Category: Uncategorized

Hands down. No contest. When it comes to spiritual growth, nothing beats the Bible.

from Move: What 1,000 Churches Reveal about Spiritual Growth by Greg Hawkins & Cally Parkinson

As I try to develop my own discipleship strategy, I am wrestling with many questions.

• How do I develop a discipleship strategy that works with unbelievers as well as believers?
• I have a limited amount of time. The people I disciple have a limited amount of time. Where is the best investment of time?
• Reproducible discipleship is simple discipleship. If it isn’t simple, it isn’t reproducible. My disciples will learn how to make disciples by how I make disciples. I have to keep it simple. What is both powerful and simple?

Over the past few days I’ve been reading part of the book MOVE which is about the REVEAL study Willow Creek did with their own church and over 1,000 other churches comprising over 250,000 congregants. In the forward to that book Bill Hybels says:

“Here’s one simple yet profound fix that came from this survey. We learned that the most effective strategy for moving people forward in their journey of faith is biblical engagement. Not just getting people into the Bible when they’re in church — which we do quite well — but helping them engage the Bible on their own outside of church.”

In Chapter one as the authors summarize their findings, they say this:

Nothing has a greater impact on spiritual growth than reflection on Scripture. If churches could do only one thing to help people at all levels of spiritual maturity grow in their relationship with Christ, their choice is clear. They would inspire, encourage, and equip their people to read the Bible — specifically, to reflect on Scripture for meaning in their lives. The numbers say most churches are missing the mark — because only one out of five congregants reflects on Scripture every day.

That is a very significant statement. Nothing. “Nothing has greater impact than…” And of course it makes total sense. We knew that didn’t we? So why is it true that few people actually read the Bible? According to a 2013 survey by the Barna Group, only 21% of Americans read the Bible 4 times a week or more, and 61% of Americans say that they wish they read the Bible more.

But there is an important hint there in that quote as well. It is not just about reading the Bible. The thing that has such a huge impact on spiritual growth is reflection on scripture. At one time I was enamored with reading through the Bible in a year programs and later with Neil Cole’s Life Transformation Group (LTG) system that includes reading 30 chapters of scripture a week. My disappointment with those systems is that setting a goal for reading x numbers of chapters a day or a week often results in more reading and less reflection.

Furthermore, there was a surprising endorsement of discipleship from the world’s largest “seeker-sensitive” mega-church.

…we identified one overarching leadership principle that emerged in our interaction with the senior pastors of these top-5 percent churches. These churches are led by individuals consumed with making disciples. Absolutely consumed. Making disciples of Christ was unquestionably their most important aspiration and the deepest desire of their hearts. And that characteristic fueled all four of the practices you will learn more about.

As I read that I couldn’t help but think of Steve Murrell and his book Wikichurch which I just wrote three blog posts about. This exactly describes Steve and the team he has nurtured at Victory Christian Fellowship, which I think is obvious from what I have written.

So the question I’ve been tossing around in my mind is this. How do we get both believers and unbelievers engaged with the Bible, both reading it and reflecting upon it? I’ve come across a couple of great ideas over the past few days that I will write more about on Monday.  Have a great weekend!

There are two conceptions of discipleship floating around in Christian circles, and I want to explore what they are and what the difference is between them.  Here they are:

1. The traditional view of discipleship is that you find a believer who is not as far along the road as you are, and you help them grow spiritually.
2. The second view is that discipleship starts with unbelievers.

Which one is the correct conception of discipleship?  In Matthew 28:19 Jesus says to “go and make disciples”.  I have some questions:

1. How many “Christians” existed in the world when he gave that command?
2. Who did he give that command to, and how would the original hearers have understood that command?
3. Was the command a universal command for all believers, or just those it was originally given to?

In answer to question #1, None.  Not a single one.  Why?  Because the term “Christian” had not been invented.  The term was used for the first time in Antioch when unbelievers started to use the term to describe believers (Acts 11:26).  And in reality, believers didn’t call themselves “believers” either.  They either called themselves “disciples” or “followers of The Way.” (Acts 9:2, 19:9, 24:22)  The term “disciples” appears 268 times in the new Testament and the term Christians appears only 3 times (Acts 11:26, 26:28 and 1 Peter 4:16), and every time it refers to unbelievers making reference to disciples of Jesus.  Therefore he certainly wasn’t saying, “find a Christian who needs to grow and help them develop spiritual disciplines”.   But was he saying, “find another disciple and disciple them”?  That wouldn’t make a lot of sense, would it?  Furthermore, Jesus gave this command to the 11 remaining disciples just before his ascension.   There were certainly other followers of Jesus at the time, as we see them in the upper room in Acts chapter one, but it is generally believed that there were not more than 100 followers of Christ at that time.

