I wish I could preach...

... and here's the helpful Stuart Olyott telling me how.  Lots of good advice.  If only I'd listened...

Who wrote Hebrews? (3)

It was great on Sunday night to begin a series on 2 Corinthians, not least because no-one wanted to argue with me about who'd written it!  ('Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God...')  

I don't intend to spend the rest of my blogging career talking about who wrote Hebrews, but I thought it was worth one more shot.  Objections 'voiced' to my defence of Pauline authorship seem to be these:

1. Paul didn't say he wrote it, and if the had, he would have done.  Answer: no authorship is claimed in the letter, but someone plainly wrote it!

2. Yes, but 2 Thessalonians 3:17 ('I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand, which is the distinguishing mark in all my letters...') says that Paul did identify himself in all the letters he wrote.  Answer: no, actually it doesn't.  He says that he penned a final (not opening) greeting in his own hand.  2 Thessalonians is one of the few places where he draws attention to that (see 1 Cor. 16:21, Col. 4:18, Philemon 19;) and the final greeting in Hebrews may well be 13:22-25.  He does not, for example, draw attention to his own handwriting in 2 Corinthians - but see 13:11ff).

3. Hebrews could have been written with apostolic approval - like the gospels of Luke or Mark - and 'why could Hebrews not have been written by Barnabas, or Apollos, say?'  Well, it could.  But Luke and Mark were included in the canon because they were written with apostolic approval; Hebrews is there because it was believed to be by Paul.  Barnabas, Apollos, Priscilla etc; - they're just later inventions to make the (imaginary, in my mind) problem go away, as far as I'm aware.

4. How do I account for the canonicity of James or Jude?  That's a good question; perhaps we can come to it some other time.  BUT for now - note that it is only a peripheral question to this particular issue.  If you're trying to show that apostolic approval is or isn't the criteria for acceptance, then 'How about James and Jude?' is directly relevant.  Otherwise, not so much.

Now, here's another Big Gun:

Who is the letter from?  What was clear to the original readers is not immediately clear to us, because the writer does not give his name.  Paul is the most likely candidate.  There are lots of similarities between his other letters and this one, both in style and content.  Everything is centred on the person and work of Christ.  In addition, the writer has a close and affectionate link with Timothy (13:23).  What seems to clinch it, however, is the fact that the author's final sentence is, 'Grace be with you all' (13:24).  Every one of Paul's letters ends with some sort of similar benediction.  Closing prayers for grace are his unique signature tune (see 2 Thess. 3:18).

The Christian church has had a long history, and the centuries bear witness that most scholars have accepted Paul as the author of Hebrews.  The reason he throws some people off the scent by some changes in style, yet plays his signature tune without signing his name, is probably something to do with the awful persecution going on at the time.  In the Second World War many Allied broadcasts went out to continental Europe using varying wavelengths, but particular tunes were used in the programmes so that discerning listeners could identify their source and pick up hidden messages encoded within them.

In such circumstances those who do not recognise the tune, or who cannot crack the code, are left guessing. Guesses about who may have written Hebrews include Apollos, Aquila, Barnabas, Luke, Silas, Philip the deacon and Clement of Rome.  The list is actually much longer than this, but we do not need to pay any attention to it.  The fact is that if Hebrews had not been written by an apostle, or by someone writing under the supervision or influence of an apostle, the early church would never have accepted it as Scripture.  But it accepted it with very little hesitation.  Early Christians hummed tunes which many others have never learned.

(from 'I wish someone would explain Hebrews to me', by Stuart Olyott, Banner of Truth, page 3.)

Living as we please...

Having been under fire a bit myself from time to time because of what I believe about Christian liberty and the rules of Christian behaviour - here's a summary of Stuart Olyott on Christian Liberty.  You can hear the sermon yourself here - scroll down to TWB20.

As Christians, we may live exactly as we please, provided:

1. We do not disobey Scripture: some things are clearly forbidden, and others clearly commanded.


2. We do not disobey lawful authority - Romans 13


3. We do not do anything to hinder our own Christian life (but note: what hinders yours may not hinder mine)

4. We do not cause a weaker brother to stumble - Romans 14.  But it is important too that we don't allow a tyranny from the weak.  ('Let them be upset!')


5. We do those things which build up Christ's body


6. We do nothing to hinder the spread of the gospel


7.  We do everything to God's glory - 1 Cor 10:31

It's a great disappointment to me that Stuart has had to pull out of the Eccentrics' Conference next week due to (his wife's) ill-health.


