matt. 9:20), but the Pharisees stretched them to enlarge their phoniness. They wanted to be called fancy titles. They want to be viewed as the ones who are the source of all wisdom, of all spiritual life. They lack humility, obviously. They love chief seats in the synagogues, places of honors in banquets nearest to the host. They were characterized by long prayers, which were only for appearance’s sake. They’re phonies. But in this whole description, there’s one thing to define their specific sin: “They devour widow’s houses” (also in Mat. 23). Katisthew = “they eat them up, they consume them.” They were guilty of taking advantage of widows. Any study of the OT would reveal God’s great concern for widows & the poor, and this is reiterated in James 1:27. Pure religion is to care for widows (e.g. Deut 10). But these purveyors of religion took advantage of widows.

There are some interesting historical finds that tell us about them. It was forbidden of them to take anything from widows, they did it anyway. They were supposed to offer knowledge without price, but they took money anyway. Keep in mind the scribes were the lawyers who were experts in not only OT law but all other law. They cheated widows out of their estates for which they were supposed to provide legal protection. They were crooked lawyers. They leached and abused hospitality offered by widows. It is recorded they engaged in excessive demands on the most vulnerable widows. They failed to protect widows, and gained a reputation for taking money from older widows who had weaker mental powers. And they did something really unacceptable: they took widow’s houses as a pledge for services rendered, and then threw them out when they couldn’t pay. The rabbis said with alms you purchase your redemption. Obviously in partnership with the Saducees who ran the temple, they cheated them on their exchange, falsely claimed their sacrifices unacceptable so they could charge ridiculous amounts for the animals they were selling. Without husbands to protect them, widows were especially vulnerable to the deceptions of the scribes.

I read that and I thought, “Not much has changed.” How many false evangelists fleece widows? That’s the only specific sin mentioned there. I find that striking. It leads to this statement at the ned of v. 47: “These will receive greater condemnation.” You would’ve thought Jesus might’ve said, “Because we have so much in common, you know what? You guys are missing it with me but you’re not going to have near the condemnation that others are going to have.” No, not lesser, but more. They were fastidiously moral, but greater condemnation would be theirs. There was no common ground at all. Our Lord did not say, “Because God loves all religions, you missed it with me, but you’ll be all right.” No, they would receive greater condemnation at all (cf. second half of Matt 23). The greater in Greek implies “extraordinary” condemnation. And it comes pretty fast, because it’s not long before Jesus pronounces the condemnation in v. 6.

But when you come into ch. 21, there’s the most fascinating account that seems entirely out of context. You look up and see the rich putting their gifts into the treasure. That’s what the system said: you put in alms to purchase your salvation. And a poor widow, Jesus says, put in more than all of them! What is this about? Why does Luke interject this moment of reflection on the temple offerings with this widow? Seems that there’s no connection to the previous. Remember the actual speech was very long and extremely severe and unforgettable and powerful and indelible; and they would’ve all be thinking about what He just said. How does this fit in? The standard answer is this: “Jesus is contrasting the genuine worship of the widow with the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees.” Virtually all commentators says this is a beautiful story in the middle of this ugly, apostate system. “Jesus is teaching a spiritual lesson,” they say. I had a hard time with this, because there is no lesson here! Here are the options (I exhausted about 25 commentaries for this):

• Jesus is teaching not much how is given, but how much is left behind.
• The true measure is the percentage of the gift and the level of self-denial required to make the gift. She is this model of giving generously without thought for how much is left for her. She is the model of the virtue of self-virtue.
• The true measure is the attitude with which one gives. (I don’t see anything about her attitude!)
• Give everything and take a vow of poverty

I will confess in spite of the popularity of these viewpoints none of them makes any sense to me. All those interpretations on the text because Jesus never made any of those points. He doesn’t say the rich don’t give enough, or have too much left over, or don’t practice self-denial. He doesn’t say that the widow gave the right amount either, or that she had a good attitude. He says nothing about anything, about their disposition or hers. Her outward action is all that is seen. It’s not necessarily humble or proud, or anything. She could have been acting out of devotion, or despair and desperation, or guilt or fear. We don’t know! It’s not important or else Jesus would have made it clear. It’s not the point.

Some say, “She gave all she had, doesn’t that indicate a right attitude?” Not necessarily. People give for all sorts of reasons, even sacrificially, for all the wrong reasons. The story is designed to teach us about attitudes, or giving. Unless the lesson is give 100% and take a vow of poverty, and that doesn’t make sense; because Jesus said take some of your money and put it in the bank and earn interest, and talks about saving. The story is not designed to say the smallest gift of the poor is more valuable than the gifts of the rich.

Just one simple reality here: she gave relative to what she had more than anything else because she gave everything. That’s all there is. No comment that the Lord loved her, that the Lord blessed her, there’s no comment that she was in the kingdom. No word to the disciples, “Men, imitate that widow’s sacrifice. Empty your pockets, put it in a bag, dump every coin in that temple.” It’s not there.

So because it is such an odd place to inject a lesson on giving, because the Lord makes no other comment, because the rich aren’t condemned and she’s not commended, because no principle is drawn from it, we can’t yet grasp the meaning. There has to be some other explanation. We can be helped by the context: judgment. Clearly in v. 6 and all the way through v. 36, the whole context is judgment. One more comment: the true interpretation of this passage is not obscure or profound or deep or one of the great spiritual insights. The disciples got it. How do we know? Because Jesus didn’t explain anything. They had lived it, they had seen it. This wasn’t the first woman who did that. It does not say that Jesus was pleased; it was in fact likely that Jesus was displeased with what he saw? How would you feel if you saw a destitute, impoverished widow give her last cent to a false religion? You’d want to rescue her! This is her last opportunity at life, but she’s now going to go home and die. You’d feel sick. It would repulse you. Any religion that would make such a poor soul feel she had to give her last two cents to buy into divine favor… that’s corrupt. And that’s exactly how I believe Jesus saw it.

Matthew 15 is an important parallel text. The Pharisees and scribes came and asked why the disciples didn’t wash their hands before eating bread.

1 Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, 2 “Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.” 3 And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 “For God said, ‘HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER,’ and, ‘HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH.’ 5 “But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever I have that would help you has been given to God,” 6 he is not to honor his father or his mother.’ And by this you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition.

This is so typical of these false religious leaders. God doesn’t want your money to the destitution of the needy. God doesn’t operate a system of religion that abuses poor people. God’s law was never given to impoverish people, but to help them. If a poor widow came to Grace Church and did the same thing, putting her last cents into the dish, we would want to find her and rescue her from that poor misconception and put people around her to provide her! This is not a model to follow. Something very different than that is going on here.

Returning to the text, “He looked up.” What does this mean? That he had been looking down. He’d come into the city of Bethany of Saturday. People had flocked to him, it’s an exhausting experience, his triumphal entry. He hides in the olive trees on Monday night. On Tuesday with massive crowds, returns on Wednesday, confrontation, teaching, preaching. He sees the system in all of its ugliness. By the end of Wednesday, he’s exhausted, and he’s spent himself, humanly speaking in a fearsome speech. An agonizing speech to the leaders of the city He loved and over which He wept. He had to be emotionally exhausted and it was now over. Now, no more sermons, no more preaching, no more invitations to salvation. And He’s exhausted, and He sits down. Mark 12:41, parallel account, says He sat down. Weary, sad, contemplating the damning religion of Judaism. Remember on Tuesday he had cleansed the temple, because they’d turn His Father’s house into a den of robbers. He knew the nation had finally rejected Him. And as He sat in the place where the previous day He had just cleaned out, He knew it could never be clean, it would be destroyed with the whole city. So he sat with thought before some final words to His disciples.

