The Healthy Church

by Rev. Dr. Andrew WG Matthews

I was asked recently by a group of Christian men, “What makes for a healthy church?” Off the cuff I gave a few answers like having enough people, teaching and practicing good theology, and good relationships among the people. Since that conversation I felt a need to expand more on the subject. I have been in full-time ministry for about twenty-five years in fourteen different churches, across four continents, in diverse theological, ethnic, and socio-economic denominations. What I offer below is based upon years of hard-fought experience not just from reading a handbook. As the adage goes, “There is no such thing as a perfect church,” but we should strive to advance the cause of healthy churches and diagnose church sickness wherever it appears. So here are a few critical characteristics of healthy churches. 

Sufficient Members: Call me simple, but a church ought to actually have people in it—and not only “two or three gathered in my name” (Matt. 18:20). Just as a human body must have certain critical organs in order to stay alive, a church needs to have enough functioning people to maintain the necessary work of the church body. Though it sounds ludicrous, I have seen churches with one or two people ferociously fight to retain their designation as a “congregation.” How few is too few? A church under fifty people will struggle to survive. Dropping under a hundred people may be the threshold where long-term viability begins to be questioned. Small churches struggle to meet budget and staff the ongoing ministries. Small churches overwhelm the people with responsibilities, or the minister and his wife and a couple of hard-workers do everything. The demographics of the congregation ought to be spread over all the stages of life. Churches unbalanced to either the older ages or the younger ages are often a sign of unhealthiness. A multi-generational congregation is a sign of a robust church that cares for people cradle to grave. Three or four generations from the same family in the church demonstrate the covenant faithfulness of the Lord and the previous generation of family heads. Having quality people is another key to viability. Churches with lots of “pew-sitters,” needy people, and the infirm may have respectable attendance figures but not the right kind of people to make the church run effectively. Churches are driven by mature, energetic, and responsible people who want to see the kingdom come and there must be a sufficient number of them. 

Spiritual People: The church needs to be full of Christians, not just attendees. A very high percentage of the members on the roll need to be born-again, Sprit-filled believers. Now having a “pure” church of only saved people is an unrealistic and unwise goal, however if the percentages are skewed too heavily to mere nominal Christians the church will lose spiritual vitality. The church is not merely a natural organisation, but a supernatural organism. The God who said “not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit” (Zech. 4:6) dwells within his body and is the effective power that causes growth to occur. A critical spiritual mass must exist otherwise the church will give way to theological drift, cold worship, and unwilling service and mission. Wolves are more likely to thrive among non-Christians and the spiritual and practical lives of the sheep will be in danger. Spiritually unhealthy congregations require either genuine revival of the existing people, expulsion of the unrepentant, or a migration of new genuine believers from outside the church. A small seed-group of genuine believers can turn into a mighty army if the Holy Spirit lives and moves within them.

Sound Theology: Churches become sick under poor doctrine and practice. Due to laxity, laziness, and liberalism churches tend to slide in keeping their theological statements of faith and practice. The most critical factor in the life of an individual Christian and a congregation is regular engagement with and transformation by the word of God. When a church no longer upholds the Bible as the authoritative word of God it is in a terminal condition. A healthy church will contend for the faith and maintain its commitments to accurate theology based upon the Scriptures. Healthy churches will adhere to the historical creeds, Reformation doctrines, and time-tested ecclesiology and polity. These doctrines teach a true knowledge of God and have proven effectiveness in training up believers in godliness. Wise polity in the church ensures that transgressions and disputes can be resolved in a manner pleasing to God and beneficial to the whole church. When church leadership no longer practice the steps of discipline (Matt 18:15-20) you can be sure that conflict and sin will be rife in the church. In a society where truth is denied, the church can be the needed sanctuary where souls can be nourished with sound theology and biblical truth.

Solid Leaders: Churches need solid leaders or they will fail. Every congregation of God’s people needs to have spiritual leaders that have oversight over the people, usually with a man acting as the main pastor who preaches the word of God. Churches need godly, wise pastors who are effective expositors and communicators of God’s word. Poor preachers are the bane of the church. Churches will struggle under weak leadership, and an inept or immoral pastor can cause much damage. Spiritual leadership can be a source of much good, but also much harm, whether the leadership is abusive and controlling or fearful and negligent. Likewise, in a healthy church the people do not resist or undermine their leaders, but honour and obey them. A church is unhealthy when the pastor and elders are not actually leading but instead some influential people in the church who wield financial or relational power are pulling the strings behind the scenes. Outside of the church offices, a church needs to have mature men and women lay leaders who can teach and serve in various ways. An effective discipleship and leadership training program will invest in the development of future leaders, elders, and pastors. 

Sweet Relationships: A healthy church will have sweet relationships. Christ taught that loving other believers is the key sign of spiritual life (John 13:35), so a church full of loving Christians is a mark of a healthy church. Church relationships should reflect the exhortations of the apostles who taught Christians to clothe themselves with tender mercies, forgiveness, generosity, hospitality, and brotherly affection. It is pretty obvious and attractive when church members actually like to be around each other and get involved in one another’s lives. Conversely, when hostility, rivalries, and strife are rampant a kind of death hangs over the church. No amount of external programming is able to cover up and reverse the sickness, and it will rot away the life of the church. Once a deacon and youth leader of a church once voiced his reluctance to inviting outsiders to his church, “I don’t want to bring anyone into this snake-pit.” I served in a community where non church-going Christians were more than happy to have dinner and fellowship with my wife and I, but they would never attend our church because of its past reputation and present members. Maintaining sweet relationships is a delicate and vital task, and Satan can easily sow “bitter roots” in the church that poison the people. In unhealthy churches the leaders are often consumed with putting out the fires of congregational conflicts. The ultimate litmus test of a healthy church is found in the gracious love exhibited by its members, so church leaders must make every effort to maintain "the peace and purity" of the church.

Seek the Kingdom: Healthy churches see that they have a mission to seek the kingdom that extends beyond themselves. When churches simply aim to maintain they begin their decline. Unhealthy churches are content with their own members and do not welcome outsiders into the mix. New people disrupt the power and popularity equilibriums and are often marginalised. Instead of staying stagnant, churches should see themselves as dynamic groups that are always changing as God brings new people into the mix, or sends them out somewhere else. In addition to reaching out and welcoming people from their own communities, churches who seek the kingdom know that they are one small part of God’s huge plan and are willing to be used to make an impact anywhere in the world. A global vision of Christ’s kingdom can open up vistas of mission and service way “above all that we ask or imagine.” (Eph. 3:20) 

These seven categories address key elements of a healthy church. Using these diagnostic tools, it is not hard to identify the spiritual health of a church. Churches reside “on the spectrum” within each of the categories, but it is evident when they have slid down the scale into sickness. “Fixing” a church is a difficult endeavour and can take much time and many hands. Many churches cannot recover from their sickness, and many of them will limp along for decades injuring the testimony of the gospel. Ultimately, unless the Lord builds his house the workers will labor in vain (Psalm 127:1), but our conviction is that the Lord wills that his church to be sanctified and, at least in the long-term, increase. Pastors usually aim to make their churches big, but they should really aim to make their churches healthy.

Theological Essay:

The Gospel in Ruins 

by Rev. Dr. Andrew W.G. Matthews

The outlook for Christianity in western societies is looking pretty bleak. Christians and Christian values are repeatedly being cancelled in the workplace, schools, and government. Even churches are now watching their backs as they come under attack for their historically orthodox beliefs on personhood, sexuality, and marriage. In countries long acquainted with Christianity the gospel is either advancing only slowly or retreating. There has not been a powerful movement of the Holy Spirit in bringing revival and mass conversions in over a century. The apostle Paul boasted that the gospel was “the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Rom. 1:16). Why then is the gospel in our day seemingly weak? Did Paul overestimate the gospel’s power or has our generation been preaching a faulty gospel? Certainly the latter. The gospel of Christ that is taught in many Christian churches today is similar to some of the castle ruins in Scotland. What once were majestic, powerful fortresses have been reduced to mere shadows of their former glory—some broken-down walls and an eroded citadel. Similarly, this gospel has a few elements of the original-- salvation and heaven-- but much of the glory is lost. If the Christian church wants to see the glory of Christianity restored in our lands we need to rebuild from the ruins our gospel message and start proclaiming the whole counsel of the Lord Jesus Christ. 

Distorted Gospels

The term “the gospel” is used in the New Testament to represent the core message of the good news about Jesus Christ, but the content of that message has been distorted. In the apostle Paul’s day there was already a “different gospel” being offered which diverged from the real gospel that Paul and the apostles preached (Gal. 1:6-9). Our day is rife with distorted gospels. Liberal churches for years have been preaching a gospel of the love of God and the brotherhood of mankind. The Son of God's coming to earth and dying shows how much God loves you, so be inspired and live a good life! The gospel of Christ effectively disappears as there is no need for people to be saved. In some churches a moralistic gospel teaches people to follow Jesus the good teacher in his cause against the moral ills of the day. If you are an old-school Fundamentalist, you stayed away from drinking, smoking, and dancing. If you are a Social Justice Warrior you oppose poverty, sexism, racism, phobias, and global warming. The prosperity gospel is still rampant across the globe where God exists to make people healthy and wealthy. Such a gospel is simply repackaged paganism where the gods are worshipped in order to grant material blessings, the kind of temptation that Jesus rebuffed from Satan (Luke 4:5-8). A just Jesus gospel demotes the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and simply looks to Jesus of Nazareth, the sympathetic counsellor who exists to guide, comfort, and affirm you during life’s difficulties. The worst false gospel though is the perversity gospel. The book of Jude warns about teachers who“pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ” (Jude 4). Don't worry about sinning, God's grace has you covered. People boast in a perverse way that they are "glorious ruins." Instead of being ashamed of sin, they revel in their "brokenness." They reason that since Jesus gets glory through grace, “Why not do evil that good might come?” (Rom. 3:8) Paul responded, “Their condemnation is just!” These kinds of gospels don't actually bring salvation but entrench the lost in their sins. What is consistent with all of these distortions is that there is little to no call to personal repentance and discovering the true transformative grace of God in Christ (Titus 2:11-12).

Diminished Gospels

These false gospels are anathema to the true gospel, but in our day we have a number of diminished gospels which retain much of the essential gospel message but lack the fullness and power of the whole gospel. In the main, the evangelical church still proclaims that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man, that his death and resurrection accomplishes forgiveness of sin, and that through faith in Christ one obtains eternal life. However, this lowest-common-denominator gospel falls short of the whole gospel preached in former days. The standard gospel of our day is what could be called a just justification gospel. The just justification gospel identifies that forgiveness of sins and justification by faith are the critical elements of salvation. The point of this gospel preaching is to get people "saved," which is primarily a pardon for sin and a place in heaven. Once that has been locked in the gospel carries little relevance to the Christian. Faith is limited to what Christ did 2,000 years ago and results in little expectation of Christ’s active rule over the church and world today. Faith is not exercised to see the kingdom come or experience personal change, instead the gospel simply reassures believers of their salvation. Just-justification preachers predominately or solely focus on "resting" or "abiding" in Christ. They instruct people to rely solely on Jesus' past faithfulness, and they down-play obedience and personal faithfulness to God. Is it any wonder that the world is not impressed with the lives of church goers?

Our poor presentations of the gospel inhibit the gospel from being powerful. In many cases there simply is no presentation of the gospel at all, or churches only subtly allude to the gospel lest they offend someone. Sermons encourage the hearer to "follow Jesus," with no mention of sin, redemption, or call to repentance. Jesus is some kind of guide on your "faith journey." Other references to the gospel seem to imply that since Christ atoned for sin, salvation automatically applies to all people. If you happen to be in the church when the gospel is mentioned, redemption is conferred upon you. The truth has been lost that sinners must experience a personal and actual conversion unto Christ. Other more bold evangelicals are good at presenting a plan of salvation (see the Four Spiritual Laws, Evangelism Explosion, or the Roman Road). In this manner salvation is achieved when a sinner understands and agrees with the plan. Plans are helpful, but you are not saved because you believe that Jesus died for you. You are saved when you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ who died for you. Salvation is not found in a plan but in a Person. 

Dynamic Gospel

We need to return to a more robust gospel message that proclaims the full work of salvation that God accomplishes through our eternal Prophet, Priest, and King, the Lord Jesus Christ. The gospel is the message about the person and work of Christ who has affected a redemption that includes four main facets:  forgiveness of sins, transformation of self, rule by a King, and hope for eternity.

Forgiveness of Sins: The fundamental truth of the gospel is that God in his grace redeems and forgives sinners. Sinners can't save themselves through good works or religious observance. God delivers sinners from their bondage to sin (redemption). Jesus' death atones for sin and satisfies God's justice, and by faith in Christ’s work for us God forgives our sins (justification). Once justified we are free from condemnation and become God's children (adoption). This initial act of salvation delivers us from all the penalty and guilt of sin and gives us peace with God. 

Transformation of Self: Christ’s redemption of sinners does not stop at merely forgiving them, he intends to completely transform them. Sanctification is the work of the Holy Spirit in a person whereby Christ completely remakes them to reflect his holy image. At the point of conversion, the Holy Spirit regenerates (“be born-again,” John 3:3) a person wherein they are actually given a new holy nature. From that point onward they are progressively transformed to be less sinful and more righteous. The power of sin over a person has been broken and their new identity in Christ defines and governs their life. Now more than ever this generation is crying out for a new identity, real transformation, and true liberty. 

Rule by a King: The gospel declares that after Jesus rose from the dead he ascended to the right hand of the Father and was crowned “both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). By his work of redemption the Son earned the right to rule. The prophetic promises of the Old Testament looked forward to a time when God would set up his Christ as the Lord who would govern the world in righteousness.  From his enthroned position in heaven (Christ's exaltation) all rule and power in this age is made subject to him for the sake of his church. The great promise and mystery of the gospel is that God would no longer just be a king over one nation (Israel), but through the Lord Jesus Christ God would rule over every nation. The OT prophetic promises looked forward to a day when the nations would stream to the "mountain of the Lord" (Isa. 2:1-5) and that "the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Isa. 11:9). By a powerful combination of kingdom and covenant, Christ the Lord provides all protection and blessings needed for his children to live in a fallen and dangerous world. 

Hope for Eternity: The gospel finally declares that through Christ the curse of death has been broken and eternal life is open to all who trust in him. The hope of heaven is good news for the Christian for it will be the compensation for all the trials and tribulation experienced in this present evil age. When Christ appears in glory the bodies of believers shall be immortally and incorruptibly resurrected, rejoined with their perfected souls, and they will live with God in a perfected new heavens and earth. Christ will reward believers for their faithfulness during their mortal existence with abundant treasures which “neither moth nor rust can destroy” (Matt. 6:19). In contrast the wicked will receive a just retribution for all their evil deeds and be cast out into eternal darkness and torment away from the presence of the Lord. 

 

Powerful Hope

If our society is crumbling, it is because the church has already crumbled. Since "judgment begins at the household of God" (1 Pet. 4:17) we need to get our house in order. If we want the gospel to be powerful once again we need to rebuild the gospel from its present ruin. With solid truth and pure hearts let us restore its broken walls and turrets. When the gospel makes a life-transforming impact on a believer--or the church at large--in turn it impacts the wider world. A resurgence in robust gospel proclamation will bring new converts into the faith. Transformed lives will confirm the truth of Jesus Christ. A renewed vision for Christ's kingdom will inspire social action and missions. Lastly, our eternal hope of reward in heaven will fuel our faithfulness on the earth.

Not only preachers from pulpits but every Christian ought to be able to articulate these truths to anyone. The biblical gospel is enough to justify the "reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet. 3:15). Our post-Christian societies are hopeless and dying because the thinkers of our day are saying that there is no absolute truth, all people are basically good, we can define ourselves, all types of sexual activity are okay, the earth is doomed, and that there is no ultimate meaning to life. In the midst of this vacuum the gospel must enter. Christians have real hope to offer the lost. The word of God is the source of infallible and absolute truth. "None are righteous" but all can experience "the righteousness of God" (Rom. 3: 10, 22) in Christ. Amid gender confusion and sexual depravity Christ can restore a true and pure humanity in both body and soul (Eph. 4:24). The world is not coming to an end, because Christ "upholds the universe by the word of his power" (Heb. 1:3). Lastly, though we cannot comprehend fully the ultimate meaning of our lives, we "know that for those who love God all things work together for good” (Rom. 8:28). These are the truths that give us hope and made our Christian lands blessed. Therefore, we must once again boldly and unapologetically proclaim to the world, “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry,... blessed are all who take refuge in him." (Ps. 2:12).  

Theological Essay:

Done with Dunking

by Rev. Dr. Andrew W.G. Matthews

“The dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.” —Westminster Confession of Faith, Ch. 28:3

I’m done with dunking. I will never again perform an immersion baptism for a Christian, but will henceforth be true to the biblical and confessional standards of my Presbyterian faith. To say this is the final step on my long sacramental journey from being a credo-baptist to being fully Reformed. I myself experienced an immersion baptism in a charismatic Methodist church a year after my conversion, and spent the first decade of my Christian life in churches that only did immersion baptism. As a Presbyterian minister I once borrowed the baptismal facilities of a Baptist church in order to immerse a family of teenagers who attended my church. In my last Presbyterian parish in the country I was willing to accommodate the preferences of Baptists in my church and go down to the local lake to immerse their believing children. I’m done with that now. 

The Baptist belief is that immersion (the total submerging of the person under water) and emersion (the coming up out of the water) is necessary in order to have a true baptism. Presbyterians hold an immersion baptism is valid before God when it meets the essential criteria of water applied by a minister in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but that it is unnecessary. The correct administration of baptism actually is “by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.” For me, to practice immersion baptism is to replace a superior mode with an inferior one and to endorse error.

The Baptist contention that the only valid mode of baptism is by immersion rests upon three flawed lines of argumentation: the meaning of the word “baptism” itself, New Testament accounts of baptisms, and the imagery of death, burial, and resurrection. First, Baptists hold that the Greek word baptizo, “to baptise,” exclusively means “to dip” or “to immerse,” thus all baptisms must be by immersion. As with most words, baptizo has a range of senses, one of which is “to dip.” Baptists argue that “to dip” is the core meaning of the word which controls every use. I will spare you an exhaustive exposition on semantic theory, etymology, and every example of baptizo in the Bible and ancient literature and simply state, in contradiction, that baptizo primarily conveys the senses of  wash, cleanse, or unite which can take place through dipping, pouring, sprinkling, or wiping. The main point is to apply water to something or someone to cleanse it. The Baptist might say then that only bathing or immersion truly conveys the cleansing of a person, and that sprinkling or pouring water over the head does not cleanse the body. Really? In that case, we should get rid of all our bathroom showers and commit to taking baths everyday. Using showers, faucets, and basins and towels, as well as bathing in rivers and lakes, has been used to wash bodies for millennia. Jesus seemed quite satisfied with a few wet tear drops and some long hair when his feet were cleansed (Luke 7:44).

Secondly, the supposed New Testament accounts of immersion baptism in the Gospels and Acts are examples of the use of sloppy eisegesis. When Jesus came “up from the water” (Matt. 3:16) or “up out of the water” (Mark 1:10) he was not necessarily emerging from beneath the water but walking out of the water or up from the river bed. The same action is enacted with Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch who saw water and stop the chariot. The text says “they both went down into the water” and then “they came out of the water.” (Acts 8:38-39). Did Philip perform a tandem baptism by both going beneath the water?  Obviously not, they both walked down into the pool of water and then both walked out. In both the cases of Jesus and the eunuch they could have stood or kneeled in the water while water was poured over them. It is supposed that John the Baptist chose the desert of Aenon near Salim because the “much water” or “plentiful water” provided deep water for immersion (John 3:23). A better reading is that these many springs of waters were where people gathered to retrieve water—and were usually quite shallow—but the springs also served John’s purpose for baptising. Other baptisms in the book of Acts were more likely accomplished by applying water than by immersing people. The three thousand at the feast of Pentecost could have been baptised using the lavers of water used in Old Testament ceremonial cleaning. Paul and Cornelius and his Gentile guests were baptised inside houses where it was uncommon to have a deep bathtub. Within the house of Cornelius the question, “Can anyone withhold water for baptising these people?” (Acts 10:47) implies that water would be brought to the new converts. Lydia’s baptism does allow for an immersion baptism in a river (Acts 16:13-15), but the Philippian jailor was present in his house, not the river, when he and all his household heard the word of God and were baptised (Acts 16:32-33). The New Testament Christian baptisms simply do not prove a case for exclusive, immersion-only baptism, but instead demonstrate the probability of a pouring or sprinkling mode. 

Thirdly, and most importantly within the Baptist perspective, the act of baptism supposedly depicts the imagery of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. The go-to verse for Baptists to prove that baptism is essentially an immersion and emersion act is Romans 6:3, “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” When the convert goes down into the water his old man dies with the crucified Christ, but then he rises up out of the water as a new man with the resurrected Christ. This up and down imagery is so vital to Baptist thinking that I once heard a Reformed Baptist professor teach that if there was not sufficient water available for a baptism he would replace the water with straw in order to recreate the burial-resurrection motif. Being buried and resurrected was more important than using water! However, the attempt to make baptism fit with this image is like trying to make a round peg fit in a square hole. Jesus died on the cross not in the grave, and he wasn’t buried underground; he was placed in a tomb. In order for the imagery to match, a baptised person would have to also depict Christ’s death on the cross as well as his burial and resurrection.

Baptists make a fundamental error in mistaking the essential meaning and imagery of the two sacraments of the Christian church. The Lord’s Supper depicts the saving work of Christ on the cross—redemption accomplished. Christian baptism depicts the saving work of the Holy Spirit—redemption applied. Baptism thus focuses on the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in joining a believer to the finished work of Christ. The primary imagery of baptism should not depict the death and resurrection of Jesus—the elements of the Lord’s Supper point to that. Instead baptism depicts Christ “pouring out” the Spirit upon his sanctified church. The Lord’s Supper was instituted on the day of Christ’s death and the first Christian baptism occurred on the day of the Spirit’s outpouring at Pentecost. The symbolism of each sacrament correlates to the two roles the 2nd and 3rd Persons of the Trinity perform in perfecting our redemption. These two distinct sacraments serve as a perpetual reminder to the church of how God saves his covenant people.

If Christian baptism portrays the Holy Spirit’s role in sanctification, the right mode of baptism is pouring or sprinkling. At the day of Pentecost Peter proclaimed to the crowds that after Jesus was raised and exalted he had received from God the promised Holy Spirit whom “he has poured out” (Acts 2:33). Peter explained that this was a fulfilment of the Joel prophecy that God would “pour out” his Spirit on all flesh (Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-18). This sanctifying work of the Spirit fulfilled other prophecies that the Spirit of God would sanctify God’s people by “sprinkling” them with water to cleanse them of their uncleanness and give them a new heart to obey God (Ezek 36:25-27). The Ethiopian eunuch beseeched to be baptised because he had just been reading about the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 52-53 who would “sprinkle many nations” (Isa 52:15; Acts 8:32-37). The mode of sprinkled blood was the primary means by which the Old Testament temple was ceremonially cleansed. The writer of Hebrews picks up on this truth by arguing that just as the blood of bulls and goats purified the temple, priests, and worshippers, the sprinkled blood of Jesus Christ purifies Christian worshippers (Heb 9:12-14; 10:20-22): “let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.” The superior “sprinkled blood” of Jesus serves as the basis of the new covenant (Heb 12:24). The baptismal sign ought to signify the pouring out of the Spirit and the sanctifying effect of Christ’s sprinkled blood on his people. The additional sanctifying images of  Christ’s baptism by “the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matt 3:11; Acts 2:3; see also Mal. 3:2-3) who came down in flaming tongues upon the people at Pentecost and the concept of the anointing of the Holy Spirit like poured-out oil upon the head support the imagery of top-down instead of down-up. The pouring or sprinkling of water on a person which symbolise this sanctifying work of Christ by the Spirit is to be preferred over the misappropriated imagery of death and resurrection.

How then should we interpret the correlation of baptism with the death and resurrection of Christ to which both Romans 3:3-4 and Colossians 2:12-13 allude? Each of these texts refer to the experience of regeneration within a believer tied to the finished work of Christ. When a person is actually regenerated by the Holy Spirit, Christ is applying his atoning work on them. Christ died as a “sinner” but then was made alive. Likewise when Christians are sanctified by the Holy Spirit they experience the “circumcision of Christ” (Col 2:11) whereby their old sinful man dies and the new spiritual man comes alive. This experience correlates to their new birth by the Spirit. The primary focus is still on how Christ applies his accomplished redemptive work onto believers by the Holy Spirit, thus the main image of baptism is still purification by the Spirit.

From a practical and worship stand-point it is not a good idea for Presbyterians to perform immersion baptisms. Unlike established Baptist churches, our buildings are not built for immersion baptisms. Instead of using our basin to sprinkle the person in the church during the regular Lord’s Day worship service, we then have to reassemble at some later time by a lake, beach, river, or swimming pool. Weather permitting, the participants descend into the water wearing a bathing suit or wet-suit; this is not a good look on a middle-aged minister, and doesn’t a wet-suit defeat the idea of being thoroughly washed? Our family attended a friend’s baptism by the ocean as part of a charismatic church. When the pastor attempted to lower the boy down into the ocean, the surf went out and he only went down to his waist. Someone cried out, “He didn’t go all the way under!” The pastor laughed and asked the boy, “Should I baptise you again?” He didn’t, and it was finished. So, from a Baptist perspective, did it really count? This amusing example simply illustrates the truth that the Lord has not complicated the governance of his church with impractical and burdensome rites. Why would God initiate a sacrament to be administered across the globe that requires deep pools of water? Give a Presbyterian minister a go-bag containing a Bible, a loaf of bread, a bottle of wine, and a flask of water and he has every element needed to conduct a complete worship service anytime and anywhere for the people of God. 

The Baptist position on the mode of baptism is exclusive, erroneous, and detrimental to the unity of the wider church. According to Baptist ecclesiology—and I include all credo-immersion-baptistic evangelical churches in this category—if a Christian has not experienced a post-conversion baptism by means of immersion their baptism is not valid. Though not stated explicitly, the Baptist position implicitly holds that in order to be designated as a true Christian and a member of the church sprinkled babies or adults must be baptised again. [Though in a Baptist’s eyes they never were really baptised the first time.] Thus Baptists do not recognise the validity of the baptisms performed in Orthodox, Catholic, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Reformed, and Anglican churches. Such a view undermines the ancient Nicene confession: “We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church. We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.”

The Presbyterian church is more accommodating to Baptist practice than Baptists are to them, but it is time to take a stand on how we do baptism. Has it not dawned on Presbyterians that Baptist beliefs delegitimise the Presbyterian church? By accommodating or affirming baptist practices in Presbyterian churches we are undermining our very existence as a denomination. I experienced the truth of this in my former parish when I discovered the baptismal fount in a back storage room covered with dust and cobwebs. This country Presbyterian church was so populated with Baptists, Brethren, and Pentecostals that the practice of pouring or sprinkling had been abandoned. Instead of continually accommodating Baptists in our church, now is the time for Presbyterian ministers to courageously correct. Don’t allow the “pastoral approach” or “being peaceable” justify your unwillingness to instruct your people in the right way to do baptism. It is time for Presbyterian ministers, along with elders, to affirm their ordination vows by using the right and biblical administration of baptism. As for me I am done with dunking, and I will boldly proclaim that “baptism is rightly administered with pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.”

Expeditious Expositions: Luke 9:57-62

Three Flawed Followers

As they were going along the road, someone said to him, "I will follow you wherever you go."And Jesus said to him, "Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head."To another he said, "Follow me." But he said, "Lord, let me first go and bury my father."And Jesus said to him, "Leave the dead to bury their own dead. But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God."Yet another said, "I will follow you, Lord, but let me first say farewell to those at my home.” Jesus said to him, "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.” -Luke 9:57-62

Christ calls all his disciples to follow him along a difficult path. Though we might think we are up for the task, Jesus will expose in us areas of profound weakness. In Luke 9:57-62 Jesus confronts three men who express a willingness to follow him but who exhibit flaws that will hinder their obedience to Christ. Jesus’ words, though harsh sounding, are effective to cut through the hardness of the human heart. You should identify with these men, as Christ exposes your own flawed expectations, obligations, and attachments that hinder you.

The first conversation in 9:57-58 reveals how Christ crushes our false expectations. The man pledges to follow Jesus “wherever” he goes. The word “wherever” has the ring of a false confidence or boast about his ability and determination to follow Jesus. People often have an inflated sense of their own inherent ability to walk with Christ. The harsh realities of suffering with Jesus often destroy such arrogance. Jesus challenges this man to not expect a good life now. Often people presume that coming under our Father’s sovereign and benevolent care will result in a comfortable life. Jesus crushes that fantasy by saying that, “the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” If the perfect and powerful Son of God is subject to deprivations in this life, you ought to expect it too. Jesus aims to spare people of the painful disillusionment that comes when God fails to meet our false expectations of earthly blessings. Let us remember that in Paul’s contentment list he only mentions two items—food and clothing, but never housing (1 Tim. 6:6-8).

The second conversation in vv. 59-60 is the only one where Jesus initiates a command to “Follow me,” in so doing Christ exerts his authority over all human obligations. The calling of Jesus to follow is not optional, but mandatory. When confronted by Christ’s command, the man pledges a delayed obedience,“Lord, let me first…” He gives priority to a competing obligation that he presumes trumps Christ’s call. Whether his father had actually died or he intended to care for his father as long as he lived, Jesus corrects him with a stinging reproof, “Leave the dead to bury their own dead. But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” This man did not have to be the one who completes the responsibility of  “burying the dead.” Let spiritually dead people do these earthly tasks, but spiritually alive people are commanded to advance Christ’s kingdom.

In the third man in vv. 61-62, Christ has to strip him of his worldly attachments. He offers to follow Jesus, but he desires first to say goodbye to his family. Though it seems like a reasonable request, Jesus’s penetrating gaze reveals that his attachment to family will hinder his obedience. He will have a hard time releasing this source of goodness and happiness. Not just your family, but everything that is familiar in your life has an unyielding grip upon you. Jesus calls this man to an unknown future, and warns him that he should not look back,“no one who puts his hands to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.” Whether it be our clan, country, our culture, Christ calls us to put it behind us and always look ahead. In the area of sanctification we need to also let go of who we were, and lay hold of whom Christ is making us to be.

You might identify with one of these men in particular, or you might see yourself in all three. Either way your weaknesses don’t disqualify you from discipleship, but they will be a hindrance. Every Christian is a “jar of clay” in which Christ inserts his treasure (2 Cor. 4:7). May we all take an honest look at ourselves, listen to these challenging reproofs, and respond in a way that makes us more fit to serve in Christ’s kingdom.

Theological Essay:

With, For, or Against Christ: Forging a New Militant Ecumenicalism

by Rev. Dr. Andrew W.G. Matthews

John answered, “Master we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he does not follow with us.” But Jesus said to him, “Do not stop him, for the one who is not against you is for you.”—Luke 9:49-50

As we read the news we see Christians under attack across the globe. Whether it be Christian schools, bakers, artists, doctors, web-designers, counsellors, academics, or pastors, all are facing increasing persecution from every side. The persecutors do not discriminate against any particular brand of Christian. In the world today there are countless religious groups that are called “Christian,” but are separated by differences in doctrine and practice. Satan would have us emphasise our differences, so that he can divide and conquer us. When the church faces hostility from the world, however, it often comes together. In Luke 9:49-50 Jesus lays down a paradigm of Christian fellowship that posits the world at war with his kingdom. You are either fighting together with Christ or fighting against him. Hitherto, pacifistic ecumenicalism stressed, “Let us be at peace with one another,” the times are now calling for a new militant ecumenicalism that cries, “Let us go to war alongside one another.” 

Not With Us

As Jesus and the disciples were traveling along the road, the apostles spotted a man who was in the process of casting out a demon. Even though this man was invoking the name of Jesus the disciples tried to hinder him. The basis for their opposition to him was that“he did not follow with us” (ESV). He was not one of the twelve apostles and probably not a part of the next circle of seventy-two disciples sent out later (Luke 10:1-24). He was clearly a man on the margins of the larger mass of followers called “disciples" of Jesus. Nonetheless, he was invoking the name of Jesus Christ. The most fundamental unity of Christ-ians is that they are all called by the name of Christ. When the church makes disciples she baptises them “in the name [singular] of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt 28:19). The message of the gospel declares that “there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). In fact, all the early creeds in the first five centuries of the church focused on defining the truths concerning the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit—defining this God whom we serve. The first point of unity among all Christians is that they proclaim the name of Jesus Christ.

The apostles opposed this man because he was not one of them. John explained to Jesus that“he does not follow with us.” The NIV translation conveys the gist of John’s concern more clearly: “He is not one of us.” This guy did not belong to the twelve apostles or their recognised wider circle of associates. The apostles were the closest to Christ. Since the Twelve actually were taught by Jesus, they were the most trustworthy representatives of what it means to follow Christ. So who was this maverick, thinking he could do works in Jesus’ name? Humans are cliquish by nature. We define our groups—who is in and who is out. We create tribes and camps, and we distrust those who do not belong to our group. Since they are not part of our group we question their legitimacy. This is the natural tendency of humans, and we need to guard against dismissing other Christian denominations simply because “they do not follow with us.”

Over the course of two millennia, the Christian church has splintered into various groups  that practice the faith differently. Many bemoan these distinct denominations, but it is actually a wise and necessary outcome. When Christians have an irreconcilable difference on a point of doctrine, the most peaceable way forward actually is to separate. You could call it achieving a “seperate peace.” Otherwise, they will perpetually fight with each other until one side subdues the other or forces them to leave. Antithetical beliefs on issues are often impossible to maintain within a single Christian group, such as the validity of infant baptism and the structure of church government. As a result, different groups have formed over the ages. They find it better to be at peace apart, instead of at war together. Though they are no longer formally together, they can still recognise each other as carrying the name of Christ.

What do we do when we are required to stand with fellow Christians whom we perceive as having an inferior understanding of the faith? No doubt the twelve apostles had a more accurate and intimate knowledge of Christ than this man on the margins. Who knows what flaws this bloke had in his theology? It is natural that we look critically on the differences and deficiencies of other Christian groups. Though each group assumes they are accurate, some are more accurate than others (Acts 18:25-26). Without apology, I can assert that the corpus of doctrines found in the classical creeds and Reformational confessions that the Reformed and Presbyterian churches uphold is the most accurate representation of biblical Christianity in the world. Any divergence from this produces an inferior version of Christianity. We may be tempted then to disdain or not associate with other Christians we deem inferior. However, to do so undermines the thrust to collaborate with others in Christian ministry and come to their defence when they are attacked.

When the Australian rugby player Israel Folau came under attack by the media and Rugby Australia (RA) for his views on repentance and homosexuality, Australian Christians by and large came to his defence. Subsequently, articles came out about some of the flaws in his church’s Trinitarian theology and some questionable practices in his church. Doubts began to creep in that maybe this athlete was not worthy of our support. Instead of standing with Israel Folau, an excuse was given to stay distant from him. This is a dangerous response. Let us be careful to recognise that just because someone is of another group and their beliefs may have flaws, to the extent that they uphold the name of Christ and the truth of his Word let us continue to assert that, “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:4-6). And let us confess as the Nicene Creed declares, “we believe in one holy, catholic, and apostolic church”.

For You

After John defends their obstruction of the man’s exorcism efforts, Jesus corrects his disciples by arguing that though he may not be “with you,” he still is “for you.” This man is on their side. The man was engaging in an act of spiritual warfare. He was casting out demons in the name of Jesus, the very same actions that Jesus and his apostles had been doing in their ministry. All of them were involved in the same spiritual warfare. Though we long for the church to be at peace, in this age the church is always at war.“Since the days of John the Baptist till now, the kingdom of God suffers violence, and the violent take it by force” (Matt 11:12). Theologians refer to the church in this world as the church militant. One day in heaven we will be a part of the church triumphant, but now we are in a perpetual war. The problem comes when Christians do not realise that they are in a spiritual conflict, or do not want any part of it. Very few Christians have been involved in an actual demonic exorcism, but every Christian conversion is an attack on Satan. Jesus said he was the “stronger one" who had bound up the “strong man” and was stealing his possessions (Luke 11:21-22). The proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ is a declaration of war against the world and the domain of darkness. Every Christian who proclaims this message of salvation is engaged in a spiritual battle. If we think that as long as we “stick to the gospel” or “focus on Jesus,” and avoid all those controversial topics like God, sin, salvation, idolatry, sexual immorality, heaven, and hell we are playing it safe, we are fooling ourselves. We have now moved into a new phase where the gospel itself is “hate speech,” because the gospel proclaims that Jesus saves sinners. What message could be more offensive to this generation? 

This man on the margins was fighting the same spiritual fight as the apostles, thus he is “for them.” He was one of their allies in Christ’s war against Satan. There ought to have been a camaraderie in their mutual conflict. To the extent that any Christian church is engaged in gospel ministry proclaiming the salvation found in Christ they are allies. Likewise, to the extent that any denomination teaches the Biblical doctrine of how a Christian ought to live godly and faithfully in this age, they are allies. The church needs to look for and identify all Christians who are fighting the good fight of faith. Unfortunately, because this man was not following with them the apostles “tried to stop him.” Hence, Jesus had to reprove them, “Do not stop him.” Instead of hindering his work they ought to have supported his work. The warfare of this age has innumerable fronts and battles, any one group can not be engaged in every battle. The overall scope of the work to reach every corner of the world and every people group for the gospel, coupled with the countless varieties of Christian works of service addressing the manifold temporal miseries of this age, require a level of supportive cooperation among all genuine believers to advance the kingdom of Christ. 

Like this man who was attacking the domain of darkness, we need to identify whoever is doing a faithful work and support them. And when they come under attack we need to stand with them. Sadly, too often when Christians are attacked they end up standing alone. We see a brother or sister being assaulted by the fiery darts of the evil one, and we desert them lest we too come under fire. When the Queensland Christian school, Citipointe Christian College, was assailed by the media, politicians, and Christian pastors for upholding a biblical ethic on sexuality, it resulted in the retraction of their policy and the resignation of their principal. Instead of rushing to their aid, the overwhelming majority of the Christian community played it safe and hid in the shadows. The warfare we are facing requires us to identify our allies and be faithful to stand with them in the fight. Oh, may it not be said of us what Paul said of his contemporaries, “At my first defence, no one came to stand by me, but all deserted me. May it not be charged against them! But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me,” (2 Tim 4:16-17).

Against You

Jesus gives a simple definition of those who are “for you”—they are the ones who are“not against you.” An apology to the woke ideologues of our day, but Jesus sees the world through a blatantly binary lens. “Whoever is not with me is against me” (Matt 12:30) and “The one who is not against you is for you” (Luke 9:50). Jesus frames the world as a battle between his kingdom and the kingdom of Satan. The battle lines are drawn, and you must choose a side. Since the entrance of sin into the world in Genesis 3, there has been enmity between the offspring of Satan and the righteous offspring of Eve. Christians will know their opponents because they will be fighting against them. Who is attacking Christians throughout the world? Militant Communism, Militant Hinduism, Militant Islam, Militant LGBTQ+, Militant Atheism. Nationalist Hinduism has expelled many Christian ministries out of India. Atheists and secularists are excluding Christianity from the public square, our schools, and our prison system. And the LGBTQ+ crowd is seeking to cancel Christians from all participation in society while shouting, “No room for bigots!” 

 Though these groups maintain many antithetical beliefs, they seldom attack each other while they share a common enemy in Christianity. These strange bedfellows generally work together in opposition against Christians. Radical feminists issue warnings that the election of a Christian politician will end women's rights in society, yet they are eerily quiet about the overt oppression of women under Sharia-law in Muslim-majority countries and communities— i.e. female circumcision, child-bride arrangements, unjust retribution, divorce, rape, and child-custody laws, employment, education, and driving restrictions, et cetera. The infamous atheist Richard Dawkins attacks the Bible and the God of Christianity, but he seldom challenges the Koran or the Allah of Islam. When Haneen Zreika, who plays for the Greater Western Sydney Giants in the Australian Football League Women's (AFLW), refused to wear a gay pride jersey due to her Islamic faith, her teammates (some of whom were lesbians) supported her, and media commentators defended her decision saying she showcased the league's commitment to diversity and inclusion. In contrast, when Christians express their religious commitments they are deemed worthy of exclusion—witness the termination of Israel Folau by Rugby Australia or the Christian doctor Jereth Kok whose medical licence was suspended by the Medical Board of Australia. Why is there such solidarity among these seemingly contradictory groups? Jesus explained it simply, “A house divided against itself cannot stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand?” (Matt 12:25-26). They are all on Satan’s side. These opponents are aligned with each other against Christians, because they are all ultimately opposed to Christ.

Identifying those who are not “with Christ” can be easy, especially if they do not identify as Christians or openly oppose the church, but there is a more insidious enemy— the enemies among us. There are people who carry the name of Christ, supposedly follow Christ, but are actually opposed to Christ. Let us not forget that one of those original twelve apostles, Judas, instead of casting out Satan became possessed by him. Time and time again, Satan infiltrates the church with wolves in sheep's clothing and attacks the church from within. It is not enough that a person is a baptised member of a Christian church or a duly-ordained minister of the gospel, if they support the agenda of the world they“do not gather with me [Jesus] but scatter” (Matt 12:30). Like a soldier in the midst of a firefight who turns his weapon on his fellow soldiers, are Christians who side with their enemies and fire upon fellow Christians. When professing believers from within the Christian community no longer maintain the essential doctrines of the Christian faith and the biblical ethics of godly living, it is incumbent upon faithful Christian leaders to identify them and hold them to account. 

The apostle Paul said of living in this world, “Redeem the time, for the days are evil” (Eph. 5:16). Indeed, the days ahead are looking very evil. The Christian communities in all the post-Christian countries need to prepare for the upcoming onslaught. We need to take note of those fighting on behalf of Christ, whether they be of the Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox strands of the Christian church, or within Protestantism—Presbyterian, Anglican, Baptist, or Pentecostal. We are entering a time when true Christian ecumenicalism is not about “birds of a feather flocking together,” but “bands of brothers fighting together.” Those who uphold the veracity of the Scriptures, the creation of male and female after God's image, the person and work of Christ, biblical sexual identity and morality, the sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit, the preeminence of the triune God in public worship, and the eternal hope of redemption will need to stand together. New battle lines are being drawn around these issues, and Christians who stand on the wrong side should no longer be seen as being "for Christ." In the fires of adversity, we may be surprised by new friends from unexpected quarters and shocked by old friends who turn against us. As we stand together for Christ may our new alliances forge even sweeter bonds of Christian fellowship.

Expeditious Expositions: James 4:13-17

Arrogant Planning

Come now, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit"-- yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, "If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin. — James 4:13-17

Being rich is risky business. It’s not just because wealth carries with it more responsibility, but that the pursuit of riches is a dangerous occupation for the soul. Jesus said that, “it is easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven.” Money matters have a particular emphasis in the teachings of Jesus as seen in the Sermon on the Mount, the parables of the kingdom, and in Jesus’ rebukes of worldly leaders. James has a decidedly negative view of rich people throughout his epistle. In James 4:13-17 the main sin of these industriously rich people is their arrogance over their presumed control of their life. 

James takes these rich people to task for boasting over their business plans. He says, “Come now you who say…” James’ rebuke is not of their planning, but their boasting. You can have a calendar, schedule appointments, and organise future endeavours without defying the reign of God over your life plans. The main problem is not the plans but their evil boasts. These rich people are boasting that they will be successful in wheeling and dealing for a whole year and will assuredly make a profit. This is not a humble prediction. James calls them out and says, “you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil.” The sin in their hearts was that they saw themselves as being in control over their lives, so they can determine whatever outcome they wished. They were certain that their plans would come to fruition.

Slapping these rich people upside the head, James applies themes from the book of Ecclesiastes to show how insignificant they are.  First, he confronts them on their assumption they are going to make a profit. “What does man profit by all the labour in which he labours under the sun?” (Ecc 1:3) is a key refrain throughout Ecclesiastes. Second, he challenges them on their lack of knowledge of the future, “you do not know what tomorrow will bring.” Third, he refers to their life as a “mist” that vanishes, an allusion to the “breath, vanity” (hebel) prime motto in Ecclesiastes. Though these people see themselves as captains of industry they are really only fleeting breaths that are ignorant and impotent concerning their futures. 

Instead of boasting over their plans people need to acknowledge that all human plans fall out in accordance with God’s master plan. They should say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” The “God-willing” attitude affirms God’s absolute control of life and our submission to his plan. To not affirm this reality is “sin” and “evil,” for it reveals an arrogant heart of autonomy and self-determination. Christians might give lip-service to God’s sovereignty, but to really believe this reality one has to learn it the hard way. After all your plans have been scuttled by God, then you realise he is in control. As Christians make plans they should write them in pencil, not pen. In all our life-planning we need to adopt the attitude that we are merely unworthy servants of Christ, bought with a price, ready to do whatever he calls us to do.