But here's an idea:  I've written recently to Jonathan Watson at Banner of Truth, suggesting that they publish a collection of Stuart's 'Shorter Writings' - they've been appearing in Banner, EMW, RT and elsewhere for decades now.  Jonathan's kindly forwarded the suggestion to Stuart himself; how about adding your vote to mine?  You can email Jonathan direct at Jonathan@banneroftruth.co.uk - if both my readers contact him, that'll be a start!

Wounded in the house of my friends?

- expository preaching under critical spotlights

Expository preaching has received some criticism recently from surprising places. First, Iain Murray published an article in the February (2010) issue of Banner of Truth, online here.

Then, Iain D Campbell wrote ‘Some thoughts on pulpit methodology’ on the Reformation 21 blog and finally Peter Masters at the Tabernacle Summer School lectured on the advantages and disadvantages of the method (see here and scroll down to July 10^th).

Murray helpfully begins with a definition: ‘If this [expository preaching] means that the preacher’s one business is to confine himself to the text of Scripture, and to make the sense plain to others, there is nothing more to discuss… But ‘expository preaching’ has often come to mean something more. The phrase is popularly used to describe preaching which consecutively takes a congregation through a passage, or book of Scripture, week by week.’’

Murray’s right so far. Properly, the phrase refers to preaching which takes a text of Scripture and opens up (exposes, hence expository) its meaning to the congregation, together with its application to their lives. But, yes, in the minds of many it means a long series on a relatively short passage.

Murray has five criticisms to make.

1. ‘Know your gifts’. ‘It assumes that all preachers are capable of making effective sermons along these lines… Spurgeon was not unfamiliar with ‘expository preaching’… and he decided it was not best suited to his gifts. There is reason to think that being an effective ‘expository’ preacher is not such a common gift as some seem to think.’

Indeed there is! In fact, there is good reason to think that preaching is not such a common gift as some seem to think (but that’s a subject for another blog). But to suggest (as Murray does – see the whole article) that too many try to follow Lloyd-Jones who don’t have his gift – while holding up Spurgeon as an alternative model – seems to miss one rather important point: we don’t have Spurgeon’s gift, either.

2. ‘What is preaching?’ Murray argues that expository preaching is seen as supreme because of the idea ‘that the foremost purpose of preaching is to convey as much as possible of the Bible. But that idea needs to be challenged…’

Here I beg to differ. I don’t think so. On the contrary, it needs to be re-affirmed. Yes, a sermon has to be more than a lecture – it has to have as its purpose to ‘strike, awaken, and arouse men and women so that they themselves become bright Christians’ but when Murray continues ‘and daily students of Scripture’ I have to disagree. I've got into bother for this before so let me say straight away: of course, it’s a good thing to be a daily student of Scripture. But you won’t find in the New Testament that idea at all – as Stuart Olyott pointed out (to my initial surprise and consternation) in the Banner of Truth Magazine some years ago. Actually, it is the preacher’s job to acquaint his congregation with the whole Bible – though not usually in one sermon. Many people - even today - are illiterate. It's a noble thing for the educated to search the Scriptures daily and check up on the preacher (Acts 17.11). But that's not the same as saying preaching is there to produce Bible readers.

3. Sermon or lecture? I’ll come back to this…

Seven Good Things about Peter Masters

PM has been criticised quite a bit in the blogosphere recently, some of it fair, some of it not so fair. No-one is perfect, no-one is beyond criticism. But we're not to be unbalanced, and certainly not to be untruthful. Therefore, here are seven things about Peter Masters that, in my own opinion, are causes for thanksgiving.

1. Personal graciousness. I know very well that he does not always 'come across' as gracious in his polemic messages and articles. But the fact is, I met Dr Masters only once, more than thirty years ago at one of the very first Tabernacle Summer Schools. I found him warm and welcoming, shy and self-deprecating - in a word, gracious. My friend Jonathan Hunt tells me that he is still the same, and I've no reason to doubt that. Thank God for his personal graciousness.

2. Passion for souls. When he went to the Tabernacle in the 70s, it was in a very poor state numerically. He set about changing that not with a ministry that drew believers from other churches but with robust evangelism. His work with Sunday Schools, his production of evangelistic materials in new and attractive formats, his determination that his congregation should be a working, soul-winning congregation, his regular evangelistic preaching - all of this is witness to a passion to see the Lord Jesus Christ glorified by the salvation of sinners.

