RESTORING THUNDER TO OUR PULPITS
Is not my word like fire, declares the LORD, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?
—JEREMIAH 23:29
On December 4, 1873, revivalist, pastor, and college president Charles G. Finney made this striking comment:
Brethren, our preaching will bear its legitimate fruits. If immorality prevails in the land, the fault is ours in a great degree. If there is a decay of conscience, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the public press lacks moral discrimination, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the church is degenerate and worldly, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the world loses its interest in religion, the pulpit is responsible for it. If Satan rules in our halls of legislation, the pulpit is responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away, the pulpit is responsible for it. Let us not ignore this fact, my dear brethren; but let us lay it to heart, and be thoroughly awake to our responsibility in respect to the morals of this nation.1
Is this true? Are the spiritual leaders of our nation largely responsible for our moral condition? Without a doubt, in Finney’s day the pulpit played a greater role in society, and there was a greater reverence for Scripture and respect for the church at that time. So, in that sense, his statement needs to be modified. But it should certainly not be thrown out. To the contrary, since the great majority of people in the United States of America still claim to be Christian, since our airwaves are flooded with 24–7 gospel radio and TV programs, since we have New York Times bestselling Christian books, and since roughly one-third of Americans attend church services on a regular basis,2 the answer remains yes: the pulpit is largely responsible. And since Jesus said that we were the salt of the earth and the light of the world, with tens of millions of believers in our nation, we really do set the spiritual and moral climate, for better or for worse.
In the days of Jeremiah twenty-six hundred years ago, this was also God’s verdict on the spiritual leaders of Judah when he laid the blame for the backslidden condition of the nation at the feet of the priests and prophets. By their bad example and their defective message, they led the chosen people into exile and judgment.3 Similar things are happening in our day.
Let the truth be told. There is very little thunder from our pulpits, very little preaching that creates an atmosphere of holy reverence (what the Bible calls “the fear of the Lord”), very little that challenges us and confronts us and stirs us and awakens us, very little that equips us to endure hardship or to be courageous or to confront the culture or to live a sacrificial life out of love for our neighbor.
Many of our leaders preach a toothless, pep talk gospel that fits in perfectly with our convenience-store, quick-fix Christianity, promising all kinds of benefits without any requirements. What a deal! Who could refuse it? No wonder we are producing consumers rather than disciples. What else can we expect when we so studiously bypass the cross in so much of our preaching? What else can we expect when we preach God the Genie rather than God the Judge?
More than fifty years ago, in his classic article “The Old Cross and the New,” A. W. Tozer wrote, “The old cross would have no truck with the world. For Adam’s proud flesh it meant the end of the journey.”4 In contrast, he noted with profound insight, “the new cross does not slay the sinner, it redirects him.”5 Today we could take this one step further and say, “The new cross does not slay the sinner; it empowers him (or her).”
In today’s view, Jesus came to make you into a bigger and better you. Jesus came to help you fulfill your dreams and your destiny. Put another way, the gospel is all about you!
Our contemporary “gospel” says, “This is who I am, this is how I feel, and God is here to please me.” The biblical gospel says, “This is who God is, this is how he feels, and we are here to please him.” The difference between these two messages is the difference between heaven and hell.
Scan the programming on Christian TV and listen to the latest “hit” sermons, and take note of how often you hear messages about all the wonderful things God can do for you, including helping you prosper financially. Contrast that with how seldom you hear messages about the wonderful things we are called to do for the Lord. And see if you can count even five times in the last year that you heard a message challenging you to sacrificial service for Jesus (and I’m not talking about making a financial sacrifice for the TV preacher). Yet Jesus said, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it,” (Luke 9:23–24). When is the last time you were stirred to the core of your being with those words? Yet they are repeated throughout the Gospels and formed a fundamental part of the message of the Lord.6
“Endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ,” Paul wrote to Timothy (2 Tim. 2:3 NKJV)—as opposed to, “Enjoy personal success as a good entrepreneur of Christ Jesus.” And he exhorted Timothy to use the Word to “correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction” (2 Tim. 4:2 NIV), warning him that “the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths” (2 Tim. 4:3–4).
We are living in such a time today, a time when the gospel of personal success, which is already dangerous, has been merged with an exaggerated message of God’s love, thereby rendering the listener impervious to warning or correction or rebuke: “If it doesn’t make me feel better about myself, it’s not from God. If it draws attention to my sin, it’s not from God. If it challenges me in any way, it’s not from God. It’s legalism, it’s bondage, it’s the law—and it’s not for me.”
No wonder the world is changing us rather than us changing the world. No wonder there can be so many of us who profess to follow Jesus yet we make so little impact for him. It is because so many of us are spiritually shallow, superficial in our faith, and at surface level in our commitment. And one reason we are lacking in depth is that we are being coddled rather than challenged from the pulpits. This idea may be painful to admit, but it’s true.
When is the last time you left a church service or Bible study overwhelmed with the reality of who God is or deeply gripped with the cost of discipleship or weeping under conviction at the revelation of your sin or laughing for joy at the Father’s extraordinary love? When is the last time you were moved by what you heard—moved to fast and pray, moved to reach out to the hurting, moved to make a major life-changing decision, moved to make a break with a sinful habit, moved to take a stand, whatever the cost or consequence? How long has it been—if ever? Perhaps the problem is not entirely yours. Perhaps it is also the failure of those of us who are teachers and preachers and leaders.
Today many Christian leaders teach that it is wrong to expect born-again believers to change their conduct, calling you “religious” (as if that’s a bad word) or, worse still, a “legalist” if you preach repentance to the church and to the lost. Today we can practice almost any sin, work in almost any ungodly profession, and still be accepted as followers of Jesus. How in the world did we depart so far from the transforming power of the gospel?
This is where we find ourselves today:
• A senior editor of one of the nation’s leading Christian publications speaks with regret of “the long-standing evangelical myth that there should be something different about the Christian.”7
• A glamorous spokeswoman for conservative Christian values explains that “I am a Christian, and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos.”8
• A well-known rapper claims a conversion to Christianity and states, “I love God, Jesus Christ is my savior and I’m still out here thuggin’.” He has been baptized, attends church regularly, and says, “I still love the strip club and I still smoke and drink. I’m faithful to my family, so I wanted to make an album where you could love God and be of God, but still get it poppin’ in your life.”9
• A former sex worker explains, “It may surprise many Christians to hear me say that I was a Born Again Christian the entirety of my 20 year career as a prostitute and adult entertainer. I was a Born Again Christian the entire time I was advocating for legalized brothels.”10
I am not making this up. Yet most Christian leaders today don’t dare call out anyone for their sinful, public lifestyle lest we be guilty of what is now considered the worst sin of all—the sin of judging! Yes, these days, it is considered worse to judge someone for sinning than it is to commit the sin. How did we fall so far from the lofty standards of the gospel? Who changed things?
Who changed things from the New Testament faith, where even the disciples couldn’t minister without being endued by the Spirit, to today’s version, where whole ministries are run with hardly any evidence of the Spirit’s work? As Tozer once said, “If the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the church today, 95 percent of what we do would go on and no one would know the difference. If the Holy Spirit had been withdrawn from the New Testament church, 95 percent of what they did would stop, and everybody would know the difference.”11 This remains true of most of the contemporary church in the West.
In the early church, Paul instructed the Corinthians to separate themselves from people who claimed to be believers but were living in outward, unrepentant sin (1 Cor. 5). Today, some of those people lead our churches and preach from our pulpits. Who changed things?
When did Jesus stop being enough? When did obedience become an option? When did keeping God’s commandments out of love for him become “religious” (in the negative sense of the word)? Didn’t Jesus say that if we loved him, we would keep his commandments (see John 14:15, 21)?
If we belonged to another religion that claimed to have other books that supplemented the Bible or traditions that superseded it, that would be one thing. But we don’t. We believe the Scriptures alone are God’s Word and that nothing that comes after the Scriptures—no tradition, no alleged revelation, no consensus—can undermine or countermand the written Word of God. So who changed things from the biblical version of the Jesus faith to the modern American version?
When did the Lord command us to fashion our preaching and our style of worship and even the way we look based on what’s trending? If some church leaders choose to trust in worldly business models and carnal consulting firms, that’s their choice. I say that we go with the power of the name of Jesus and the wisdom of the Word of God and the fullness of the Spirit. I say that we go with the New Testament model, applied with boldness, wisdom, and compassion to the pressing needs of the day.
It is a doomed strategy when we try to make the gospel of Jesus palatable to lost sinners, take away its offense, remove its reproach, water down its contents, and explain away its standards. In doing so, we dishonor the Lord and contribute to the damnation of the lost. It’s time we wake up and repent of this worldly, faithless approach.
Let me illustrate the folly of trying to preach a palatable gospel. Suppose that a doctor made an amazing scientific breakthrough, perhaps the greatest of all time. He discovered a cure for cancer that was 100 percent successful, and it worked for all forms and all stages of cancer. Perhaps the most incredible thing of all was that just one dose of the medicine would cure the cancer for life.
The only problems were that the medicine had to be taken in pill form, each pill cost one million dollars, the pill was huge and difficult to swallow, and it left a terrible, bitter taste that lasted for seven days.
Of course, the research and development team was ecstatic over the discovery. They met with the doctor, telling him that he had to make three simple changes for his breakthrough to succeed: he needed to figure out a way to reduce the cost of each pill so it would sell for one thousand dollars per dose; he needed to reduce the size of the pill so people wouldn’t choke on it; and he needed to remove the bitter taste.
After two years of hard work, the doctor called the team back, announcing that he had succeeded on all fronts. With the new formula he had developed, each pill would cost just one thousand dollars, it would be packaged in a small gel cap, and it would actually have a pleasant aftertaste. There was only one problem: the pill no longer cured cancer!
And that is exactly what we have done with the gospel. We have tried to make the narrow gate wide and tried to make the cross of Christ popular, thinking somehow we would get more people “saved.” But our message no longer saves!
We have tried to make Jesus acceptable to sinners rather than making sinners acceptable to him, removing the call to submit to his lordship and live a new life in him. And we have redefined repentance, reducing it to a mere change of mind rather than a change of direction: specifically, a turning from sin and a turning to the Lord, an about-face by the grace of God and the power of the Spirit.
Belief in Jesus is now presented as a good insurance policy and packaged as a great deal at that. “Just give up your guilt and depression, and in exchange, receive success, prosperity, and eternal life!” May I ask you to show me one example of a message like that preached to the lost anywhere in the Gospels or Acts? Or do we think we know better than the apostles?
Was there a reason that Paul, when reaching out to the Roman governor Felix and speaking about “faith in Christ Jesus,” also spoke to him “about righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come” (Acts 24:24–25 NIV)? Is this part of our gospel message? And was there a reason that Felix became unnerved (literally, “frightened”) after hearing Paul’s message? Could it be that Felix came to speak with Paul accompanied by his wife Drusilla, whom he took away from her lawful husband to have her as his personal trophy, and that’s why Paul talked with him about “righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come”? Could it be that Paul indirectly confronted him about his sins?
Of course we should be people of compassion, reaching out to the lost with hearts overflowing with genuine love and care. And of course we should exercise wisdom and cultural sensitivity. But love tells the truth, and we do not win the world by becoming like the world; we win the world by becoming like Jesus—and by presenting the Jesus of the Scriptures and the gospel of the Scriptures, whether it brings offense or reproach or mockery.
Paul wrote that when Jesus returns, “He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus” (2 Thess. 1:8 NIV). How often do we think of the gospel as something to be “obeyed”?
To quote A. W. Tozer again:
The trouble is the whole “Accept Christ” attitude is likely to be wrong. It shows Christ applying to us rather than us to Him. It makes Him stand hat-in-hand awaiting our verdict on Him, instead of our kneeling with troubled hearts awaiting His verdict on us. It may even permit us to accept Christ by an impulse of mind or emotions, painlessly, at no loss to our ego and no inconvenience to our usual way of life.12
Let us return to the New Testament gospel, exalting both the holiness of God and the love of God, presenting Jesus as both Lord and Savior, and preaching a message that is foolishness to those who perish but is the power of God to those who believe (1 Cor. 1:18). Let’s preach the truth without compromise, empowered by the Spirit, filled with compassion, and unashamed of Jesus and the cross. As we do, God himself will back the message about his Son.
I certainly don’t believe that every message should be heavy, and I fully affirm the pastoral calling to shepherd the flock—a pastor is a shepherd—and that means offering instruction, comfort, and encouragement along with all kinds of practical teaching. It is also imperative that our words are filled with kindness and tenderness and that we speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15). But is there never a time to warn or sound the alarm? Is there never a time to raise up a spiritual army and send that army out to make an impact? Is there never a time to make the sheep uncomfortable? Given the morally confused state in which we find ourselves today, is it too much to think that our pulpits would offer clarity and guidance and sobriety? Our nation is in critical condition. How can we hold our peace?
Pastors have told me that they dare not address certain issues, because those issues are too controversial. We must act wisely, I am told by so many; but all too often, what we call “wisdom” is simply a cloak to cover up our cowardice. May the Lord Jesus help us to stand!
In 2014 George Barna reported the results of his latest poll, saying,
When we ask [pastors] about all the key issues of the day, [90 percent of them are] telling us, “Yes, the Bible speaks to every one of these issues.” Then we ask them: “Well, are you teaching your people what the Bible says about those issues?” and the numbers drop . . . to less than 10 percent of pastors who say they will speak to it.
And what, exactly, holds them back from addressing controversial issues from the pulpit, including, “societal, moral and political issues”? According to Barna, “There are five factors that the vast majority of pastors turn to. Attendance, giving, number of programs, number of staff, and square footage.”
He continued: “What I’m suggesting is [those pastors] won’t probably get involved in politics because it’s very controversial. Controversy keeps people from being in the seats, controversy keeps people from giving money, from attending programs.”13
Fired up by the results of this poll, pastor and radio host Chuck Baldwin wrote:
Please understand this: America’s malaise is directly due to the deliberate disobedience of America’s pastors—and the willingness of the Christians in the pews to tolerate the disobedience of their pastor. Nothing more! Nothing less! When Paul wrote his own epitaph, it read, “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith” (2 Tim. 4:7 KJV). He didn’t say, “I had a large congregation, we had big offerings, we had a lot of programs, I had a large staff, and we had large facilities.”
But Baldwin wasn’t done. He also gave this direct and unnerving charge:
It is time for Christians to acknowledge that these ministers are not pastors; they are CEOs. They are not Bible teachers; they are performers. They are not shepherds; they are hirelings. It is also time for Christians to be honest with themselves: do they want a pastor who desires to be faithful to the Scriptures, or do they want a pastor who is simply trying to be “successful?”14
Now, I want to be the first one to say that there are many fine pastors in America. Anything but hirelings, they are overworked and underpaid while serving their communities out of love. And I recognize that churches have bills to pay and financial obligations to meet and must therefore be conscious of their budgets. If attendance goes down, giving will likely go down, and that might mean your ministry can’t support a missionary overseas or your church has to cut back on a feeding program or eliminate a children’s pastor from the staff. These are certainly issues to consider.
But the sad fact is that all too many leaders do draw back from addressing critically important social and moral issues for fear of losing people or losing income or losing reputation. This is nothing other than cowardice and compromise. Yet this very approach is put forward as a great model for church growth today.
I urge every Christian leader in America reading this book to ask themselves some honest questions (as I ask myself as well): If your congregants are slumbering, are your words calculated to wake them up? If your congregants are compromised, are your words calculated to convict them? If your congregants are worldly, are your words calculated to call them to separation? I know there are many other questions to ask, including these: What if your congregants are hurting or discouraged or hopeless? Are your words calculated to heal and encourage and inspire? Those are worthy questions as well. But today we seem to put all the emphasis on the last two questions and almost no emphasis on the first three.
My dear fellow leader: Is God calling you to train a holy army of world changers, or is he calling you to build a luxurious Christian country club? Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.”15 Isn’t that where we find ourselves today?
Yale law professor Stephen L. Carter gave us a powerful picture of what it means for the church to recapture its prophetic zeal.
Along with many African-American theologians, I believe in the tremendous importance of preserving religious communities not only as centers of difference—that is, places where one grasps the meaning of the world as different from what you find in the dominant culture—but even more so as centers of resistance. These centers of resistance do not simply proclaim “We don’t believe what the rest of you believe,” but say, “We are willing and ready to sacrifice, to lose something material for the sake of that difference in which we believe.”
He understood that this was something the church was uniquely called to do.
Indeed, radical transformation will demand a sacrifice. But a fundamental demand for sacrifice will not arise in politics. It will have to arise from the church, which is really the only contemporary, genuine source of resistance to the existing order. Nobody else can do it. Nobody was ever persuaded to go out and risk life and limb because of reading a smart article on philosophy and public affairs. No people ever said they were going to organize a march and be beaten by the police because of something they read in The New York Times op-ed page. It is only religion that still has the power, at its best, to encourage sacrifice and resistance.
But, Professor Carter urged, “one should have no illusions. All too many pastors today, black and white, are so worried about filling the seats. Clergy deliver brilliant sermons that preach up to the edge of asking people to do something, and then they will pull back. Some pastors display prophetic leadership and call for sacrifice, but their numbers are small.”16
Pastor and Oklahoma state representative Dan Fisher has called for the return of the “Black Robed Regiment,” a name given by the British to American ministers who helped spark the fires of the American Revolution, preaching against the tyranny of England and even leading their congregations into battle. But he is not calling for pastors today to take up arms against the government (hardly!) nor is he seeking to foment a politically based revolution. Instead, he is calling on preachers today to follow in the footsteps of their forefathers, who knew nothing of the so-called separation of church and state. Instead, they fearlessly confronted the issues of the day, and they helped pave the way for our freedom.17
May that Black Robed Regiment rise again today. As a leader in the body of Christ, I say to my fellow leaders: America’s well-being depends on us. It’s time to let the lion roar. Let your voices be heard!