Tag: spiritual growth

Jerry Bridges on Judgmentalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 15 Comments

As a follow up to Saturday’s post on the Legalist “Not Me” dance, today I want to quote Jerry Bridges on the problem of Judgmentalism.

Bridges is a well known, and respected author. He’s known for highlighting the role of grace in the Christian’s life. I’ve reviewed his book, Trusting God here previously. One of his most recent books, Respectable Sins, takes aim at the sins that we too easily let slide. Andy Naselli posted some excerpts from the chapter dealing with Judgmentalism, and I’m going to share some of them here, but encourage you to go read Naselli’s full post and then consider picking up a copy of the book for more.

The sin of judgmentalism is one of the most subtle of our “respectable” sins because it is often practiced under the guise of being zealous for what is right…

Example 1: Dress

I grew up in the mid-twentieth century, when people dressed up to go to church. Men wore jackets and ties (usually suits and ties) and women wore dresses. Sometime in the 1970s, men began to show up at church wearing casual pants and open-collar shirts. Many women began to wear pants. For several years, I was judgmental toward them. Didn’t they have any reverence for God? Would they dress so casually if they were going to an audience with the president? That sounded pretty convincing to me.

Only I was wrong. There is nothing in the Bible that tells us what we ought to wear to church. And as for dressing up to meet the president, that’s a cultural thing centered in Washington, DC. If you were invited to meet the president while he is vacationing at his ranch, you would probably show up in blue jeans. Reverence for God, I finally concluded, is not a matter of dress; it’s a matter of the heart. Jesus said that true worshipers are those who worship the Father in spirit and truth (see John 4:23). Now, it’s true that casual dress may reflect a casual attitude toward God, but I cannot discern that. Therefore, I should avoid ascribing an attitude of irreverence based purely on a person’s dress….

…My point here is that it doesn’t matter which side of an issue we are on. It is easy to become judgmental toward anyone whose opinions are different from ours. And then we hide our judgmentalism under the cloak of Christian convictions.

Paul’s response to the situation in Rome [in Romans 14] was, “Stop judging one another regardless of which position you take.” …

I suspect that some of my dearest friends may disagree with some things I’ve said in this chapter. Some do not see the manner of dress in church or the type of music we sing as matters of preference. For them, it is a conviction. I respect their thinking and wouldn’t want to change their convictions at all.

I’d like to be like Paul, who took a similar position regarding the divisive issues in Rome. He did not try to change anyone’s convictions regarding what they ate or the special days they observed. Instead, he said, “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Romans 14:5). Such a statement makes many of us uncomfortable. We don’t like ambiguity in issues of Christian practice. It’s difficult for us to accept that one person’s opinion can be different from ours and both of us be accepted by God. But that is what Paul says in Romans 14. And if we will take Paul seriously and hold our convictions with humility, it will help us avoid the sins of judgmentalism. (pp. 144–48)

I only shared the part about dress, but Naselli includes more on how music and alcohol factor in to this judmentalist problem.

What are your thoughts on this? I, for one, think Bridges nails it on this one. This is indeed a problem, and can be for those of us on both sides of the question in dispute. Rom. 14 and 15 have more to say about this, and we would do well to listen.

Quotes to Note 23: Calvin on Christ-Centered Bible Reading

~ Bob Hayton ~ 7 Comments

With the New Year, many of us have chosen our new daily Bible reading plan. With that in mind, I recently stumbled across an important quote from John Calvin that bears on how we approach our Bible reading. I thought sharing it with you all would be especailly appropriate, on this first Monday of 2011.

Commenting on John 5:39, Calvin notes:

…we are taught by this passage, that if we wish to obtain the knowledge of Christ, we must seek it from the Scriptures…. First, then, we ought to believe that Christ cannot be properly known in any other way than from the Scriptures; and if it be so, it follows that we ought to read the Scriptures with the express design of finding Christ in them. Whoever shall turn aside from this object, though he may weary himself throughout his whole life in learning, will never attain the knowledge of the truth; for what wisdom can we have without the wisdom of God? Next, as we are commanded to seek Christ in the Scriptures, so he declares in this passage that our labors shall not be fruitless; for the Father testifies in them concerning his Son in such a manner that He will manifest him to us beyond all doubt. But what hinders the greater part of men from profiting is, that they give to the subject nothing more than a superficial and cursory glance. Yet it requires the utmost attention, and, therefore, Christ enjoins us to search diligently for this hidden treasure…. By the Scriptures, it is well known, is here meant the Old Testament; for it was not in the Gospel that Christ first began to be manifested, but, having received testimony from the Law and the Prophets, he was openly exhibited in the Gospel.

