Paul Tripp and the Pastor’s “Dangerous Calling” (Part 2)

Paul David Tripp’s “Dangerous Calling” Seminar was an excellent example of what a parachurch speaking ministry ought to be.  In my last post I commented on two of Tripp’s perspectives on the temptations of pastoral ministry today.  Here are some more thoughts about his presentation:

3. Dr Tripp’s third perspective was a reminder that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church, “everything else is body.”

He spoke about the dangers of confusing our personal kingdom with God’s kingdom.  This temptation may loom larger in popular, successful ministries, but I am not immune from mistaking my predispositions for God’s purpose for me.  Furthermore, we must be watchful of other well meaning friends.  “There are people who love you and who have a wonderful plan for your life.”  

Paul Tripp and the Pastor’s “Dangerous Calling” (Part 1)

Last week a small group of us from church attended a seminar by Paul David Tripp on the “Dangerous Calling” of the Christian ministry.

Those who know me know that I can be a skeptical old dog when it comes to these seminar speakers.  “Good technique/little real substance” has been my reaction on more than one occasion.  But I am glad to report that Dr Tripp exceeded my expectations with his materials, his theological acumen (and concern), and his ability to talk for 5 hours with only a lunch-break to give his constitution a rest.

Let me give you a precis of the seminar:

Tripp made a number of salient points (8-11 depending on how you reckoned them).  Each were brought home with good illustrations from life – usually the speaker’s), and preceded by a solid and authoritative exposition of a passage of Scripture.

Peter Masters Speaks Out Against The New Calvinism

For quite a while now I have been telling people that the more solid evangelicals in Britain do not think too highly of the Calvinism of men like John Piper or C. J. Mahaney.  This is because of what they see as a misuse of Jonathan Edwards’ teaching to recommend Christian “hedonism” and the introduction of charismatic teachings into supposedly Reformed congregations.

But there is another reason, and this reason: “Worldliness,” is the subject of an excellent article by the Met. Tab’s Peter Masters.  It is worthwhile reading the whole thing.

Real Spirituality: What Does The Incarnation Teach Us?

Our world is certainly troubled.  There is so much hostility, so much greed, so much unfairness.  For many people today, the way through the hardness of day to day life is through “spirituality.”  Indeed, “spirituality” is on the rise in our society.  Whatever the growling New Atheists say, it is a fact that the majority of people yearn to find some sense of meaning in a form of spirituality.

Even Christians may have leanings this way too.  For example, in taking my students through the first era of Church History I have had cause on several occasions to call to their attention that practically all of the so-called great leaders in the early Church for the first five centuries were ascetics.  That is, they believed in celibacy and simple diet and longed for solitude.  Well, which of these is spirituality?  Are any of them “spiritual” per se?  I don’t think so.

Great Post on Nominal Christianity

Over on Triablogue there was posted this excellent article on the spiritual depth (or lack thereof) of many professors in our churches.  It is well worth the short time it takes to read it.

The Christian Mind: Sapientia and Scientia

In 1994 the evangelical historian Mark Noll published The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind.[1] The book is not much more than a sustained lambast against two conservative subtraditions, Young Earth Creationism and Dispensational Premillennialism. Howbeit, Noll rightly laments “the generations-long failure of the evangelical community to nurture the life of the mind.”[2] In fact, he admonishes his peers because, “fidelity to Jesus Christ demands from evangelicals a more responsible intellectual existence than we have practiced throughout much of our history.”[3] This is because “the gospel properly belongs to the whole person”[4]

 

A. The Need for Wisdom and Knowledge

 

Noll’s prime example of a Christian intellect is the great American philosopher-theologian Jonathan Edwards. For Edwards, he writes, “True knowledge was rather ‘the consistency and agreement of our ideas with the ideas of God.’”[5] One is reminded of Edwards’ words in his great sermon entitled “Christian Knowledge,” where he states that,

 

The faculty of reason and understanding was given for our actual understanding and knowledge. If a man have no actual knowledge, the faculty or capacity of knowledge is of no use to him. And if he have actual knowledge, yet if he be destitute of the knowledge of those things which are the last end of his being, and for the sake of the knowledge of which he had more understanding given him than the beasts; then still his faculty of reason is in vain; he might as well have been a beast as a man. But divine subjects are the things, to know which we had the faculty of reason given us.[6] (Last italics mine).

This is crucial to recognize. Man is not put on earth to “do that which is right in his own eyes”; he is to think God’s thoughts after Him; to gather up, as it were, the wonders of creation in his mind and to reflect upon them, finally returning ever new praises back to the One who placed them there. Like D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones once reminded his hearers,

 

Do let us, therefore, examine ourselves very seriously about these things. It is very wonderful and enjoyable to have fellowship of kindred minds. What is more enjoyable than this? But it can lead to nothing – nothing at all – if we are not ever mindful of the fact that it is merely the means provided by God to bring us to a knowledge of Himself.[7]

 

How different is this to the way the world looks at human knowledge. For example, Jungian psychology has made the mind the servant of Self. Its preoccupation with self-actualization, self-enhancement and psychological wholeness has affected the thinking even of many who have been given “the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16).[8]

The Christian Mind and its Ramifications

The New Testament is clear about the fact that believers are to adopt a “renewed mind” (Rom. 12:2), that they “walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having their understanding darkened…” (Eph. 4:17b-18a), but rather, that they are to “be renewed in the spirit of their mind” (Eph. 4:23), having “learned Christ” (Eph. 4:20b). Christians are to live by “every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4).

Now, if this is such a clear teaching in the Bible, how come many Christian pastors, authors, and educators teach as if ‘the Christian mind’ is something that can only be used when one is thinking about “spiritual things”? It’s as if they believe that “the mind of Christ” which Paul speaks about at the end of the second chapter of First Corinthians, only functions well in that small subdivision of our lives we call the religious or spiritual life. What is the problem here?

Christian Dating: Yes or No?

I suppose every Pastor would say that the issue of dating is one of the most important for him to have a clear stance on. A number of practical, not to say emotive issues are involved. In this short paper I would like to give what I believe is the biblical perspective. Others might well disagree with me, but I firmly believe that the following view is both God-honoring and “ in-line” with the life of faith to which all Christians, of whatever age, are called (2 Cor. 5:7).