And His eyes are down, and as His strength comes back, He lifts his head, looks up and Mk 12:41 says He was sitting opposite the treasury observing how people were putting their money into the treasury. This was an open quad. It was called the treasury because there were 13 receptacles attached to the columns for people to give of their money. And here is the real heartbeat of false religion: the leaders are becoming rich at the expense of the people they abuse. Always, false leaders are moved by greed. The Pharisees and scribes were lovers of money. As our weary Savior looks up, He sees the rich putting their gifts into the treasury. Mk 12:41 even says they put in “large sums.”

The religious system was built on money and the rich had enough to give and live. That was the pattern. People giving to a system of works-righteousness and salvation-by-alms.

What is characteristic of these leaders? They devour widows. Ah! Jesus had just mentioned one sin in the Lukan account: the severe abuse of widows. The theology of the leaders was that “if you are poor or sick, it’s because God is punishing you. And if you want to escape your punishment, give your money to God and buy salvation, blessing, favor.” And here is the widow, the victim of a corrupt system. She puts in her last bits of money in hope that God would favor her. In today’s vernacular, an act of “seed faith.” Two small copper coins: 132 of these made a denarius. Nothing said about her attitude, spirit, desperation, legalism. Nothing said about her personally. All he says is this (v.3): “Truly I say to you this poor widow put in more than all those rich people…. for she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.” What is He saying? This system abuses the poor, those who can least afford it. Belittled in their state, add to that the fact that they were women and therefore second-class, and easily exploited. The real tragedy was the abuse of widows taking place in the name of God in the house of God, the God who cares for the widow and the orphan. The temple had truly become a den of robbers, taking advantage of the most defenseless of all. The rich could afford to put in, but she couldn’t. It literally says, “all she had to live on.” “In my last effort, I’m going to put all my money here, last hope; and if it doesn’t work, I’ll die.” No way this is being commended as a noble effort. He was simply making the point that the temple system was badly broken, taking advantage of helpless people, and He’s not happy about what He sees. Because in v. 5, the disciples are talking about the temple, and the discussion going on is about the beauty of the temple. And Jesus talks about the inevitable destruction of the temple. Jesus’ response was: “Any system of religion that takes the last two cents out of widow’s hand is corrupt and I’m going to bring it down.”

Jesus resented this. The last note, leaving the temple, wasn’t a theological note. There was plenty to condemn the system theologically. But it was the practice that Jesus condemned, of abusing defenseless people. One of the reason that there was a Reformation was because the Roman Catholic people was abusing people (in the same way). If it wasn’t Luther, someone else would’ve done it. People were fed up with the system, of being abused. By the way, the largest percentage of givers to charismatic prosperity preachers by far are single older women. Where do you think these guys get their massive ranches, dozens of homes, fleets of jets, massive amounts of money? From the desperate under the guise of “seed faith.” “Send me your money and God will make you rich!” So I say, “Woe to you who sell your miracle water, and miracle rags. Woe to you wealthy self-indulgent TV preachers who make your money on the back of the poor, diseased, impoverished. Woe to you who indulge in $10K/night hotel rooms who claim revelation from God with monety taken from the most desperate and desolate. You will not escape judgment.”

I read about a hotel employee in Africa who was under the influence of a prosperity preacher, who’d embezzled up to $400,000. When they finally tracked him down, he lived in poverty. Where was the money? He wanted more, so he said he gave it to a prosperity preacher. How bizarre is that, thinking God will bless you because you gave money that you stole? That is a blasphemy to the name of God. They will not escape judgment.

As we think about so many of these things, all these aberrations are terrible defections from the Book. Just stay faithful to the Word.

The second general session began half an hour after the first seminar session.

As the session began we were called to worship from Psalm 34:1-3, led by an assistant minister of music from GCC. We sang together, “Come, Christians Join to Sing” and “And Can It Be?” After that, classical guitarist and grace Church member Christopher Parkening played a beautiful piece on his guitar for us. Then John MacArthur stepped up and thanked Christopher, and then introduced the speaker for this session.

The keynote speaker for this session will be Tom Pennington, senior pastor of Countryside Bible Church in the Dallas Area. Tom has been associated with The Master’s Seminary and Grace Church for a number of years. John M. and Tom have been close friends for 16 years, including 4 years as a senior associate pastor alongside MacArthur. Tom and his wife Sheila have three daughters.

(As before, the remainder of this post is written from the perspective of the speaker)

As I thought about my responsibility this afternoon, I was reminded of a famous incident from the life of Spurgeon. In his pastor’s college, Spurgeon would often pick a passage on the spot and pick a student. One day he picked a student to preach from Luke 19 to preach on Zacchaeus. The man stood up and preached, “Zacchaeus was a little man, and so am I. Zacchaeus was up a tree and so am I. Zacchaeus came down, and so will I!” As we begin this conference, we need to ask, “Why are we here?” Why are you here? Preaching, food, fellowship, books, it doesn’t get any better!

There are specific reasons for all of us, whether encouragement, refocus, life & ministry. While the specifics may vary, at its root, there is one basic common reason: we all want to have an effective successful ministry. One defined by spiritual life & vitality. By stability and fruitfulness. And that’s what we want for our individual lives as well. Where can we find the roadmap for this? In one sense, Scripture in general. But there’s a specific passage I want to highlight today: Psalm 1.

The purpose of the book of Psalms is to provide a divinely inspired record of man expressing himself to God. Spurgeon said, “Psalm 1 is the text from which the rest of the Psalms is a sermon.” It is one of the wisdom Psalms. It is intended to guide us in the path of divine wisdom. According to Thomas Watson, Psalm 1 discovers the quicksand on which the wicked sink to perdition, and the saints tread to glory. The theme of this Psalm is that there are only two paths in life: the way of the righteous (vv. 1-3), the way of the wicked (vv. 4-5), and verse 6 gives us the destination of those two paths.

But I want to look especially at the spiritual prosperity that comes with the way of the righteous. “How blessed is the man.” This surprises us because it’s not the usual Hebrew word for “blessed.” The usual word is barach and speaks of God’s intervention in a life and grants blessing. The second word is eshare, and it is never used to refer to God, and never something God does. God never uses this word. It is a strictly human conclusion about another person or circumstance. The picture behind this word is another person inspecting the life of the righteous and coming to a conclusion. it could be translation, “O to be envied” or “How completely to be envied” is this man. The Septuagint uses the same word here as the New Testament in the beatitudes. There is an objective state of well being that is accompanied by subjective feelings of satisfaction, joy and delight. Bruce Waltke writes that this word refers to people who experience life as the Creator intended.

Consider v. 3. “… in whatever he does, he prospers.” The point of the analogy is that the righteous man has life, bears fruit. This man has spiritual life & health & vitality; unlike the wicked who are pictured as chaff which has no biological life at all. The righteous man is also carefully cared for. The Hebrew word for planted is literally “transplanted” and the word “stream” often refers to irrigation canals. So this man has been carefully cared for by someone, in a dry and arid climate. This is a picture of sovereign grace. This requires the faithful care of a gardener who tends it. God has brought life into something that didn’t have life, transplanting this man where he will grow strong & spiritually health. Contrast with chaff which can be driven by the wind.

This is also a life of significance: “it yields its fruit in its season.” When a tree bears fruit it benefits others, fulfilling the reason for its existence (unlike good-for-nothing chaff). He goes on to say the enviable life has endurance: “its leaf does not wither.” Even when drought comes, this life survives. Compare again with chaff: what isn’t driven away by wind is gathered and burned. The righteous is enviable because of his stability, significance, endurance. Notice in v. 3 he returns the picture of the tree, and simply concludes with his point: this man enjoys a remarkable state of well-being accompanied by joy & satisfaction. He has life, cared for by God, fulfilling his purpose, giving blessing to those around him. Whatever the circumstances, his soul prospers and thrives.

That is what every one of us wants as men and ministers, as people and pastors. This is picture of a life we all crave and desire. But here’s the tragedy: we can pursue those worthy ends in the wrong way, and often do. Every couple of years, a new solution appears in the Christian marketplace, promising to fulfill these promises. The same temptations come to us as pastors, pursuing success in the church. The list is nearly endless: maybe we just need to refine our purpose, add some staging & props to create interest, maybe take another survey and reframe our ministry, maybe we just need to embrace some medieval practices and light some candles, etc. These are well-intentioned (but wrong).

Do you want to enjoy the kind of spiritual prosperity in life & ministry that Psalm 1 describes. I know you do, that’s why you’re here. The path to that kind of life is found right here in Psalm 1. There are only two paths: that of the righteous and that of the wicked. The way of the righteous is the way of the Bible and the way of the wicked is everything else. How do we get on the path that produces such an enviable life?

The psalmist identifies two foundational commitments if you want the kind of life that is eshare.

The first is to abandon every human way. Look at v.1, the three expressions of sinfulness and wickedness described. It possible describes a progression of sin. But it’s probably no the primary point. The three verbs used in v.1 are the three postures of someone who is awake. if you’re not asleep, you’re walking, standing or sitting. The point is that in the whole of our waking lives, if we want to be the righteous man, the righteous man has nothing to do with these things. The Hebrew grammar suggests the same, the tense of the verbs pointing to the habit of one’s life. So what does he abandon?

He does not walk in the counsel of the wicked. The word counsel refers to the giving of advice in making decisions. Here the psalmist means the advice of those who regularly break God’s law. The righteous doesn’t walk, as a habit of law, in the counsel who walk in disregard of God’s law. For example, if you’re younger than 40, you probably wear your hear messy (cheap shot at Sovereign Grace in which you like it bald!). If you’re 40-60, you hold your hear in place. And greater than 60, you’re just glad you have hair. Why do we make those choices? Truthfully it’s because we’re following the culture/people around us. Which is fine because the Bible doesn’t dictate hair styles. The problem becomes when we follow the advice of the culture in how we run our lives and our ministries. How are we tempted? To adopt the philosophies of our time. For example, we live in a world where naturalism reigns, which says macroevolution is fact. So we attempt to sync our understanding of Genesis with evolution. Or humanism, which moves us to man-centered ministries. Postmodernism says the reader gives the text its meaning, so we shape the text to mean whatever we want. So we can be tempted to embrace the counsel of wicked in the philosophies of our day.

We can also embrace the methodologies of our day. Some examples include measuring by crowd size. Trying to entertain. Adopting secular psychology by outsourcing the counseling of the church. Survey your folks to find out what they want and shape your ministry. This works for selling cars, but not for preaching the gospel. Whatever form it takes, the righteous man abandons the advice of the wicked at every level, whether in his life or in his ministry.

V. 1 adds he doesn’t “stand in the path of sinners.” The word for sinners refers usually to those who commit specific offenses against specific commands. The Hebrew word for path comes from a word meaning “to tread, to trample.” It refers to the paths or ruts formed by carts passing the same ground again and again. So it’s a perfect metaphor to refer to someone’s lifestyle or habits. I was the last of 10 kids, and our family owned a red jeep in the south. We lived in the woods & swampland, and our jeep cut trails all over those woods. And everywhere we went, just beneath pine straw was red alabama clay. What do you get when you coming lots of rain, red clay and jeep? Fun! If we took the same trail several times, it wasn’t long before the jeep cut ruts into the clay making the paths impassable. The Hebrew word for paths speaks of those kinds of ruts: predictable kinds of behavior. We are not to continue in the ruts, patterns of behavior in which sinners live. We must not adopt the lifestyle of sinners.

Consider to Psalm 119, which I consider a commentary on Psalm 1. You see the same picture in verse 104: “From your precepts I get understanding, therefore I hate every false path. Because I love your way, I hate all other paths.” V. 128 even more profoundly, “I esteem as right all of your precepts concerning everything / I hate every false path.“

Proverbs 4:14 makes the same point: “Do not enter the path of the wicked, do not proceed in the way of evil men. Avoid it, stay away from it.” Go around it, far around it. The emphasis is again made that the righteous person does not adopt the lifestyle/behavior patterns of sinners. There are voices today that say we should adopt the way of our culture in the name of contextualization. However well-intentioned, this is still standing in the path of sinners. There are other ways as well. There are undoubtedly men in this room, even as they are indulging a life of secret shame. If you are hiding a pervasive unrepentant life of sin, I plead with you: repent of that sin, seek God’s forgiveness, and quietly get out of the ministry. Maybe you don’t have a secret life of shame, but you’ve gotten lazy. You’ve gotten into a pattern of giving in and giving up. “Resolved, never to give over, nor in the least to slacken, my fight with my corruptions, however unsuccessful I may be.” Jesus said as much in Matthew 5: “Cut off your hand…” He meant we must get radical in dealing with our sin, doing whatever it takes to deal with the sin that’s in our lives. If you are tolerating ongoing habits of sin, you are standing in the path of sinners.

There’s a third thing the righteous man doesn’t do: he doesn’t sit in the seat of scoffers. This has to do with our belonging. The Hebrew word for scoffer describes those who are farthest from repentance; those who openly ridicule and reject God’s laws. This doesn’t mean we cut off all contact with these people. Paul told the Corinthians we have to interact with unbelievers because we’re in the world. But the psalmist is talking about “sitting” which refers to a gathering. There are times this is referring to formal assembly, and other times an informal social one. This is talking about connecting ourselves physically or socially such that we belong to scoffers. This may sound old-fashioned, but this is the path, that we must run away!

I’ll mention ways we sit in the seat of scoffers. Attending seminaries, sitting under the feet of men ridiculing the faith. Joining the local ministerial association when there is no unity on the fundamental doctrines of our Christian faith. We cannot belong to the assembly of those who are scoffers.

Don’t miss the main point of v.1. Together these three nouns include all unregenerate men. These are not small subsets of unbelievers. In fact, the psalmist wants us to see is that that every unbeliever without exception is included in v.1. The righteous man abandons every path of all those who reject God. He abandons thinking like they think, living like they live, belonging where they belong. If this is not your commitment, you will never spiritually prosper in the sight of God. You may have some success in this life, but you will not enjoy the enviable life that Psalm 1 describes. Calvin wrote, “no man can be duly animated to the fear and service of God, and to the study of his law, until he is firmly persuaded that all the ungodly are miserable, and that they who do not withdraw from their company shall he involved in the same destruction with them.”

Second, we must embrace only God’s way if we would live the enviable life. The psalmist reduces the righteous man to one thing: his response to Scripture. The righteous man finds his delight & meditation in the law of God. Early in Israel’s history, “torah” was used to refer to one command, the pentateuch, the whole law, etc. Eventually it referred to entirety of God’s revelation. The point here is how a man responds to God’s way as revealed in the bible. Note: he delights in it. The word refers to emotional joy or desire. It’s what he wants, it’s what he craves. A picture of this word in a non-theological setting by going back to Psalm 107:30, it’s used to describe experienced sailors stuck in a storm for days and when completely exhausted, their chief delight becomes the idea of returning to land, to a “delightful” harbor. That’s a picture of what our desire for God’s Word is to be.

This is also a major theme of Psalm 119. E.g., vv. 14, 24, 35, 47, 72, 77, 143, 174 all speak of rejoicing, delighting in God’s law, often better than gold or prosperity, in spite of trouble. Is that really how you think about the Bible? If on Sunday morning if you substitute anything else for the Word of God, I guarantee that is not the case. But that’s not the case for most of us here. But let me ask, can you truly say that you find delight and pleasure in the Word of God? Or has your approach to Scripture become merely cold & academic, just for sermon preparation? Do you find more joy in theological blogs than in the Bible? If you have to admit that you’re not in the same place in the psalmist, how can you increase your delight? Simple: spend more time there. Jeremiah 15:16 describes how he “ate” the word of God and delighted. Luther said the more you draw and drink from the Word, the more it stimulates your thirst.

The happy enviable righteous man finds his greatest delight in the Word of God.

There’s a second response of the righteous man: he also meditates on it. This describes the man who quietly speaks to himself about the Scripture, or reading quietly and going over & over again. It literally means to moan, mutter, whisper. The main point, though is not what comes out of the mouth, but what’s in the heart. In the context of Psalm 1, we can define meditate as to reflect, to think, to have an internal discussion of the Scripture. To think deeply about the Word of God. There are always two goals to this type of thinking. First, to understand the meaning of the text. Meditation brings weight to the text through illumination, consider Psalm 19:18. Or the prayer that God would open our eyes to see. Illumination is a work within us that enables us to grasp and love the meaning in the text before us. It’s so we grasp as reality for ourselves what the sacred text sets forth for us. The second goal of meditation is application.

But this kind of work requires diligence and hard work.  Don’t be lazy! Not all “expository preaching” truly is. You need to meditate on the text, and also apply it to yourself.

[At this point, I needed to leave the session 10 minutes early to attend to our travel group's affairs. Sorry!]

A few miscellaneous notes:

Each year the conferees at the Shepherd’s Conference are treated to a special gift.  Past gifts have included a garment bag and a leather portfolio (dubbed “the sermonator”).  This year’s gift was simple: a $50 gift card to the conference bookstore.  I’m a bit sad at the lack of personalization but I haven’t yet examined the selection in its entirety yet (representatives from numerous publishers have set up table in the bookstore).

Each year conferees also receive a box full of great books.  This year’s book bag includes the following books:

• The New Answers Book by Ken Ham
• Brothers, We Are Not Professionals by John Piper
• The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 by James Montgomery Boice
• The Mortification of Sin by John Owen
• 1 Samuel: Looking on the Heart by Dale Ralph Davis
• The Cross and Salvation by Bruce Demarest
• Love That Lasts by Gary and Betsy Ricucci
• Jesus Christ: The Prince of Preachers by Mike Abendroth
• The Doctrines of Grace by John MacArthur
• Putting Jesus in His Place by Robert M. Bowman Jr. and J. Ed Komoszewski
• The Cup and the Glory by Greg Harris
• The Master’s Plan for the Church by John MacArthur
• James (Reformed Expository Commentary) by Daniel M. Doriani
• A Tale of Two Sons by John MacArthur

Being the “music guy” at my church, it wasn’t a difficult choice for me to pick which seminar to attend in the first round. Andrew Snider, who’s on staff at the Master’s Seminary, is leading a serminar titled “A God-Entranced Worship: Infusing Your Music with a Biblical Theology of Worship.” I hope my notes may prove encouraging and/or helpful to some of our readers. My plan for the remainder of the conference is to attend the following seminars:

• Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs: The changing sound of corporate worship(Clayton Er, Bill Brandenstein)
• To Protect & Serve: An interactive forum on elder rule (Rob Iverson)
• Delivery & the Powerful Pulpit: Preaching the sermon with clarity and conviction (Alex Montoya)

For your reference, the SC folks will be making available for download notes from all the seminar sessions after April 21 at www.shepherdsconference.org (but that won’t be live!).

After opening in a word of prayer, Andy Snider welcomed attendees of the seminar, which is being held in the main worship center of Grace Church. He teaches theology at TMS, and has been involved in music ministry for his entire adult life. He and his wife (the latter being the ‘real musician’) have been involved together since they day they met. For the last 20 years, he has seen a lot, and the Lord has laid a real burden on his heart for corporate worship in the church. The goal of the seminar, in his mind, is to reflect theologically on worship in order to consider the role of music in a corporate worship setting.

The guiding principle for this reflection is “faithful worship”:

• Adheres to biblical intent for worship
• Expresses the Christian faith
• Manifests & inspires worshipers’ faith – “my faith in God grows as I express it in corporate worship”

Theology of worship is a very broad topic, so he’s going to try to take some key issues in order to help us think about music in a corporate service.

Note: How does private worship related to corporate worship? Psalm 34:1-3 refers to our “private” worship life, our devotional worship life:

I will bless the Lord at all times; his praise shall continually be in my mouth.

My soul makes its boast in the Lord; let the humble hear and be glad.

O magnify the Lord with me, and let us exalt His name together.

When we gather for corporate worship, it is so the private worship can overflow into a corporate worship setting. We sense this on the first session when we sing together with thousands of other men.

There are three areas he wants to address: motivations for faithful worship, the nature (“what”) of faithful worship, and then the leadership of faithful worship.

Motivations (“why”) for faithful worship

Summary: worship is a response to God’s self-revelation. In the book Recalling the Hope of Glory, Allen Ross talks effectively about worship being a response. There are three aspects to the revelation, trinitarian in nature.

First, worship is a response to the transcendent attributes of God.

God is holy. When you consider God’s holiness, the OT & NT words for holiness refer to “separation.” Holiness speaks primarily not of ethical considerations but the fact that God is separate from the universe. Isa 57:15 speaks of God being “high and lifted up” (though especially from sin). There is God, and then there is everything else. Include in this category his omniscience, his omnipresence, the fact that he’s not bound by the universe’s limitations on power, knowledge, etc. He has no beginning, no end, he doesn’t age. This should have an effect on our worship. We come to worship a God who is separate — and yet is God with Us, the Holy One, in our midst. Also included in our consideration of His holiness is that He is sovereign (Ps 103:19). The OT system of worship, particularly sacrifices, is oriented toward the holiness of God (Lev 19:2). It had implications for people’s life and their worship. Peter brings the same verse into the NT in 1 Peter 1. In Lev. 10:3, God reminds Moses that He will be treated as holy, that He will be honored. So the holiness of God is a key motivator for our worship together as the people of God. No one song can complete any one theological aspect, but the holiness of God must be reflected in our worship as a whole.

God is love. The love of God is a pervasive theme in the Old Testament. We have a prayer in Exodus 33 that reminds us of a renewal of God’s covenant in the aftermath of the worship of the calf, etc. It culminates with Moses asking God to show His glory. But the display of His glory the next morning wasn’t bright lights, but the attributes of God (Ex. 34:6-7). Six of the seven attributes have something to do with the love of God, only the last makes reference to His judgment against sin. The idea that the OT has no reference to the love of God is misled; 8 times this passage is quoted in large part or in whole in the Old Testament from the pentateuch to the post-exilic period. When the people in the Old Covenant thought of God, this is what God wanted them to think: that he is a God of love & forgiveness. This theme is continued in the NT, stated conveniently in 1 John 4:8,16: “God is love.” These same attributes come up in Titus 3:4-7, applied to Christ, in the Greek. In this passage we see the six attributes of God’s love and the one of God’s justice shown in Christ. How does God’s love appear as a motivation of worship (Psalm 136): Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good, for his steadfast love endures forever.” We joke about repetitive choruses, but here in Psalm 136, we see 3 words (“his steadfast love endures forever) 26 times. God must be okay with some repetition (more later).

God is just. I’m using the term just here on purpose instead of righteous. The justice of God encompasses both His character trait of righteousness as well as his demand for righteousness among His creatures. He is righteous in Himself and requires righteousness in others. It is just for Him to require His people to imitate His righteousness. We can see this brought forth in Romans 3:26 – “that He may be just and the justifier” – bringing together the attributes of His love and His righteousness. How is God’s justice/righteousness portrayed as a motivation for worship. Take for example Ps 35:28: “My tongue shall tell of your righteousness and of your praise all the day long.”

