It is important for ministers of the gospel to, at one and the same time, avoid that theological dilution by which we fail to bring up children “until they are farther advanced” while rejecting that ecclesiastical elitism that refuses to “accommodate to the capacity” of those we are instructing.

“We keep our preaching basic because we have so many new believers. If we give them too much doctrine, they won’t be able to understand it.” I can’t remember how many times I’ve heard church planters and pastors say such things. Sadly, as their ministries begin to grow numerically, mature believers in the congregation are left to languish in spiritual malnourishment and discouragement.
Ministers need to learn how to break down, rather than water down, the truth of God’s word.
On the other hand, there are those churches (though significantly fewer in number) in which ministers seem to wear their academic interests on their sleeve in the pulpit. They burden the congregation with highly nuanced theological subjects or phraseology in the name of faithfulness. Whether it is compromising ministers diluting God’s word to the spiritual malnourishment of the congregation or ivory tower pastors caring little about bringing along new believers, one of the great needs of our day is for preachers to learn how to break down, rather than water down, the truth of God’s word.
We find this important principle at work in the ministry of the sixteenth-century theologian John Calvin. On the whole, Calvin tended to reserve his more academic prowess for his work The Institutes of the Christian Religion and his commentaries rather than for his sermons. In his essay, “Calvin’s Sermons on Ephesians: Expounding and Applying Scripture, ” Randall C. Zachman helpfully observes,

[Calvin’s] sermons differed from the commentaries both in terms of their audience and their objective. The commentaries have, as their audience, the future pastors…with the goal of revealing the mind of the author with lucid brevity. The sermons have, as their audience, ordinary Christians within a specific congregation with the goal of expounding the intention or meaning of the author, and of applying that meaning to their use, so that they might retain that meaning in their minds and hearts, and put it into practice in their lives.

Calvin sought to adjust himself in different ways to his readers and hearers, distinguishing between what he wrote for the academy and what he proclaimed from the pulpit. A brief comparison of his commentary on Genesis and his sermons on Genesis serve to demonstrate this difference of approach. To be sure, it is a task of no small difficulty.
Ministers must be careful to neither deny the sovereign working of the Spirit nor intellectually insult the congregation.
In our day, when ministers water down God’s word they almost always do so from behind a missiological smokescreen. Insisting that a robustly theological ministry is a detriment to reaching the unchurched, they introduce a number of serious problems.
First, ministers—perhaps inadvertently—give the impression that the ability to impart spiritual understanding lies within the power of the messenger rather than in the working of the Spirit and word of God. In essence, they suggest that the outcome of their teaching is commensurate with the supposed intellectual ability of the hearers. This not only denies the sovereign working of the Spirit of God through the word of God—it levels an intellectual insult at the people to whom they minister.
Read More
Related Posts:

Finding faithful pastors is essential—and possible. But fostering trust isn’t blind faith. Trust is earned. Get to know the pastors before you join a church. Follow pastors who follow Jesus in ways that are apparent to all.

“How can we trust anyone—especially pastors?”
A tenderhearted sister asked this question during a recent study in 2 Timothy. We had just discussed the danger of false teachers and the apostasy of pastors like Phygelus, Hermogenes, and Demas. She struggled with how to respond.
In the wake of the recent admissions of reports of abuse, corruption, and cover-up in the Southern Baptist Convention, her question resonates with many others.
When men who are supposed to represent Jesus hurt people under their care, it’s atrocious and disorienting. Whether you’ve been wounded directly or indirectly by such hypocrites, we all need a path forward that avoids forsaking either faith in God or trust in his church.
9 Warning Signs
While we must avoid harboring a spirit of suspicion toward all leadership, we are called to be discerning, sober-minded, and on guard (1 Pet. 5:8; 1 John 4:1). Not all pastors who exhibit the following traits are abusive wolves. Undershepherds are also struggling sheep. But if these sins characterize your pastor, serious concern and severe action are necessary.
1. Isolated
Shepherds should be known by their sheep. Appearing in the pulpit is only a small part of a pastor’s responsibility. If church members lack any visibility into their pastors’ lives, they are unable to “consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith” (Heb. 13:7).
Dangerous pastors insulate themselves to avoid detection, and sin flourishes in isolation. A pastor’s life must be open to observation.
To be clear, pastors must be able to have private time with God, family, and close friends. And not every member of the church is going to have a close, personal friendship with every pastor. However, it should be clear and observable that a pastor is living in godly, mature, Christian community. Pastors who avoid intimate relationships with anyone are highly suspicious.
2. Unaccountable
Trustworthy pastors plead for accountability. Any pastor unwilling to be held accountable by godly gospel partners is vulnerable to all sorts of evils.
A pastor who leads alone is a pastor empowered to oppress. Whenever possible, then, a plurality of qualified elders should be established. Obviously, there will be seasons and locations where co-laborers may be few, but my point here is more about disposition than demography. Even when there are few pastoral hands on the plow, a shepherd can exhibit a desire for accountability from friends and other leaders.
God designed the church to have this built-in accountability structure for many reasons, including to protect pastors from sin. So these pastors or friends shouldn’t be “yes men,” unwilling to offer critique. Instead, they must courageously love the lead shepherd by holding him to God’s standard (1 Tim. 3:1–7). We all need men around us to support and encourage us, but we must we wary if the lingua franca shifts from biblical love to biased loyalty.
3. Defensive
Continuing this theme, godly pastors will encourage members to give feedback, share concerns, and help them grow in faithfulness. Beware of pastors who cannot receive critique or who become defensive whenever questions arise. A church where criticism is treated as high treason is not a spiritually safe environment for the pastor or those under his care.
For example, I’m convinced that some sort of a formal review of a pastor’s pulpit ministry—for encouragement and for constructive feedback—is both a proof of humility and an antidote to defensiveness. This might take place at a staff meeting or an elders’ meeting or a time set aside for a “service review.” Regardless of context, it should be clear that a pastor is himself open to correction, committed to continued growth, and desirous of learning from others around him.
4. Entitled
Instead of seeing service to Jesus as a high honor, some pastors think they’re indispensable to God’s work. They feel entitled to special treatment.
I know of a church where people were hesitant to push back on the pastor since he had done so much for them. Sadly, he was cultivating a secret life of indulgence that took advantage of enamored sheep. He had a huge impact on lives for good—and ill.
Read More
Related Posts:

What then is the best way to fight idolatry in our own lives and keep the commandment? What is the best way to call unbelievers to the one true and living God? What is the best way to reclaim those who have turned away to serve gods of their own imaginings?

You shall have no other gods before me (Exodus 20:4, Deuteronomy 5:7).
Over half a century ago, the late Martyn Lloyd-Jones, minister at Westminster Chapel, London, aimed the penetrating light of the first commandment at modern idolatry, saying, “There are many people today who never darken the doors of a place of worship but who say they believe in the love of God. Yet they reject the gospel. They do not believe in a God who is wrathful against sin; a God who must punish sin; a God who sent his own Son….”
Refusing to believe in the God who made them, they believe in a god they have made.
One on hand, such people are the spiritual kin of all who bow down before gods carved of wood. They are idolaters, of the same seed as stone worshippers. They too adore a god of their own imagining, their own crafting, a counterfeit god making counterfeit promises to enslave their souls to the father of lies. Abraham was once of this stock. But God graciously visited him and heaven rejoiced (Josh. 24:2).
On the other hand, many of the people Jones identifies are the ones who should know better. Not all grew up in idolatry. As children, many of them heard of the true and living God: the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. They heard of the God who judges sin and saves sinners. Many even received the sign of his covenant, but they “were not united by faith with those who listened” (Heb. 4:2).
In fact, the most frequent pastoral use of the first commandment throughout scripture is when prophets lay it down as a straight edge to expose the crooked idolatry of those who once had drawn near to God.
A foundational example of this is the Lord’s ministry to Israel while they were yet in Egypt. After four hundred years of bondage, God rose to answer their cries, but it was not their faithfulness that moved him. Through Ezekiel the Lord recalls their idolatrous condition even prior to the exodus:
Read More
Related Posts: