The Danger of Having the Last Word

Mike Leake

I find a strange cocktail of encouragement and despair as I read through articles in the Christian blogosphere.  Sometimes as I read I smell the aroma of Christ flowing forth.  Other times I can hear what sounds like a serpent chuckling. 

I try to avoid lengthy comment threads.  I also avoid “discernment” ministries and those blogs which seem to make it their aim to expose sin in the camp.  There is a ton of really bad stuff out there.  Caricatures, misinformation, slander, malice, and all manner of worldly wisdom seems to, sadly, abound in the Christian blogosphere. 

As one that battles with whether or not to enter a discussion, I found advice from John Newton helpful.  After being slandered John Ryland, Jr. consulted his long time mentor about whether he should respond.  Here is Newton’s answer:

Let him alone, and he will expose himself more effectually than you can expose him.  And his performance will soon die and be forgotten, unless you keep the memory of it alive, by an answer.  I believe scarcely any thing has [contributed] so much to perpetuate disputes and dissensions in the professing church, as the ambition of having the last word.

If this is true in Newton’s day when “the last word” would often mean a lengthy and sometimes costly tract through the press, how much more true is it today when we can “perpetuate disputes” by simply hitting the reply button. 

Why 1 Corinthians 13:1-3 Has Been Rocking My Soul

Mike Leake

It was just another Sunday and we were playing one of countless videos for the Lottie Moon offering (at least I think that’s what it was). Maybe it was a video about Loving Muslims, I can’t remember. But it caught my attention. Not the video. I have no idea what it was about. One of the missionaries is what caught my eye; or rather my heart.

I have no way of actually knowing what was going on in his heart at the time, but from all appearances it seemed as if he was a man that deeply loved the Lord and loved people. You could see it in the glimmer in his eyes. It wasn’t that he was “loving people” because that’s what he was supposed to do. No, I think he really loved these people, because he’s spent some serious time with Jesus.

The missionary was laughing and joyously interacting with people of whom he probably only shared a handful of words. Words didn’t matter. Love did. And it was their shared smiles that the Lord used to break my crusty heart and reopen it towards love.

In a whirlwind as my eyes fixated on the missionaries smiling face, the Lord spoke to my heart saying, “you don’t love people”, while simultaneously drawing my attention to the first three verses of 1 Corinthians 13.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Reading it in the Message really drove the point home:

If I speak with human eloquence and angelic ecstasy but don’t love, I’m nothing but the creaking of a rusty gate. 2If I speak God’s Word with power, revealing all his mysteries and making everything plain as day, and if I have faith that says to a mountain, “Jump,” and it jumps, but I don’t love, I’m nothing. 3If I give everything I own to the poor and even go to the stake to be burned as a martyr, but I don’t love, I’ve gotten nowhere. So, no matter what I say, what I believe, and what I do, I’m bankrupt without love

That means all of the work I put into being a good writer…bankrupt without love.

All of my effort at honing my pastoral skills…bankrupt without love.

Books.  Knowledge.  Seminary education.  Study of church history…bankrupt without love.

Bankrupt without love.

Jesus, help me love.

What Should a Newtonian Calvinist Say In a Pastoral Interview?

Mike Leake 1 Comment

I have been breaking one of my rules lately.  I have…gulp of shame…been reading far too many comment threads on blogs.  Even worse these blog posts have been about…choking down the shame of broken resolve…Calvinism. 

While indulging the part of my brain that lacks sound judgment, I have witnessed a common thread.  This thread presents itself as a forceful suggestion that Calvinist’s should be upfront and honest about their Calvinism and intentions of “reforming the church” in the interview process. 

I figure those that mention this have a couple of different scenarios in their mind.  One scenario would have the search committee, unfortunately, not mention the C word.  To this the young, restless, and reformed brother gets a wry smile, closes up his Bible, leaves the interview process, gets on Founders.org and begins to plot his path to world dominance. 

The second scenario has the search committee actually asking the dreaded question of Calvinism.  Here the Calvinistic pastor starts to sweat, shifts in his seat, and comes up with an rather evasive answer about only following Jesus or the Bible or something like that.  Of course he still goes home and gets on Founders.org and begins to figure out how to reform this dastardly church setting and make everyone bow a knee to JC (that’s for John Calvin).

I wish that those two scenarios were as ridiculous as I have written them.  But the truth is, caricatures are often present because of at least a seed of reality. 

So, it seems that in response to these silly scenarios–rather real or imagined–Calvinists ought to lay their cards out on the table in the interview process.  In this they should present to the search committee their five year plan for turning the church into something that would make that stale painting of Calvin actually sprout a smile. 

I disagree. 