In answer to question #2, He obviously gave this command to his 11 disciples.  If he told his 11 disciples to go and make disciples, then they must have understood that to mean that they should do with others what he had done with them.  They may or may not have been religious when he called them.  Matthew (as a tax collector) was considered a traitor an outcast in Israel when Jesus called him.  Tax collectors were viewed by the Pharisees as a special class of sinners.  Simon was a Zealot, certainly belonging to a fringe of Judaism that was focused more on political aims then spiritual aims.  Some have gone so far as to call him a terrorist of his day.  That may be a bit extreme, but without a doubt some zealots did espouse violent means to obtain their nationalistic goals.  Some of the disciples were simply fishermen.  Blue collar job.  Self employed tradesmen.  We know nothing either good or bad of their spiritual aims.  The point is that Jesus called a diverse group of people to follow him, and their calling obviously had nothing to do with their spiritual depth when he called them.  In fact, Jesus did not call any from the religious leadership groups (Pharisees, Saducees, Scribes, Priests, etc).  Therefore, in answer to question #2 it would seem that the people he gave this command to would have understood it to mean that they should approach normal everyday folk of diverse spiritual, vocational, and political backgrounds to invite them to become disciples of Jesus.  Furthermore, the text says to make disciples “of all nations”.  In other words, not just Jews and not just religious types.

In answer to Question #3, we need to look again at the text.

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,  teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”  Mat 28:18-20

If they were to make disciples “of all nations” (greek ethne, all ethnic groups), could this group of 11 men actually be expected to accomplish that?  Obviously not.  Secondly, he tells them to teach them to observe (some translations say “obey”) all that he had commanded them.  Does “all” include this last command?  It would seem to.  And if it does, then this command is for those who come after them as well.

So back to the original question, which one of the two conceptions of discipleship is correct?  I think the evidence is that they are both correct, but the first is more corrent than the second.  The first one is the starting point, but it does not eliminate the second one.  However, too many books about “discipleship” start with the second one instead of starting with the first one.  As I read everything I can get my hands on about discipleship, I am still finding new stuff being written which focuses exclusively on helping believers develop spiritual disciplines.  Very few discipleship books are being written on how to “make disciples” of those who do not currently describe themselves as “Christians” or followers of Jesus.  Jesus called unbelievers to follow him.  But at some point, these ordinary men became “believers” and were saved by faith.   What was that point?   Was it when they left all and followed him?  Maybe.  But they certainly were still lacking in faith in many ways, and their progress in faith was at different rates.  So he lived with them and taught them for three years until they were ready to continue on their own.  Jesus integrated the two, and I think that is what he was commanding us to do.  I wish I saw more (or better) models of an integration of these two aspects of discipleship.  Can you point to any for me?

This is my third post on WikiChurch: Making Discipleship Engaging, Empowering, and Viral

One of the things I love about this book is the emphasis on training others to replace you. Steve Murrell describes himself as an “accidental missionary.” He and his wife went to Manila on a short term mission trip, and ended up staying. But it was the knowledge that they were leaving that necessitated their equipping mindset from the first day.  One of the things I love about this book is the emphasis on training others to replace you.  Steve Murrell describes himself as an “accidental missionary.”  He and his wife went to Manila on a short term mission trip, and ended up staying.  But it was the knowledge that they were leaving that necessitated their equipping mindset from the first day.

I can remember saying to Ferdie Cabiling, “I’m going to train you to do this because we are all going back to the United States in a few weeks.”  Ferdie replied, “But I’ve only been saved three days!” “Yes, but this guy has only been saved three minutes, and to him you’re a spiritual giant. Remember I told you to read the Book of Mark? How far have you read?” Ferdie eagerly replied, “I’ve already finished Mark, and I’m almost finished with Luke.” Then I told him what has become a constantly repeated Victory slogan, “Just stay one chapter ahead. As long as you stay one chapter ahead, you can disciple him, but if he passes you, then he will disciple you.”

That strikes me as a great slogan to be known for.  It encourages people to stay ahead.  But it also encourages them to use what they have without hesitation.  That is the essence of what Wikichurch is all about.  This reminds me of Rolland Allen’s great classic work, Missionary Methods: St. Paul’s or Ours.  He emphasizes the need for a short ministry and the need to leave and let new believers take over.  He says:

“The question before us is, how he could so train his converts as to be able to leave them after so short a time with any security that they would be able to stand and grow. … The sense of stupefaction and amazement that comes over us when we think of it is the measure of the distance which we have travelled from the apostolic method.”

“Thus St Paul seems to have left his newly-founded churches with a simple system of Gospel teaching, two sacraments, a tradition of the main facts of the death and resurrection, and the Old Testament. … We can hardly believe that a church could be founded on so slight a basis. And yet it is possible that it was precisely the simplicity and brevity of the teaching which constituted its strength.”

“By teaching the simplest elements in the simplest form to the many, and by giving them the means by which they could for themselves gain further knowledge, by leaving them to meditate upon these few fundamental truths, and to teach one another what they could discover, St Paul ensured that his converts should really master the most important things. … A man does not need to know much to lay hold of Christ. St Paul began with simplicity and brevity.”

“In so doing he ran grave risks. It is characteristic of St Paul that he had such faith in Christ and in the Holy Spirit indwelling in the Church that he did not shrink from risks.”

“I think that it is quite possible that the shortness of his stay may have conduced in no small measure to St Paul’s success. … By leaving them quickly St Paul gave the local leaders opportunities to take their proper place, and forced the church to realise that it could not depend upon him, but must depend upon its own resources.”

Another aspect of Murrell’s approach is that it isn’t all about getting people into full time ministry.  Quite the opposite.  He believes in the power of lay people doing most of the ministry.

The fact that we have a lot of young leaders at Victory causes some to conclude that we regularly challenge our people to go into the ministry or that we hold up the idea of full-time ministry as the “high calling.” Actually, it is almost completely the opposite. We do everything we can to equip and empower every person to minister. However, ministering to people and becoming a professional church employee are two very different things.

This resonates deeply with me because I attended a Bible College where it was all about going into “full time ministry”.  Those of us who did not feel called to vocational church work felt it was necessary to have some kind of excuse.

The thing that has led to the exponential growth at Victory (it only accelerates year by year even though Steve is no longer actively pastor there) is the focus on “making disciples”, rather than “doing discipleship”.  In other words, the focus is on reaching the lost.  Steve says:

A church’s training usually follows the church’s objectives. Invert that equation and you get this: an inventory of a church’s training will reveal a lot about the church’s true purpose and intent. Some churches equip endlessly—providing classes, seminars, and online courses on every topic imaginable. All that training is good, except that the majority of a traditional church’s training is geared toward Christian living, not Christian serving or Christian ministry.  In other words, we teach people what to believe, how to confess their faith, how to be reconciled, how to raise their children, how to manage their finances, how to treat their spouses, how to exercise, how to pray, how to eat. The common denominator of those trainings is that every application relates to the believers and their own families. You can practice all that Christianity in the comfort of your own home. If, on the other hand, the church is committed to the Great Commission, to engaging culture, to establishing foundations, and to every member being a minister, it will radically affect the purpose and content of equipping.

I love that emphasis.  But I wish he told us more about how he developed that culture in his church.  There are lots of books on the subject of discipling people, how to help people develop their own spiritual disciplines, etc.  There isn’t much out there on how to turn people outward to the world.  What does it take to make that happen?  I know it is not a program.  But it has to be more than just the subject of sermons.  The average Christian has no idea how to engage the lost.  And the average pastor has no idea how to teach them how to engage the lost, because he is not doing it either.  I would love to know how others have made that transition.

This is a follow up to yesterday’s post on the book WikiChurch: Making Discipleship Engaging, Empowering, and Viral by Steve Murrell.  Here are a few of the things I loved about that book:

• Steve Murrell is humble.  He doesn’t portray himself as some kind of mastermind who came up with this great strategy.  He describes himself as an accidental missionary and details how he really stumbled onto his success in discipleship out of necessity and by accident.
• Steve does not even tell you how Victory does discipleship.  He doesn’t give you a model.  That is not what this book is about.  But he doesn’t do it because he realizes that the model you use for discipleship must fit your individual situation.  He encourages churches in their movement to adapt their own model.  What works in Manila may not work in the provinces and certainly won’t work in Dubai.  He says that some of their pastors have even contextualized what they do for specific sub cultures in Manila.  I’ve read too many “This is what worked for us and you should do what we do” books.  This is not one of them.
• Steve takes a very long view of things.  He is not into quick fix.  He seems to be a plodder.  But he has focused on the single most important thing.

When it comes to making disciples, creating the right culture is much more important than using the right language and material. I wish I could tell you it’s easy, but changing and maintaining a healthy discipleship culture is the most difficult and elusive part of ministry.

One of my typical comments to leaders formulating their own process of making disciples is that the details of their system are not as important as how committed they are to the process. Even if you had the perfect disciple-making process for your community, it would not work automatically without commitment and consistency. We have been updating and adjusting our methods for decades, not because we had nothing better to do, but always because some aspect of our process was not working as well as it should. Even though we have gained momentum through the years with the Victory discipleship process, it does not fuel itself. Focused hard work is required to keep it running. What enables us to keep putting in the effort, fixing the problems, and seeking God about how to do it better? It is that we have committed ourselves to making disciples. We are not committed to getting big or to staying small. We are not committed to reaching politicians, athletes, or actors—rich people, poor people, or smart people. We are not committed to prosperity, political influence, popularity, or fame. We did not set out to formulate and implement a discipleship strategy to see whether it would work. What keeps us at it is not merely a long-term commitment but a lifetime commitment to the Great Commission. We are here to honor God and make disciples. We have no plan B.

Disciple-making churches are fueled by a discipleship culture, not by a magic “silver bullet” method. When the culture is right, almost any method will work. When the culture is toxic, even the best method will fail. Here’s the challenge: changing methods is quick and easy (some leaders change methods monthly), but changing culture is hard work and takes years. Do the hard work and build a discipleship culture; don’t just import a discipleship method.

• The whole point of this book is about the thoroughly Biblical concept of making disciples.  He says,

“Jesus told His followers that He would build His church. Then one of the last things He told them to do was make disciples. It’s that simple. We make disciples, and He builds the church. We do not build the church, and He does not make disciples.”

“Jesus told us to make disciples and that He would build the church. Instead, we try to build the church and continue to neglect making disciples.”

• He rightly emphasizes that “making disciples” is not primarily about leading existing believers to maturity.  It may include that, but when Jesus gave his command in Matthew 28 he was clearly not talking about setting up classes or accountability groups for new believers.  He was talking about making disciples of lost people.  Much that has been written on discipleship (including the current stuff like Robby Gallaty’s Growing Up) misses this.

Discipleship, in our understanding, is not a mentoring program to help encourage Christians to become better Christians. The discipleship process starts with introducing nonbelievers to the gospel and person of Jesus Christ…. When we separate the Siamese twins of evangelism and discipleship, we kill both. The biblical starting point of discipleship is evangelism, and the whole point of evangelism is to make disciples.

• Steve’s approach to numbers is right on target.  He does not glorify bigness, but recognizes that the whole point is to reach lost people, and if lost people are being reached, then there is growth.  He has an extensive discussion about the soil, and how if the soil is not right things won’t grow.  In other words, he is saying that his situation in Manila is an environment where the soil has already been prepared.  He said that success in Manila may mean thousands coming to Christ, but for their church plant in Dhaka Bangladesh it may mean 100.  But he also says,

As long as there is one unsaved person on my campus or in my city, then my church is not big enough.

• However, even though he does not idolize growth and numbers, he recognizes that much growth and effectiveness is sacrificed in order to maintain control.

Growth is not always easy to control. Every church or ministry is either organized for growth or organized for control. At Victory–Manila we gave up on control a long time ago. It has been many years since I could approve or even know about every decision. These days I do not even know the names of many people on our staff, let alone the thousands of discipleship group leaders. To avoid losing control, some pastors decide to stay small. The reverse is more often the reality. When pastors determine to control everything, their ministries remain small as a consequence. We cannot force or require people to make disciples, nor would we even try to do so. Likewise, we cannot control the speed and extent of our growth. We do not control people. However, we work hard to maintain and control the training system and process of making disciples.

• It is that willingness to let go and trust the Holy Spirit that I love about his approach.  You have to be willing to let go and let other people make mistakes, and trust the Holy Spirit to work in them and through them.  Speaking to Church leaders, he said:

“If you’re not experiencing the kind of fruitfulness you desire, it’s not because you are too lazy to minister. Quite the contrary, it might be because you minister too much.” I went on to say that ministering too much will prevent many church planters from getting to the next level of growth or will prevent disciple-makers from seeing their small groups grow and multiply. Next, I posed a question to them, the same query I constantly ask the leaders I work with: “Do you spend more time ministering to people or preparing people to minister? Do you spend more time preparing messages or preparing people?”

OK, enough writing today!  More on this subject tomorrow.

This little 15 minute video is well worth your time. It is actually an intro to a new book out by Tim Keesee titled Dispatches from the Front: Stories of Gospel Advance in the World’s Difficult Places, but it resonated with me on several different levels.
Tim has done 6 videos so far in his series by the same name. I have watched 5 of them and will post more information on them in the future.

Dispatches from the Front: Prologue from Hansen Production Services on Vimeo.

This is a video you have just got to take the time (30 minutes) to watch.

YembiYembi: Unto the Nations from Jesse Low on Vimeo.

http://vimeo.com/jesselow/yembi

Over the last few days I have listened to this message by John Piper (below) 3 times. He is speaking as a guest speaker in a church, and chose to preach on a truth he discovered in scripture in his early 20’s and was life changing for him.  This truth is at the heart of the gospel, but also at the heart of the way the believer lives every day.  Have you ever wondered if you are to wait for God or get busy and go to work on some problem? John just nails this issue so clearly and with such balance.

From of old no one has heard or perceived by the ear, no eye has seen a God besides you, who acts for those who wait for him.
(Isaiah 64:4)

For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to give strong support to those whose heart is blameless toward him.”
(2 Chronicles 16:9)

For God alone my soul waits in silence; from him comes my salvation. He alone is my rock and my salvation, my fortress; I shall not be greatly shaken… For God alone, O my soul, wait in silence, for my hope is from him.
(Psalms 62:1-2,5)

God Works for Those Who Wait for Him from Desiring God on Vimeo.

Woe to rebellious sons, declares Jehovah, to make counsel, but not from Me; and to weave a covering web, but not of My Spirit, in order to add sin on sin; who are walking to go down to Egypt, but have not asked at My mouth, to take refuge in the stronghold of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt. And the stronghold of Pharaoh shall become a shame to you; and relying on the shadow of Egypt shall be a disgrace. For his rulers were in Zoan, and his ambassadors reached to Hanes. Every one is ashamed over a people who do not profit them; they are not for a help, and not for profiting, but for a shame; yea, also for a reproach.
(Isaiah 30:1-5)

For thus said the Lord GOD, the Holy One of Israel, “In returning and rest you shall be saved; in quietness and in trust shall be your strength.” But you were unwilling, and you said, “No! We will flee upon horses”; therefore you shall flee away; and, “We will ride upon swift steeds”; therefore your pursuers shall be swift. A thousand shall flee at the threat of one; at the threat of five you shall flee, till you are left like a flagstaff on the top of a mountain, like a signal on a hill. Therefore the LORD waits to be gracious to you, and therefore he exalts himself to show mercy to you. For the LORD is a God of justice; blessed are all those who wait for him.
(Isaiah 30:15-18)

Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help and rely on horses, who trust in chariots because they are many and in horsemen because they are very strong, but do not look to the Holy One of Israel or consult the LORD! And yet he is wise and brings disaster; he does not call back his words, but will arise against the house of the evildoers and against the helpers of those who work iniquity. The Egyptians are man, and not God, and their horses are flesh, and not spirit. When the LORD stretches out his hand, the helper will stumble, and he who is helped will fall, and they will all perish together.
(Isaiah 31:1-3)

Recently I read an excellent little article that is freely available on line (here and here) by Scott Rodin titled Becoming a Leader of No Reputation. It was a reflection on his tenure as president of a major seminary in the USA, and what he learned in that time. One of the things that really struck me was his discussion of the difference between anointing for a leadership position versus being appointed to such position.  Here is a partial quote from the article.

I know of few Christian leaders today who were anointed before they were appointed.  We have employed the business model of doing careful searches looking for Christian leaders whom we can appoint to office. We check their credentials, put them through rigorous interviews, and even give them psychological tests before we make the critical appointment. Once in place, we then anoint them and ask God to bless their work.

