Founders Ministries

John Newton: A Brief Biography

During his final days in December 1807, John Newton said, “What a thing it is to live under the shadow of the wings of the Almighty! I am going the way of all flesh.” A friend replied, “The Lord is gracious.” Newton responded, “If it were not so, how could I dare to stand before him?” Newton’s indebtedness to the amazing grace of God in saving and preserving rebels flooded his consciousness from new birth till death. His Hymn has reminded generations of God’s pervasive grace for two and one-half centuries.

Learning the bare facts of a person’s biography can orient us to his life. Here are some for John Newton. John Newton was born in London, July 24, 1725. His mother died in 1832 and with her perished all instruction in Christian truth. His formal education began at a boarding school when he was eight and ended when he was ten years old. He sailed on a merchant ship with his father from 1836 through 1842. Eventually, Newton served as the master of a slave ship. After years of unrestrained blasphemy, wild and carless living, in which he “bore every mark of final impenitence and rejection”[1] a gracious work of God patiently and by degrees brought him to serious searching around 1748 and saving faith sometime the next year. Eventually, Newton served as a parish minister in the Church of England at Olney from 1764-1780. Along with William Cowper he authored Olney Hymns, published in 1779.

Newton moved from Olney to St. Mary Woolnoth in London in 1780. He was active as a supporter of William Wilberforce in the abolition of the slave trade in England. He maintained his ministry at St. Mary Woolnoth until his death December 21, 1807.

John Newton never forgot the rescue from sin and devastation that God wrought on him. Early in his life he picked up and set down a form of legalistic, self-righteous religion. By 18, he had been convinced by a clever sceptic of the fantastic character of all religion and Newton “plunged into infidelity with all his spirit.”[2] The few years subsequent to this saw him careless in all eternal and temporal things. He was a deserter from a ship, whipped and scorned, tormented by a slave-holding woman, sick almost unto death, and in great dangers in storms at sea. Newton narrowly escaped death on several occasions. In retrospect, he viewed these escapes as special arrangements of divine providence to secure him for salvation and for ministry.

He reached a high position on a slave ship and was given responsibility to manage a long-boat in Sierra Leone in order to sail from place to place to purchase slaves. He had rejected his former infidelity by 1748 and had several times of serious thought about his need of forgiveness. Later as he addressed skepticism and infidelity among parishioners in London, Newton described his escapade with this intellectual difficulty in a letter to his parish, St. Mary Woolnoth, in London.

I know how to pity persons of this unhappy turn, for it was too long my own. It is not only a hazardous, but an uncomfortable state; for, notwithstanding their utmost address and endeavours, they cannot wholly avoid painful apprehensions, lest the Bible, which they wish to be false, should prove to be the truth. It was thus with me, and it must, in the nature of things, be thus with every infidel. To doubt or deny the truth of Christianity is too common; but to demonstrate that it is false, is an utter impossibility. I laboured in the attempt, but when I least expected it, I met with evidence that overpowered my resistance; and the Bible which I had despised removed my scepticism. He against whom I had hardened my self, was pleased to spare me; and I now live to tell you, that there is forgiveness with him.[3]

He made progress in abandoning some of the evil practices of former years but still lacked any consistent grasp of the nature of gospel faith and true holiness. Similar to a line in verse three of “Amazing Grace,” Newton stated, “I was no longer an infidel: I heartily renounced my former profaneness, and had taken up some right notions; was seriously disposed, and sincerely touched with a sense of the undeserved mercy I had received, in being brought safe through so many dangers.”[4]  He seems to have come to genuine faith around 1749; he married February 1, 1750, to a girl he had loved since 1742 when she was 14 years of age. He became master of a ship and was gone for fourteen months, but used the time for reading, discipline, and solitary contemplation. In all he made three voyages to purchase slaves that had been collected by slave traders on shore.

Newton’s reflections on his nine years in the business of buying and transporting slaves caused him deep shame. In writing “Thoughts Upon the African Slave Trade,” Newton stated, “I am bound in conscience to take shame to myself by a public confession, which, however sincere, comes too late to prevent or repair the misery and mischief to which I have, formerly, been accessory.”[5] Having begun in 1745 on the coast of Guinea, mastering a ship by 1750, ready for a fourth voyage in 1754 on his ship, God visited him with a sudden illness and he resigned his ship to another captain. His nine-year involvement in the slave trade came to an end. He had found it disagreeable but did not consider it unlawful and wrong. At a distance of thirty-three years, Newton described the effects of the slave trade, the slave ships, the slave auctions, the life on plantations on captor and captive alike. The slave men endured—if they finally endured at all—difficulties designed for them; the women have to submit to outrages they have no power to resist, “abandoned, without restraint, to the lawless will of the first comer.”[6] He gave himself to join forces with those who argued in Parliament to abolish the African slave trade. He knew of nothing “so iniquitous, so cruel, so oppressive, so destructive” as that.[7]

Through a series of clearly providentially arranged circumstances, Newton was able to find by 1757 a business that allowed him much time for study. He formerly had taught himself Latin, had read many of the Latin classics when on ships, and now determined that he would give himself to learn Greek. This was done to a degree that he could consult and use certain helps in the language in order to draw his personal conclusions as to the meaning of texts. He also read much of “the best writers in divinity” in English, Latin, and French. Soon he began to engage in writing and confined his reading mostly to the Scriptures. He summarized, “I have been obliged to strike out my own path by the light I could acquire from books; as I have not had a teacher or assistant since I was ten years of age.”[8] Having had some opportunities to preach and engaged in an encouraging discussion with a seasoned minister, Newton wrote his wife, “I fear it must be wrong, after having so solemnly devoted myself to the Lord for his service, to wear away my time, and bury my talents in silence, … after all the great things he has done for me.”[9]

Newton grew in his deep conviction that God was preparing him for some work of gospel ministry. For a while he considered joining the Dissenters until his mind was relieved of some of his “scruples” concerning conformity. After receiving approval for parish ministry, several attempts for a parish failed until 1764 when the Bishop of Lincoln approved him and promised to ordain him. He carried through on this, though as Newton reported, “I was constrained to differ from his lordship on some points.”[10]  After being ordained deacon in April 1764, he was ordained as priest in June of 1765 and was appointed to the parish of Olney.

In 1768 he published “An Address to the Inhabitants of Olney.” He began with a pledge of genuine concern for these people in the parish: “Every person in the parish has a place in my heart and prayers, but I cannot speak to each of you singly.” After giving a summary of gospel truth, Newton addressed six groups of parishioners. One, he addressed those who had faith or were convinced of its necessity. He encouraged them to pursue true faith and not to allow distractions to interrupt their quest. Two, those who felt the gospel to be a burden and would not give it a patient hearing he challenged them to examine his preaching and consider the sure approach of death. On what would they lean in that hour? Could they prove his doctrine was out of accord with the New Testament or the doctrinal standards of the Church? Third, he addressed those who abstained from public worship and their profanation of the Sabbath. He feared that they might be given over to a reprobate mind. Others who found time for only one public service a week should not be surprised that God withholds his blessing from them even in that service. Fourth, he lamented how generally the word of God was ignored among the people of the parish. In particular he pointed to sexual sin of multiple varieties. Such person are especially susceptible to divine judgment for God “will not hold you guiltless in the day of his wrath.” He urged these parishioners to humble themselves, repent, and “flee to the refuge provided for helpless sinners in the gospel.”[11] Fifth, Newton addressed the spirit of open impiety and infidelity. He held up his own case as one in which a blasphemer, persecutor, and injurious man “to a degree I cannot express” obtained mercy. “The exceeding abundant grace of our Lord Jesus Christ brought me out of that dreadful state” He urged this sort of unbeliever to seek the Lord while he may be found; if not, do not increase wrath by making jest of the Scriptures, the gospel, and those who love them. Sixth, there was a considerable number that were not believers, but were not openly profane, were regular in their attendance, but probably rested in their outward privilege and thought their freedom from open abominations made them safe. To them he urged, “May the Lord awaken you to a diligent search into your own hearts, and into his holy word, and not suffer you to take up with any thing short of a real and saving change.”[12]

In both parish ministries, at Olney and in London, Newton experienced spiritual success and ministerial distress. At Olney, his influence on William Cowper induced in Cowper “the only sunshine he ever enjoyed, through the cloudy day of his afflicted life.”[13] Cowper’s intense state of mental and spiritual distress had led him to serious plans and attempts at suicide. A mental confrontation with Romans 3:25 and the reality of the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ led Cowper to an experiential appropriation of gospel comforts. He moved to Olney in 1767 for the purpose of receiving the preaching and pastoral care of Newton. Cowper devoted himself to consistent and helpful ministry among the parishioners at Olney. Newton and Cowper often discussed evangelical doctrine and spiritual life, sharing common passion for the rescue of their lives by divine grace including their collaboration on Olney Hymns. The publication of Olney Hymns by Newton was Cowper’s first literary appearance. Among these were “There is a Fountain Filled with Blood,” based on Zechariah 13:1, “Oh, For a Closer Walk With God,” based on Genesis 5:24, and “God Moves in a Mysterious Way,” containing the line “Behind a frowning providence, he hides a smiling face.” Subsequent to writing this hymn Cowper relapsed into a severe depression for almost a year. Newton gave him consistent pastoral care during this time.

J. M. Ross, the memoirist of Cowper in Cowper’s Poetical Works [14] nursed an intense dislike for Newton and his piety as well as his theology. He called him an “intensely evangelical and energetic divine.” He blamed him for Cowper’s’ relapse into severe depression by characterizing his influence as driving him to “pharisaic minuteness” prompted by religious feelings … unusually gloomy and atrabiliar.”[15] He called Cowper’s happy labors beside Newton in ministry as “the unhealthy nature of the work in which he was now engaged.” Ross possessed the uncanny talent for passing around his insulting evaluations by saying of Cowper, “His thoughts were neither mystical nor profound; they were not even subtle or warmly poetical. Seldom indeed has so genuine a poet possessed so poor an imagination.”[16] Ross did recognize, however, the consistent and even powerful influence Cowper had on the middle classes of Englishmen. The religious received him as a notable ally. He did not “veil in doubtful haze the truths of Christianity,” but with him “all is as orthodox as a sermon.” Englishmen could understand him as “easily as they did their clergymen on Sundays.”[17] The clarity and resonant relevance of Cowper’s poetry was largely due to his years of hearing the sermons of Newton, even if later years and Cowper’s unstable mental condition and wide variety friendships and pastimes cooled their relationships.

Also, at the time that Cowper had lapsed into a period of deep mental and emotional instability, Newton began an extended correspondence with Thomas Scott, writing at least eight letters from June to December, 1775.[18] Scott, verging toward Socinianism and resistant to creedal subscription, looked on Newton as shackled by “enthusiastic delusions” and “rank fanaticism.” Newton dealt tenderly with him. Without insulting him or treating him condescendingly, he discussed both orthodoxy and Christian experience with friendly firmness. Giving only mild defense of the necessity of subscribing a creed and practicing a liturgy, Newton was firm on the specific doctrinal issues that he suspected were at the bottom of Scott’s challenges. “I am far from thinking the Socinians all hypocrites,” Newton assured him, “but I think they are all in a most dangerous error; nor do their principles exhibit to my view a whit more of the genuine fruits of Christianity than deism itself.” In the matter of God’s acceptance of sincerity in place of accurate understand or mental commitment, Newton responded, “It is not through defect of understanding, but a want of simplicity and humility, that so many stumble like the blind at noon-day, and see nothing of those great truths which are written in the Gospel as with a sun-beam.”[19] Newton wrote of total depravity, the necessity of regeneration and its insuperable power, the Trinity, justification and other doctrines as clearly taught in Scripture and verified in experience. “Since my mind has been enlightened, “Newton testified to Scott, “everything in me and everything around me, confirms and explains to me what I read in Scripture; and though I have reason enough to distrust my own judgment every hour, yet I have no reason to question the great essentials, which the Lord himself hath taught me.”[20] Scott’s final reception of these truth and experience of this faith in Jesus was yet several years away. Eventually, however, he was brought to see the truth of Newton’s doctrine and experience and to become the “humble recipient of the kingdom of heaven as a little child.”[21]

Despite his consistent, loving, and biblically faithful labors at Olney, the group of faithful hearers which afforded him joy and support passed away but were not replaced by other persons of similar spiritual experience. Finally the unconverted so dominated the social life of the parish, that on one occasion Newton had to ransom his house from their intent to do violence on a particularly rowdy and riotous evening. Within a year he left Olney for a new appointment in London. Newton told Richard Cecil that “he should never have left the place while he lived, had not so incorrigible a spirit prevailed, in a parish which he had long laboured to reform.”[22]

The move to London did not eliminate the difficulties of an evangelical, experientially-alive Anglican priest in an Anglican parish. Criticism mounted during his first year of parish ministry there, and he felt that an explanatory letter concerning his doctrine and his preaching was necessary. On November 1, 1781, he published “A Token of Affection and Respect to the Parishioners of St. Mary Woolnoth.”[23] Part of the difficulty of a parish ministry in an ecclesiastical establishment is that confidence in the regenerate character of the congregation must be very low. The minister does not minister to a church. His is a task to herd goats  and seek to justify his ministry and his message to those who are naturally and principially opposed to his purpose. The appeal Newton makes to the parish is admirable for its courage, its spirit of legitimate deference, and its undercurrent of evangelism, but as an implied comments on the condition of the parish, it is lamentable.

He admonishes those who are in the parish and have received the baptism of the established Church of England whom he never sees on the Lord’s Day. The auditory is numerous but Newton observed, “I see so few of my own parishioners among them.”[24]  Many to whom the “word of salvation is sent, refuse to hear it.” Also, Newton observed the progress of “infidelity” among them, a general disregard for the Christian religion in particular. He reminded them clearly that the facts, provisions, and conditions of the gospel message were matters of divine revelation and they “cannot wholly avoid painful apprehensions, lest the Bible, which they wish to be false, should prove to be true.”[25] Many others perhaps believe in a formal sense that the Bible is true but give little energy to either knowing or obeying it. They are offended when “a faithful preacher forces upon your conscience” the consequences of careless regard to the dictates of the final judge and, therefore, find sufficient excuse for not hearing him again. Some still attend worship, but do it in other parishes to avoid the intensely Bible-centered preaching of Newton. They should be careful that their contempt is not really against him, though they may delude themselves to think so, but is against “the doctrine of the prophets and apostles, and of Christ himself.”[26]  Newton professed never to have purposely given offense, but also he knew “that if I would be faithful to my conscience, some of my hearers must be displeased.”[27]  How to sort out the meaning of terms of opprobrium used against him, Newton was unsure; he was sure, however, that any term used, such as “Methodist,” even if void of any clear meaning would be “sufficient proof that it cannot be worth their while to hear me.”[28]  Others complained that he preached too long at forty-five minutes when they were quite eager to use a much longer portion of their day to hear useless entertainment or political speech. “It is not so much the length,” Newton warned, “as the subject matter that wearies you.”[29] Other complained that he preached extempore and did not read his sermons. His complaint evoked the most extensive response from Newton. He explained the historical situation which led to reading sermons as a safety measure for the preacher and how that developed into a mark of scholarly preparedness. Newton objected to the impression and showed how extempore reasoning and admonition showed expertise and knowledge in a way that a manuscript did not. Scripture topics, moreover, are fit “to awaken the strongest emotions, and to draw forth the highest exertions of which the human mind is capable.”[30] Since his subject matter is of infinitely “more concern to his hearers” than any other subject upon which men can place their thoughts or employ their tongues, “shall a minister of the gospel … be thought the only man who has chosen a subject incapable of justifying his earnestness.” Given that his office requires him to “unfold the wonders of redemption, or to enlarge on the solemn themes of judgment, heaven and hell” can it be conceived that he should not indulge “such thoughts and expressions upon the spot, as the most judicious part of his auditory need not disdain to hear?”[31] He urged them to consider with penetrating earnestness that eternity was at stake and that they could not be accepted by him in the great day of his appearing if they were not “born from above, delivered from the love and spirit of the world, and made partakers of the love and spirit of the Lord Jesus.”[32] He declared himself without guilt of their blood in that day. To those who believed the gospel, had not deserted their place under his preaching, and maintained a viable experiential fellowship with Christ in his saving work, he gave a serious call. They could assist him to stop the mouths of gainsayers with conduct consistent with gospel faith and spiritual virtue. Such consistent heavenly-mindedness would “constrain them to acknowledge, that the doctrines of grace, which I preach, when rightly understood and cordially embraced, are productive of peace, contentment, integrity, benevolence, and humility.” Many would look for their halting and miscarriages, but the Lord has “engaged to support, to guide, and to guard you, and at length to make you more than conquerors, and to bestow upon you a crown of everlasting life.”[33]

Very few days of his life subsequent to his appointment to Olney were free of his astonished admiration of such a transaction of grace and eternal security. His letter to London parishioners stated, “No person in the congregation can be more averse from the doctrines which I now preach than I myself once was.”[34] In a letter to John Ryland, Jr., Newton pointed to the providence of God in the death of useful ministers and in the calling of the most unlikely persons to gospel ministry. Samuel Pearce was taken very early in life (33 years of age), “not half my age,” wrote Newton, “but undoubtedly he lived to finish what the Lord had appointed him to do. So shall you and I.” Newton considered himself old at 74 but expressed his confidence in divine purpose, “Old as I am, I shall not die before my set time.” He wanted to “improve the present” and be prepared for the future. “Indeed,” he wrote, “I see little in this world worth living for on its own account; though I think no one has less reason to be weary of life. But I am not my own, and desire to have no choice for myself. May we live to His praise and die in His peace.” Further meditation on these phenomena brought Newton to observe, “The usefulness of some is protracted, while others like Mr. Pearce, are taken away early. … He who has the fulness of the spirit will never want instruments to carry on his work. He can raise them up as it were from the very stones.”[35]

Newton regularly called to mind the testimony of Paul as an encouragement. After Paul’s description of the deep rebelliousness and injurious intent of his life, he said of himself that of sinners “I am the chief” (1 Timothy 1:15). For Newton, this meant that even chief sinners could be saved and would thereby magnify the grace of God. He frequently drew attention to Paul’s testimony for he knew that its broad parameters enveloped him in its embrace. In a hymn entitled “Encouragement” Newton wrote

Of sinners the chief,

And viler than all,

The jailer or thief,

Manasseh or Saul;

Since they were forgiv’n,

Why should I despair,

While Christ is in Heav’n

And still answers prayer.[36]

Not only was Paul’s salvation designed for the encouragement of others, but his vibrant apostolic ministry given him by grace stirred Newton with God’s sovereign and surprising intentions. Paul received the grace of God for salvation and further to be an apostle, a preacher, and a teacher (2 Timothy 1:11). In fact, the glorious gospel of the blessed God was committed to his charge (1 Timothy 1:11). The grace to Newton imitated that to Paul even in that. In reflecting on his appointment to the parish of St. Mary Woolnoth in London, Newton wrote, “that one of the most ignorant, the most miserable, and the most abandoned of slaves, should be plucked from his forlorn state of exile on the coast of Africa, and at length be appointed minister of the parish of the first magistrate of the first city in the world—that he should be there, not only testify of such grace, but stand up as a singular instance and monument of it—that he should be enabled to record it in his history, preaching, and writings, to the world at large—is a fact I can contemplate with admiration, but never fully estimate.” [37]

In 1799 Newton wrote John Ryland, Jr. with further expressions of amazement at God’s choice and qualifying of unlikely instruments. “He can call the most unworthy persons, and bring them from the most unlikely places, to labour in his vineyard. Had it not been so, you would have never heard of me. From what a dung hill of sin and misery did he raise me to place me among the princes of his people! Consider what I was and where I was (in Africa) and you must acknowledge I am a singular instance of sovereignty and the riches of His mercy!”[38] When friends thought at eighty years of age that he had gone beyond the competence required to maintain a pulpit ministry encouraged him to step down, he replied, “What! Shall the old African blasphemer stop while he can speak?”[39]

Newton’s epitaph inscribed on a memorial tablet at St. Mary Woolnoth celebrated the truly surprising grace of God in his conversion as well as in his long and effective ministry.

JOHN NEWTON,

CLERK

ONCE AN INFIDEL AND LIBERTINE,

A SERVANT OF SLAVES IN AFRICA,

WAS,

BY THE RICH MERCY

OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR

JESUS CHRIST,

PRESERVED, RESTORED, PARDONED,

AND APPOINTED TO PREACH THE FAITH

HE HAD LONG LABOURED TO DESTROY.

[1] John Newton, The Works of John Newton, 6 vols (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1985) 1:24. Hereinafter designated as Works.

[2] Works, 1:10

[3] Works, 6:569.

[4] Works, 1:32.

[5] Works, 6:522.

[6] Works, 6:535.

[7] Works, 6:548.

[8] Works, 1:50.

[9] Works, 1:54.

[10] Works, 1:55.

[11] Works, 6:559.

[12] Works, 6:562.

[13] Works, 1:61.

[14] William Cowper, Cowper’s Poetical Works. Edinburgh: William P. Nimmo, nd. Hereinafter designated as Cowper’s. An introductory “Life of William Cowper” was written by J. M Ross.

[15] Cowper’s, v.

[16] Cowper’s, xiv.

[17] Cowper’s, xvi.

[18] These letters are contained in Newton’s Works, 6:556-618. Thomas Scott gave an account of his skepticism and his rescue from it in the Force of Truth, London: Printed for G. Keith, 1779. Scott’s “authentic narrative” was published the same year that Olney Hymns was published.

[19] Works, 1:568.

[20] Works, 1:570.

[21] Works, 1:68.

[22] Works, 1:69.

[23] Works, 6: 567-583.

[24] Works, 6: 568.

[25] Works, 6: 569.

[26] Works, 6: 371.

[27] Works, 6: 572.

[28] Works, 6: 574.

[29] Works, 6: 574, 575.

[30] Works, 6: 577.

[31] Works, 6: 578..

[32] Works, 6: 580, 581.

[33] Works, 6:583.

[34] Works, 6: 582.

[35] Grant Gordon, Ed. Wise Counsel, (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2009) 369, 370.

[36] Works, 3:581.

[37] Works, 1:73. Quote included in the biographical introduction by Richard Cecil.

[38] Wise Counsel, 370, 371.

[39] Works, 1:88

Pastoral Reflections on a Pastor’s Hymn

There are not many events from the year 1773 that still affect our lives today. There are not many people who were around in 1773 that are still remembered today. But I can guarantee you that on any given Sunday, Christians in various churches around the world are singing a song written by an ordinary pastor in 1773. “Amazing Grace” has been advertised as a song written by a former slave trader and as a song written by an abolitionist (both of which are true), but it should not be lost on us that John Newton wrote this hymn as a pastor. And in this 250-year-old hymn, Newton continues to pastor God’s people today with truths to anchor our faith and lessons to guide our ministries.

Here are a few reflections on the way “Amazing Grace” might shape our own walk with Christ and service to Him.

Written with Humility

The name of this hymn is more well-known than its author, and that’s exactly how Newton would want it to be. When he sat in his study on a cold winter day in the small town of Olney to write this hymn, he never dreamed it would go on to become the most famous hymns in history. He wasn’t thinking about the world; he was thinking about Olney. Newton never dreamed this song would one day be sung by world leaders; he was thinking about his own congregation. Newton wrote ‘Amazing Grace’ with the goal to honor Christ and edify His people. He didn’t write for fame but to serve.

Every pastor (and every Christian) must always be on guard against the tendency to do things for our own glory. We may not have global or even national aspirations, but we all desire recognition or credit from someone for the work we do. We all, like the disciples, have spent our energy arguing (even inwardly) over which of us is the greatest (Luke 22:24). Newton knew this battle in his own heart as he once wrote, “Self likes to do great things, but grace teaches us to do little things with a great spirit – that is for the Lord’s sake.” We should pray that the same amazing grace that saves sinners like us would also grow a humble heart in each of us that cries out with John the Baptist, “He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:30)

Written with Faith    

The shape of “Amazing Grace” flowed out of a long-established habit of Newton’s. At the beginning of every new year, he would dedicate time to both look back over the past year reflecting on what the Lord had done and look forward to the next year dreaming about what the Lord may do. In Newton’s words, he was looking to “past mercy and future hope”. In fact, Newton’s original title for “Amazing Grace” was “Faith’s Review and Expectation”. Newton knew the importance of anchoring our present experience in God’s past faithfulness and future promises, and he lived, pastored, and wrote with the wide view of God’s work in mind.

The words of “Amazing Grace” carry you across the entire path of the Christian life. One author describes this hymn as “a collective autobiography for every Christian. ‘Amazing Grace’ is perceptive biblical theology, embraced by one man deeply moved by his own redemption, articulated for corporate worship.”[1] If you want to know where your life and ministry have been, currently are, and are going, allow Mr. Newton to tell you the story of God’s grand redemptive work. He is the God of our past, present, and future. He is the Ancient of Days. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Newton’s faith-filled reflection should prompt our own: Is our view of the past characterized more by nostalgia and regret or God’s mercy and faithfulness? Is our view of the present shaped more by our mood and circumstances or by God’s presence and truth? Are our hopes for the future built on the world’s temporary joys or God’s eternal promises?

John Newton knew that faithfulness to Christ over a lifetime could only grow out of a wide view of God’s work. Living with this wide view adjusts our outlook on what a life of faith looks like for ourselves and for those we serve. As Newton once wrote, “Remember, the growth of a believer is not like a mushroom, but like an oak, which increases slowly indeed but surely. Many suns, showers, and frosts, pass upon it before it comes to perfection; and in winter, when it seems dead, it is gathering strength at the root. Be humble, watchful, and diligent in the means, and endeavor to look through all and fix your eye upon Jesus, and all shall be well.”

Written with Truth

“Amazing Grace” was one of many hymns written by Newton over the course of his ministry. In their famous Olney Hymns, John Newton and William Cowper compiled almost 350 hymns, and 280 of them were written by Newton.

His goal was never hymn writing for the sake of hymn writing. He originally began the practice of writing hymns to accompany his sermons with the goal of making God’s Word more accessible for his people. The small village of Olney was made up of mostly poor and uneducated laborers, and Newton’s hymns put theological truths in a form that was both accessible and memorable for his people. “Amazing Grace”, like many of Newton’s hymns, is written with great simplicity. Most of the words in the song are only 1 syllable! Newton demonstrated great love and care for his congregation.

The specific truths that he wanted to communicate to the people of Olney through “Amazing Grace” flowed out of 1 Chronicles 17. King David’s prayer in these verses sparked Newton’s own “review and expectation”, and he wanted to guide the faith of his church in the same direction. This connection to Scripture is one of the most important lessons of this famous hymn. The lyrics of “Amazing Grace” are not a compilation of Newton’s own thoughts and opinions; they are expressions deeply rooted in biblical truth. His own active relationship with the Lord through the Bible was the source of his ministry to his people. For Newton, ministry was not utilitarian, it was devotional. God’s Word was not simply a tool used for pastoring people, it was a treasure that led to abiding in Christ. As we learn to enjoy Jesus in our daily lives and serve Him in ministry, may we say with the psalmist, “I rejoice at your word like one who finds great spoil.” (Psalm 119:162)

Written with Sincerity

Though “Amazing Grace” is one of the most famous songs of all time, the circumstances of the day Newton first introduced the song have remained in the background. The story of January 1, 1773 demonstrates the honesty of Newton’s experience of God’s grace and the sincerity of his commitment to express that grace to others.

In Newton’s journal entry from that day, after preaching from 1 Chronicles 17 and singing “Amazing Grace” for the first time ever, he wrote the following entry in his journal, “I preached this forenoon from 1 Chronicles 17:16-17. Hope I was enabled to speak with some liberty, but found my own heart sadly unaffected.” Newton’s honesty here should be a great encouragement to every Christian that senses dullness within your heart. On the day that John Newton introduced what would become the world’s most renowned hymn, his heart was “sadly unaffected”. To some this may raise a red flag, but it should do the exact opposite. Newton’s freedom to acknowledge his flat heart only serves to further spotlight the beauty of God’s grace. It is not a sign that his lyrics were insincere but proves their sincerity. How amazing that God graciously chose to save sinners knowing our hearts will be slow to respond even after experiencing such a great salvation.

On top of the condition of Newton’s soul on that cold day in 1773 is the state of his friendship with William Cowper. The renowned English poet was one of John Newton’s closest friends. Cowper was in the service at St. Peter and St. Paul that morning. He heard Newton preach from 1 Chronicles 17, and he sang “Faith’s Review and Expectation” with the congregation. But, unfortunately, this was the last time Cowper would attend a worship service for the rest of his life. Cowper experienced seasons of deep depression, and as he walked home from church that day he felt himself slipping into another bout of depression. His mind drew darker as he struggled home. Once home, he wanted to express his faith in the midst of his emotion and doubt, so he sat down and wrote another now famous hymn, “God Moves In A Mysterious Way”. As Cowper continued to sink into a downward spiral, Newton was called to Cowper’s house that evening. Cowper had attempted suicide, and Newton arrived, cleaned him up, and continued to show his love and care for his friend by visiting him many times in the weeks and months to come. It is not far fetched to think that Newton had Cowper in mind as he wrote and sang “Amazing Grace”.

John Newton was no stranger to suffering throughout his life. From Newton’s perspective, the most significant trial he ever endured was the death of his dear wife, Polly. On the 1-year anniversary of her death, Newton wrote in his journal, “At length, the trial which I most dread came upon me…My right hand was not chopped off at a stroke…It was sawn off by slow degrees; it was an operation of weeks and months; almost every following week more painful than the preceding. But did I sink…The Lord strengthened me, and I was strong…I felt as much as I could well bear, but not too much; and to this hour I only stand because I am upheld.” Through his own circumstances and through his care for people like William Cowper, Newton learned the sustaining power of God’s grace.

Written with Wonder

Finally, the words of “Amazing Grace” were the result of a heart that was in awe of Jesus. Newton wondered at God’s salvation. He never got over God’s grace. No matter how many hymns he composed or how many letters he wrote or how many visits he made, Newton worked hard to keep his focus on Jesus, “Every step along the path of life is a battle for the Christian to keep two eyes on Christ.” This is true in both life and ministry.

All of us are tempted to let our focus drift to what we have done for Jesus rather than what Jesus has done for us. We would do well to heed Jesus’ words to his followers in Luke 10:20, “Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” Jesus’ mission for us should thrill our hearts more than our ministry for Him. Newton knew this doesn’t come easy for any Christian. He once wrote, “I find that to keep my eye simply upon Christ, as my peace, and my life, is by far the hardest part of my calling.” 

Every day of the Christian life is a day we need God’s grace. The Christian life is started by grace, continued by grace, and completed by grace. Newton wondered at this grace day after day all the way until his last day. As he approached the end of his earthly life, 34 years after he wrote “Amazing Grace”, he told one of his friends who stopped by to see him, “I am packed and sealed and waiting for the post.” Newton’s wonder created within him a deep longing for glory. He once said about heaven, “If I ever reach heaven, I expect to find three wonders there: to see some I did not expect to see there, to miss some I did expect to see there, and, the greatest wonder of all, to find myself there.” May God’s grace never cease to be amazing to us, and may our wonder only increase as we get closer to the day when we will see our gracious Savior’s face.

Though many songs, events, and characters of 1773 have long since faded into history – including much of Newton’s own work and ministry – the eternal truths of gospel grace continue to echo forward for every generation. Newton would likely prefer to be forgotten as long as Christ is remembered. Some of Newton’s final and most famous words lead us to this very truth, “My memory is nearly gone, but I remember two things: that I am a great sinner and that Christ is a great Savior!” 250 years later, His grace is still amazing.

[1] Tony Reinke, Newton on the Christian Life. Page 39.

Exposition of “Amazing Grace:” An Appreciation of 250 Years of Edifying Influence

Editorial Comments on Founders Journal

Exposition of “Amazing Grace:”

 An Appreciation of 250 Years of Edifying Influence

The 250th anniversary of the first singing of “Amazing Grace” was January 2023. It was written by John Newton and sung by his parish congregation in Olney, England. This Journal is committed to a theological exposition of that hymn. I have written the discussion of verse three and a biographical sketch of Newton. My pastor, Cam Potts, who preached a series of sermons on “Amazing Grace” at the beginning of 2023, has written how a study of the hymn energized certain pastoral commitments. A seasoned musician and profound theological thinker, Jim Carnes, worship pastor at Southwoods Baptist Church in Germantown, Tennessee, has provided an enlightening discussion of verse one. Paul Taylor gives an edifying exposition of verse 2 and includes a doctrinal investigation of the concept of the fear of the Lord: “ ‘Twas grace that taught my heart to fear.”  Erik Smith, a theologically and historically trained business man, discusses verse four by looking at how God’s promise [“The Lord has promised good to me”] is worked out in the various aspects of his providence. How pleasant and assuring it is to consider the truths of which Erik reminds us. Joe Crider, Dean of the School of Church Music at The Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, has taken on verse five and the often fearful impressions given concerning the time “when this flesh and heart shall fail.” He gives us a look at the vail of death and the pleasant prospects that God’s saving and preserving grace present to believers. Joe Nesome, pastor at First Baptist Church in Jackson, Louisiana, looks at verse six with a peek into the dissolution of this present temporal order (“The earth shall soon dissolve like snow”) that will be replaced by an eternal fellowship with the living God.

Charles Spurgeon’s Public Evangelism (Part 1)

This article is Part 1 in a series.

Each local church plays a vital role in the great commission. Sadly, according to C. H. Spurgeon, the great commission has become the great omission. Spurgeon writes:

The gospel command is so little obeyed that one would imagine that it ran thus, ‘Go into your own place of worship and preach the gospel to the few creatures who will come inside.’ ‘Go ye into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in’ … we ought actually to go into the streets and lanes and highways, for there are lurkers in the hedges, tramps on the highway, street-walkers, and lane-haunters, whom we shall never reach unless we pursue them into their own domains.[1]

The aim of this article is to set before you a minister of the gospel, namely Charles Haddon Spurgeon, who sought to wield the sword of the Word in the public Sphere. Spurgeon made it his every effort to win the lost wherever he went. Speaking of this, he writes: “not only must something be done to evangelize the millions, but everything must be done … This must urge us onward to go forth into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in.”[2] As we begin, let’s think of the “what” and the “how” of Spurgeon’s evangelism.

First, what is an “Effective” Public Witness? As we begin, we must think of that common argument you often hear regarding public evangelism. Is it an “effective” witness in our day? One may attempt to argue that this “public” witness was effective and acceptable in Spurgeon’s day, but times have changed! Many would argue that a “public” wielding of the Word is offensive to the sinner. However, it is critical to understand that society has never been accepting of such evangelistic labours. Consider the following statement from an interview done with Paul Washer:

Spurgeon was constantly attacked in his culture for the openness of his faith and the openness of his preaching. If you go back to the time of Whitefield and just look at the political cartoons written against Whitefield, I mean, he was considered an absolute fanatic, a crazy man. Why? Because he preached in the open-air … It has never been with the culture to do open-air evangelism … It has been against the culture since the moment the apostle Paul stood up in that great coliseum and spoke the Word of God.[3]

In his public witness into the community, Spurgeon was not trying to “re-invent” the wheel of public evangelism, but instead was seeking to go back to the “ancient paths” and follow the pattern of his Lord. Spurgeon argued that “open-air preaching is as old as preaching itself … Indeed, we find examples of open-air preaching everywhere around us in the records of the Old Testament.”[4] Similarly, through open-air preaching, Spurgeon followed the pattern of the Lord Jesus Christ, and his apostles, who actively sought the lost outside of a building. Spurgeon writes: “Our Lord himself, who is yet more our pattern, delivered the larger proportion of his sermons on the mountain’s side, or by the seashore, or in the streets. Our Lord was to all intents and purposes an open-air preacher.”[5]

Second, what did Spurgeon to do bring the Gospel to the public square? Over the next three articles, we will seek to look at Spurgeon’s public witness in terms of open-air preaching, personal evangelism, and tract and literature distribution. For this article, I want to look at Spurgeon’s use of open-air preaching in his early years of ministry.

The prince of preachers, Charles Spurgeon, avidly supported open-air preaching, arguing that it is “very easy to prove that revivals of religion have usually been accompanied, if not caused, by a considerable amount of preaching out of doors, or in unusual places.”[6] The great benefit of open-air preaching is “that we get so many new-comers to hear the gospel who otherwise would never hear it.”[7] Recalling his former days of ministry at Waterbeach Baptist Chapel, Spurgeon wrote the following:

There went into that village, a lad, who had no great scholarship, but who was earnest in seeking the souls of men. He began to preach there, and it pleased God to turn the whole place upside down.[8]

Throughout his journals, Spurgeon would fondly recall his days of open-air preaching: “I preached at Bristol, many years ago, in the open-air … I had a crowd of sailors and collier to listen to me, and when I began to talk to them about Christ’s redeeming work, I saw the tears streaming down their cheeks.”[9]

As the Lord richly blessed and multiplied Spurgeon’s pulpit ministry, he still made it his effort to preach in the open-air from time to time, and he greatly encouraged others to do so:

I have preached twice, on a Sabbath day, at Blairmore not far from Benmore, on a little height by the side of the sea … I have been compelled to abstain from these exercises in London, but not from any lessened sense of their importance. With the Tabernacle always full, I have as large a congregation as I desire at home, and therefore do not preach outside except in the country; but for those ministers whose area under cover is but small, and whose congregations are thin, the open air is the remedy, whether in London or in the provinces.[10]

The street evangelist has the great privilege of picking up those who would never enter a church building: “The open-air evangelist frequently picks up these members of the no church party, and in so doing he often finds some of the richest gems that will, at last, adorn the Redeemer’s crown.”[11] Therefore, if we are to see multitudes of sinners won to the Lord Jesus Christ, the church must actively seek them. The doctrine of the total depravity of man showed Spurgeon that man is not seeking after God. Instead, the evangelist must seek after the lost.

However, Spurgeon believed that open-air preaching must only be done by some men, men who are called by God, sent out by the blessing & support of the local church, and compelled with love for sinners. Far too often, open-air preachers are controlled by their pet peeves, and not the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this reason, Spurgeon gave certain criteria for open-air preachers:

He must have (1) a good voice; (2) naturalness of manner; (3) self-possession; (4) a good knowledge of Scripture; (5) ability to adapt himself to any congregation; (6) good illustrative powers; (7) zeal, prudence, and common sense; (8) a large, loving heart; (9) sincere belief in all he says; (10) entire dependence on the Holy Spirit for success; (11) a close walk with God by prayer; (12) a consistent walk before men by a holy life.[12]

From this list of criteria, we can learn two lessons. First, open-air preachers must have large and loving hearts: “We win hearts for Jesus by love by pleading with God for them with all our hearts that they would not be left to die unsaved, by pleading with them for God.”[13] We must proclaim “a great Saviour to great masses, a great Saviour to great sinners” showing that “Jesus, by his death, has become immensely rich in pardoning grace”[14] If properly done, open-air preaching can be greatly used by God:

I am persuaded that the more of open-air preaching there is in London the better. If it should become a nuisance to some it will be a blessing to others, if properly conducted. If it be the gospel which is spoken, and if the spirit of the preacher be one of love and truth, the results cannot be doubted … The gospel must, however, be preached in a manner worth the hearing.[15]

On another note, the open-air preacher must be resolved to fix his eyes upon the gospel of Jesus Christ. When preaching in the open-air, Spurgeon rightfully argues that “our object is not to conquer them in logical encounters, but to save their souls … Christ is to be preached whether men will believe in him or no.”[16] Similarly, the preacher must “keep to [his] subject, and never be drawn into side issues. Preach Christ or nothing: don’t dispute or discuss except with your eye on the cross. If driven off for a moment always be on the watch to get back to your sole topic. Tell them the old, old story.”[17]

Second, Spurgeon argued that the open-air preacher must be done in a manner worth hearing. This means that the style of preaching must be simple, clear, and compelling. The open-air preacher must acquire a style fully adapted to a street audience. Spurgeon suggests that “the less formality the better, and if you begin by merely talking to the two or three around you and make no pretence of sermonizing you will do well.”[18] Additionally, the preacher must use illustrations and interact with the audience: “In the street, a man must keep himself alive, and use many illustration and anecdotes.”[19] The preacher must “have something to say, look them in the face, say what you mean, put it plainly, boldly, earnestly, courteously, and they will hear you.”[20] Therefore, when open-air preaching, Spurgeon would recommend a quiet, loving, penetrating, conversational style of preaching.[21]

Concluding Remarks:

So what? How do we go forward as the people of God in 2024? As pastors, if our congregation is to function as a public witness for  Jesus Christ in the twenty-first century, we must prepare our people for it. Our people must know the message of the gospel that we are to proclaim. They must be firmly committed to the means that God has given us to share the gospel, namely, the proclamation of his Word. And as pastors, we must seek to train and disciple leaders who will then go out and proclaim the gospel on the streets. To encourage public witness in the church, Spurgeon would do two things. First, he would make public evangelism regular pray in the life of the church. Second, he would actively encourage and development evangelists in his local church. We can do the same as we seek to be salt and light in this dark generation.

 In terms of prayer, you can see Spurgeon’s evangelistic heart in the following exhortation to his congregation:

Preaching the gospel is the means which He is pleased to bless. much that he may work by the means of our Evangelists and bring thousands to the Lord Jesus. They are men full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and God is with them.[22]

In terms of encouraging the development of evangelists in the local church, Spurgeon his pastoral students to be active in open-air preaching. Spurgeon writes: “One of the earliest things that a minister should do when he leaves College and settles in a country town or village is to begin open-air speaking.”[23] One of Spurgeon’s students, Thomas Medhurst, followed Spurgeon’s advice and began his ministry preaching in the open-air. This open-air ministry later led to his call as pastor at the Baptist Church at Kingston-upon-Thames.[24] Pastor, what are you doing to equip and send out evangelists into the public square? Who knows what God would do if His people unleashed His Word in the streets of our Nation! May God bless your efforts for the glory of His great name and the advancement of His gospel.

                  [1] Ibid.                  [2] C. H. Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students (1894; repr., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1954), 253.             [3] Cameron Buettel, “Cameron Buettel Interviews Paul Washer” (Grace Community Church. San Antonio, July 23, 20.                  [4] Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students, 234.                  [5] Ibid.                  [6] C. H. Spurgeon, Autobiography: The Full Harvest, ed. Susannah Spurgeon and Joseph Harrald (1900; repr., Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 2014), 2: 91.                  [7] Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students, 255.             [8] C. H. Spurgeon, Autobiography: The Early Years, ed. Susannah Spurgeon and Joseph Harrald (1900; repr., Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1976), 1: 193.                  [9] Spurgeon, Autobiography: The Full Harvest, 92.                  [10] Ibid., 87-89.                  [11] Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students, 257.                  [12] Ibid., 269.             [13] Iain H. Murray, Spurgeon V. Hyper-Calvinism: The Battle for Gospel Preaching (1995; repr., Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 2010), 82.             [14] Ibid.                  [15] Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students, 265.                  [16] Ibid., 270.                  [17] Ibid., 269.                  [18] Ibid., 263.                  [19] Ibid., 265.                  [20] Ibid., 266-267.             [21] Ibid., 268.             [22] Ibid., 31.                  [23] Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students, 262.             [24] Ibid., 27.

Lord, Hear My Prayer

Lord, hear my prayer, and let my cry

Have ready access unto Thee;

When in distress to Thee I fly,

O hide not Thou Thy face from me.

Attend, O Lord, to my desire,

O haste to answer when I pray;

For grief consumes my strength like fire,

My days as smoke pass swift away.

My heart is withered like the grass,

And I forget my daily bread;

In lonely grief my days I pass

And sad my thoughts upon my bed.

My foes reproach me all the day,

My drink is tears, my bread is grief,

For in Thy wrath I pine away,

My days are like a fading leaf.

But Thou, Jehovah, shalt endure,

Thy throne forever is the same;

And to all generations sure

Shall be Thy great memorial name.

The time for Zion’s help is near,

The time appointed in Thy love;

O let Thy gracious aid appear,

Look Thou in mercy from above.

O Lord, regard the prayer of those

Who love the walls of Zion well,

Whose hearts are heavy for her woes,

Who sad amid her ruins dwell.

Thy power and glory shall appear,

And Zion’s walls shall be restored;

Then all the kings of earth shall fear

And heathen nations serve the Lord.

The Lord, exalted on His throne,

Looked down from Heav’n with pitying eye

To still the lowly captive’s moan

And save His people doomed to die.

All men in Zion shall declare

His gracious name with one accord,

When kings and nations gather there

To serve and worship God the Lord.

– Johann Michael Haydn (1737–1806)

What Does Genesis 1:1 Have to Do with John 3:16?

What Does Genesis 1:1 Have to Do with John 3:16?

In a word, everything. Soteriology is based on ontology. Salvation occurs in creation. Redemption takes place in reality. This should be self-evident but in our post-modern world more and more reality is being judged as simply social constructs or determined by the almighty self.

Let me explain. Ours is day when the very idea that absolute truth exists is judged outmoded, offensive, and hateful. This, of course, means that moral relativism dominates the thinking of many people. You can have your truth and I can have my truth and the two need not even approximate each other much less agree. What’s right for you may not be right for me. Ultimately each person (the self) is the determiner of is true and false, right and wrong, and good and bad.

It’s all relative, except, of course, the fact that it is all relative. That, my friend, is absolute. If you doubt me just try to live as if it is not and see how quickly you are charged with hate speech (or thoughts), bigotry, or violence. Such heresy must be canceled. The guardians of the left will not tolerate any questioning of their orthodoxy a person’s identity is precisely what [insert preferred pronoun] says it is. Biological sex has nothing to do with gender. Today when anxious friends ask brand new parents if their baby is a boy or girl, the only politically correct answer is, “We won’t know until they tell us.”

Ours is day when the very idea that absolute truth exists is judged outmoded, offensive, and hateful.

What is going on in the LGBTQIA+ revolution through which we are living is fundamentally a rejection of “Nature and Nature’s God.” This is the Apostle Paul’s point in Romans 1:26-27 where he describes the end result of those who “exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (25). “For this reason,” Paul writes, “God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error” (26-27, emphasis added).

Paul is talking about female (v. 26) and male (v. 27) homosexuality. Both are not “natural.” The word he uses is φυσικόςis (physikos)” everything which by its origin or by observation of its constitution seems to be a given. To call it ‘given’…is already to go beyond the sphere of naive description and implies a judgment on its actual constitution or true nature.”[1] In other words, male-male and female-female sexual relations are unnatural—against nature; against what is “a given.”

To put a fine but biblically and theologically fine point on it, such relations are a denial Genesis 1:1 and the rest of the creation account in chapters 1 and 2. It is a denial of creation and, therefore, of the Creator.

Here is where the connection to John 3:16 comes in. The God who “so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life,” is the same One who created the world in the beginning. To be reconciled to that God a person must lay down the arms of rebellion against him. That is, a person cannot continue worshiping the creation rather than the Creator and experience the saving grace of Jesus Christ, who is the Creator’s Son.

To make sure I am being clear—there is no such thing as a “gay Christian” or an “LGBTQIA+ Christian” or any other reality-denying-hyphenated Christian. You cannot deny the Creator and his creation and have his salvation at the same time. The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus took place in the real world. He is a real Savior for real sinners. The salvation he gives is a real salvation. It is impossible, therefore, to experience this salvation while denying reality and the real God who both created it and accomplished salvation in it.

You cannot have the God of salvation while continuing in rebellion against the God of creation. He is the same God.

What this means is that Tim Keller’s would-be aphorism, though readily parroted by J.D. Greear and Ed Litton (and who knows how many after them) is as spiritually dangerous as it is disingenuous. Said Keller, “I know homosexuality doesn’t send you to hell because heterosexuality doesn’t send you to heaven.” While progressives and homosexuals readily applaud Keller’s cleverness, the Apostle Paul begs to differ. He wrote, “For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience” (Ephesians 5:5–6). Homosexuals do are not excluded from the “sexually immoral.”

You cannot have the God of salvation while continuing in rebellion against the God of creation. He is the same God. You cannot have the real Jesus while you insist on living in unreality. An inevitable component of true repentance is the renouncing of every relation that is “contrary to nature.”

Soteriology is built on ontology. You cannot have the grace that saves while rebelling against the nature that is. We should never mislead anyone by suggesting they may savingly believe the gospel of Jesus Christ while living in the unreality of LGBTQIA+ identity or the contra-reality of homosexuality.

The good news is that those who are enslaved to such false ways of living are not beyond hope. The gospel really is the power of God to salvation for all who believe. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17). The Corinthian church was a living testimony of this. In his list of the kinds of people who will not inherit the kingdom of God, Paul includes “the sexually immoral,” “adulterers,” and “men who practice homosexuality.” But then he reminds the church that “such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

By all means, let us proclaim the amazing grace that is announced in John 3:16. But let us never do so to the exclusion to the undeniable reality that is revealed in Genesis 1:1.

[1] Helmut Köster, “Φύσις, Φυσικός, Φυσικῶς,” ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 253.

True Happiness

Fix my heart and eyes on Thine!

What are other objects worth?

But to see Thy glory shine,

Is a heaven begun on earth:

Trifles can no longer move,

Oh, I tread on all beside,

When I feel my Saviour’s love,

And remember how He died.

Now my search is at an end,

Now my wishes rove no more.

Thus my moments I would spend—

Love, and wonder, and adore.

Jesus, source of excellence!

All Thy glorious love reveal!

Kingdoms shall not bribe me hence,

While this happiness I feel.

Take my heart, ‘tis all Thine own,

To Thy will my spirit frame;

Thou shalt reign, and Thou alone,

Over all I have, or am.

If a foolish thought shall dare

To rebel against Thy Word,

Slay it, Lord, and do not spare;

Let it feel Thy Spirit’s sword.

Making thus the Lord my choice,

I have nothing more to choose,

But to listen to Thy voice,

And my will in Thine to lose.

Thus, whatever may betide,

I shall safe and happy be;

Still content and satisfied,

Having all in having thee.

Christian Nations and the Aim of Missions

Imagine the following statement being made from the pulpit of your church by a guest speaker: “Our mission is to make this nation a Christian nation.”

What is your reflexive reaction in this hypothetical situation?

Perhaps you have noticed the lack of context in this thought experiment. Regardless of what context you may have added in your imagination, now consider if your visceral response is any different if our fictional guest speaker is:

A political officeholder sharing his agenda for the upcoming legislative session.

A Chinese missionary explaining his exploits in Asia.

An urban evangelist summarizing his recent ministry in your city.

Each of these scenarios that what the phrase “Christian nation” denotes can vary widely from what it connotes.

If this thought experiment teaches us anything, it is that context matters. Such is always the case in matters of theology in general, and this is nowhere truer than in matters of political theology, and specifically, the conversation on Christian nationalism.

In terms of the latter, Andy Naselli has attempted a helpful taxonomy of the various species of this movement—making clear the great deal of overlap between various camps of principled, biblical conservatism regardless of whether one willingly wears the Christian nationalist moniker. Naselli has done commendable work, with all the necessary nuance and carefulness in his definitions. Yet in the emotion-laden discourses that prevail in the negative world, Christians do not always have the opportunity to offer such clarifications. Sometimes, we are best off attempting to steer the connotations in a positive direction.

But, returning to our hypothetical scenario, we can easily imagine how the connotations of terms like Christian nation or Christian nationalism can vary widely, even among ostensibly conservative evangelicals. In political discussions, such shibboleths often arouse suspicion, thanks to progressive rhetoric linking them with colonialism, racism, or other aberrations. But in the context of global missions, to long for the flourishing of Christian nations is simply to echo the refrain of Scripture’s great missionary texts:

“Let the nations be glad and sing for joy, for you judge the peoples with equity and guide the nations upon earth.” (Psalm 67:4)

“All the nations you have made shall come and worship before you, O Lord and shall glorify your name.” (Psalm 86:9)

“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.” (Matthew 28:18-20)

“After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands[.]” (Revelation 7:9)

My simple contention is that as the debate over Christian nation boils, we must keep these texts close at hand for the sake of our brothers and sisters who have yet to work out their theology of political engagement. The missionary spirit of the Christian faith, expressed in these and similar passages, contains all the resources we need to awaken (some might say “radicalize”) our fellow evangelicals to the monumental task of subjecting our civil life to the lordship of Christ. If our fellow Christians who are indifferent to the civil sphere, or who have imbibed the secularist fantasy, would but consider what Scripture says about discipling the nations, they’d soon be our allies in discipling ours.

By way of illustration: recently, I was privileged to spend nearly two hours with a pastor from the Indian state of Manipur—now a war zone. My pastor friend described in detail the conflict between the Hindu-majority valley tribes and the predominantly Christian hill tribes, along with the persecution and internal displacement happening to Christians as a result.

“The conflict between the two tribes flared up on [May 3rd], 2023,” he explained, “when the students from Kuki-Zo community namely All Tribal Student Union of Manipur called for a Tribal Solidarity march to oppose the High Court’s recommendation for inclusion of Meiteis in Schedule Tribe list. The Kuki-Zo were against this inclusion because it would help the Meiteis to monopolize all privileges and resources such as jobs, lands, and property which would be a threat to their very existence.”

He continued, “Thousands of tribal students participated in this rally which was held peacefully. In retaliation, the valley-based Meitei organizations organized counter-blockades, beat a pastor to death, and started burning houses belonging to Kuki-Zo community. From then on, the situation spread like wildfire with the burning of over 300 churches, hundreds of villages, 150 deaths, 60,000 displaced with ongoing kidnappings and arsons.”

At the heart of these tensions lies a complex interplay of ethnicity, religion, and political maneuvering—most notably a broader Indian political context in which radical Hindu groups, leveraging the Meitei tribe, have expanded their influence. Despite these barriers, the pastor to whom I spoke, together with his church, is ministering to displaced Christians who have lost everything and preaching Christ to those they encounter from the valley tribe. Sacrificially, they have devoted themselves to frontlines ministry including orphanage work, education, evangelism, and more.

Hearing such accounts overwhelms comfortable suburban ears such as mine. Yet impressed as I was with the faith and endurance of this community of believers, what struck me most was the pastor’s analysis of the situation in general and its potential answer: “The only solution to end this ongoing conflict is to grant Total Separate Administration to the Hill Tribals who are under the governance of Valley State government.” This amounts to the division of Manipur into two states: one with a Christian government, the other under Hindu rule.

At this point, I questioned my friend. Surely this is not possible, I reasoned, given the Hindu character of India as a whole. But he then proceeded to list several Indian states in which Christianity, in his characterization, is a “dominant cultural force”: Kerala (18.4% Christian), Nagaland (80%), Mizoram (80%), and Meghalaya (70%).

He shared as well, of course, the way in which the current Hindu regime would resist the addition of a new Christian state in India. “India is still a Hindu majority country,” he explained. “There has been propaganda to make India an entirely Hindu nation, with many pro-Hindu parties and government calling for everyone to return to Hinduism.”

Still, from his standpoint, the notion of organizing the hill tribes into a Christian state was at least plausible—especially since the hill and valley tribes currently cannot coexist peacefully. For him, this “Christianized” hill tribe government would simply entail freedom from persecution, freedom to consume foods such as beef, and freedom from anti-conversion laws which impede Christians throughout the country—benefits, he noted, which other predominantly-Christian parts of India do enjoy.

Throughout the entire conversation, I was struck by the straightforwardness of this pastor’s reasoning. Here was a Christian pastor—hailing from a corner of the world marked by idolatry, spiritual warfare, violent persecution, high concentrations of unreached people groups, and Hindu nationalism—unironically advocating for Christian self-governance. Yes, he was completely aware of the negatives of a nominal Christianity. (He shared that calling nominal hill tribes Christians to true discipleship forms a major part of his ministry.) Still, he saw no conflict between his evangelistic aims and the parallel goal of aligning their civil polity with the aim of Christ’s kingdom. And why should he?

Put another way: it apparently did not occur to this faithful minister that statements such as those found in John 18:36 (“My kingdom is not of this world”) and 1 Peter 2:13 (“Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution”) preclude the formation of Christian states or nations. This shepherd was willing to “dirty” his hands with political concerns because of his overriding concern for the peace of his people and the welfare of his sheep. His desire for the conversion of the nominal Christians of his tribe and the ultimate evangelization of the enemy tribe cannot be fulfilled if his own tribesmen are all dead. Christian self-rule in Manipur, thus it seems, is the logical implication of missionary zeal and love for one’s neighbor.

Reasoning according to a biblical worldview demands we employ just weights and measures (Leviticus 19:35-36). This means employing the same standards evenhandedly upon others’ ideas as we would use in measuring our own. Thus, when we hear talk of Christian nations or even Christian nationalism, ought we not afford such persons the benefit of the doubt—given that their aims for our body politic are those same aims we pursue in missions for all nations? And if this is the case, could we not win more and more of our brothers to the cause of godly Christian political engagement by emphasizing these biblical realities—that Christ has received authority over all the nations (Revelation 11:15), and that we are to labor in the public square in light of that authority ourselves?

Brothers: let us recognize that if we truly believe in global missions, then we necessarily confess the imperative of striving for Christian nations—and inversely, if we believe in shaping Christian nations, then we must joyfully commit ourselves to doing so not only at home but also abroad. And in this way, may the Lord establish the work of our hands.

Every Church is a Christocracy

If the last few years have forced evangelicals to reconsider anything it is the nature of authority in the world and in the church. On Monday, March 16, 2020, President Trump announced that a corona virus was spreading throughout the world in such a way that we were facing a pandemic of epic proportions. He and federal health officials proposed a “15 days to slow the spread—or flatten the curve” of the virus in hopes of minimizing the impact of the looming disaster.

As we know, those 15 days quickly expanded into months, and then years of governmental officials restricting the activities of citizens, businesses, and institutions—including churches. Very soon, governors began issuing executive orders telling churches that they could not meet, or that they could only meet according to governmental guidelines—which often included restrictions on singing or having no more than 10 people present (as in the case of Virginia).

Virginia Governor, Ralph Northam held a press conference December 10, 2020 and said,

“Christmas is two weeks away. The holidays are typically times of joy and community. We gather together, we celebrate our faith, and we celebrate with family.”

“But this year we need to think about what is truly the most important thing. Is it the worship or the building? For me, God is wherever you are. You don’t have to sit in the church pew for God to hear your prayers,” Northam said. “Worship with a mask on is still worship. Worship outside or worship online is still worship.”

He called on faith leaders to “lead the way and set an example.”

Similarly, Governor Gavin Newsom in California issued an executive order forbidding churches from meeting. Later he said that churches could meet but under very severe restrictions. His restrictions continued until Grace Church and Pastor John MacArthur successfully won a judgment against him in the Supreme Court.

These, and similar actions by civil authorities, forced churches and church leaders to reconsider what Scripture teaches about how the church relates to the state. Specifically, who has the right to tell churches what they can and cannot do, when they can gather, and how they can gather?

Jesus Christ is Lord of the Church. He and He alone is Head of the Church as well as the Head of every local true church.

Though that was a painful process for many churches, and some negotiated those challenges better than others, I think it is safe to say that for many it helped clarify what has always been true but can no longer be taken for granted, and that is that Jesus Christ is Lord of the Church. He and He alone is Head of the Church as well as the Head of every local true church.

I am confident that no church would deny that as an article of faith, but learning afresh to consider what it means practically—and what it may cost to honor His lordship in the face of opposition or persecution—has been a blessing to many churches.

Jesus Christ is Head of the church. When Peter confessed that Jesus is the Messiah, the “Son of the living God,” Jesus responded by saying, “On this rock I will build MY church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).

Paul introduces the idea of Jesus being the “head of the church” in six passages in his letters to the Ephesians and the Colossians. In Ephesians 4:16 he says that as we mature in sound doctrine and learning to speak the truth in love, we are able to “grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ.” In Ephesians 5:23 Paul writes, “For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.”

In Colossians 2:19 Christ is called “the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.”

Christ is Head of the church in the sense that He is the One “who stands over it” in the sense of being the basis of its existence, the source of its life, and the authoritative Ruler over it.[1]

What this means is that every church—regardless of its polity—is ultimately a Christocracy. Jesus is Lord of the church. He is the Head of every true church. This truth, rightly understood, rightly guides church leaders in both addressing a church’s internal affairs and determining its mission.

Internal Affairs

When questions, challenges, or controversies confront a congregation the primary goal in responding to them should be to determine the mind of Christ. What does the Lord Jesus have to say on this? What is the way of Christ (1 Corinthians 4:17) to resolve this? Christ’s mind and ways are revealed to us in Scripture. There the job of church leaders and church members is to discern what the Bible says a church should do in any situation.

Granted, some situations are clearer than others, but no decision of any significance should be taken without first grappling with biblical teaching and principles. We do this because Christ is Head of the church.

Christ is Head of the church in the sense that He is the One “who stands over it” in the sense of being the basis of its existence, the source of its life, and the authoritative Ruler over it.

One clear example of how this works out practically is in the area of corrective church discipline. Matthew 18:15-20 unambiguously outlines normal steps for dealing with sin in the church. Since Christ is Lord of the church, true churches understand that they do not have the option to ignore these instructions. That is likewise true of the more urgent and immediate command to “purge the evil person from among you” (1 Corinthians 5:13; read the whole chapter) when a public, scandalous sin is being committed by a church member.

If a church sees itself as a Christocracy, it will obey the Lord Jesus in this area, even when it is painful and unpopular to do so.

Mission

How the church goes about making disciples is also governed by the Headship of Christ. Our starting point is with the exalted position of our crucified, risen Savior. Jesus Himself prefaces His great commission with this reminder: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” Only after asserting His universal lordship does He issue the command to His followers, “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” (Matthew 18:18-20).

Churches own the mission to evangelize the nations. We preach Christ both personally and publicly, formally and informally; in pulpits as well as coffee shops; on the job site as well as the playground. There is no place nor any person who is outside the scope of our concern. Why? Because as Head of the church our Lord has “all authority.” His authority extends everywhere.

As Paul puts it in Ephesians 1:22, God“put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church.” Jesus is not only Head over the church but also, over “all things.” All principalities, powers, governments, institutions, and individuals are subservient to our sovereign, risen Lord. God made certain of that by raising Jesus from the dead and giving Him, in the capacity of our risen Mediator, to the church.

So our evangelism, while full of compassionate pleading with people to be reconciled to God through faith in Jesus, is never to be carried out as if our Lord is dependent on human power for disciples to be added to His family. He is Lord of lords and King of kings and we, His ambassadors, go out in His Name, calling all people to come to Jesus Christ and be saved (2 Corinthians 5:20-21).

Our evangelism is never to be carried out as if our Lord is dependent on human power for disciples to be added to His family.

The early church had this understand of Jesus as King and the church as a Christocracy as they carried out their mission. We know this by the response of their opponents to their efforts. In Thessalonica, the response to the preaching of Paul and Silas was so profound that hostile Jews dragged some of the new converts before city officials. There they charged them not with becoming Christians, but with proclaiming the kingship of Jesus. “These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also,…and they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus” (Acts 17:6-7).

Could it be that one reason so many churches seem to be making so little difference in the world today is because we have lost sight of the kingship of Christ? He is Lord. He is Head of the church. God has raised Him from the dead and made Him head over all things for the church. We carry out our marching orders to make disciples because all authority belongs to Him and we are His ambassadors.

Pastors and elders must teach their congregations to recognize every true church is a Christocracy. We do what we do in obedience to our Lord. We conduct our affairs and carry out His mission in the Name of our King Jesus. Perhaps, as the Lord grants us grace and courage to live this way, we will, like the early church before us, have reason to be charged with turning our world upside down.

[1] Heinrich Schlier, “Κεφαλή, Ἀνακεφαλαιόομαι,” ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 679.

A Compelling Case for a Confession of Faith – Part 2

In the last post, we considered some introductory reasons for every local church to have a healthy confession of faith. In this post, I’ll give you 5 positive reasons for having a confession of faith.

First, because:

We Have a Conviction

Robert Paul Martin wrote, “An unwillingness to define with precision the faith that it professes to believe is a symptom that something is desperately wrong with a church and its leadership.”

Local churches are not Milton Bradly. We are not inventing, producing, or playing games. We have a conviction regarding the truth of God. Here we stand; We can do no other!

We aren’t looking down at the ground kicking our foot saying “Ah shucks, I guess we sort of believe this or that…” No! It is the duty of every local church to boldly proclaim, this is what the Bible says!

Churches that embrace historic confessions of faith, like the 1689 2nd London Baptist Confession, declare, “While everyone is progressing and minimalizing and moving to the shallow end of the pool, we are going to regress. We are going to go backward to our roots. We are going to maximize. We are going to go deeper and fuller and more thorough.”

No matter your church’s confession, you must, in a world that is trying to customize and personalize truth, stand on God’s truth unapologetically. 

No doubt confessions like the 1689 are thorough. But consider what Baptist B.H. Carroll wrote,

“A church with a little creed is a church with a little life. The more divine doctrines a church can agree on, the greater its power, and the wider its usefulness. The fewer its articles of faith, the fewer its bonds of union and compactness. The modern cry, ‘Less creed and more liberty,’ is a degeneration from the vertebrate to the jellyfish, and means less unity and less morality, and it means more heresy. Definitive truth does not create heresy—it only exposes and corrects. Shut off the creed and the Christian work would fill up with heresy unsuspected and uncorrected, but none the less deadly.” 

Local churches should love thorough, biblical, Baptist confessions of faith because we love the truth. Because we have real conviction.

I love the first line of the 1689 because it sets the tone for everything else:

The Holy Scriptures are the only sufficient, certain, and infallible standard of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience.

This confession of faith serves the Bible. It is not equal to it. It is not above it. It’s an arrow that points to the Scriptures. If ever we find a conflict between the Bible and the Confession, we go with the Bible, since it is supreme.  

Confessions of faith are important because we have a conviction. 2ndly, because

We Have a Commission

Here is the gospel: The Son of God took on human flesh, conceived by the Holy Spirit., and was born of the Virgin Mary. He grew up in obedience to His earthly parents and His heavenly Father. He began His ministry around age 30. In everything He did He fulfilled all righteousness.

He proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God. He called sinners to repentance. He showed us the truth. He Himself is the truth.

He then died for the lawless sinners. Covenant breakers. He bore God’s wrath justly due our sins. He was buried and rose again on the 3rd day in victory. All who embrace this truth by faith and turn from their sins in repentance will be saved.

Upon His resurrection and before His ascension, Christ gave His church a commission (cf. Matt. 28:18-20). That commission is one of making disciples. We cannot make disciples apart from teaching.

Thus, a confession of faith helps the church fulfill this commission. It sets forth what we believe Jesus taught us to teach the nations. About the Bible. About God. Aboud sin. About redemption. About the church.

Because we take the Great Commission seriously, we have put down in writing what we believe so that we can teach it. A good confession of faith helps us do this rightly. It helps us form good ways to talk about the Trinity, the gospel, God’s governance of the universe, Christ, covenant theology, and the list goes on and on. All these precious truths we believe and hold so dear, we are to teach to others.

A confession of faith is useful because we have a Conviction, a Commission, 3rdly, because

We Have a Contention

The church today is the church militant. We are at war. We are contending for the faith (cf. Jude 1:3). We are contending for the truth. The world, flesh, and devil are constantly striving to minimize, change, or eradicate the truth.

New warped aphorisms are invented all the time that say things like: “Love over verses.”

You understand what that’s trying to do? Chip away at our foundation. It’s saying look past what God says in His Word and just “love” people. Ignore the Bible’s definitions and embrace a 21st century standard.

But this is where a good confession of faith comes in and helps us protect the truth. It helps us say, “Nope!” It helps us say, “Here is the faith once delivered that we are contending for.”

Individual Christians and churches are called to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. What is that faith? Someone may say, “Well, it’s what the Bible teaches!” Yes, this is true. But a lot of people say a lot of weird things about what the Bible teaches.

So, a confession of faith essentially says, here is what the Bible teaches. Here is the faith once delivered and passed down from generation to generation. Here is the truth that we are contending for.

5thly, a confession of faith is useful because

We Have a Commemoration

1 Samuel 7:12says,: “Then Samuel took a stone and set it up between Mizpah and Shen and called its name Ebenezer; for he said, ‘Till now the LORD has helped us.’”

A healthy confession of faith is an Ebenezer. It is a rock of remembrance. It is a commemoration. It is a reminder that we have only arrived where we are today by God’s help, that He has helped generations past, and that by His sovereign grace He will help generations future.

Holding to a historical confession of faith says, we stand in a long line of godly men and women who have been anchored in the same truth. Furthermore, by God’s grace, our children and grandchildren and their grandchildren will continue to hold the line and continue to gird themselves up in truth.

We have a confession of faith because we have a conviction, a commission, a contention, a commemoration, and finally, because

We Have a Congregation

Every local church is to be a pillar and buttress of the truth (cf. 1 Tim. 3:15). We are not just a bunch of individuals, but a body and we are called to a corporate faith.

This is certainly not dismissing the necessity of an individual and personal faith in Christ. You cannot be saved by someone else’s faith. You must personally put your faith in the person and work of Christ. In His life, death, burial, and resurrection. There is no salvation without personal faith in Jesus.

But this personal faith is not a privatized faith. You confess what the church confesses because the church confesses the truth.

Ditches to Avoid

We have a conviction, commission, contention, commemoration, and congregation. This is why every local church should use a healthy and historical confession of faith. Practically, when it comes to a church using a confession of faith there are two ditches to avoid:

Hyper-confessionalism

This is when a church treats a confession of faith in word or deed as on par with the Bible. Remember, a confession of faith is under the Bible’s authority and is to serve the Bible. A local church reserves the right to amend, reword, or add to a confession of faith as necessary, though it should do so with the utmost care. Yet, we can never amend, reword, or add to the Bible!

We must avoid hyper-confessionalism. But 2ndly, we must avoid:

Nominal Confessionalism

This is when a church has a confession, like, say, the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, but no one actually knows what it says. It is literally or metaphorically stuffed back in some ancient file in a closet somewhere in the church building that no one every uses anymore.

Thus, it has become a confession of faith in name but not practice. This is why confessional churches should be committed to reading, studying, teaching their confessions. In this age of religious pluralism, of the wild west where everyone can just believe whatever they want for whatever reason they want to, in this wicked age, every faithful church should have a confession of faith. And every member of the church should strive to know what that confession teaches and why. Truth matters.

Now, this doesn’t mean there won’t be disagreements at times with members over portions of a confession of faith, and that’s okay.

At our local church, no one is required to be a 1689 scholar or in strict agreement with every single sentence to be a member of the church. Within the life of the church there is liberty of conscience on certain issues. Some people are going to look at things differently. Some are going to need to be taught better. And everyone must be seeking to mature in the faith.

However, the 1689 helps us because upfront it says, “This is what we believe.” This is how our elders are going to teach. If you desire to be divisive over issues or cannot accept the teaching, then this would not be the best place for you.

It’s one thing to disagree and be willing to learn or to disagree and be willing to strive for unity, it’s one thing to be like that and it’s a different thing to just seek to sow division among the Body.

Conclusion

The strategy of churches over the last few decades has been to be as “big tent” as possible so as to include the largest number of people possible in the church. What our world needs, though, is churches willing to be dogmatic over the truth.

We need to obey verses like Eph. 6:14. Stand firm. Gird yourselves in truth. These are not the days for minimizing truths. These are not the days for nuance and ambiguity.

It’s like those who profess to be in Christ’s army are trying to hide which side they are on. They are covering up their uniforms so as not to stick out.

But I’m saying, wear the armor of Christ boldly. Let’s take out the biggest, most visible, flag for Christ that we can and let’s plant that thing firmly and unapologetically in the ground.

This is not because we want division or brashness. It is because we know that Christ is worthy of a church that loves His truth. It is because we know the only antidote, the only hope, the only thing that will turn our communities, our homes, our nation around, is truth.

Gird up church. Let us protect. Let us proclaim. Let us perpetuate God’s truth. 

Scroll to top