Why I Wish Everyone Was a Calvinist

Not that I think Calvinists should be in any way disingenuous.  If a church asked a very pointed question, “boy, you plan on makin’ us one of them Calvinist churches”, then you ought to be honest and sincere.  But there is another side to this… 

I wish that every follower of Jesus was also a Calvinist. 

And I would hope that my non-Calvinist brothers and sisters would wish the same thing of their own theologies. 

I am a Calvinist because I believe that is what the Bible teaches.  And as such I believe that being a Calvinist leads to more joy, better evangelism, better practices, a deeper relationship with Jesus, more passion, better marriages, etc. 

I could care less if you call yourself a Calvinist, a biblicist, or Big Papa.  At the end of the day I hope that you follow Jesus.  But I, and feel free to throw darts on this one, believe that Jesus is a Calvinist—or put that another way Calvin (at least in his soteriology) was biblically faithful to Jesus and his gospel.  I hope you’d say the same thing about your beliefs.

It would be supremely unloving for me to be indifferent on this matter.  I believe embracing the doctrines of grace leads to greater joy in Jesus.  I want you to have that joy.  Not joy that comes from John Calvin but that comes from a better understanding of the gospel.  And I hope you’d say the same thing to me about your “system”. 

But…

I’m also a Newtonian Calvinist

Being a “Newtonian Calvinist” in this regard means two things.  First, it means that like Newton I believe that people come to embrace the doctrines of grace not through someone “beating notions in their head” but through experience. 

After a young and seemingly arrogant Ryland wrote in his book of poetry that he “aimed to displease the Arminians”, Newton responded thus:

You say, I aimed to displease the Arminians, I had rather you had aimed to be useful to them, than to displease them.  There are many Arminians who are so only for [lack] of clearer light.  They fear the Lord, and walk humbly before him.  And as they go on, by an increasing acquaintance with their own hearts and the word of God, their objections and difficulties gradually subside.  And in the Lord’s time (for he is the only effectual teacher) they receive the doctrines of grace which they were once afraid of. 

The worst type of Calvinist are those that have “notions too hastily picked up, when not sanctified by grace, nor balanced by a proportional depth of spiritual experience”.  Even if you did convince someone of the truth of Calvinism but they did not have a proportionate experience then you’ve probably just created that miserable and mostly unhelpful creature we call a caged-Calvinist. 

The second thing, my job as a believer is to love my brothers and sisters in Christ and not to “beat notions in their head”.  As Newton said in a letter to the Rev. Mr. Whitford:

I allow that every branch of gospel truth is precious, that errors are abounding, and that it is our duty to bear an honest testimony to what the Lord has enabled us to find comfort in, and to instruct with meekness such as are willing to be instructed; but I cannot set it my duty, nay, I believe it would be my sin, to attempt to beat notions into other people’s heads.

This means that while I heartily wish that you embrace the doctrines of grace I also know that it’s not my job or responsibility to bring that about.  I want to preach the truth (in as much as a finite sinner like myself is able), rest in grace, and love you like Jesus; that is my job. 

Conclusion

I will not shy away from preaching and teaching what I believe about Calvinism.  Or as Newton said, “to bear an honest testimony to what the Lord has enabled us to find comfort in, and to instruct with meekness such as are willing to be instructed”.  But at the end of the day I am not going to argue at length about Calvinism. 

I want every person that God has “put under my charge” to embrace the doctrines of grace.  But even if they do not I still hope to graciously and lovingly provide for them safe pasture.  And that “safe pasture” is found in embracing Jesus not the doctrines of grace. 

This is why if asked in an interview whether I want to “charge the church into Calvinist” I’d struggle with how to answer.  Not because I want to be deceptive, but because it’s partially true, but not because I want to serve Calvin.  I would want them to embrace the doctrines of grace because I believe it will provide them more joy and God more glory.

The Arrogance of Choosing Your Own Mediator

Mike Leake

“I have chosen Aaron to be the mediator”, says the Lord.  (Numbers 16-17)

“That’s ridiculous, we have a right to be the mediators”, says those involved in Korah’s rebellion.  “Who do Aaron and Moses think they are to tell us who can and cannot approach God”? 

—

“I have chosen Jesus to be THE mediator”, says the LORD.

“That’s ridiculous, I’m a good person and ought to be able to enter God’s presence anytime I want.  It’s part of what God owes me for having created me,” says those involved in the greater rebellion. 

“Who do these people think they are trying to tell us that Jesus is the only way to God?  That is so arrogant.  We disagree, anybody can get to God so long as they are sincere.”

So who is arrogant?  The one who says I believe God’s Word when he says “I have made Jesus THE mediator”, or the one who says, “I disagree LORD, we can have whoever we want for a mediator—heck, we don’t even need a mediator”? 

If you want to be consistent with God’s Word the humble thing to do is to believe that Jesus is the Aaronite priest (check out Hebrews) and not seek any other mediators—including yourself.