The Biblical evidence seems to indicate that God selects leaders in the opposite order.  Samuel anointed David before appointing him King. The selection criterion for leadership was not based on who would most likely get the appointment, but whom God had anointed for this task. And appointment without anointment always led to disaster.

In 1997, I was satisfied that I had met the criteria for the job and was pleased to be appointed for the position of president. And while our board said a lovely prayer and laid hands on me, in retrospect I think the process was backward. No one asked me if I t know what I would have answered, but the issues and criteria to consider in forming an answer to this question were ones that I never considered in my response to my appointment.

With God’s anointing comes God’s power and presence. There is a special blessing bestowed on God’s anointed. It is the blessing of God’s power manifest in ways only seen through the work of God’s chosen. God’s anointed shout and walls fall. They lift their feeble staff and seas part. They speak God’s word boldly and movements are begun that free men’s souls. God’s anointed do the miraculous because they are the servant of the Almighty. There is a unique presence of God in the lives of those God anoints and calls to leadership through that anointing. Without it, we are continually thrown back upon ourselves to make things work. With it, we have the resources of heaven at our disposal if we will be the faithful servant.

For this reason, God’s anointed are incredibly unique people. God’s anointed will do anything God asks… anything. God’s anointed will seek God’s will with a passion.  They will not move without it and they will not be diverted from their course once they have it. God’s anointed will love what God loves and hate what God hates. That means loving God’s people, God’s church, God’s environment, God’s resources, and God’s plan. It also means hating sin in every form and coming against anything that stands between God’s loving plan and its accomplishment. God’s anointed are people of keen discernment, they are branches who are solidly engrafted into the true vine. God’s anointed are servants first, last and always. And God’s anointed have only one passion, to know and do God’s will that He might have the glory. In this way, God’s anointed are
people of no reputation.

I did not come into my leadership position with a clear sense of anointing but in these past five years I have come to better understand and value the distinction between appointment and anointment.

This got me thinking about the whole subject. My google search led me to an amazing message by Christine Caine (my first time to hear her) on the whole subject of the gap between anointing and appointing. You might want to fast forward to about 5 minutes into this video to get past the preliminaries.

Christine Caine at World Mandate – Anointing to the Appointing from Antioch Community Church on Vimeo.

This whole issue is closely related to the whole matter of waiting for God’s timing or waiting upon the Lord in general.  Tomorrow we’ll continue the discussion along those lines.

I love this message by Francis Chan titled Is This Really Church?  You’ll want to fast forward to about 22 minutes into this 58 minute video to bypass some introductory comments of interest only to his church.  But at that point he dives into comparing his own church to the New Testament Church.  I think he is right on.

This is from an American Pastor questioning if what he created was indeed what Scripture says Church is supposed to be. But unfortunately, American missionaries have exported the same thing to countries around the world. I see it in the country I live in now.

I just finished reading The Unexpected Journey: Conversations with People Who Turned from Other Beliefs to Jesus
by Thom Rainer.  This was both an enjoyable and educational read.  He has 13 chapters telling the testimonies of people from widely divergent backgrounds who came to faith in Christ, and in the final chapter he draws some applications to the lives of believers today.  I highly recommend this book, but won’t spoil it by getting too detailed about the contents.  It is a fun read.

One of the things that struck me was how many of these people did not understand very much about what Jesus did for them on the cross.  They just turned from their false god to Jesus.  And this is much like other personal testimonies I have heard recently from former Buddhists who have come to Christ (I’m currently in a predominantly Buddhist country).  They certainly didn’t understand substitutionary atonement.  They just turned to Jesus as Lord.

As I thought about this it reminded me of this blog post I read recently, which discusses the question that has haunted many readers of the classic Pilgrims Progress over the years.  The question is, “When did Christian get saved?”  It is somewhat confusing, because Christian asks Evangelist “Whither must I fly?” Evangelist directs Christian to the Wicket Gate, or to Christ, and not to the cross.  But later we see Christian losing his heavy burden at the Cross.  Jim Orrick, professor of literature and culture at Boyce College (Louisville) teaches a course on The Pilgrims Progress, and has concluded that Christian gets saved at the Wicket Gate, and loses his burden of shame (gets assurance of salvation) at the cross.  You should read the entire explanation, but he ends with this:

the third error my students sometimes make, they are confused about the proper object of saving faith.

“Are you saying that someone can be saved without the cross?” a concerned student asks.

“No,” I answer, “No one can be saved apart from what Jesus accomplished on the cross, but the Bible proclaims that a person gets saved when he receives Christ, and the Bible does not say that a person gets saved through believing that Jesus died for him. Christ himself is the proper object of saving faith, not some part of his work.”

This is a reflective moment for most, because in these days, virtually everyone has been told that if he will believe that Jesus died for him, he will be saved, but I repeat: this is not found in the Bible. A person is saved not when he believes in right doctrine (substitutionary, penal atonement, in this case) but a person is saved when he believes in the right person, namely Christ. So the object of saving faith is not a doctrine but a person. Christ himself is the treasure chest of salvation. Receive him, and you receive all that is in him. The doctrine of substitutionary, penal atonement is an indispensable, essential component of the gospel, but it is not the whole gospel. How many Christians understood this crucial doctrine when they first received Christ? Nearly none! So how could they have been saved? Because, in spite of having underdeveloped or even mistaken ideas about the nature of the atonement, all who receive Christ the risen Lord as Lord and Savior are saved.

Recently I have written on this blog several articles (here and here and here and here) about the power of questions in discipleship and evangelism. My scripture reading today was in Luke 2 and 3.  Luke 2 contains the story about Jesus being left behind in Jerusalem as his family heads home after the Passover.  When they found him, he was in the temple.  Luke 2:46 says:

Then, after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions.

Now I had always assumed that passage was saying that as a young boy Jesus was asking the religious leaders spiritual questions because he wanted to grow in his knowledge of the Lord.  But the next verse adds an interesting detail:

And all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers.

So Jesus was listening and asking questions.  But he was doing something else.  He was providing answers.  Evidently he was asking questions that the religious leaders could not answer on their own.  He was listening to them, but evidently not in order to learn from them.  As a 12 year old, he was the one with the understanding and the answers.  He wasn’t asking questions and listening in order to learn.  He was asking questions and listening in order to teach.  Even as a 12 year old, Jesus was the Master Teacher!

Check out this 35 second clip:

Mark Dever, a grad student at Corpus Christi College, walked through the busy, narrow streets of Cambridge, England.

“Sir, could I interest you in some literature?” said a Hare Krishna disciple on the street corner. He pointed some books and pamphlets at Mark’s midsection. His offer was made in the tone of a fast-food server: “Welcome to McDonald’s, may I take your order.”

Mark replied, “No, thank you.”

“Why not?” asked the persistent Hare Krishna.

“Honestly?” said Mark, with raised eyebrows and a smile.

“Yes.”

“Well, I think that what you’re asking me to read just isn’t true.” Mark, still smiling, waited for the response.

“True? How can you say that?” the Hare Krishna said with a half laugh.

“Well,” said Mark, “for example, I believe that Jesus was God.”

“Oh, well, I do too,” he replied, with a dismissive wave of the hand.

“No, no,” said Mark. “You believe that Jesus was god in a Hindu sort of way. You know, in the sense that I’m god, you’re god, the trees are god . . but I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was God with a capital g, the big one-God Almighty.”

“Oh,” said the Hare Krishna, with sudden awareness and concern written on his face.

Mark continued, “But don’t be worried. I suspect that if most people watching us didn’t know you were the Hare Krishna and I was the Christian, they would agree with you and not me.”

“What do you mean?” The Hare Krishna guy’s demeanor became real but cynical. Even he had a hard time seeing how a shaved-headed guy on the street corner passing out literature could be considered status quo.

Mark rubbed his chin. “Well,” he began, squinting his eyes thoughtfully at the young man, “I suspect you believe that most people are created basically good and that if we just do some things right we can become better people.”

“Yes, I guess that is what I believe.”

“And I would suspect that most of the people walking by on this street believe that we’re basically good and just need to not make mistakes to be better.”

“Okay,” he said as he looked around.

“But you see, I believe that we’re bad, corrupted and basically rotten to our core, and that the only hope for us is radical surgery: for God to rip out our evil hearts and give us new ones. The Bible calls that being born again.”

The Hare Krishna guy gave a thoughtful look. He glanced from side to side. “Umm, you wouldn’t happen to have any Christian literature, would you?”

Straightaway Mark took him to a bookstall and bought him his first Christian book.

J. Mack Stiles. Speaking of Jesus: How to Tell Your Friends the Best News They Will Ever Hear(pp. 63-64). Kindle Edition.