From One Table To Another, Or How to Change An Opinion

Mike Leake

pexels-photo-631411I want to make a modern-day Matthew (Levi). But we aren’t as united as they were in first century Jerusalem. If you wanted to provide a stock image of a hated member of society a tax collector was an obvious one. Pharisees and Sadducees and Essenes had bitter debates about things like the resurrection of the dead, which books should be considered Scripture, etc. But one thing they didn’t seem to debate was that tax collectors were goons.

There were two types of tax collectors. The first type was the general tax collectors—they collected things like property tax, income tax, and poll tax. These were a fixed rate and usually collected by Romans.

The second type of tax collector was the one who would tax everything. (This was somewhat similar to our sales tax today but it wasn’t a fixed rate). The way these tax collectors made their money was in whatever they could squeeze out of the people. They’d give what was due to Rome and then pocket the rest. The more corrupt they were the more money they could make. Rome didn’t care what kind of tax these locals charged so long as they got their cut.

Matthew was the second type of tax collector. Now some of these types of tax collectors would be like a chief tax collector they’d hire others to do their dirty biding. If you remember Zaccheus he was one of these. But not Matthew. Matthew was one of the little guys who did his own thing—who set up his own lemonade stand and milked his own people out of their hard earned dollars.

Needless to say tax collectors were hated and despised. Not only were they daily reminders of Roman domination they were just crooked and dirty. Many Jews considered submission to Rome to be treason against God. And so to sell out like Matthew had done—this is just unthinkable. How could someone do such a thing? What kind of person is this? The Mishnah and the Talmud (Jewish writings) had whole sections dogging on tax collectors—and lumping them in with thieves and murderers. It was actually ruled by Jewish rabbis that it was okay—lawful even—to lie to tax collectors.

Making a Modern Day Matthew

So how do I make a modern-day Matthew. Do I make him a liberal and pull out all the characteristics that would make my right-wing audience easily identify him as a goon? What position do I have our Modern Day Matthew take on sexuality? What about immigration reform? Offshore-drilling? This Matthew is sold out to the “leftist” culture. Maybe I can call him a cultural Marxist or throw out a couple terms like “woke”.

Or do I go the other path? Do I have him sitting at a table selling MAGA material and being a fully convinced Christian Nationalist? What is his position on gun control, women’s rights, etc? Do I make him abusive and controlling? This Matthew is sold out on the right-wing of things. Maybe I can call him a misogynist or a white supremacist or something.

Does everyone sufficiently hate our Matthew now? If I haven’t done a good enough job of painting a picture then here is a box of crayons—do the work yourself and come back in a moment.

Here is a question for us. How would you encourage change for Matthew? Picture the meme of the guy with a cup of coffee and a sign that tells you that you’ve got five minutes to convince him. What do you do?

The World of the Real Matthew

The world in which the real Matthew lived had an answer for this:

Repent.

Change your life, stop being such a lying, thieving, cheat. And then maybe God will have something to do with you. Study Torah (start reading your Bible) and get your life cleaned up so that maybe you won’t be such a piece of scum.

That was Matthew’s world. Even if wanted to repent—there wasn’t much of a way for him to do this. It was engrained in him that this was who he was. He’d always be a bum. Folks like Matthew tend to just buckle and fully embrace their identity, maybe trying to justify it or sanctify it a little.

You pass by Matthew’s tax collector booth as a good and righteous person who has all of the greatest opinions on all of the things and you spend your five minutes telling him he needs to turn his life around. If our social media accounts are any indication this isn’t a stretch. How many times is “do better” our mantra?

But there’s a different way…

The Jesus Way

My guess is that Matthew was just as much a “do-good” legalist as the rest of the bunch. He’d just given up on the game. He just accepted his identity as a sinner. That’s how the world was divided.

The righteous were the ones who worked hard to follow God. The sinners are the ones who didn’t. We see this in Mark 3:16. The word for “sinners” is one that really just means common folk—those people who don’t give themselves to studying the Torah 24/7. The less-thans. The outcasts. The ones that don’t pass the muster. The ones who fail every religious test.