3. Evangelistic preaching. Evangelistic preaching - a regular, weekly gospel sermon - is very much out of vogue today. Various arguments are produced against it; but the biggest reason, I'm convinced, why men do not do it is that they do not know how to do it.

Peter Masters has both argued for evangelistic preaching and modelled it for forty years or so. His book 'Physicians of Souls' (and there's another edition, called 'Physician of Souls'- note the difference) is, quite simply, brilliant. Every pastor/preacher should read it and attempt to imitate it. Masters' evangelistic preaching has produced an audience for it (I mean, unconverted people come); and it has produced fruit, with hundreds converted during those forty years.

4. Consistent ministry. Have you noticed how, every few years, new ways of growing congregations are produced? Some of them are better (more effective, or more Biblical, or both) than others; but one thing is sure: chopping and changing every few years will never work. Peter Masters knew what he wanted to do, and has done it consistently, and fruitfully. We've reason to be grateful to God for that; he has shown that the gospel without frills is still powerful under God.

5. Robust Calvinism. Like Spurgeon, I'm a Calvinist because it's a nickname for Biblical truth, not because of any particular fondness for the Reformer. So, I think, is Peter Masters. His Calvinism, like Spurgeon's, provokes and sweetens and empowers his evangelism, rather than restricting it. He has shown (again) that Calvinism really can build an inner-city congregation even in the 20th/21st Centuries; that it can be preached evangelistically, and that it does build up the souls of the saints. Thank God for that, too.

6. Willingness to innovate. I think the Tabernacle was the first Reformed ministry to make use of posters on the Tube. Superbly illustrated in cartoon-style by Lawrence Littleton Evans, they were brilliantly contemporary, gently provocative and successful in getting people to hear the gospel at 'The Tab'. Some years ago when we asked permission to do our own leaflet based on a 'Tab' poster called 'Why not hear the gospel?', the permission was readily and warmly given. Then again, Masters' own magazine-style evangelistic booklets were innovative and clear. Everybody's doing them now; but they weren't then.

7. Stand against charismatic issues. Masters has consistently warned against the dangers of charismatic doctrine with its supposed gifts and revelations, and has been one of the very few prominent evangelicals to do so. Most non-charismatics seem content to stay aloof and stay silent, and even to criticise cessationists. Masters has argued theologically and Biblically for the temporary nature of the sign gifts and has done so convincingly. Indeed, I abandoned my own charismatic views at the Tab Summer School I mentioned earlier under the compelling arguments presented (on that occasion) by Stuart Olyott. To this day I know of no other significant Reformed conference that has taken this line. Our charismatic friends lose no opportunity to promote their views (and rightly so, since they believe it to be the truth of God); but on this side of the debate, we try to stay neutral. Masters has not stayed neutral, and for that I am grateful to God.

Stuart Olyott: The ministry of the word is an and

(part 3)

(No music today! Time to finish this article.)

As I mentioned here, I was recently at the Evangelical Ministry Assembly (EMA) in London. It was outstanding, with highlights including John Piper ruminating on Galatians 3:2 ('hearing with faith') and Vaughan Roberts on George Whitefield. (There's something strangely moving about hearing a preacher say 'Whitefield preached his first sermon in London in this church, entering by that door and making his way through the crowds...')

Incredibly, an mp3 of the whole conference will shortly be available for only £4.99, and downloads will also be available soon. Every preacher ought to hear at least the Vaughan Roberts session!

But this is not about that. By kind permission of Adrian Reynolds at Proc Trust, I can post the whole of Stuart Olyott's article in their resource guide, called - well, title's above. Extracts number one and two have already been published; here's the third and final one:

Suggestions

In seeking to put all this into practice, I have found the following suggestions to be helpful.

The first is to live by the motto, ‘Prayer first, study and activity second.’ My normal routine is to get up and have breakfast, engage in family and personal devotions, shave and shower, and then to give myself to a session of sustained prayer before doing anything else at all.

The second is to pray outside. This keeps me from giving in to the temptation to start other work before having a time of special communion with God. During thirty-five years of pastoral ministry in the inner city, this meant walking the streets and parks, and praying out loud – but not too loudly. At certain times a large umbrella and waterproof trousers proved useful!