So we can take God’s holiness, love and justice as categories and see how these guide our worship; and not the music style, or order of service or liturgy we choose to use, no human conception or desire for fun. Our worship music must be essentially Godward. If we choose these priorities this can even take care of some of our silly disputes over style. Does this music speak of the attributes of God in such a way that people are brought to a place of worship, adoration of God.

The Redemptive Centrality of Jesus Christ

Jesus fulfills OT worship (Heb 8-10). We are told that Christ is the perfect sacrifice — once for all – for sins. He is also the perfect High priest for sinners. The uniqueness of Christ is that He is both the sacrifice itself, as well as the perfect High Priest. As the one who partook of our weaknesses in the incarnation, and offered sacrifice for sins; He intercedes for us before God. So worship culminates in the person of Christ. So our worship should be motivated by that redemptive centrality. Not only does He fulfill OT worship, but Christ dominates NT worship. Jesus is portrayed as the object of worship. But He is also displayed as the channel for worship. E.g. Heb 13: “Through [Christ], let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God…” He’s not only dominant as the object of worship, whom we worship; but He is also our access to God. We must never forget that we can gather to worship because of the cross. Our worship music must exalt the beauty of Christ. Do our worship services make Jesus appear beautiful? People should be responding in adoration to the Savior. Is He our friend? Yes. But is He just portrayed as a buddy? Or is He also portrayed as Lord and Redeemer who brings us into the presence of God. I choose the word “beauty” on purpose. Our music should not just portray the right facts, but should compel them to respond.

The Enlivening Presence of the Holy Spirit

He is the presence of God among us (we’re the sanctuary/temple of God). 1 Cor 3:16, is not referring to “me individually,” but as a group, we together are the temple of the Holy Spirit. As the temple of the Spirit, He is among us to unify and enliven our worship. There’s something qualitatively different about corporate worship. there’s a reason David said, “Magnify the Lord with me” and didn’t just stay in his room. One reason for that for us is that the Spirit is among us. Our worship music must be energized by the Spirit. It doesn’t mean we don’t plan, or just “go with the flow.” Rather, our worship music should be built upon the reality of our awareness of and dependence on the Spirit (“the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”).

The Nature (“what”) of Faithful Worship

Worship is a believer’s joyful work (as John Frame writes about). We come to give ourselves. Our worship involves an investment of ourselves. Worship is:

Sacrifice. Allen Ross helped me so much in this area. there’s a tendency to think about the sacrificial part of worship as merely a part of the Old Covenant, and is now past. But there’s a legit sense in which our worship is described as sacrifice. Understanding our worship as sacrifice is based on an understanding of Christ’s sacrifice. Christ is our once-for-all offering. His redemptive work is done, and He makes intercession for us in the presence of God. We therefore come to God in Christ just as Old Covenant believers came to God through the sacrifice of animals. The sacrifice of Christ makes worship possible. But the NT also speaks of our worship as a sacrifice of ourselves as well (Romans 12:1). Sacrifice of self is pleasing to God. Presenting our bodies as a sacrifice is worship language. It is expected that we will render this service to God. So we are to offer ourselves as sacrifices, our whole lives. We see this in Psalm 51:17 (NET) as well, “The sacrifices God desires are a humble spirit – a humble spirit, O God, a humble and repentant heart you will not reject.” And I would say that because worship is sacrificial, it is also transforming. But we have to be careful. This is not a sacrifices that appeases God (like a sin offering) but one that pleases God (like a thanks offering).

This implies that our worship music should acknowledge and confess sin. It should also rejoice in the Savior and the cross. Our music should express our joy that Christ has made the perfect sacrifice for us. It should express our commitment (“sacrifice of self”) to Christ. In life and especially when coming together with God’s people. And it should focus on fellowship with God and others. We shouldn’t forget that corporate worship is to be done “corporately.” We allow our people to come worship God as “me” coincidentally with others… but rather there should be a sense of “let us exalt His name together.”

Proclamation. Worship is proclamation. I would love to stop and tlak about how worship in th OT involves proclamation. When Abraham leaves Haran, we are told that he gathered up his servants & possessions, and “all those he acquired.” The most prominent Jewish commentator translates this as “the souls that he had won.” Probably people who saw Abraham worshiping, and joined him in worshiping! There’s a proclamation element prior to Moses. We can talk about how the Lord’s table is a proclamation of His death until He comes!

Revelation informs worship. The word of Christ dwelling richly among us is to inform our worship music (Col 3:16). Not just richly dwelling “among me” but “among us.” Since revelation informs worship, public reading and exposition drive worship. Biblical content provides truth to which worshipers respond — not just emotional response! The content, the text of our songs is what we are to respond to. If the Word of Christ – the gospel – is richly dwelling among us, what are we responding to? The message of truth. Col. 3:16 continues about “teaching and admonishing one another.” this shows us that worship is a way of learning. Worship music is related to this learning. There’s some debate on the grammar here, but it’s clear that the music is related to the learning that’s supposed to take place in our corporate worship gatherings. But it needs to be said that this kind of learning is not exactly the same as preaching & teaching, or even discipleship counseling. As a child I did not learn the facts of the gospel through a song. My pastor, teachers, parents taught me. But as I sang songs about the gospel, I began to ponder it. The music functions to slow me down to think about these words. As a result, a certain kind of learning takes place. Learning theology is not about stocking the bookshelves of your mind with true propositions. If your heart is not affected by the truths that you learn, you have not learned it. You really don’t know it! Worship music is a way of helping to apply (learn!) these truths to our lives. When we leave a service, it’s not the text of the sermon that’s usually ringing in our ears, but the music. Music appeals to our will. It’s also one way of evangelism (1 Cor 14:24-25). It’s certainly true that the church itself is composed of those who have placed faith in Christ, but Lord willing there are those who are among us not yet part of our church; it’s very important that unbelievers be able to decipher what’s going on in your midst, so that they can fall to their knees and confess Christ as Lord. So worship music is a way of learning, esp. related to our will.

The implication here is that our worship music must focus on Biblical truths. It must also communicate content clearly; better a repetitive clear song than a flowery song that people don’t understand. This is an area we have to take care of, esp. with older hymns with beautiful texts. Lest people fail to connect with the meaning, no matter how rich they are. Our worship music must also draw believers to believe truth. Not just instructing in the sense of explanation, but expanding our application and our embrace of Biblical truths. I hope in your worship life you encounter songs, even old ones, that cause you to pause and say, “You know, I’ve never really thought about that text.” And God uses it to change you even though you’ve been singing it for years. As an example, “Like a River Glorious,” though “perfect” it increases; just last fall, the peace of God portrayed in that song came to me in a fresh way. This is one reason new songs, or re-arrangements of old songs, are so important. “When I Survey the Wondrous Cross” is a terrific hymn, but it never gets around to why the cross happened. So remember, worship is proclamation.

Celebration. Worship is a celebration; not that we’re just duty-bound to sing about Biblical truth. Worship is a response of joy! Joyful celebration is pervasive in apostolic ministry, and is systemic to the Christian faith (Romans 14:7). Joy is key! We could talk about tendency to separate “joy” and “happiness.” Study the concept of joy in either OT or NT, and you will find words that refer to happiness that you can’t hide. There’s an element to Biblical joy that can only be described as happiness, and particularly in our worship assemblies. We are gathering as those who can be happy about Jesus and what’s He’s done and doing even in the midst of suffering. Worship music can be overly somber or restrictive.

