It seems to be one of Satan’s devices, in order to destroy the good tendency of any truth, to get its advocates to [make it trite] out of its senses, dwelling upon it in every sermon or conversation, to the exclusion of other things. Thus the glorious doctrines of free and great grace have been served in the last age, and so have fallen sadly into disrepute. If we employ all our time in talking about what men ought to be and to do, it is likely we shall forget to put it into practice, and then all is over with us. -Andrew Fuller, Nov. 21 1786
Review of Am I Really a Christian by Mike McKinley
I had just finished preaching another message from 1 John. Very shortly after closing the service I was approached by one of our Jesus-loving teenagers. She seemed sad. I knew what she was getting ready to say…
“Mike, I don’t think there is any way that I’m saved”.
I knew what she was going to say because we had already had this conversation quite a few times. She was, as many of us are tempted to be, prone to a morbid introspection. If you gave her the “tests” of 1 John—she’d fail them every time…at least in her own mind. But if you asked everyone that knew this girl they would say that she deeply loved Jesus and didn’t have much of a concern that she wasn’t saved.
Actually this scenario has replayed quite a few times over the years. It seems that many times those that should have assurance are so sensitive to sin that they begin to question whether they are saved. But those that probably should be concerned are pretty confident that they are right with the Lord.
There are those that will read this and chalk it up to my being one of those neo-Reformed (please somebody tell me what this means) types that are deeply influenced by the Puritans and Jonathan Edwards; men who seem to get their jollies from people engaging in morbid introspection. These free-grace types will say that we should never have people question their salvation. If they made a decision to follow Jesus then they are saved.
That theology would certainly make things easier, but I remain convinced that there is a very biblical place for asking this question, “Am I Really a Christian”. After all Scripture does call us to “make every effort to make our calling and election sure”. And 1 John was written so that a group of confused and beleaguered disciples questioning whether they were saved or did the dissenting group have a monopoly on the truth.
Walking the Fine Line
It is this question, “Am I Really a Christian”, that Mike McKinley hopes to answer in his book of that title. And McKinley, as a pastor, seems to be fully aware of the danger in writing such a book. After all he does not want to give false hope to those that are not really “in the faith”. But at the same time he does not want to cause a true believer to doubt.
Throughout this book McKinley walks that fine line of pastoral sensitivity. He is not afraid of bringing the truth and saying bold things. His five things that the Bible says will accompany true conversion are certainly hard hitting. And McKinley does not pull any punches or soften the blow in the way he words things. He is not afraid to say, things like, “You’re not a Christian if you enjoy sin”.
But at the same time he also is sensitive to those that are prone to introspection and will quickly conclude that they must not be saved. In the same chapter that he says, “you’re not a Christian if you enjoy sin”, he also encourages the reader to consider their whole life trajectory.
Raising Concerns
This obviously raises a concern though. Just like the young lady I mentioned in the introduction, there are certain people that will almost ALWAYS fail these tests in their own mind. Even if you ask them to consider their own life trajectory they will magnify the bad and minimize the positive change.
There is the other end of the spectrum too. There are those that are so self-sure that they will pass every test. Even the ones that they should fail. So are these tests really all that helpful?
These five things that will always accompany true conversion are most subjective. Belief in true doctrine is perhaps the most objective—but a person given to morbidity will quickly say they must not accurately believe a doctrine if they do not live that doctrine. In their mind they will never hate sin enough, never love people enough, and never value God more than the world. Therefore, can they rightly say they believe? Can they rightly say that they have persevered?
Of course the self-confident person can check doctrine off their list. He can be deluded into thinking that he has persevered, he can minimize sin, he can magnify his love for others, and can delude himself into thinking that he has love for God and that his love for the world is only “missional”.
Furthermore, these tests typically cause the wrong response. If I didn’t pass the “love” test then I am encouraged to become more loving. But in reality what needs to happen is that my heart needs to be changed. McKinley would certainly agree. And that is really the whole point to this book; if you aren’t bearing fruit can you rightly say, “I’m a Christian”?
But often what happens when we talk about assurance is that people who “fail” the tests are sent on a quest to complete what is lacking. If I love the world too much, perhaps I should burn my cd’s. Then I can pass the test—then I can say that I’m a Christian. This of course leads to a works-based salvation—which certainly is not the gospel.
Concerns Answered
McKinley seems to be aware of these difficulties. And that really is what sets this book apart from many of the other books on assurance. In chapter eight the readers are encouraged to find their hope and assurance in the basis of their salvation; namely, Jesus Christ Himself. As McKinley says, “we can build our assurance of salvation on no other foundation except the greatness and kindness of Christ” (127). He then encourages those of us prone to morbid introspection to “stop thinking about yourself this very second, turn the eyes of your heart toward him, and trust him.” (128)
In chapter nine McKinley does what every book on assurance should—he points out the necessity of the local body of Christ in answering this question. Going back to the young lady in the introduction, what she needed was not a series of tests that she would fail. What she needed (and thankfully this is the counsel I provided) a new set of eyes to look to Christ and not herself. She needed brothers and sisters in Christ that would point out the beauty and sufficiency of Jesus. But she also needed brothers and sisters in Christ to point out her positive trajectory.
Conclusion
With the helpful questions at the end of each chapter this book would make a great resource to go through with a person struggling with whether or not they are saved. It may also make a good small group material to not only encourage and strengthen assurance but also cause a sleeping and nominal church out of their slumber.
McKinley does a wonderful job of walking the fine line between easy-believism and morbid introspection. He does it with pastoral sensitivity, wit, wisdom, and engaging writing. I highly recommend this book.
I got it free from Crossway in exchange for a review. You will have to buy it; thankfully you can do so for about 10 bucks.
There is also a website dedicated to this book: http://www.amireallyachristian.com/
Lessons from a wise old man that I originally thought was bitter, cynical and just plain wrong (Part 3)
A former professor that I once dismissed as a bitter, cynical, and just plain wrong and angry old man actually turned into one of my favorite teachers. What changed wasn’t him. It was me.
This has taught me a few things about ministry: one thing is that If they are “bored” maybe they aren’t doing missions. One other thing it has taught me is that Maybe missions should go before (or simultaneously with) training.
I was once of the opinion that people should very cautiously engage in missions/ministry until they have spent a good amount of time being “fed”. (E.g. people should attend evangelism seminar’s and such to get a good grasp on the gospel before they go out and share it).
My thinking in this was that the last thing we want is for our people to go out and “botch” the gospel message. Furthermore, why would we want new believers to get “eaten up” by ministry to broken and sinful people? Wouldn’t it be more wise to have them take about a year worth of training and classes before sending them out to the wolves? Maybe we can let them hang out in the preschool department for awhile, or be a trustee, or run the sound…you know something they can’t screw up too majorly.
I’ve changed my opinion.
Instead of people sitting on the sidelines they should be actively engaged in missions/ministry the second they become followers of Jesus. There are so many good reasons for this but here are my top 3:
1. Missions creates hunger
What drove me to Scripture early on in my walk with Jesus were teenagers that asked difficult questions. The more I did missions/ministry the more I realized how vital prayer is to the Christian life. As the pressure of being an example tended to increase in my life I became more desperate and hungry for Jesus.
I was no longer bored in sermons, classes, or lectures because I was hungry for information that I could pass on to others. Rather than sitting in a chair being “fed” to the point of being fat, I was engaged in the field and pouring out so much that I was making myself hungry. THEN when I came to sit under the Word I was starving and needed fed. Missions has a way of creating hunger. Hunger creates desperate Bible students, prayer warriors, etc.
2. Web of Relationships
As believers grow more in their relationship with Jesus and other believers we have a tendency to know less and less lost people. Our friendships begin to change. And as our hearts change we find that some relationships are more difficult to sustain given our new found love for Jesus. This is both a good thing and a bad thing.
It is good that our love for believers is increasing. But it is bad that often we make ourselves into bubble communities that shield ourselves from sinners. Though this is bad it seems to be a painful reality. So, why not take advantage of this web of relationships early on—by encouraging new believers to engaged in ministry/missions with those in their web of relationships?
3. Seminary
This is going to sound really arrogant and jerky of me, so I’ll warn you in advance. Forgive me.
I get really bothered sometimes in my seminary classes. You can usually tell the guys that are actively engaged in missions/ministry and those that are using this as a time of being “fed”. The guys that are using this as a season of getting fat on truth and knowledge tend to be the ones in class that see gray issues as only black and white.
I sit in class many times and just shake my head; knowing that some of these guys are going to get chewed up once they get into a church. They have various ideas or way that they say things that I know from experience will probably not work in a local church. They may be doctrinally sound but they haven’t been seasoned. (And I say this as a 30 year old that has only been doing ministry for about 10 years—I’m sure wiser people than me say the same thing about my ideas, etc.)
Seminary is a weird culture and if it is not tempered by missions/ministry then we spend a good amount of our time arguing about secondary issues. I’m convinced that the church culture can sometimes be the exact same way. A church that fights about carpet, clocks, and church signs is probably not actively involved in missions.
Missions/Ministry has a way of displaying what is really important. It also has a way of making the theoretical reality. And those theories, doctrines, etc. either get blown up quickly or they are wisely and deeply embraced for a lifetime.
Conclusion:
I am all for training people while they are doing missions. But I’m beginning to think it may not be wise to have seasons where we are simply getting fat on knowledge.
The fatter the people get at the beginning the harder it will be later to get them to move.
Your church should be hated…BUT for the right reasons
“Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets” (Luke 6:26)
“Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.” (1 Timothy 3:7)
These two verses are not in contradiction. In fact they are meant to compliment one another. A Luke 6:26 church (to the exclusion of 1 Timothy 3:7) is not healthy. Neither is a 1 Timothy 3:7 church (to the exclusion of Luke 6:26) a healthy church.
Some churches believe that being persecuted (no matter what reason) is the mark of a true church. After all Jesus said, “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil”. Westboro Baptist Church fits that bill. So does this mean that they are “Blessed” according to Jesus?
Other churches believe that being thought of well by outsiders is the mark of a true church. After all the world is watching us and we may be the only Jesus that some people ever see. That means if they hate us then they also hate Jesus—and we certainly do not want them to hate Jesus. This is why Paul wants the overseers to be thought of well by outsiders. If they like the pastor then they probably will want to come to church. But what do we do with what Jesus said in Luke 6:26?
Why did they love the false prophets?
In Luke 6:26 Jesus is contrasting the true prophets (Luke 6:22) that were hated, excluded, reviled, and spurned as evil. Now after Christ true prophets are regarded in such a way “on account of Christ”. But false prophets tell the people exactly what they want to hear.
False prophets are described by Paul in 2 Timothy 4. They are the ones that draw a crowd because they reject the truth and instead “teach to suit their own passions” and “wander off into myths”. People will flock to a church that tells them everything they want to hear about themselves.
I’d be really cautious if everyone loved our church. In fact I’d be a little wary if those that actively reject the gospel feel right at home in your church. Jesus seems to be saying that true prophets will be hated, excluded, reviled, and spurned as evil. And Paul said that godliness will be persecuted.
So then it is good to have everyone hate you?
There is a little phrase that I have thus far left off of my quotation of Luke 6:26. Yes, true prophets will be hated, excluded, reviled, and spurned as evil but they will be “on account of the Son of Man”.
The folks at Westboro Baptist aren’t being persecuted because they are following Jesus. They are being persecuted, reviled, hated, excluded, and spurned as evil because frankly they deserve it. They are evil. They twist Scripture to suit their own hateful impulses and they hide behind passages like this to make themselves think they are being persecuted for the sake of righteousness.
This I believe is what Paul is saying in 1 Timothy 3. An overseer (and I believe this would in many ways extend to the church as a whole) should be well thought of by outsiders; namely, they should not be able to rightly point a finger and say, “this man is a swindler, a liar, a cheat, a hatemonger, etc.”
Conclusion:
I love what Ed Stetzer says, “The cross should be the only stumbling block any “outsider” would ever face when entering our churches.” Of coure by “the cross” is a reference to Christ and everything upon which he stands. And I believe Stetzer would agree that the cross should be so illuminated that those who hate Jesus also have a tendency towards hating those who are magnifying Christ.
Your church should be hated…but only because of the offensiveness of Jesus (and our fidelity to Him), and not because you’re an idiot.
One more thing to consider…