J.C. Ryle on Revivalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 8 Comments

American Christianity in general, and Fundamentalism in particular has been greatly impacted by the Revivalist movement. J.C. Ryle, often hailed as the last of the great British Puritans, is perhaps best known for his book entitled Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties, and Roots. In a chapter on “Counting the Cost”, he had some important things to say about the Revivalist movement. I find Ryle’s words quite helpful on this subject, especially as they are spoken by an orthodox, evangelical churchman looking on as Revivalism was beginning to sweep the known world.

Warning: the quote here is a bit long, but many of you will want to read the whole thing, I’m sure.

For want of “counting the cost,” the hearers of powerful evangelical preachers often come to miserable ends. They are stirred and excited into professing what they have not really experienced. They receive the Word with a “joy” so extravagant that it almost startles old Christians. They run for a time with such zeal and fervour that they seem likely to outstrip all others. They talk and work for spiritual objects with such enthusiasm that they make older believers feel ashamed. But when the novelty and freshness of their feelings is gone, a change comes over them. They prove to have been nothing more than stony-ground hearers. The description the great Master gives in the Parable of the Sower is exactly exemplified. “Temptation or persecution arises because of the Word, and they are offended” (Matt. 13:21). Little by little their zeal melts away, and their love becomes cold. By and by their seats are empty in the assembly of God’s people, and they are heard no more among Christians. And why? They had never “counted the cost.”

For want of “counting the cost,” hundreds of professed converts, under religious revivals, go back to the world after a time, and bring disgrace on religion. They begin with a sadly mistaken notion of what is true Christianity. They fancy it consists in nothing more than a so-called “coming to Christ,” and having strong inward feelings of joy and peace. And so, when they find, after a time, that there is a cross to be carried, that our hearts are deceitful, and that there is a busy devil always near us, they cool down in disgust, and return to their old sins. And why? Because they had really never known what Bible Christianity is. They had never learned that we must “count the cost.”* (the following long footnote is Ryle’s)

*I should be very sorry indeed if the language I have used above about revivals was misunderstood. To prevent this I will offer a few remarks by way of explanation.

For true revivals of religion no one can be more deeply thankful than I am. Wherever they may take place, and by whatever agents they may be effected, I desire to bless God for them, with all my heart. “If Christ is preached,” I rejoice, whoever may be the preacher. If souls are saved, I rejoice, by whatever section of the Church the word of life has been ministered.

But it is a melancholy fact that, in a world like this, you cannot have good without evil. I have no hesitation in saying, that one consequence of the revival movement has been the rise of a theological system which I feel obliged to call defective and mischievous in the extreme.

The leading feature of the theological system I refer to, is this: an extravagant and disproportionate magnifying of three points in religion,-viz., instantaneous conversion-the invitation of unconverted sinners to come to Christ,-and the possession of inward joy and peace as a test of conversion. I repeat that these three grand truths (for truths they are) are so incessantly and exclusively brought forward, in some quarters, that great harm is done.

Instantaneous conversion, no doubt, ought to be pressed on people. But surely they ought not to be led to suppose that there is no other sort of conversion, and that unless they are suddenly and powerfully converted to God, they are not converted at all.

The duty of coming to Christ at once, “just as we are,” should be pressed on all hearers. It is the very cornerstone of Gospel preaching. But surely men ought to be told to repent as well as to believe. They should be told why they are to come to Christ, and what they are to come for, and whence their need arises.

The nearness of peace and comfort in Christ should be proclaimed to men. But surely they should be taught that the possession of strong inward joys and high frames of mind is not essential to justification, and that there may be true faith and true peace without such very triumphant feelings. Joy alone is no certain evidence of grace.

The defects of the theological system I have in view appear to me to be these: (1) The work of the Holy Ghost in converting sinners is far too much narrowed and confined to one single way. Not all true converts are converted instantaneously, like Saul and the Philippian jailor. (2) Sinners are not sufficiently instructed about the holiness of God’s law, the depth of their sinfulness, and the real guilt of sin. To be incessantly telling a sinner to “come to Christ” is of little use, unless you tell him why he needs to come, and show him fully his sins. (3) Faith is not properly explained. In some cases people are taught that mere feeling is faith. In others they are taught that if they believe that Christ died for sinners they have faith! At this rate the very devils are believers! (4) The possession of inward joy and assurance is made essential to believing. Yet assurance is certainly not of the essence of saving faith. There may be faith when there is no assurance. To insist on all believers at once “rejoicing,” as soon as they believe, is most unsafe. Some, I am quite sure, will rejoice without believing, while others will believe who cannot at once rejoice. (5) Last, but not least, the sovereignty of God in saving sinners, and the absolute necessity of preventing grace, are far too much overlooked. Many talk as if conversions could be manufactured at man’s pleasure, and as if there were no such text as this, “It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.” (Rom. 9:16.)

The mischief done by the theological system I refer to is, I am persuaded, very great. On the one hand, many humble-minded Christians are totally discouraged and daunted. They fancy they have no grace because they cannot reach up to the high frames and feelings which are pressed on their attention. On the other side, many graceless people are deluded into thinking they are “converted,” because under the pressure or animal excitement and temporary feelings they arc led to profess themselves Christians. And all this time the thoughtless and ungodly look on with contempt, and rind fresh reasons for neglecting religion altogether.

The antidotes to the state of things I deplore are plain and few. (1) Let “all the counsel of God be taught” in Scriptural proportion; and let not two or three precious doctrines of the Gospel be allowed to overshadow all other truths. (2) Let repentance be taught fully as well as faith, and not thrust completely into the background. Our Lord Jesus Christ and St. Paul always taught both. (3) Let the variety of the Holy Ghost’s works be honestly stated and admitted; and while instantaneous conversion is pressed on men, let it not be taught as a necessity. (4) Let those who profess to have found immediate sensible peace be plainly warned to try themselves well, and to remember that feeling is not faith, and that “patient continuance in well-doing” is the great proof that faith is true. (Rom. 2:7; John 8:31.) (5) Let the great duty of “counting the cost” be constantly urged on all who are disposed to make a religious profession, and let them be honestly and fairly told that there is warfare as well as peace, a cross as well as a crown, in Christ’s service.

I am sure that unhealthy excitement is above all things to be dreaded In religion, because it often ends in fatal, soul-ruining reaction and utter deadness. And when multitudes are suddenly brought under the power of religious impressions, unhealthy excitement is almost sure to follow.

I have not much faith in the soundness of conversions when they are said to take places in masses and wholesale. It does not seem to me in harmony with God’s general dealings in this dispensation. To my eyes it appears that God’s ordinary plan is to call in individuals one by one. Therefore, when I hear of large numbers being suddenly converted all at one time, I hear of it with less hope than some. The healthiest and most enduring success in mission fields is certainly not where natives have come over to Christianity in a mass, as recent events have shown in New Zealand. The most satisfactory and firmest work at home does not always appear to me to be the work done in revivals.

There are two passages of Scripture which I should like to have frequently and fully expounded in the present day by all who preach the Gospel, and specially by those who have anything to do with revivals. One passage is the parable of the sower, That parable is not recorded three times over without good reason and a deep meaning.-The other passage is our Lord’s teaching about “counting the cost,” and the words which He spoke to the “great multitudes” whom He saw following Him. It is very noteworthy that He did not on that occasion say anything to flatter these volunteers or encourage them to follow Him. No: He saw what their case needed. He told them to stand still and “count the cost.” (Luke 14:25, etc.) I am not sure that some modern preachers would have adopted this course of treatment. (pg. 88-91 of the 2001 Grace Books International edition)

Do you agree or disagree? I think even Ryle would be surprised at how far these tendencies of the Revivalist movement would go. He would be dumbfounded by “free grace” theology or the gospel which turns conversion into such a “moment in time” that it’s compared to a tattoo which one can regret moments later and yet still be stuck with, no matter what.

I encourage you to read Ryle’s entire book online. Or you can pick up a copy of Holiness for yourself.

Quotes to Note 14: Christian Hedonism in The Shepherd of Hermas??

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

I’ve been reading through a nice little edition of The Apostolic Fathers recently put out by Moody Press. Today, I came across a section in The Shepherd of Hermas that sounds a bit like what John Piper might say. I’m not endorsing everything in The Shepherd of Hermas, there are plenty of reasons why it shouldn’t be considered to be canonical (or part of the NT), but this little bit caught my attention. Let me know what you make of it or what you think of this quote.

I’m quoting from the 10th commandment which focuses specifically on grief caused by the inability to do something through doubt or grief after getting wrongfully angry over something.

Both these are grievous to the Holy Spirit– doubt and anger. Wherefore remove grief from you, and crush not the Holy Spirit which dwells in you, lest he entreat God against you, and he withdraw from you. For the Spirit of God which has been granted to us to dwell in this body does not endure grief nor straitness. Wherefore put on cheerfulness, which always is agreeable and acceptable to God, and rejoice in it. For every cheerful man does what is good, and minds what is good, and despises grief; but the sorrowful man always acts wickedly…. For the entreaty of the sorrowful man has no power to ascend to the altar of God [because] grief… mingled with his entreaty, does not permit the entreaty to ascend pure to the altar of God…. Cleanse yourself from this wicked grief, and you will live to God; and all will live to God who drive away grief from them, and put on all cheerfulness. [pg. 222 of the 2009 Moody edition of The Apostolic Fathers]

Becca’s Story

~ Bob Hayton ~ 12 Comments

I continue to hear from readers about how the story of my journey out of extreme fundamentalism has been a blessing to them.   From time to time, my readers share some of their own stories.   Recently, a young woman named Becca shared her story with me, and I received permission from her to share it with you all.   May it be a blessing and encouragement to you all.

2/12/2010

Bob,

I am twenty-three years old. I was born into a IFB family with all the fixins’. My parents were strongly KJV only; no secular music whatsoever was allowed in our household. We attended church every Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday. I was in Patch the Pirate Club. I can remember my dad railing over and over again about “secular” music, the “world’s” music, and he had books about the beat of the music causing one’s heart to beat irregularly. I am surprised I got away with wearing pants. That was a non-issue, usually, with my parents, although my mom did tell me once that she wished she’d raised me to wear skirts only. My previous pastor was once noted for having said that parents would rue the day they allowed their daughters to wear pants. I have never worn pants to a church service at that church before.

I was “saved” at the age of four. I remembered bits and pieces, but did not remember what I prayed or really remembering I was a sinner. Thus, for years upon years, even when I was in college, I doubted my salvation. What if I wasn’t really saved because I didn’t mean what I’d said at the age of four? I went off to the WILDS (summer camp) of Brevard, NC, where my counselor told me that if I couldn’t remember my salvation experience and was having doubts, then I probably wasn’t saved. I was incapacitated by fears of eternal damnation.

All of my childhood and teenage years were spent observing rules and regulation imposed by my IFB church. I knew nothing of God, but everything about what I “should” be doing. I was strongly KJV only, but I couldn’t defend my reasons behind it. I was strongly against secular music, but probably couldn’t have given reasons why. By the age of nineteen, I realized I had built concrete walls on a foundation of sand. I had no logical reason for any of the convictions I held.

When did the turnaround occur? When I went to college. My parents were hoping I’d choose PCC, but I couldn’t wear skirts all the time and it wasn’t accredited. I chose to attend Clearwater Christian, the small, accredited university on the Gulf Coast. Dad wasn’t thrilled “they allow handholding!” and a visiting evangelist had told Dad that he would never advise anyone to attend CCC. Nevertheless, I had liked what I’d seen when I visited there and it was only by the grace of God that he led me there. The school changed my life.

CCC is conservative, yes. It is fundamental. But it is not “fundamentalist,” in the derogatory sense of the word. It is Scriptural, but it couldn’t be compared to a terrorist regime in the standards it holds. At first, when I discovered that the girls I lived with had versions of the Bible that weren’t KJV, I wrote them off. Little by little, when I saw my godly Bible professors using other versions, I gave them a chance. Finally, I broke down and bought an ESV. It was also at CCC that I was truly introduced to Reformed Theology. RT had always been referred to in my circle as being not biblical or even heretical. My mom said, “I can’t accept that God would die for me and not my daughter” (my sister). I was, surprise, surprise, strongly opposed to Reformed Theology, although, once again, I could not back up my beliefs against my more knowledgeable friends. My parents and my church had raised a child with a delicate egg shell of beliefs; on the outside, the shell looked nice, but if it developed the slightest crack, the whole thing would crumble because there was no support on the interior of that shell. My ESV Bible made the clarity and the flow of the words so much clearer and cleaner; for the first time, the Bible was real to me. The more I read, the more I stumbled upon words like “chosen,” “drawn,” “gift,” “grace,” “mercy,” “God wills,” “hardens,” and the whole shebang of those words that make up the “Calvinist’s Dictionary.” I couldn’t ignore these words, however. They were there after all. I read them and reread them in context and they presented truths which I could not deny: the sovereignty of God, his mercy, his love, his ultimate glory. I walked away from reading, came back later. The truths were still there and again, they were undeniable. My professors and our chapel speakers backed up these truths and little by little, I was drawn into the beauty of Reformed Theology. When I finally accepted it fully, I was awestruck. My doubts were taken away for no longer did I need to place what little hope I had in that wimpy prayer I prayed as a four year old. My full trust was put in Christ alone. I was awakened to what “grace” really meant. I saw Christ as he really was. No longer, no longer was I entrenched in doubt, guilt out of not meeting the standard, fear of hell’s fires…. For the first time, I began learning about Christ, not about what I should be/shouldn’t be doing.

Now, as a twenty-three-year old, one year out of college, teaching, I am a full-blown Calvinist. . . .or, “Biblicist.” I attend a Reformed Presbyterian church. I wear pants to services. I have high-lighted and annotated my ESV until the pages are soft. I keep finding new references to being “drawn” to Christ. I am finding music that backs up my theology. I am reading Piper. And I have never been more in love with Christ, more on fire for Him, more wanting to scream my new-found freedom from the rooftops. When I was entrenched in the IFB circle, I was shallow, foundationless, searching, confused, disoriented. I was fully confident in nothing at all. However, by God’s grace, I have now been led into the light of His glorious Gospel, and I thank God for opening up my eyes to the truth. I wish everyone could know what I know and I am so happy to have found your site because you do know what I know; you have found what I found. Aren’t you grateful? I am.