But celebration should also be reverent. The fear of God is real to true worshipers (Heb. 12:28-29). Our worship gatherings of being reverent people, which protects us from being trite.

Because worship is celebration, our worship music should give expression to joy arising from redemptive realities. And it should also inspire awe and humility. And it should draw us to an elevated expression. A couple of years ago, he passed a church sign that listed services and said, “Casual worship: 6pm.” Casual worship — nothing could sum up better one of the key problems of the contemporary church. It’s “casual.” “Come and hang out with Jesus for a while.” The closeness we have with God the Father is a humbling closeness. But none of this dependent on any musical style! This can be accomplished with many different styles.

The Leadership of Faithful Worship

Worship is a communal activity.

The Pastor’s Example. You may or may not be the worship leader in your church, but I challenge you to be the lead worshiper in your church! If you are shepherding a flock, your church’s worship will never rise beyond your personal example. There’s a good chance you all believe the right things. But what we need is not necessarily better theology, but better leadership. The pastor(s) must lead in worship by engaging in worship. Don’t go over your notes during the worship music. You get engaged, and your people will see it and follow.

The Pastor’s Exhortation. Music is not warm-up. Teach (yourself & the congregation) on the purposes of worship! If we had a gathering of people who just wanted to worship God, they might not be so concerned about what instruments are on stage. We also need to shepherd “weaker brothers” who are overly concerned about styles. We need to be concerned that a particular sound won’t cause them to sin; we need to shepherd them beyond that. We have so many more important things to talk about than style. There’s always going to be a line beyond responding and disrupting, and we have to deal with that. Note we’re not trying to invoke a particular response (clapping, “amens”, etc.). But we want folks to feel free to respond. Have you ever stood in the back and watched people sing about great and glorious truths, but people are just singing with no life at all? Something’s wrong.

The Pastor’s Evaluation. Disciple your worship leaders. Are you involved in worship leaders’ lives? Leading music is a pastoral function. It’s part of our function as shepherds to ensure that the ministry is executed, but we also have to oversee it. We also have to ask, are we doing all things for edification (1 Cor 14:26) and decently and in order (v. 40). “In order” means not chaotic and perceptible.

We need to ask the right questions. Like, how can we get our people to have a fuller appreciation of music for God’s glory. We can go on and on about one style or another being associated with a lifestyle. Let’s instead shepherd folks to gain a better appreciation of the gift of music as a vehicle for worshiping God. “How do I shepherd my people toward fuller worship.” Also, handle Scripture correctly. Make sure we don’t read texts on worldliness as meaning that certain music styles are out! Shepherd people toward a passion for faithful worship that is driven by redemptive realities, that understand God is, and as a means for engaging with those realities.

Other areas affected by worship theology: special music, instrumental music, use of technology, “order of service” and use of liturgy.

Q&A

Snider then opened it up for questions from the seminar attendees.

“What are the limits for corporate worship?” Our music must convey the realities of God clearly, and it must not be chaotic. Music must keep us together. I have a hard time thinking about how rap could be used in a corporate worship setting. Regardless of what you think of rap “music” (his emphasis), it couldn’t keep us together, because most of us can’t rap! There are other styles, extreme rock & roll (e.g. speed metal), which are ill-suited for corporate settings. There are songs we can sing on our own that just don’t work. One question is, is it “singable” — can people catch onto.

“In revelation informs worship, should our worship set be before the preaching, or after?” How many have been in a service where music was not done until after the sermon. Consider an experiment, where you begin the service with a sermon, to show that worship is a response to revelation.

“Special music?” We’re at a church in L.A., entertainment culture. I’m sensitive that we have brothers from other cultures here. You have your own cultural considerations. Here in the U.S. we are in an entertainment culture. I challenge you to think carefully about how you position special music in your worship service. Is it a sacrifice of praise, proclaiming Biblical truth, celebrating the redemptive realities of the cross, drawing attention to the one we worship? It’s tougher than you think. I never want people to think about “what an amazing song” they heard if they don’t go on about how it blessed their soul! The biggest blessing is when someone comes up after I’ve been involved and say, “You know, that one line is something I’ve never thought about.”

“How to introduce new arrangements of old hymns to a congregation?” There are differences of opinions. My suggestion is that you introduce a hymn with a new arrangement, to show you can sing great words to different music than you are accustomed do. We do new arrangements in Crossroads all time. Sometimes they add a new refrain. It makes you stop & think about the words, if you can get past the fleshly response of, “That’s supposed to be with an orchestra.” If you can get people in a right theology of worship, they can get past it to deeper worship. Examples include Chris Tomlin or David Crowder (“O For a Thousand Tongues”). Also you can introduce really good new stuff, like the stuff from the Gettys.

“Can you provide insight on how to help a musically talented leader on what is easy for a congregation to sing?” Sometimes it’s trial and error. A key aspect of replacing debates about style is to apply the principle that we prefer one another. We need to take the principle of deferring to one another into our corporate worship setting, putting aside the many different personal musical preferences so that we can come together to worship! This is a job for shepherds to help encourage their churches in this way.

The first session was prefaced with a winds orchestra and organ playing a number of instrumental pieces, conducted by the Grace Community Church minister of music, Clayton Erb. I’m seated in the 7th row back as we prepare for the commencement of the conference.

The Master’s Seminary student body joined together as a choir to open the session. They shared with us a beautiful rendition of “Be Thou My Vision”.

John MacArthur then stepped up the pulpit (which rose up out of the stage!) and offered a formal welcome to all the conferees. He thanked the choir, and as well made mention of the numerous conferees (indicated by a show of hands) that are staying in the homes of members of the church. As he prepared to pray for the conference, someone offered a loud “thank you,” to which MacArthur replied with a “You’re welcome… and there won’t be any answering back to the preacher!” *grin*

He prayed then for the conference, that God would accomplish His purpose for His glory in every life, and committed the time to the Lord in the name of Christ.

After the choir performed another piece, the whole congregation of men was invited to rise and sing together “Praise to the Lord, the Almighty,” followed by “O Worship the King.” What a rousing sound to hear so many boldly rejoicing in Christ in song!

We were then treated to a moving performance of “Blessed Assurance” performed by baritone Jubilant Skyes, with Mark Grace on piano.

John MacArthur then took to the pulpit again to bring us the first keynote message, joking about having to follow Jubilant’s act many times (“Please, one more, one more!”). What follows will be in the first person as Dr. MacArthur preached it.

Introduction

I want to begin by expressing his desire to set the tone to the conference (and then made an chuckling allusion to last year’s controversial opening keynote on eschatology). I want to suggest that the heart of my message is “Why Every True Calvinist Must Affirm a Biblical Ecclesiology” (and reject church growth theory). If you believe the words of Matthew 16, that God has chosen and determined who He will redeem and written their names down in the book of life; if you believe that Jesus will receive all those the Father gives to him, keep them, lose none… the question is, “How does church growth theory fit into that?”

Sovereign election has already determined who will constitute the redeemed church. That was determined in the counsels of the Trinity before time began. Furthermore, our Lord has laready fully propitiated the wrath of the Father for the sins of the elect. Scripture teaches that there was an actual atonement. It is Biblical to use words like definite, actual, real, specific with reference to the atonement. Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice was designed to procure salvation/atonement, not just to make it potential/possible. Christ did not do on the cross the same thing for the people in hell as he did for those in heaven.

This is what Scripture affirms, though we defer to another time to defend it. That leads us to this necessary conclusion: since the Lord has determined the church, draws, regenerates, justifies his Church and brings his church through eternal sanctification to glory, this is a supernatural work. But it’s not a work apart from means. Through which God does His work and we participate. It is the Lord giving life, giving repentance, giving saving faith to his church; and it will not fall church by one soul.