The third is to have a prayer schedule. I have a small and robust notebook divided into five sections. In each section is a list of church members, regular attendees, family members, friends, ministers and missionaries, church activities and Christian ministries. I seek to pray through one section each day. So why are there only five sections? This is because I do not follow this system on Sundays, and also have a ‘free day’ to catch up on any day’s intercession that has been interrupted or hindered.

The fourth is to use aids which will stimulate prayer. Almost every day I recite a portion of the Westminster Shorter Catechism and use it as a foundation for prayer. I also make frequent use of the writings of E.M. Bounds, especially his ‘Power through Prayer’, using each sentence as a ‘prompt’.

The fifth is to prepare sermons in this spirit of prayer. On my walks I often take a photocopy of the Scripture passage on which I will be preaching. I run it round in my head, talk to the Lord about it until the message is clear, and then make notes. Such prayerful interaction with the text adds a marvellous freshness to the exegetical and other preparatory work which will then follow in the study.

‘Prayer is the first thing, the second thing, the third thing necessary to a minister. Pray, then, my dear brother; pray, pray, pray.’ (Edward Payson)

Stuart Olyott: The ministry of the word is an and

As I mentioned here, I was recently at the Evangelical Ministry Assembly (EMA) in London. It was outstanding, with highlights including John Piper ruminating on Galatians 3:2 ('hearing with faith') and Vaughan Roberts on George Whitefield. (There's something strangely moving about hearing a preacher say 'Whitefield preached his first sermon in London in this church, entering by that door and making his way through the crowds...')

Incredibly, an mp3 of the whole conference will shortly be available for only £4.99, and downloads will also be available soon. Every preacher ought to hear at least the Vaughan Roberts session!

But this is not about that. By kind permission of Adrian Reynolds at Proc Trust, I can post the whole of Stuart Olyott's article in their resource guide, called - well, title's above. Extract number one was yesterday; here's number two:

The secret

How is it that the apostles were able to keep to their priorities and so many of us are not? It is not difficult to give an answer. We only have to think about what they had experienced in the previous three or four years. They had seen the Lord, spent time with him, listened to his teaching and witnessed his miracles. Some of them had been present at both his transfiguration on the mountain and his bloodied agony in the garden. But none of these things, nor the cross, the blood, the resurrection, the appearances or the ascension had made preachers out of them. For this they had to wait for the day of Pentecost. Every apostle knew that no-one could be a true preacher without being ‘clothed with power from on high’ (Luke 24:49).

In recent days they had learned the lesson afresh. We do not read that any of them had prayed for Pentecost to be repeated. They knew well enough that this could not be. They had lived through a unique event. But they also knew that if they were left to themselves, they would be for ever powerless. It was essential that they should have the direct and immediate blessing of God. For this they could only pray, which is precisely what they did after it became clear that the Jewish authorities would not tolerate any further preaching: ‘And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the Word of God with boldness’ (Acts 4:31).

Since then, the persecution had been stepped up. No wonder they kept prayer as their first priority! Mere words would not conquer their enemies and win the world. They needed a force by which they could declare God’s truth with ever-loving hearts, fiery tongues and superhuman authority. This power from the Holy Spirit was the one thing to be sought and secured. They could not work this up; but they could call it down, and this is what they set themselves to do A little prayer would not do. No average wave would ever sweep away the resistant Rock of Gibraltar, the unregenerate heart, even though it might throw up spangles of spray filled with rainbows. A resistless tsunami was required. God alone can do God’s work, and we must ask him to do it.

Suggestions

In seeking to put all this into practice, I have found the following suggestions to be helpful... (continued Monday)

Stuart Olyott: The ministry of the word is an and

As I mentioned here, I was recently at the Evangelical Ministry Assembly (EMA) in London. It was outstanding, with highlights including John Piper ruminating on Galatians 3:2 ('hearing with faith') and Vaughan Roberts on George Whitefield. (There's something strangely moving about hearing a preacher say 'Whitefield preached his first sermon in London in this church, entering by that door and making his way through the crowds...')

Incredibly, an mp3 of the whole conference will shortly be available for only £4.99, and downloads will also be available soon. Every preacher ought to hear at least the Vaughan Roberts session!

But this is not about that. By kind permission of Adrian Reynolds at Proc Trust, I can post, over the next few days, the whole of Stuart Olyott's article in their resource guide, called - well, title's above. Here's extract number one:

The first preachers of the early church were the apostles and they had a problem: something that was good was threatening to displace what was best. This is recorded for us in Acts 6:1-7.

The problem

The Jerusalem church was growing at an extraordinary speed. Conversions were taking place every day, both among the local Jews as well as among the Greek-speaking Jews visiting the city from abroad. Many of the new believers were widows who had no means of material support, and their new brothers and sisters had taken on the responsibility of providing them with a daily meal. The problem was that many of them, especially among the Greek-speakers, were going hungry. The distribution system was not working. Genuinely needy people were suffering. There was growing discontent in the church, especially among the Greek-speakers. If it continued, the church would soon split.

Why was the system not working? It was because of the apostles. There are only so many hours in a day and they were perfectly clear about how to us them to the best advantage. They had drawn up a list of priorities from which they were not going to budge, even if this meant that increasing numbers of widows went hungry. There were three items on their list, which went like this:

1. Prayer

2. Ministry of the Word

3. Everything else

There had never been so many believers as there were now. How they needed praying for! How they needed feeding from God’s word! In the apostles’ judgement, spiritual nourishment was infinitely more important than physical nourishment. Nonetheless, it was not right that widows should do hungry, just as it was not right that preachers should get distracted from their first and second priorities. But how, how, was it going to be possible to have both satisfied widows and praying preachers?

The solution

“The twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, ‘It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.’” (Acts 6:2-4, ESV)

The preachers kept their priorities, the widows got their meals, new men became actively engaged in vital ministry, church peace was restored, the Word of God spread wonderfully and the flood of conversions continued to astonish the watching world!

The apostles were as dependent upon prayer as any other preachers. They understood that it is better to default on every other responsibility than it is to neglect prayer. It even takes precedence over the ministry of the Word. Compared with prayer, preaching is only an ‘and’. It must never take first place. Prayer recognises God as God, and depends on him to do what he would not do without prayer. Prayer, and prayer alone, is the way by which the Lord’s armies call him onto the field.

True prayer stirs itself up to lay hold on God (Isaiah 64:7). This takes time, energy, faith and perseverance. It is easy to allow other things to slip in and get in the way. It is not only sinful or questionable things that provide such hindrances, but also things that are right and necessary which have been given a wrong priority. The servant of God gets sidetracked. The door to the secret place is not shut (Matt 6:6). The preacher gets caught up in his exegesis and preparation, his administration, his commitments, the needs around him, or in the actual act of preaching. He no longer knows what it is to wrestle with God and to prevail (Gen 32:28).

More tomorrow.

The ministry of the word is [only] an ‘and’…

Last week I was at the Evangelical Ministry Assembly, organised by the Proclamation Trust and hosted by St Helens’, Bishopsgate.

In the past, the suggestion has been made that, for all its excellencies, the PT may be a little unbalanced.  In particular, that it may effectively downplay the work of the Spirit, and the need of the Spirit in powerful (that is, effective) preaching. 

If that’s ever been the case, every effort was made this year to correct it.  I hope to blog on it later this week – but it’s only a hope: having been away three full days last week, there’s a fair bit to catch up on this week.  And after this week, a report on the EMA will be less relevant.

One innovation (new to me, but I haven’t been for a few years, so it may not be new this year) was a booklet called ‘Resource Guide’ that had a number of helpful articles in it – including one by Stuart Olyott called ‘The ministry of the word is an and’; this is an extract from that.  If I can get permission, I’ll post the whole article.  Meanwhile, here’s the flavour.

The apostles were as dependent on prayer as any other preachers.  They understood that it is better to default on every other responsibility than it is to neglect prayer.  It even takes precedence over the ministry of the Word.  Compared with prayer, preaching is only an ‘and’.  It must never take first place.  Prayer recognises God as God, and depends on Him to do what He would not do without prayer.  Prayer, and prayer alone, is the way by which the Lord’s armies call Him onto the field.

True prayer stirs itself up to lay hold on God (Isaiah 64:7).  This takes time, energy, faith and perseverance.  It is easy to allow other things to slip in and get in the way.  It is not only sinful or questionable things that provide such hindrances, but also things that are right and necessary which have been given a wrong priority.  The servant of God gets sidetracked.  The door to the secret place is not shut (Matt. 6:6).  The preacher gets caught up in his exegesis and preparation, his administration, his commitments, the needs around him, or in the actual act of preaching.  He no longer knows what it is to wrestle with God and to prevail (Gen 32:28).