But Jesus blows that system up. Yes, there are still categories of righteous and sinners—but what did Jesus say, “Only God is righteous”. And so Jesus—being God—is the only one in the righteous category and everyone else is in the other category. In order to be made righteous it doesn’t happen through effort it happens through our relationship to Jesus.

You see this in Jesus’ call of Levi/Matthew. Follow me!

That’s the Jesus way. It’s radically different. It’s not “change your stinking ways so you can become righteous”. It’s, “follow me, and I’ll make you righteous.” Righteousness happens through connection and relationship to Jesus.

He does leave his tax collector booth. You can’t really follow Jesus and cling to your table. But there is something else going on here in that Jesus is now willing to be identified with this tax collector.

And once Matthew leaves his own table he’s immediately invited to another table—this one filled with Jesus and a bunch of other outcasts and “sinners”. Legalism will always dismiss the Lord’s table and try to turn it into something they can control.

Legalism looks at transformation and the gospel doing work in someone, it looks at Jesus reaching sinners and says, “What kind of man identifies with sinners like this?” What kind of religious leader is this? Sinners and tax collectors like Matthew have no hope of ever becoming righteous. But the problem is, neither do the Pharisees and scribes. They too are sinners but they don’t have the capacity to see it.

Here is the conclusion:

You want to see transformation happen with the guy sitting at the table with an opinion that ticks you off? Maybe try inviting him/her to another table. And you might just find that he’s not the only one who changes sitting at the Jesus table.

—

Photo source: here

How We Lost the Conversation on Human Sexuality

Mike Leake

photo-1625480857953-700f9cac1582“Father, why’d you get so upset at that man who helped the lady?”

Everyone else seemed to be celebrating at synagogue when the visiting teacher had helped Miss Ruth. But not his dad. His father, a religious leader, was indignant at the traveling teacher. Rather than celebrating he rebuked the congregation, and not so subtly the teacher. It sure put a damper on Miss Ruth’s great day.

It wouldn’t have added to the conversation to admit that he’d also been part of the group who had been teasing the strange lady who seemed to always be staring at the floor. Joshua remained silent on this point, but he was abundantly curious about his father’s rebuke of what seemed like a work of God.

“I was upset, Joshua, because the Law matters, the temple matters and holiness matters. It is very clear in our Law that we are not supposed to do work on Sabbath. This woman had been disabled for 18 years. If this teacher was authentic he would have waited until sundown to do his healing. It could have waited.”

This answer didn’t make much sense to Joshua. Had he been a little younger his father would have been dealt a barrage of ad infinitum “why” questions. But he was older and had to be more cautious in his approach.

“Why is it okay to help somebody on one day but not another?”

Joshua’s father tried to explain.

“You see, Joshua, there was a time when our temple was destroyed, our homeland was razed, and we were carried off into a foreign land. All of this was because HaShem (the Name) was displeased because we did not honor him. We were guilty of things like profaning the Sabbath. When we returned to the land our fathers wanted to make certain we did not break the Law anymore.”

“You mean like making sure people didn’t get healed on the wrong day,” Joshua interjected perhaps a bit too forcibly.

“No! We do this because we want to honor the Sabbath.”

Josh interjects a bit more forcefully this time, “But how does that honor the Sabbath!”

Josh is beginning to get a bit more heated as the cognitive dissonance ratchets up. He starts thinking about all the rules his family has lived by, rules about tying knots, picking up sticks, writing letters, number of steps taken. It is all starting to collapse for him.

His father tries a bit harder to bring Josh back to the family way. “It honors the Sabbath because that’s what we are called by God to do! It is clear from the Law that this should have waited for tomorrow!!!!”

“I just don’t understand, father, where do you read this? Where in the Law does it say this?”

Josh’s father grabs out a scroll and points to Leviticus 23 and then another from Exodus. “Here, Josh! It’s clear. Read it, son. Do not disgrace your father.” They read the scroll:

‘For six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work. It is a Sabbath to the LORD in all your dwelling places.”