The question for us is this: as the Lord builds his church, by what means does he do it? And secondly, has He revealed the mans to us. If we are undershepherds of Jesus Christ to be the human instruments to build His church, we need to understand how He does it. We need to get in line with divine pattern. There are many ways to build the “first church of the tares.” Behind which Satan is the real power. It can be done very effectively, it can be big and enduring. The gnostics did it, and it’s still around. The Roman Catholics have done it, the liberals, the cults. They’re all still around. The church of the tares is actually bigger than the church of the wheat. Even those who call themselves evangelicals today are busy doing it. There are anumber of places called “churches” where tares gather in increasing numbers. The successful assemblies of tares will eagerly market their skills at “tare development.” It can be very seductive to those motivated by pride, numbers, popularity. If you want to compete with other “tare pastors” there is ample information, seminars, data on the internet, to work on building your church of the tares with a smattering of wheat. However, if you serve Christ and recognize him as the head and builder of the church, then all you want to know is, “How can I be useful to him in the buiding of his church?” And that is why you are at the Shepherd’s Conference.

So back to our question, and the answer is not vague, complicated, difficult. It is simple, straightforward. It is so clear as to be inescapable, and singular as to make every one of us to be duty-bound to faithful to His will and means so clearly revealed. If you are caught up in chasing every fad for church growth, if you are buying the bags of church growth stuff that clever marketers are selling, if you’re reading every survey to analyze culture… I want to throw the gauntlet down today, and urge you to make a choice. You want to to be a means by which Christ builds His church, that’s a different thing altogether.

The heartbreaking thing, I’m not going to say anything you don’t know, or haven’t known for years. It’s not hidden under some obscure historical contextural reality or Greek nuance. It’s a plain message. Christ said he would build His church, and the book of Acts shows how He did that.

Is it too obvious to say that the book of Acts was given by the Holy Spirit to show us how Christ builds His church? Not in theory, but in reality. This is exactly how the Lord went about building the church He promised He would build. I want us to particularly see the amazing story of church growth in the early part of Acts. And this is only the beginning. There’s a hint at the size of this in Acts 2:39, “… as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself.” In that verse is divine sovereign election, effectual call, the substance of everything from the opening remarks about the fact that the Lord is building His church. It’s for those who come after you, who are far away from you. This is almost an infinite verse, going beyond generations and places until finally we get to heaven and we see people from every tribe, tongue and nation gathering around the throne worshipping the Lamb.

How successful was Christ’s effort in the early church? Acts 1:12ff shows how in one day the church goes from 120 to 3000 souls. The Lord is building His church. In v. 47, “and the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.” Acts 4:4, “and many of those who heard the message believed and the number of the men came to be about 5000.” The number is growing and growing. Acts 5:14, “multitudes of men and women were constantly added to the church.” Now it’s in the multitudes of thousands. Go to 6:7, 9:21, 12:34, 16:4-5, 17:12, 19:20, over and over, the church continues to grow. So when we say that the simple obvious theme is the book of Acts is to answer, “How does Christ build his church?” it will help us for us to go back and see the components that produced this church growth. This is coming out of no history, it’s the first generation church.

What are those elements?

First, they had a transcendent message. This is so obvious it may those of who have embarrass those of us who have forsaken it. What is the agency by which the Spirit produces salvation? The word of God (Romans 10). So we understand that salvation comes by means of the Holy Spirit using the message. And that message is a singular message: if you preach any other message, you’re accursed. Any other gospel, you’re cursed. By definition this singular message must be transcendent. What is plain is that the message of the early church transcended all cultures, levels of education, notions of status, nations, etc. Please note, there is no “global village.” National identity was fixed and unmixed in those contexts, unlike the “universal mentality” we’re used to in our day and age. There is no mass media producing “world norms.” There were deeply engrained cultural perspectives all over the globe and they had no effect on the message.

Going back to Acts 1:8, “You shall receive power [for evangelism] when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you shall be witnesses of me …” Note the utter indifference to geographical, racial, ethnic issues. The power of the gospel is all that matters, you can take it to the ends of the earth. 2:5, the Jews in Jerusalem would’ve had distinct characteristics. They were all there at Pentecost; the power of the Spirit came and they were speaking in languages. Note v. 8 how they hear in their own language from all variety of regions! “We hear them in our own tongues speaking the mighty deeds of God.” All that is necessary for the power of God to be released in a given situation is that the truth of God be proclaimed. It’s irrelevant what the cultural expecations are. Then Peter preaches his sermon, and all this diversity of people were pierced to the heart in response to his exposition of Psalm 16. It is a message of sin and repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Doesn’t matter what nation you’re from, what language; the message never, ever changes. We know who is going to respond to his message (v. 39), “those who the Lord shall call to Himself.” Not only did he not identify with the generation, he said, “You’ve got to be saved from it ["this perverse generation"].”

Practically, the transcendence of the message means that the message never changes, no matter who you are talking to. The Jews said, it’s a stumbling block. The Gentiles called it foolishness. Paul responds, I’ll continue to preach only Christ and Him crucified. Why would you change the message when the natural man doesn’t understand the things of God (1 Cor 2). So the apostles went out with absolute disdain for “any contextualization at all. The modern cry for contextualization is a curse. Because people are spending all their time trying to figure out whether they should have holes in their Levis as if that’s a mean to drawing in the elect. Instead of spending time figuring out the Biblical context. The apostles crossed hard national social cultural lines and the message never, ever changed. It’s the Word of the Lord. Contextualization, JM calls it “zip code ministry.” Is that what you want? “We’re big in our zip code!” You must affirm the message transcended it’s original culture. it ignores all the pecularity of style and envere descends to musical styles or clothing. So he posed this question, “Can your message go to any person, every person? not only in your zip code, but in your town? In your state, country? Can your message go anywhere in the world? Can you take your sermons anywhere on the road and preach them?”

I’ve preached my messages just about everywhere on the planet: from the high mountains of Ecuador to the business buildings of Hong Kong. And I never change the message. We have many translations of GTY radio, books, study Bibles… and the message never changes. Or… do we need an expiration date on our sermon CDs?

It’s pretty obvious: the Lord builds His church with straightforward, simple gospel truth. The Corinthians were bugged by the lack of contextualization, but Paul didn’t care. John the Baptist, all the OT prophets, and Jesus Himself didn’t care about contextualization. Don’t appeal to anything to people that is innate to their fallenness. Wherever their corruption goes, don’t go there. The true gospel has to be alien.

Second, they had a regenerate congregation. There’s an odd idea! Is it too obvious to say the church of Jesus Christ is an assembly of true believers? To call an assembly of non-believers “the church” is preposterous! There is a serious defect in a minister gathering non-believers and calling it a church. Modern evangelicalism seems to love gathering non-believers into a building and call it a church, and call it church growth. Maybe there’s a better way to identify these places, let’s call them “non-churches.”

In the early church it was about a regenerate congregation. Acts 2:42: they were devoting themselves to the apostles’ doctrine, fellowship, breaking of bread and prayer. You had 3000 people who’d made a profession of Christ, were baptized; and doing nothing but those things that are connected to spiritual life. The apostles’ teaching, fellowship (the interchange of ministry, the “one anothers”), coming the Lord’s table, and prayer. That’s a real church, doing what real Christians do. You probably read sometime back about Willow Creek admitting they’ve been doing it wrong all along… and then had a conference with Brian MacLaren about how to find new ways to collect non-Christians. That’s not a church. Instead here in Acts 2, you have saints doing real ministry, “all those who believed…” That’s a church! They had all things in common, giving people to had need, day by day continuing in one mind, devoted to spiritual disciplines, taking meals together with sincerity of heart. That’s a church. What is the result? V. 47, the Lord was adding to their number day by day! In a matter of weeks, thousands and tens of thousands.

The Lord defines His church as real believers engaged in the spiritual disciplines, gathering for spiritual purposes. This is far cry from what goes on in the “non-church” today. An event is designed for unbelievers, and a few straggler believers in the assembly of tares getting nothing to lift them up from their spiritual weakness. The Lord builds his chruch from the foundation of true believers.

Third, when the Lord builds His church, it is marked by a valiant perseverance. You need a balance. The church is not to seek popularity. We understand that all who live godly will suffer persecution. The chuch does not seek to be popular, in its true expression, the essence of our message offends sinners. But the church should also gain some measure of respect in the world for the integrity, graciousness, etc. that comes with being a Christian. When in Acts there was a healing in the temple, and Peter healed the beggar, there were people in wonder & amazement at what took place. So there’s a sense in which people do see the church and see amazing evidences of transformed lives. They may see a drug addict, adulterer, criminal, totally transformed by the power of Christ. That’s why we see in Acts 5:13, “they held them in high esteem.” This is what Jesus meant by men “seeing your light and glorifying your Father in heaven.” We want to live lives of virtue and character and showing the power of the redeeming Christ. 1 Tim 3:7 says even elders are to have a good reputation with those outside of the church.

But alongside that general esteem or respect — and we’ve all experienced that from non-believers — they resent us for the message. The resentment comes at the point of the truth preached and proclaimed. So in the modern strategy, you big with the number one idea (“they like us becausewe’re nice”) and you pull back the rest so they keep on liking us. But if you continue with the message, they’ll start not to like us. So it was in Acts 2:36ff, “whom you crucified!” He’s talking to religious Jews. In 3:17ff, Peter calls his listeners to repent and return. Again the message clearly is repentance. Same again in 4:10ff, a continual tone of indictment. Same in 5:17ff. The picture that emerges is this: there is necessary a kind of integrity & virtue that’s manifest in the church and the world. But the message when preached honestly is rejected, it is hostile, it is offensive.

There’s a trend today to eliminate the law from evangelism. Prov 16:6 says by the fear of the Lord one keeps away from evil. But you only have that if you know what God demands. You can’t take the law away because (1) you take away from the work of the Spirit (convicting the world of sin & righteousness), and (2) you take away the ally in the unregenerate man (Romans 5) and his conscience accuses him even in the law already in the heart. We can’t back away from sin, righteousness, judgment, not perishing. This is an exclusive message that puts all those who do not believe in the category of those who are damned forever. We are called to alarm the sinner. That’s going to create hostility. Persecution. Jesus said it could even result in our losing our lives. And the early church felt it big. You would conclude from the early believers going to jail, if you were church growth, that “this is not good. We want to be accepted, we want to be liked by everyone. It’s tough enough to get them believe something that’s foolish. Tough enough to tell them they gotta be slaves to Christ. But to tell them they might be put in jail, executed? That’s not going to work!” Oh yes it is: “but many of those who heard the message believed… ” Persecution doesn’t retard the church. People come to salvation not because it’s an easy way, but because the Spirit of God draws them because they’ve been chosen by the Father!

You know the story of Acts 12:24. The church has a valiant perseverance in the face of persection. Even the threat of death cannot stop the church. We don’t need to mitigate the cost of becoming a Christian.

Fourth, the church growth plan in the book of Acts involves an evident purity. The biggest threat to the early church was this: there were so many signs & wonders, so many miracles that unbelievers might come to church for the wrong reasons. That’s the deadly danger. There are lots of sick people, diseased, disabled. Miracles were going on! This is beyond a light show, a rock band, skit or drama; it’s the real deal! And the fear in the church was that unbelievers would come in, and they knew that Satan would sow tares. So the wonder of it all had to be mitigated with a deadly fear. That fear had to be so great that it stopped non-Christians outside the door. This is upside-down from church growth strategy.

In Acts 5, God Himself provides the horror in Ananias and Sapphira. They tried to deceive the church, claiming to give everything they had, laying it at the apostles’ feet. I don’t think Ananias was a believer (“Satan fooled your heart”). And when his deception was revealed, Ananias dropped dead, and “great fear fell upon all who heard of it.” God was sending a message that you can’t fool your way into the church — you’re liable to drop dead in there. Then Ananias’ wife came in 3 hours later (JM joked, “Come on, how long does it take to do your hair!”). She’s coming in to make a show (JM also likes that church went on over 3 hours). Peter says to her, “Why is that you have agreed to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test… she immediately.. breathed her last.” (JM: “Nice job for early church ushers”). And the point: “Great fear came upon the whole church.” The church has to live in fear and awe of the holiness of God. The word went out from that city, community.

The church always of one accord, engaged in spiritual disciplines, in v. 13 the Lord got what he wanted, “none of the rest dared associate with them.” However, “the people held them in high esteem.” It’s a far cry from “Let’s go there, it’s fun.” No, it’s “Don’t go there, you’ll die!” What happened? Multitudes were added to the church? Why? it’s not a human thing. The Lord builds his church around a regenerate congregation committed to purity. The first instruction to the church is Mt. 18: it would be better to drown than to lead another believer into sin. You as a pastor or church leader never want to be responsible for leading another believer into sin.

As a pastor, I want to have joy with my people. But church is not about being a jokester, or clever pop jargon. It’s certainly not about coarse, dirty talk. It’s so interesting to watch the flow of church growth. It starts with meeting people at their social level (restaurants, peer groups). The second wave is all about felt needs (psychological connections). Now we’re in the third wave: sensually. Let’s connect at their visceral level. Let’s laugh at crudeness, rudeness. Let’s say explicit things on the pretense of identification. Planting evil thoughts in their minds and trying to recover them?! Worldliness: anything said or done that appeals to the flesh. If you can’t control your mouth, should you be in ministry? No, we pursue holiness, we take the high ground. True shepherds grieve over sin, they don’t lead their followers into fleshly thoughts (2 Cor 12). Gal 4:19, shepherds are not satisfied until Christ is fully formed in their people. You pursue godliness, holiness; and the Lord will add to His church, because it’s His!

Finally, a qualified leadership. The trend is against this in the “church of the tares” movement. Untrained, unqualified, untested people with no accountability. But look at Acts 6, the need to minister to some Hellenistic widows. There’s a call for leadership in v. 3. So they select seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and wisdom, to take care of the tables. Why? When they wanted spiritual leaders, they wanted spiritual leaders! What are you looking for in the leadership of your church? They chose men who fit these criteria! They weren’t looking for men full of business savvy, marketing experience, entrepeneurial background. They wanted people full of the Spirit able to minister to people with the Word of God. What happened? The church kept growing, “obedient to the faith.”

All of this happens in the power of the Holy Spirit.

One more consideration in conclusion: there is clear instruction in the New Testament about the kind of church the Lord rejects. It is contained in Revelation 2-3. Two churches out of seven he acknowledges and affirms: Smyrna and Philadelphia. The rest he condemns:

• Ephesus: no love for Christ
• Pergamus: tolerating error/heresy
• Thyatira: comfortable with sin
• Sardis: programs and no life
• Laodicea: the church at room temperature, upsets nobody. Lukewarm. Popular with everyone.

Seven times those letters end like this, “let him who has ears, let him hear what the Spirit says to the church.” Rev. 3:20 is Christ knocking, saying, “Do you have a place for me in your church?” Are you going to part of a church where Christ is the head?

We pulled in for the first day of the conference 2 hours prior to the first session… and the parking lot was already full.

Fortunately (for us), the commute from North Hollywood was counter-commute.  Not so fortunate for the typical L.A. commuter:

There’s a good crowd of folks here, no surprise.  Here are a few photos from around the campus: