I’m excited about the launch of Ministry Grid this fall. Todd Adkins and his team have partnered with churches across the country to provide a customizable platform for training your leaders and volunteers. Here are a few of the sample videos.

Afshin Ziafat (Providence Church) – “Sharing the Gospel with Muslims”

Bob Russell (Southeast Christian Church) – Developing a Transition Plan

Spence Shelton (The Summit Church) - “Small Group Spiritual Formation Plan”

Jeff Iorg (Golden Gate Seminary) – “Learning Humility”

Danny Franks (The Summit Church) – “The Sermon Starts in the Parking Lot”

Matt Papa – “What is Worship?” 

There’s only so much you can learn about a church from their website.

Sure, you can check the church’s doctrinal statement to find out what the people believe. You can see from the church calendar what programs run and how active people are in church activities. But the calendar and confession don’t necessarily tell you about the church’s culture.

Culture is the heart of your church, the atmosphere your church creates – whatever makes your church unique.

Unfortunately, the culture of a church doesn’t always match the confession. And when the culture isn’t aligned with the confession or the calendar, the culture typically wins. Which means, as church leaders, we shouldn’t spend all our time stocking the calendar or tweaking the confession. Instead, we need to take a step back and ask some questions about our culture.

In Creature of the Word, Matt Chandler, Josh Patterson, and Eric Geiger write:

“A church culture is healthy when there is congruence and consistency between what the church says is important to her and what others know really is important to her.”

So how do you know what your church culture is like? Here are a few questions:

1. What are you funding?

If your website says “missions” is a core value, and yet the music ministry budget is four times as big as your missions ministry, your church culture doesn’t line up with your stated values.

Follow the money. What are you funding? It’s likely that the more inward-focused your budget is, the more inward-focused your church is.

2. What are your people talking about? 

I recently spent some time on a college campus, and went to dinner with a couple guys. For two hours, all I heard about was the people these guys were discipling. Drug addicts. Homeless people. People far from God. It was clear from casual conversations that the culture of the school was mission-focused.

Spend time in casual conversations with the people in your congregation. You’ll discover what people are excited about. Talk to them long enough and you’ll discover the motivation behind the excitement. Are volunteers excited about VBS because of their love for kids, or because they hope to outshine the other churches across town? Are people always talking about personal preferences or how to be better effective in mission?

3. Who or what is the focus of attention?

What is the church focused on? Certain programs that give the church a good reputation? A ministry that gets good press? Powerful worship? Preaching? All these are good things can eventually supplant the worship of Christ.

Pity the pastor whose message is all about Jesus but whose ministry is all about himself! It’s possible to say Jesus is the hero from the platform and yet live as if you’re the hero of the church.

4. What are signs that back up your talk?

In Creature of the Word, a gospel-centered framework is described as a house.

• Theology is the foundation – what your church believes.
• Ministry philosophy is the structure and the design of the house, the commitments that undergird all your church does.
• Practice is the furniture of the house, what your church actually does.

Look at what your church is doing, the activities your church is involved in. And ask yourself where your practice aligns with your philosophy and theology. What are the signs that your people actually believe the confessional statement about evangelism? Or the core value of hospitality?

Look for the signs that back up your church’s talk, and then publicly celebrate those signs constantly. You become what you celebrate.

Conclusion

It’s possible to talk about grace and still be a legalist. It’s possible to talk about Jesus and still be self-centered. It’s possible to talk about guests and still be unwelcoming.

So check the culture of your church. Listen to those who visit. Ask friends to give you feedback. Don’t give up until the Jesus you worship and proclaim from the platform is the center of everything your church does.

Many churches using The Gospel Project for Kids are now working their way through Joshua and Judges. Exciting stories, for sure!

But we’ve heard from a few leaders who are troubled by the violence in these accounts. One pastor recently asked us how we approached the planning process:

How did you balance the need to convey the Biblical message and keep it age appropriate? How do you respond to the modern desire to keep children from being exposed to the violence in the Bible?

There are two approaches to telling preschoolers and elementary kids stories that contain violence.

Avoid the Violence

The first approach is to leave the violent stories for Bible storybooks at home and not tell the stories in a group setting. Parents choose what stories to tell their kids and when to tell them. At church, the violent parts are excised. (For example, in 1 Samuel 17, the focus might be on David taking food to his brothers, not David’s slaying of Goliath.)

Just the Facts 

The second approach is to tell the stories that contain violence, but to leave out any additional graphic detail or sensationalism that might distract from the point of the story. Along these lines, you’d tell a preschooler how God helped David kill the giant with a slingshot and five stones, and how this story helps us marvel at the power of God to do great things through ordinary people. You wouldn’t need to focus attention on David cutting off Goliath’s head, etc.

Many curriculum options for kids take the first approach. The Gospel Project takes the second. We stick with the facts of the story without dwelling on the violence.

Why We Tell the Stories

Here are the reasons we tell the violent stories:

• Small children, especially preschoolers, may not fully understand death, but we believe they are far more perceptive than we give them credit for.
• Some of the world’s most beloved fairy tales are violent (“The Little Red Riding Hood” or “Hansel and Gretel), but because of our familiarity with these stories, we tend to overlook the violent elements and tell them to our kids anyway. Why would we tell our kids imaginary stories from culture and not true stories from the Old Testament?
• We’ve discovered that, as teachers, it’s our own unfamiliarity with the Bible that causes us concern when telling these stories. The teacher who is shocked by the story of Achan or Ehud or Jael has no trouble with Noah’s Ark (where God destroyed every living creature) or Abraham and Isaac (where a father almost stabbed his son). In this case, we teachers need to learn about the little-known stories and see the most familiar stories with fresh eyes.
• Violence in the Bible shows us how bad our sin is and what our sin leads to. We go from a perfect garden to a brother killing his brother. The good news of the gospel grows brighter when we see the darkness of sin.
• Our children encounter violence in this sin-filled violent world. We can shelter our kids from hearing about Newtown or terrorist attacks… for a time. But eventually, the reality of our fallen world will confront them. It’s important for kids to know that God is not surprised by tragedy or unable to work in the midst of violence.
• The most important story in the Bible is the most gruesome and most troubling – the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It’s not necessary to show bloody pictures or sensationalize the details of crucifixion. But surely we must tell our kids the story of Christ’s sacrificial death for us. Unjust violence leading to cosmic restoration is the heart of the Christian faith.

Figuring out the age appropriateness of introducing certain stories is something that individual parents and teachers must discern. As curriculum providers, we do our best to walk a fine line. We want to faithfully tell the stories of the Bible in ways that focus on their main point without being distracted by or without denying the violent elements in the stories.

What do you think? How do you handle the Bible’s violent stories with your kids?

In this week’s Leaders Tips video for The Gospel Project, I introduce the Summer volume, The God Who Is, and mention two types of people you may have in your small group: the theology nut and the theology novice.

Below the video is a partial transcript of how I recommend helping both types of Christian understand the purpose for studying theology.

More than likely, you will have two kinds of people in your group.

The Theology Novice

One kind of Christian doesn’t understand the need for theology. What’s the point of digging down deep into theological truths about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit? As long as I love God and try to do good and read my Bible, what’s the point of all this theology? How does it benefit my walk with God?

The Theology Nut

The other kind of person in your group wants to study theology. It’s what they live. They want to go deep. They want to ask big questions. They’re all about theological debate and controversy.

Helping the Theology Novice

For the person who doesn’t understand the need for theology, show how the gospel is about what God has done for us in Christ that we might know Him, and that the more we study the truth about God, the more we would come to know Him and find theology relevant to our lives. Theology helps us plumb the depths of God and see the beauty of the gospel so that we are empowered for mission.

For the person who is not really interested in theology, say, “This is vital, because this is about God. This is who God is! What would it be like if we said we loved someone and yet didn’t want to know more about them, to get to know them better?”

All of us our theologians. The only question is: What kind of theologians are we? We all believe certain things about God. The question is: Do our beliefs line up with Scripture and do our beliefs cause us to love God more and be engaged in His mission?

Helping the Theology Nut

For the person who loves to study theology, make sure you connect knowledge about God to our knowledge of God.

We’re not just studying theology for theology’s sake, as if God were just an object to be studied. Theology is meant to be a window to a God we must adore, worship, and devote our lives to.

Good theology leads us to mission. Bad theology leads us to study the Bible and theology for its own sake, as just an academic exercise to win trivia or win a debate. Biblical theology, properly understood, is meant to lead us to an encounter with Jesus Christ so that we are then compelled by His love to be involved in the mission He has called us to.

Conclusion

Help the person unsure of the relevance of theological study understand why they need to consider the impact of going deeper in their understanding of who God is. Help the person who loves studying theology translate their love for theology into love for God and love for people. That’s the whole purpose of theology anyway.

Over at The Gospel Project blog, there are a number of great posts about how to maximize the summer months for spiritual growth. Here’s a rundown of the posts:

FOR PASTORS AND CHURCH LEADERS

Ben Trueblood - Student Pastor, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

“Be strategic and focused as you enter this very important season of ministry” writes Trueblood. He gives student pastors three specific ways to do this during the summer weeks: considering focusing your summer toward one theme, connecting your students with opportunities to serve, and challenging your students to think.

Todd Engstrom - Small Group Leader, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

“What if your community continued striving to be a spiritual family this summer, rather than pushing pause?”  With the new rhythm of summer, Engstrom urges small groups to take the opportunity to change it up by gather in new ways, studying something new, and vacationing together.

Alvin Reid - Student Leader, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

“…The summer offers unique opportunities for students to step up and step out in their faith. Youth camps, mission trips, and other activities that focus on Christ in a season of leisure offer phenomenal times of growth.” And he warns student leaders not to slip into the mindset of letting weekly, consistent discipleship decline in the busyness of preparing for those activities.

Andy McLean: Youth Minister, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

Mclean is right, “…there is less competition for the amount of potential time you have with students – school is out, many of the extra-curricular activities have been put on hold, and students generally have a lot of free time during the summer months. So, if one is trying to seize upon opportune moments for intentional discipleship, why not focus on redeeming the summer months for this very purpose?”

Matt Capps: Pastor, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

Matt urges pastors to not let pastoral vision and ambition vacation during the summer months. He argues that pastors need to develop an intentional plan not only for personal discipleship, but also for relational discipleship because “this is where faithful and fruitful ministry often occurs unnoticed.”

FOR THE FAMILY

Trillia Newbell - Women, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

Using Ephesians 5:15-16, Newbell expounds on the phrase “making the best use of” our days by asking, how can we redeem them?  She encouraged the readers to turn relaxation into fellowship with friends and with God, to involve kids and their activities, and to keep your quiet time.

Aaron Armstrong - Family, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

Aaron is right, sometimes we forget the opportunities God puts right in front of us to teach our children about Himself and the world He has given us. He encourages parents to find ways to teach their kids about the beauties and promises of the gospel through walks, gardening, and by having a good time.

Eric Mason - Husband and Father, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

Mason reminds us husbands and fathers that the summer is a prime opportunity to take initiative to lead our families. He writes, “…step up and be the husband and father that God has called you to be. Be intentional about being home, engaged and interested in your family. Take the task of spiritual formation and gospel promotion in the home seriously. This is the most important legacy you can leave your children, and the most formative way to love your wives.”

Jamie Ivey - Mom, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

“Use the summer to truly minister to your children and ask God to move their hearts towards His. You have so much time with them and are investing in their lives every day, so use this time to ask God to point out specific ways that you can pray for them.” Ivey encourages moms to use that time to explore God’s Word with them, to pray with them and for them, and to show them more about this God that loves them deeper than you ever could.

Michael Kelley: Men, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

According to Kelley, we usually ” play defense against the pressures of life. But what if instead of playing defense this summer, we chose to play offense? What if we had a redemptive mindset toward the time we have rather than a defensive one?…Summer could become something different. A time to walk boldly. A time to engage rather than pull back. A time to stride through life, looking this way and that, determined not to miss any opportunity.”

Josh Cousineau: Parent, Don’t Waste Your Summer!

Cousineau contends that “…the summer should be a time to dive deeper into the story of who God is. Children will have less school, work for us as parents can slow down, vacations happen. All of these things are chances for us as parents to lead our family to invest the summer for the glory of Jesus… This may mean thinking through our vacation time and building a rhythm into it of Bible study and learning more about our Lord and Savior.”

Right beliefs do not always lead to healthy cultures.

I’ve been watching the discussion about complementarianism – “new wave” and “old wave.” It’s interesting to see how new and old waves interact with each other, build on one another, correct each other, and warn each other.

As I read the comments on some of these posts, I wonder if there’s an aspect in this conversation that has been overlooked. It’s not about the specifics of complementarian viewpoints, but the kind of culture that sometimes grows up around complementarianism. It’s a culture that goes beyond the books and pamphlets that affirm godly manhood and womanhood in an age where gender distinctives are often minimized; instead, it is a culture of silent or exaggerated expectations that crush people who color outside the extra-biblical lines.

When I say the culture of complementarianism seems “crazy” at times, I mean two things, one good and one bad.

Good Crazy

First, there is a level of craziness that comes from being outside the mainstream of American life. Just quote Ephesians 5 on television today and you’ll look crazy, but this is a craziness that we should embrace.

The image of men and women, equal before God, embracing their unique roles, where men graciously lead their wives in love, and women willingly lay aside rights and power to graciously submit to their husbands – this is a picture of the gospel. Husbands and wives, in fulfilling their different responsibilities, shine light on different angles of Christ’s work. Christ, though equal to the Father, submitted to His will. In love, He gave His life for His Bride.

Furthermore, complementarianism isn’t the only (or main) aspect of Christianity that seems crazy to a lost world. There’s our belief in absolute truth, in salvation apart from works, our affirmation of Jesus as the only way to God, our belief in eternal hell, and our view of sexuality. We’ll always be tempted to tone down the crazy, but once we shave off the distinctive edges of Christian truth, we trade the power of the gospel for a bowl of postmodern porridge. There’s an element of “crazy” in complementarianism that ought to be embraced and celebrated in the same way we embrace the craziness of the gospel itself.

Bad Crazy

But there’s another kind of crazy that we shouldn’t be so crazy about. It’s the craziness that sometimes grows up in the culture of complementarianism. I’m talking here about culture, not the beliefs.

Culture is a lot harder to pin down and define, and yet culture communicates, sometimes more than our statements. In some churches that affirm a complementarian view of manhood and womanhood, a culture develops that goes beyond the complementarian beliefs into a skewed version of manhood and womanhood that we did not discern from the Scriptures, but from previous generations of American culture.

Some examples…

Last year, I wrote a blog post intended to encourage stay-at-home wives (like my own), and I got a lot of emails from puzzled men and women who felt I had overlooked the guilty consciences of working moms. I quickly discovered there are a number of people who are sensitive to this discussion because they’ve endured scorn and judgment for having a dual-income home. Here is a sample:

My wife has been a working mom for the first years of our marriage, and although we expect to bring her home from work upon the arrival of our next child at the end of this year, she’ll probably keep working on a very part-time basis.  You can imagine in our environment that we often face explicit or implied criticism/judgment that she is a working mom.

Notice the reference to the environment of their church. The idea that it is never appropriate for a wife to work outside the home is not something you’ll see in the best scholarship of complementarian thinkers and leaders, but it is an expectation that grows up in the culture among some complementarian churches.

(As a side note, in the Romanian villages I served in, the idea of women seeing their role as either inside or outside the home didn’t make sense. Families did whatever it took to put food on the table, which meant the women were just as active outside in the garden and fields as the men were. The kitchen duties were split, depending on whatever item was going to be cooked. The man was the head of the household, but the roles were not as specific or limiting; neither were these activities extrapolated as timeless specifics for everyone everywhere.)

There are other elements of crazy culture we should be aware of:

• a reticence or hesitance to affirm and celebrate women’s contributions in local church ministry, particularly contributions that are more up-front and visible.
• a warped vision of manhood that focuses on calloused hands and physical labor and ignores other kinds of work.
• the assumption that marriage is always better than singleness, so that singles feel like their identity is wrapped up in not having a spouse.
• unwillingness to celebrate any evidence of gospel ministry or fruit among those with a more egalitarian viewpoint.
• an unexpressed expectation that the godliest women have quiet and introverted personality types, and cannot be assertive and outgoing.
• a competitive tendency that leads to unhealthy individual comparisons and rushed judgments, rather than extending grace to one another.
• a spectrum of “holy” and “holier” choices with regard to a child’s education (from public school all the way to homeschooling).

I could go on.

The human heart is constantly seeking to justify itself. Too often, we as Christians are trying to one-up each other by grasping for a sense of superiority over our brothers and sisters because of the extrabiblical laws we’ve created and now keep.

It’s the culture of complementarianism that needs to be renewed and restored. Because there’s nothing crazier than taking a beautiful picture of the gospel and making a new law out of it.

Matt Papa is one of the leaders in the renaissance of new worship songs coming out of the gospel-centered movement. He serves on staff as a worship leader at The Summit Church in Durham and his latest release is This Changes Everything. 

We had lunch a few weeks ago and wound up talking about Keith Green. Afterwards, we decided to take the conversation to the blog.

Trevin Wax: What first attracted you to the music of Keith Green?

Matt Papa: The thing that first attracted me to Keith’s music was the thing that attracts me to all music: passion. When Keith sang, you got the sense that he needed to. When he played the piano, you got the sense that the piano would be injured.

Keith was sheer intensity, but it wasn’t just the music. The only thing that eclipsed his musical intensity was the almost-awkward intensity of his lyrics. He was A. W. Tozer behind a piano – blunt, abrasive, cutting – but the prophetic fire in his bones was always set to a melody that somehow made the medicine palatable. He had that “thing” all real prophets have: the anointing to offend with enough grace to keep you listening.

Trevin Wax: For the uninitiated, what five songs would you consider Keith’s best work?

Matt Papa: Here are my picks:

• The Sheep and the Goats is a musical work almost in a class by itself.
• Asleep In The Light gives a little taste of his intensity.
• To Obey Is Better Than Sacrifice is another dose of intense.
• There Is A Redeemer is a timeless hymn.
• Oh Lord, You’re Beautiful is a classic worship chorus.

Trevin Wax: Keith spoke out against the development of the Christian music “industry” from a financial standpoint. He foresaw the future of artists crossing over into secular music as well. Do you think Keith was right or wrong in his warning against CCM?

Matt Papa: I think he was probably right and wrong (and I’m not trying to be political here).

I think Keith was right because there is much that is disgusting about the modern Christian music industry. There are plenty of artists out there who hide their greed behind a trite Christian lyric. Keith was certainly not one of those. He once said:

I repent of ever having recorded one single song, and ever having performed one concert, if my music, and more importantly, my life has not provoked you into godly jealousy (Romans 11:11) or to sell out more completely to Jesus!

As many people know, Keith ran his entire ministry by faith – by the love offering. He would not allow money to “hinder” the gospel, and he spoke out violently against the future compromise (and demise) of the Christian music machine. There was a purity to Keith’s ministry that is unparalleled.

I think he was probably wrong in some ways, too.

Early on, Keith was somewhat of a legalist, as many of us tend to be early on in our faith. He expressed blood-earnest conviction about things which, later on in his life, he recanted when the grace of God began to tenderize his heart.

The music industry could have been one of those things. The existence of an industry in and of itself is not a bad thing: Christian music, Christian book publishing, etc. It is good that products are created that manifest the beauty of Jesus Christ and serve people. It’s also good that artists and writers are able to pay their bills. The danger exists because these industries are filled with sinners who can make success an idol.

Trevin Wax: Looking back at Keith’s life and legacy, what do you see as his strengths and weaknesses?

Matt Papa: Keith’s greatest strength was probably also his greatest weakness – it was the fire. Keith was so utterly convinced about everything. I’m sure it was that confidence that made his ministry so compelling. He was reckless, unafraid to offend.

I believe these qualities were used by God to awaken a generation. So many people I meet, still today, have been affected and are still encouraged by his ministry. But along with this certainty, he crossed the line into ungraciousness at times. He reminds me a lot of Peter.

Another virtue with (perhaps) a vice was his pioneering spirit. Keith and Melody had four kids. They had a traveling ministry and a magazine (newsletter). They went on mission trips, they started schools, they opened houses for drug addicts, and the list goes on and on.

So where’s the vice, you ask? One general oversight of the 1970′s was (in my opinion) a lack of involvement and connection to the local church. The “hippie” spirit was a pioneering, wandering one. I’m not sure where Keith and Melody landed on this issue, but my guess is their contribution to a local body was minimal.

Trevin Wax: Had Keith not died so young, where do you think he would have wound up? What was his trajectory?

Matt Papa: That’s a fantastic question, and one that I think about from time to time. My guess is that he would probably would have ended up on the mission field. Late in his life, Keith and Melody took some overseas trips, and Keith was really wrecked by the experience. He became a passionate mobilizer after these trips. I think they might have ended up serving outside North America.

Trevin Wax: No Compromise: The Life Story of Keith Green has been an influential book for many people. What is it about Keith’s story and music that continues to inspire and engage people?

Matt Papa: It was never the songs that made Keith’s songs so great. It was that he lived his songs. Keith was just as passionate behind the dinner table as he was behind the piano. He lived by faith – a wild journey of choosing to follow God and trust Him completely.

Leveraging his music ministry housing drug addicts, helping the poor, serving the least of these… Keith’s whole life was intense, and his songs were just the overflow, the soundtrack of his life. It’s ironic, but what makes his music so amazing, even today is that the music was nothing. Jesus was everything.

In a recent episode of Unbelievable, Andrew Wilson and Rob Bell have an engaging dialogue about the legitimacy of homosexual relationships within Christianity.

Here are some thoughts on the debate:

1. Kudos to Andrew Wilson for maintaining his composure as he gently presses Rob not only to be clear on his position, but also to reveal the grounding for the position. Too often, discussions on this issue are so focused on the tip of the iceberg that the foundational, grounding elements of the argument are assumed and never made explicit.

~~~~~

2. Rob appeals to the contemporary state of things to make his case:

It is time for the church to acknowledge that we have brothers and sisters who are gay and want to share their life with someone. This is a part of life in the modern world. And that’s how it is. And cultural consciousness has shifted. This is how the world is. 

When Andrew asks Rob if homosexual behavior is sinful, Rob answers:

I am for monogamy, I am for fidelity, I am for commitment. I think the world needs more of that. I think that promiscuity is dangerous and destructive. Some people are gay and want to share their life with someone, and they should be able to. That’s how the world is, and we should affirm that. And we should affirm monogamy, fidelity, and commitment, both gay and straight.

Note that Rob answers by appealing to the way the world is in order to make his case. He believes the church must affirm the world as it is.

What is puzzling to me is why Rob takes such a strong stance on fidelity and monogamy when so many in our culture celebrate sex before marriage, adultery, and all sorts of non-monogamous relationships. If the job of the church is to affirm the world as it is, then wouldn’t we have to affirm promiscuity too? It’s not a big jump from Rob’s comments on accepting homosexuality to accepting promiscuity:

It is time for the church to acknowledge that we have brothers and sisters who are promiscuous and want to share their life with multiple people. This is a part of the modern world and we should affirm that. Some people are promiscuous and want to share their life with more than one person, and they should be able to. That’s how the world is, and we should affirm that.

So, on the one hand, the church is to stand apart from the world and call people to repentance – a radical change of lifestyle (from promiscuity that is destructive and dangerous to fidelity that is shalom-creating). But on the other hand, the church must affirm the world and embrace the choices of our gay and lesbian friends because that’s just the way the world is. Make sense to you? Me neither.

~~~~~

3. Rob uses the commands of the Old Testament Law that Christians do not follow today (wearing different kinds of fabric, etc.) to disregard the Old Testament regulations about human sexuality (except for promiscuity, see above). For an articulate response to this line of thinking, please read Tim Keller’s blog post on “Making Sense of Scripture’s ‘Inconsistency’.”

~~~~~

4. Andrew does an excellent job of showing the beauty of repentance within the Christian community:

We just baptized a number of gay men in our church recently. It’s just wonderful.

But each one of them is saying, “But now, when I get baptized, I die to the old me. I rise again to the new me that is Christ-shaped, that’s eschatologically-informed and transformed. Resurrection life which is a completely different type of creature. A lot of the desires I have had, a lot of the things which I’ve wanted to do, I – like Paul did in the season in which he wrote 1 Corinthians, and like Jesus did – I put on hold sexual desires. I die to a lot of the things I want, in order to follow Christ. And I rise to new life…”

We look and say, “What does Christ-shaped new creation look like?” We’ve got gay guys in our church (and women as well) who say, “Dying to my old life and being risen again to new life in Christ means dying to all the acts of the flesh, including some of the sexual things that – yes, I wanted to do them, just like lots of people want to have sex with lots of people, some may want to have sex with two or three people simultaneously, that doesn’t mean I’m okay to do that. It means I am just like anyone else (greed or desires to slander or swindle) regarding any number of other sins. We say those things die with me. We repent and get baptized.”

To not put that in front of someone is to say, “You can have the kingdom, but if it costs too much, we’ll just lower the asking price…”

Yesterday, we looked at Michael Emlet’s characterization of people needing counseling as saints, sufferers, or sinners. 

The danger of ignoring or minimizing these categories is that we will fail to offer the proper counsel at the proper time. Instead, we will offer counsel that would be helpful in one situation and yet woefully inadequate in another.

Ignoring these categories would lead us to a “one-size-fits-all” approach to counseling, where we frequently turn to our favorite Bible passages to apply surface-level advice rather than getting to the roots of the issue.

According to Emlet, we use a weed-eater that takes care of symptoms but leaves the roots alone. By compartmentalizing the solution, we fail to bring people back to the great story of redemption (79).

Forgetting the Saint 

Consider what happens when we ignore or minimize the “saint” aspect of a Christian’s life. We concentrate on what remains to be changed in the heart of the Christian. Our approach will tend toward a list of “do’s and don’ts.” We will tell people how to manage their suffering or how to confront their lingering sin.

If the person has a tender conscience and is struggling to accept God’s forgiveness of previous sins and failures, then pointing out ongoing sins that need to be confronted is not the best approach. We will be focused on the “not yet” aspect of redemption, without giving much attention to the “already” of Christ’s work for us. Imperatives from Scripture will displace the indicatives of salvation.

Emlet uses the example of a parent who is always focused on the character traits lacking in their children, rather than the character traits present. In other words, the focus is correcting children for doing wrong and rarely, if ever, praising children for doing right (80).

Affirming the evidences of grace in a person’s life is not a justification for ongoing sin or an excuse to persist in willful rebellion. Instead, it provides motivation and encouragement when we are tempted to despair.

When our eyes are set on our continuing struggle, we are less likely to bask in the glorious freedom we have in Christ. It may seem counterintuitive, but it is true: failure to affirm the “already” aspect of our salvation will slow down our progress in the “not yet” of sanctification.

Forgetting the Sufferer

Consider what happens when we ignore the “suffering” aspect of a Christian’s life. We will concentrate on the role the person has played in bringing about their suffering, not the external forces that are coming against them. Our approach will “minimize sin committed against them and maximize sin they commit” (80). The person requesting counseling is crying for help, but we will fail to hear the cry and instead respond with a posture of judgment.

It is true that the causes for suffering are complex and can rarely be reduced to purely external circumstances or purely internal sins. This makes the “suffering” category somewhat difficult to define.

Are there elements of the suffering that are caused by a person’s own failures? Usually, yes.

Are there elements of the suffering caused by external circumstances beyond a person’s control? Usually, yes.

Rarely is our suffering caused solely by our sin or solely by outside circumstances, particularly when the suffering is expressed in the breakdown of relationships.

Still, it is wise to begin with an attempt to connect with a person’s experience as a sufferer before confronting their remaining sin. Connect first; confront later. Why? Because the confrontation will be even more powerful and persuasive if the person is convinced that the counselor has connected with their pain and understands their sorrowful circumstances.

Emlet uses the example of an “angry, blame-shifting man” he once counseled. Perceiving that this man would not return for another counseling session, Emlet ”let him have it with both barrels” and “lobbed mortar after mortar of biblical truth to blow up his self-oriented ways of living” (80).

After this experience, Emlet’s teacher criticized his approach and recommended that he prioritize connecting with the man at the experiential level before dealing with the other issues. Ignoring the category of sufferer can cause the counselor to minimize the very issues that have led the person to seek help in the first place.

Forgetting the Sinner

Consider what happens when we ignore the “sinner” aspect of a Christian’s life. We may coddle a person when they need to be confronted. We may lead a person to think that all their pain and suffering is caused by outside forces or other people.

Ironically, in the attempt to empathize and make a person feel better about themselves or their situation, we denigrate them by implicitly denying their identity as responsible image-bearers who are accountable to God. Emlet writes:

“We do people no favors when we overlook their self-destructive (and others-destructive) patterns” (81).

In too many counseling sessions, pastors are reticent to point out remaining sin in a person’s life for fear of offending them and causing them to not return. Unfortunately, the failure to confront sin leads to superficial sessions that fail to address the root problems of one’s suffering.

It is common to see prominent pastors in magazines or television interviews who treat viewers as if they are merely “saints” or “sufferers,” but rarely “sinners.” Such advice may make for compelling television, but it fails to address the heart issues behind many of our struggles.

In Cross Talk: Where Life and Scripture Meet, Michael Emlet encourages pastors and church leaders to approach people as “saints, sufferers, and sinners.” This categorization helps the counselor know whether to turn to Scriptural passages that remind a person of their identity in Christ, console them in the dark day of suffering, or confront them for their unrepentant sins.

Emlet believes “each person we meet is wrestling in some way with two problems:

1. First, the problem of identity and purpose: who am I and what in the world should I be doing? (This corresponds to God’s address to us as saints.)
2. Second, the problem of evil: evil from ‘without’ (which corresponds to our experience as sufferers) and evil from ‘within’ (which corresponds to our experience as sinners)” (74).

These three categories correspond with the experience of the Christian. It could be that a seemingly unrelated symptom presents itself and leads the Christian to request counseling, but the underlying root cause will generally fall into one of these three categories.

A Word for Saints

As “saints,” we need to be reminded of our relationship with God. Our identities are not wrapped up in our jobs, our families, our wealth, or our hobbies. We are defined by our relationship to God.

The Word consistently reminds God’s people that they are set apart for His missional purposes in the world, to bring Him glory and to find their joy in Him. When doubt arises in our hearts, or temptation comes, or disillusionment takes hold, the Christian is commanded to remember the God whose image we bear and in whom we find forgiveness and restoration.

A Word for Sufferers

As “sufferers,” we need to be reminded of the fallen world we live in, and the evils from “outside ourselves” that confront us during our earthly existence. Suffering is not necessarily a sign that we have done something wrong. Instead, it is often the mark of God’s people. As Emlet writes:

“Scripture assumes that, since the fall, the people God has chosen are sufferers” (76).

He points to the slavery of God’s people in Egypt and other periods of foreign oppression described in the Old Testament.

In the New Testament, we are confronted with vivid images of suffering in the lives of Paul and Peter. The final book of the Bible (Revelation) gives hope to the people of God who are suffering for the faith.

There is no way to make sense of the biblical storyline if the suffering of God’s people is not taken into consideration. This suffering has a redemptive purpose: to conform us into the image of our Savior, the One who suffered prior to receiving glory.

A Word for Sinners

As “sinners,” we need to understand that we will continue to struggle against sin until the day Christ completes His work in us. It is true that Jesus has defeated sin and inaugurated His kingdom, and yet because the old age of sin and brokenness continues on until His return, our lives are characterized by consistent confrontation with sin as we grow in our faith.

Emlet points out the flaws we see in the apostles and New Testament writers themselves as evidence that God’s people will continue to struggle against sin (79). The Scriptures warn us away from sin and urge us to put it to death in our lives and live in light of the salvation we have received by grace through faith.

Why These Categories Matter for Counseling

All Scripture is God-breathed and is profitable for believers in different ways during different seasons. But an experienced counselor will use wisdom in determining what passages of Scripture are most appropriate for a person in need of God’s Word.

• If the person is struggling with a problem that indicates a lack of understanding of their identity in Christ (perhaps lingering guilt or shame over past sins), the counselor will turn to passages of Scripture that confirm their identity as belonging to God’s forgiven people.
• If the person is struggling to come to terms with suffering (perhaps social ostracism or failing health), the counselor will turn to passages that console and comfort them, reminding them of God’s promise to be present in times of suffering or the redemptive end of all our trials.
• If the person is caught in sinful attitudes or actions, the counselor will turn to passages that confront the person and warn them about the consequences of ongoing, unrepentant sin.

One Caveat

Emlet’s threefold categorization of saint, sufferer, and sinner is a helpful way of looking at the people who come to us for counseling. Biblically speaking, however, there are only two kinds of people who seek help: those who are saints (believers in Christ) and those who are sinners (unbelievers in Christ).

Once we have established that the person seeking help is a believer (therefore a “saint,”) it is important to realize that we are all saints, sufferers, and sinners simultaneously. The counselor’s goal is to recognize which area to emphasize and what kind of medicine to give at the appropriate time. This categorization should not be misconstrued as a firm prescription for every situation, but as a helpful grid through which to view the people who seek care.

Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at what happens when these categories are ignored.