“See, son. The Law is clear. That is why I was so angry with that woman and the teacher. They profaned the Sabbath. To not confront this could have made all of us guilty.”

Josh walks away, rolling his eyes, and wondering why his dad just doesn’t get it. 

When You Forget the Why

One of the most valuable lessons I learned in seminary came from Dr. Donald Whitney in a class on spiritual disciplines. On the class schedule there were two days marked “fasting”. We were required to fast.

I’ll be honest, I bristled at this being on the calendar. It felt really stupid and legalistic. Fasting didn’t seem like the type of thing you should do for a grade in a class. We were supposed to do the fast and write our experience in a journal.

The day came for the first fast. We hadn’t been taught a single thing about the practice, just that we had to do it. I did it, but rather begrudgingly. I tried praying some. Tried muscling through it and making at least some spiritually profound lesson out of it. In truth, it was terrible and it was a mostly empty experience.

When we came to class I was kind of surprised to hear Dr. Whitney say something like, “That was pretty bad wasn’t it?” And that’s when he taught us the lesson:

Discipline without direction is drudgery.

We didn’t know why we were fasting. We didn’t have any purpose to it. We didn’t know a theology of fasting. It was just a discipline without any direction. Much like “Honor the Sabbath”.

That’s what happened to Josh’s dad. He had lost the core of why they even honored the Sabbath. It lost the heart of what it was supposed to be symbolizing. It wasn’t about dependence upon God—it was about completing an assignment.

And because Josh had gotten a tiny taste of the freedom from this teacher who healed Miss Ruth on the Sabbath, things he had been taught his whole life stopped making sense. He saw through the ritual and all he heard was a guy yelling at a lady whom he’d always known as being a bit weird.

When you move away from the heart of why you end up being the type of person who yells at redemption rather than rejoices. You can be angry with the substance because you’ve become hyper-focused on a shadow. He is indignant at Messiah when he should have been celebratory.

And the next generation will either see this duplicity and run away or they will double down on it. But here’s the shame of the whole thing. Those who run away aren’t ever running away from the substance which is at the core. And those who double down aren’t doubling down on that which is at the heart of the matter but they go all-in on the periphery. 

Now, let’s bring this story up to date a little…

Why Does It Matter What Consenting Adults Do?

“Dad, why were you yelling about those two guys holding hands. Isn’t love what Jesus was all about?”

“Son, the Bible is very clear…one man, one woman…”

—

Now, there are differences between our two stories. But the conversation itself is very similar.

If you went to a youth group in the 1990s or early 2000s you likely had some sort of True Love Waits campaign. Purity culture came as a result of the cultural obsession with human sexuality.

The church responded in a way similar to the Pharisees of the days of Jesus. We built fences around certain biblical commands for purity. And those fences started becoming part of the Law itself. Some teens didn’t actually break any explicit commands in Scripture but were condemned as if they had.

Then when the conversation turned to issues of gender identity, same-sex relationships, etc. some within the church doubled-down on the rules and others simply walked away. Neither of which, I would argue, are actually dealing with the core issues of human sexuality. We aren’t having conversations about why God might say certain things about our sexuality. And how our flourishing might be an aim. We’ve lost the ability to ask tough questions on these matters.

“Why does it matter what two consenting adults do…” shows us how far the conversation has moved from the central concerns of human sexuality. If we want to have a meaningful conversation with the Josh’s in our life then we’re going to have to work overtime to get the conversation back to the core.

—

Photo source: here

A Simple Discipleship Plan

Mike Leake

photo-1629141648935-fd2986d92c6fOne of my favorite stories to tell when I’m trying to inspire a congregation to engage the work of children is this one. L.R. Scarborough tells a story from the ministry of D.L. Moody:

“Mr. Moody tells of a little street urchin in Chicago who went many, many blocks across the frozen streets of the great city, passing church and Sunday school after church and Sunday school to the church served by Mr. Moody. A Sunday school teacher stopped him one morning and said, ‘Where are you going?’ He said, ‘To Mr. Moody’s Sunday school.” He said, “Why, that is many, many blocks away. Come into my class in this Sunday school nearby.’ The boy said, ‘No.’ The teacher persisted and finally asked the boy why he went so far through the cold across the city to Mr. Moody’s Sunday school. He said, ‘Because they love a fellow over there!’

