Misunderstandings, Monikers, and Misrepresentations Part 3: Reflections of an Under 40 Pastor in the SBC

Let no one look down on your youthfulness, but rather in speech, conduct, love, faith and purity, show yourself an example of those who believe. 1 Timothy 4:12 NASB.

The words that resound from the mouth of the young pastor today are often a lament that, due to their age, they are not taken seriously. Casting stones at the generation that has gone before, the young pastor lambastes the outdated practices of a foregone generation. Pleading for respect, the impetuousness bred into a generation that seeks to live in the culture of immediate satisfaction demands a seat at the table now and not later. If those pleas for immediate attention go unheeded, they threaten to abandon the ship in favor of a raft thinking it will provide much more ease of control and rapidity of movement. However, arriving at the shore quicker may lose its advantage if the cargo is disproportionate to what is required to sustain those who the vessel has brought.

Perhaps the concern of the generation that has gone before is simply that once we reach our destination, our cargo may prove to be quite disappointing, even inadequate. Paul had written young Timothy two letters to remind him of precisely what is important. Apparently, Timothy was facing significant opposition that entailed concerns in regards to his age. Whatever age Timothy was (Interestingly, Guthrie says he could be up to age 40) is of less importance than the truths which Paul communicates to Timothy. Respect is gained through lifestyle, not demand.

If we heed Paul’s words to Timothy as our own, we must understand that there is a certain ministerial ethic that is demanded of us before respect can be demanded for us. Here, Paul lists five necessities for Timothy to follow if he will gain the respect of the older generation.

First, Timothy is to practice a ministerial ethic that is evident in his manner of speech. Though this includes Timothy’s official actions in preaching and teaching, it does not limit it to such. Timothy’s day to day speech is as important as his official activities as pastor.

One prominent blog in recent weeks contained a post asking the question, “Do potty-mouthed preachers belong in the SBC?” This post was complete with videos of differing views of this recent phenomenon. One in particular sought to simply dismiss “curse-words” as nothing more than cultural mores that are impositions upon a person’s freedom of speech. Essentially, in his idea, the only reason a curse word is a curse word is because culture has defined it as such.

Whatever the linguistic development of such words happen to be is irrelevant. The culture, by and large, sees such language as offensive. A pastor need not utilize offensive language to either shock an audience into attention or make a connection with an audience by removing the barriers. In essence, for a pastor to use what is culturally agreed upon as gutter language is to communicate that a person can come to Christ with no change of their heart producing a change of speech. I have ministered to people from many different walks of life in many different cultures and not once have they been offended because my language was different than theirs. As a matter of fact, they seemed to have the idea that my language SHOULD be different than theirs. Timothy was instructed to gain the respect of the senior generation by practicing a ministerial ethic that is revealed, at least in part, by his speech.

Secondly, Timothy was told to have a visible conduct that earned respect. Legalism is often the charge that is leveled at the ones who ask for a life that demonstrates nobility. Paul uses the verbal form of this word for conduct in 3:15 of this same epistle so that Timothy would know how to act in the household of God which is the community of faith. The use of the word as a noun is translated elsewhere as “manner of life” in some translations.

Suffice it to say that Paul was calling Timothy to understand that, should he gain the respect of the people, he will do so by the visible walk that he has. Thus, the command is not one of legalism, but one of witness. If Timothy will conduct himself in the manner worthy of a minister, he will gain the respect of those who surround him.

The charge of legalism is most often leveled at the contemporary debate concerning alcohol consumption among Christians. Some pastors have argued for moderate consumption of alcohol in recent days. Newspapers regularly carry reports of churches willing to buy the first round in order to gain an opportunity to meet the people.

Of course, it will be quickly pointed out that Timothy was instructed to take a little wine for his stomach. There are men much more adept at arguing the meaning of that passage than am I, thus I will simply refer you to them. Mine is a simpler question. Why? Alcohol is an industry that is responsible for more abuses, adulteries, and deaths than anything else. So, why? Why do some insist on its consumption? Why? Do we really think we can fulfill the Great Commission more efficiently if we endorse moderate drinking? Will it really make us more relevant to reach a culture steeped in drink if we join in with them? Is there really one person out there who would not have come to Christ if the pastor had not joined in drinking a glass of wine? So why argue for it? Why?

Thirdly, Paul instructed Timothy to have a ministerial ethic that demonstrated itself in love. The first two qualities focused on the outward nature of the minister, this one begins a focus on the inner nature of the minister. Allow me simply to say that our love must not only be demonstrated for the lost of the world, but also must be demonstrated for the generation of the saved before us. It is true that doctrinal errors have been made in the past. It is true that methodological failures have occurred. But the only difference between theirs and ours is that our errors haven’t all come to the surface. I am unaware of any of the generation that precedes this one who is claiming inerrancy for themselves. Let us be warned, love heeds wisdom.

Fourth, Timothy is told that gaining respect from an older generation requires exemplifying faith. Ours is a tradition that champions faithfulness over popularity. The Anabaptists sought to worship freely in accordance to a full obedience to the Bible. The English separatists sought free worship without state mandated restrictions. The Conservative Resurgence generation has stated that in the early days, they did not expect success. There is at least one common thread that bound all of these together. Their measure of success was primarily faithfulness to God’s word, and secondarily numerical increase; and only then as more of a blessing of God than a concoction of man.

Many of the under 40 movement are demanding a voice with more appeals to their creativity and natural ability than to an active demonstration of faith. Faith is not simply an inward state of belief, but it is an outward action. In other words, faith is observable. It demonstrates loyalty to the Lord. As a matter of fact, the New English Translation translates this word as “faithfulness.” As my colleagues walk in faithfulness to the Lord, I have no doubt that those who have risked much for the rescue of a Convention will not prohibit the passing of the baton at the appropriate time, but will be excited to have the opportunity to do so.

Finally, Timothy is told that by living a pure life, the senior generation will be moved to respect. Towner says that this word corresponds primarily to the sexual nature of mankind. Through the demonstration of sexual purity, Timothy will demonstrate himself worthy of leading the church into the next generation.

The contemporary church finds itself in the difficult situation of a sexually saturated culture that desperately needs a word from God. Homosexuality is gaining in acceptance, fornication has become the norm, and pornography is much of the world’s entertainment. The job of the church is to lift high the beauty of the marriage bed while speaking prophetically against the lusts of the world. Pornography has no justification regardless of the context in which it is utilized.

For a minister to fail to reflect an ethic that is in line with a message of holiness for the sake of cultural connection is to invite antinomianism to rest on our front door. One day we will emerge thinking the animal is at rest, only to find that in our emergence, we have seasoned ourselves with the sugar of compromise, making us a delightful dessert indeed.

Respect is a by-product of the ethic that seeks to be an example. It is not a demand that is gained because of position, prominence, or ability. If the young pastor will consistently demonstrate a ministerial ethic that seeks to exemplify Christian conduct and faith, he need not demand a place at the table, for someone will reserve one for him.

Misunderstanding, Monikers, and Misrepresentations: Reflections of an Under 40 Pastor in the SBC Part 2

But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph in Christ, and manifests through us the sweet aroma of the knowledge of Him in every place. 15 For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; 16 to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life. And who is adequate for these things? 17 For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God. 2nd Corinthians 2:14-17 NASB.

The buzzword of division among under 40 pastors is ‘relevance.’ Here, as with so much of ministerial lingo, is much room for debate primarily because the word has come to assume definition without having been defined for the larger audience. With no definition comes no consensus, thus the majority can affirm its use without knowing precisely what is being affirmed; further, when a minority cautions its use, they become the subject of derision by its proponents, though the proponents themselves hold varying, or even contradictory definitions of what is meant by the term.

Relevance was once championed for the use of chairs and projection in worship. Now the battle over relevance has to do with street talk and profanity. It has been argued by some (though I think largely the minority) that shock jock language is acceptable because of the audience that is being targeted. “If a preacher wants to reach a sailor then he must sound less like a preacher and more like a sailor,” as the argument goes. In other words, to continue to talk like a preacher is to make one irrelevant at engaging the world of a sailor. This concept seems flawed for at least two reasons.

First, it assumes the irrelevance of the message as it is. The nature of the Gospel is that all men are lost and in need of salvation through Christ, without which there will be eternal separation from God in a place called Hell. That message is relevant no matter the audience.

Second, it assumes the sufficiency of the preacher. It implies that the message itself is of limited power, and is in need of someone to give it life. Therefore, the message becomes in need of the preacher, not to make it known, but to make it worth knowing.

Rather, we should begin with two presuppositions. First, those who respond to the offer of salvation do so because of the power of the word and Spirit. Second, the person who responds to the message of the Gospel does so precisely because they recognize it is different from the message of the world. The Bible calls the minister to be an example, not an accomplice.

Does relevance mean that the preacher is able to communicate something to the world, or does it mean that preacher has something the world needs to hear? In other words, does the preacher have a world to which he needs to make a message relevant, or does he have a message that is relevant that needs to be given to the world? One says the message is irrelevant and needs relevance added to it, in this case by the preacher. The other says the message is relevant and simply needs someone to deliver it to the world.

I cannot help but find the irony that much of what is considered relevant is often derived from polls. These polls are taken from the same people who no longer believe in Satan, Hell, or the exclusivity of Christ. Yet we make our authority for relevance to be the responses received from polls. In turning to the theologically erroneous to develop our practice of proclamation we can hope to establish a blissful ignorance at best.

In 2 Corinthians Paul has spent much of chapter 1 lamenting the difficulties that he has faced. He has been rejected by those that should follow him, persecuted by those to whom he has sought to minister, and criticized by those who did not understand his message. Yet, he counters all of that by reminding us of some truths that will greatly aid in ministry in 2 Corinthians 2:14-17.

First, Christ will lead his people in victory. Wherever the gospel is preached, Christ will be victorious. We must ask ourselves if we really believe the message is able to accomplish what we say it can accomplish. We must determine whether our approach to preaching begins with the assumption of an inherent relevance contained within the message or if relevance is intentional on the part of the preacher. I fear that our over-fascination with intentional relevance may be revealing a lack of trust in the inherent relevance of the message.

Second, the preaching of the gospel will be satisfying to some, and putrefying others. We should not seem surprised when it is rejected. We must escape the developing mentality that a successful ministry will be embraced by everyone. To remove the offense from the Gospel requires removing the Cross from the Gospel. To remove the Cross from the Gospel is to remove the good news from the Gospel, leaving us with no Gospel at all.

Third, we are inadequate to bring the Gospel to a higher level of accomplishment than what is already inherent within it. Any pursuit of relevance that seeks to make the Gospel more successful is to place the adequacy upon the preacher and remove it from the message. In the words of Paul, “Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God” (2 Cor. 3:5). In other words, we don’t make the Gospel relevant, it makes us relevant. Should we lose the Gospel of salvation in favor of a gospel of coping, we shall have discovered ultimate irrelevance. Then we will no longer speak for God and we will no longer have anything unique to say to people.

Fourth, we are not free to peddle the word of God. That is, we dare not seek to make the Gospel more palatable to social desires or cultural norms. We are not to be manipulative with the word of God. Some attempts at relevance hold little of the Gospel message, as if we can stealthily slip in the message of salvation and make the hearer a Christian without their knowing it.

Fifth, what we preach, we preach in Christ and before God. Perhaps a question every preacher should ask is if their message was written in manuscript form, would the Lord be willing to claim that message as His own? Would He hesitate to read every word? If the message is indeed in Christ and before God, then we should expect that God would be willing to own every word of the message.

To seek relevance at the expense of Biblical fidelity is ultimately to be irrelevant. We will say nothing they have not already heard. We are to expose the message in all of its fullness, which by design, is radically different from any other message the world has heard. It should sound different because it is different. The message that we are to communicate finds its locus in the inerrant and sufficient word of God.

It is a message that by nature is offensive to those who are perishing and satisfying to those who are being saved. Is it possible that the perceived losses we have suffered are due more to a lack of trusting in the power of God’s word and Spirit than in a culturally mandated relevance? There is no more relevant message than the simple message of the God who came to save sinners using the Cross as an instrument of reconciliation for those who respond in faith. Anything less is irrelevant.