I love the simplicity of this. And it fits well with my philosophy of ministry: love people, preach Jesus. We can have a tendency to over complicate things. Sometimes when we have a languishing discipleship ministry within our church what is needed isn’t a big multi-point plan. Often it’s getting back to simple basic things. To this end I’ve often found Robert Coleman’s Master Plan of Evangelism to be beautifully simple.

Do What Jesus Did

When Jesus called the disciples into a relationship with Him he was also calling them into ministry. It would be through these first disciples that the entire world would be changed. Coleman looks through the New Testament to see the evangelism/discipleship strategy of Jesus—and it is gloriously simple. Coleman lists eight guiding principles which leads to replicating disciples. I will show at the end how I think you can simplify this even further.

  • Selection—find those who are faithful, available, and teachable and invite them into a meaningful relationship.
  • Association—spend time with them
  • Consecration—call for a commitment
  • Impartation—give away the Christ in us to them
  • Demonstration—show how to follow Jesus
  • Delegation—give them a job
  • Supervision—watch them do the job
  • Reproduction—encourage them to repeat the cycle with someone else.

This is the core of Coleman’s book and it’s incredibly helpful. Imagine what would happen in our churches if only ten people decided to follow this plan with 3 people per year. It doesn’t require seminary training—it simple requires being faithful, available, and teachable and spending time with Jesus with other people.

Here is my simple version of Coleman’s principle. Pick 2-3 people commit to a weekly or semi-weekly meeting and just “talk about Jesus” and live your life together. At the end of the year each person finds 2-3 people to repeat the process.

Overcoming a Significant Barrier

This is an incredibly simple plan but there are a couple barriers. For one, we often shy away from this level of intimacy with other people. But if we get over that hurdle we find another one—once we reach this level of intimacy with another person we are really slow to dissolve the relationship so we can pursue discipleship with others.

I wish I could tell you I know the answer to this, but I do not have one. The truth is, we don’t have a model in the New Testament of Jesus leaving his original twelve and then picking up a new set of disciples. He spent three years with them and then was crucified. But we do know that the Holy Spirit, through persecution, did kind of bust up the original band of twelve. They were spread all throughout the world. But there is no indication that they did not remain at least as close as one could remain when no longer in proximity without cell phones and email.

What I have seen happen is that life (I think you could say the providence of God) has a way of working this issue out. There are those who seem to truly be lifelong companions on a deeper level. But for the most part these types of discipleship groups tend to ebb and flow—often by things as simple as work schedules. And then you find a few new people and start the process over.

What I do know is that this barrier is not significant enough to not start the process. Find 2-3 people who you can begin this with even today. Encourage them to a committed discipleship type of relationship and explore ways to reproduce that group.

What have you found successful in these types of discipleship relationships? How have you worked to overcome the reproduction barrier?

—

Photo source: here

If you have Kindle Unlimited, The Master Plan of Evangelism is free right now.

The Difference Between a Prophet and a Narcissist

Mike Leake

pexels-photo-10853457The days of Jeremiah were perilous days where there was a competition on who was speaking the word of God. Jeremiah claimed to be speaking God’s Word. They were not welcome words. They were words of judgment, approaching disaster, and calls for repentance. The court prophets had a completely different message. They proclaimed a message of hope and prosperity. Both claimed to be speaking for God.

Yesterday, we shared a fictional story (though sadly all too often reality). It was noted that a narcissist will often take the role of a prophet. It is part of his/her stage of devaluing that which he/she once overwhelmed with love and affection. It’s all for the purpose of control. But this can be incredibly confusing at certain stages. Narcissist can sound like prophets—they can even speak truth. They can be charming, perceptive, and their bold stance for truth can be appealing to Christians. At times a true prophet may sound like a narcissist and the narcissist can sound prophetic. How can you tell the difference.

Prophets weep, narcissists are fake empaths

Jeremiah was known as the weeping prophet. The message which he was delivering was heart wrenching. He didn’t want to do it. It was a fire in his bones that he was weary of having. He wept at the catastrophe. Jeremiah had empathy. “My eyes are spent with weeping; my stomach churns…because of the destruction of the daughter of my people…”

A narcissist can weep. A narcissist can even fake emotions and empathetic responses. But they struggle with actual empathy. If you bring your tragedy to a narcissist he will either engage in comparative suffering (even trying to one up you) or may try to listen but end up telling you how you feel.

Narcissist’s have become very skilled at faking empathy. They can seem as if they are great listeners and incredibly caring. They may even be the first person to check on you when you have gone through a tragedy. But set up a boundary and see what happens? Do they respect your story? Are they letting you tell your story on your terms? Is your story being swallowed up by their own? That’s a good way to detect a narcissist instead of a prophet.

Prophets are often vulnerable, narcissists are fauxnerable

Think of Ezekiel. He embodied his message. The prophets make themselves very vulnerable. They lay it all on the line. They are often an open book.

That’s not the case with a narcissist. Here I turn to Chuck DeGroat, who has coined this excellent term fauxnerability (a fake vulnerability). Here are some characteristics of fauxnerability:

  • Contradictions. (Not consistent in their character)
  • Disclosures focus on the past
  • Staged fauxnerability (tears on stage little empathy face to face)
  • Victim mentality
  • Lack of curiosity
  • Oversharing
  • Self-referencing

Again a narcissist has often mastered how to appear vulnerable. But look for some of these tells. The narcissist has to be in control and so true vulnerability isn’t an option. Ask about a present sin or struggle that the narcissist has not yet gotten mastery over. Are they asking questions or making statements? That is often the biggest tell.

Prophets speak truth and leave the results to God, narcissists speak half-truths and force results

A prophet will very passionately and persuasively share God’s message. They are definitely invested in whether or not their hearers respond. Jonah’s disinterested posture towards Nineveh is an anomaly. The prophets cared about response—but they did not force a response. They were not controlling. They were not bullies. They were proclaimed truth and left the results to God.

There is a phrase that John Newton liked to use. He saw a difference between notions in the heart and notions in the head. That which was in the heart would lead to action and affection. But notions in the head typically led to a cold and formal religion. And he liked to refer to some as “banging notions in the head”. He’s not using the word but I think Newton is describing a narcissistic tendency. A narcissist doesn’t have curiosity. They cannot handle diversity of thought and opinion. Their world is colored in black and white—with the narcissist being the handler of the varying shades.

If you disagree with a narcissist they will not be able to articulate your position effectively. A prophet can do this. A prophet can listen. What happens when you disagree with a prophet? Typically the prophet weeps as he entrusts you to the Lord’s care. Not a narcissist. A narcissist will fight until you line up. Here is a picture:

But, when others do not behave the way the narcissist wants them to, they become unsettled and easily upset as they do not know what to expect next as others and things are not going according to their plan. A textbook narcissist demands others say or do whatever they want so they can reach their delusional goals, as other people are simply characters in their play, as they often will not consider others a real human being with thoughts and feelings.

Conclusion

There are a few more signs that might help you discern between a narcissist and a prophet. Narcissists will tend to isolate and try to gather a following. A prophet is more community and other-oriented. The key here is whether or not the goal and aim is God. Even the harshest words of the prophet are aimed at drawing into a deeper relationship with God. The prophet’s words do not terminate upon the prophet. It is not allegiance to the prophet but to the word of God that matters. This is not the case with a narcissist.

What happens when you discover that the “prophet” isn’t actually speaking the words of God but is actually a narcissist? We will tackle that question next time.

—

Photo source: here