God is Better than All

November 6, 2009

Mark Dever’s advice to first and last year college students

Filed under: Audio/Video Recommendations, Mark Dever — pjtibayan @ 12:13 pm

Mark Dever had a Q & A session at Boyce College recently.

Advice to first year college students: “You need to realize you’re arrogant. Not because you’re a first year student but because you’re a human being who’s fallen. Even if you’re redeemed you’re still fallen. Ok? You’re not glorified yet. Got that straight? That’s important. Now, you need to realize that that means you need people and that doesn’t mean just your friends here. Right? Even the Gentile Pagans have friends. No, you need to be in a local church that’s healthy and it preaches the Word. The church is far more important than any school you will ever go to. So you need to get in a local church, join it, officially be a member, put yourself under the authority of the elders in that church. They will watch over your soul as men who must give an account to God, Hebrews chapter 13.”

Advice to last year college students: “You are arrogant… Not because you’re in your final year but because you’re a fallen child of Adam. Even if you are redeemed, you’re still fallen. Alright? You know you’re not in glory yet. You’re not glorified. So you need to be in a local church. You need to be in a healthy local church. You are making life decisions that you are not competent, you are not made by yourself to make. You’re meant to be in a community of faith where your character is known, your gifts are understood, where they can give you good counsel and direction so get in a local healthy church. Spend this final year in school in a healthy local church as an official member of there.”

You can listen to the whole Q&A session here.

October 26, 2009

Ecclesiological Guidelines to inform Church Planters

Filed under: church health, church planting, church polity, church reform, ecclesiology — pjtibayan @ 2:52 pm

I think this document is helpful and general enough for all Baptists to agree with as they plant churches.  It’s called: Ecclesiological Guidelines to Inform Southern Baptist Church Planters.  I certainly recommend this to church planters and pastors thinking through basic biblical ecclesiology.

October 24, 2009

The Gospel 101 (by Immanuel Church in Nashville)

Filed under: church, church health, gospel — pjtibayan @ 11:40 am

This can be found at the Immanuel Church’s website:

The gospel breaks down into four profound truths.

One, God made us and owns us. “It is he who made us, and we are his” (Psalm 100:3). God’s goodness puts an absolute claim on our lives. He is honored and we are happy when we treasure him above all else.

But is that how we respond to God?

Two, we refuse God every day. We run after empty pleasures and selfish goals. We may try to offset our guilt by adding some religion into our lives. But our problem is too deep for that: “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately sick” (Jeremiah 17:9). What offends God is not just the bad things we do; it’s that we treat him as a last resort rather than the Fountainhead. That root-evil grows up into all the other evils that make life miserable.

Then has God abandoned us? No.

Three, Christ stood in our place. God can see when he isn’t wanted. But – get this – he humbled himself and came down into this world as an egoless nobody, just one of us, to win us back. Jesus lived the perfect life we should have lived. He died the guilty death we deserve to die. Then God raised him from death, to announce to us all that Jesus is the One who has earned God’s approval for the sake of others. “Jesus was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Romans 4:25).

So, what is our part?

Four, God invites and commands us to prize Christ as our only legitimacy before God. We must renounce our sinful disobedience. Even more, we must renounce our proud obedience. And we must receive, with the empty hands of need, the Lord Jesus Christ. If we hand over to him both our bad record and our good record, he credits to us his perfect record. Then all of God’s promises become ours forever. “To all who did receive him, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12).

Will you receive Christ – right now?

October 23, 2009

Why Capitol Hill Baptist Church is Enthusiastic to be cooperating with the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)

This is from Capitol Hill Baptist Church’s new membership class teacher notes:

The Southern Baptist Convention

Now, a significant part of missions and outreach in our church involves a partnership with the Southern Baptist Convention.  So before we finish up today, I’d like to give you an overview of what that partnership looks like, since so many people who take this class tend to be new to the SBC.  To do that, I’ll answer a few questions that we normally get.

1. What does it mean to be a Southern Baptist Church?

A Southern Baptist church is a local church that has voluntarily chosen to be “in friendly cooperation with, and contributing towards the causes of, the Southern Baptist Convention.”  This may sound a bit strange to some of you, so let me be clear that we mean no disrespect with this language, and we’re not using it to keep us at arm’s length from the Convention, it’s simply the official language of the SBC Constitution. It means that every Southern Baptist Church is completely autonomous.  It doesn’t take orders from the SBC, it can be in friendly cooperation when it wants, and disassociate itself when it wants.  That means that the Southern Baptist Convention isn’t a church, but is rather comprised of thousands of local churches that cooperate together for the primary purpose of missions and evangelism. It is a parachurch organization to serve churches.  And, frankly, if you use the term “denomination” in the way that most people use it—as a body with authority over churches, that makes decisions that are carried out in all its churches—as is the case with Presbyterian churches, Anglican churches, Lutheran churches, and many others—then the SBC isn’t really even a denomination either.  It’s basically a big pot of money that many different churches contribute to that goes to fund missions and seminaries, and a few other things.

So when we say the words “in friendly cooperation with?” we mean that we have a shared theology and vision for missions and evangelism. And when we say “contributing towards the causes of…,” it simply means that we financial support to the work of the Convention.

2. Where did the SBC come from?

The SBC emerged out of the need to better support and facilitate missions, both here in North America and around the world.  So in 1814, independent Baptist churches from South Carolina to Massachusetts came together to form the first national Baptist organization in America. It became known as the Triennial Convention because it met every 3 years, and its purpose was to coordinate the funding of international missionaries like Adoniram Judson, the famous missionary to Burma.

In 1845 this association of churches and the Convention they founded split over 2 issues:
Should a central sending board, or local sending boards send missionaries?  Secondly, and more significantly, over the issue of slavery.  The specific question that brought this to a crisis was “could slaveholders be sent as missionaries?”

Sadly, most of the Baptists (as well as Methodist, Presbyterian and Episcopalian) churches in the south, didn’t believe slavery was morally wrong. However, most northern churches, Baptist and non-Baptist alike, correctly understood that American slavery was an abomination and antithetical to the gospel. At about this time, almost all of the major Protestant denominations split on north/south lines, including Baptists, over the issues of slavery and secessionism, with the southern churches in our case forming the Southern Baptist Convention.  At the end of the war some of these splits were reversed and denominations reunified, but in the case of the SBC the rift remained permanent due to theological disagreements with what became the more theologically liberal Northern Baptist Convention (today’s ABC – American Baptist Churches, USA).

Fortunately, the SBC has since publicly repented and apologized for its past position, declaring that church members must, “unwaveringly denounce racism, in all its forms, as deplorable sin” and “repent of racism of which we have been guilty whether consciously or unconsciously.”

But that was only one of two big crises that has shaped the SBC.  As American churches moved from the 19th into the 20th century, theological liberalism—a denial of the authority and truth of the Bible—began to grow in most major denominations, including the SBC.  By the 1970s SBC pastors were being trained in SBC seminaries by professors who denied core gospel doctrines like the divinity of Christ, the necessity of faith in Him for salvation, the authority of the Bible and more.  Like the racism before it, if this had continued, CHBC would likely not be an SBC church today.  But, again, in God’s mercy a change occurred.

Beginning in the 1980s there was something of a grass-roots rebellion in the SBC, something not seen in other major US denominations, and the congregational polity of the SBC churches made this possible.  Over time the seminaries and sending boards were reformed, which meant that for the SBC, money was now supporting missionaries and seminary professors who would not actively work against the gospel.  And so today we are especially excited about how our money is used for pastoral training and for missions—and their partnership with us as we send out missionaries with them and send our young men to their seminaries for training.

And that’s really why we continue to be in not just friendly but enthusiastic cooperation with them.  A church of our size would have great difficulty sending out the number of missionaries and pastoral trainees as we do with the budget that we do if we had to do this all on our own.  But because there are 40,000 SBC churches out there contributing to the same institutions—many of which are too small to have their own missionaries, for example—we are able to benefit from this partnership, and contribute to it, in some very unique ways.  It’s yet another example of how churches cooperating together can accomplish so much more for the gospel than they could do on their own.

October 15, 2009

Good Deal on Tim Keller’s New Book (I ordered one)

Filed under: Uncategorized — pjtibayan @ 2:52 pm

Timothy Keller
The Empty Promises of Money, Sex,
and Power, and the Only Hope that Matters


“Combining biblical theology with experienced surgery on the soul over the years in modern Manhattan, Pastor Tim Keller performs an M.R.I. of our hearts and graphically exposes its results… Read this volume, but only if you dare submit your heart to the surgical probe of the Gospel… And like any good surgeon, Keller doesn’t leave us merely exposed, but compellingly points us to the cure: the One exposed, ravaged, ruined and resurrected for us.”

- David B. Garner, Associate Professor of Systematic Theology, Westminster Theological Seminary
Read the rest of Dr. Garner’s review


Browse the Introduction

Single Copy: $19.95 $11.97 (40% Off!) »

Case of 12: $239.40 $131.67 (45% Off!) »

Order Now to arrive on or after the official release date of Tuesday, October 20, 2009.

Please Note: Ordering this title may delay your entire order by one or two days.

October 13, 2009

Thoughts on welcoming visitors at a Sunday Church Gathering

Filed under: church, church growth, church health, church planting, church reform, mission — pjtibayan @ 11:16 am

Matt Chandler had some wise words on welcoming people in your Sunday gathering:

We have spent a great deal of time thinking through what happens in our weekend services. We want to teach deeply the things of God and do it in a way that the unconverted among us can hear and understand. Everything from what and how we sing to words used, not used, and redeemed are thought through. Even the welcome and announcements don’t escape this dialogue. Each weekend I do our welcome and announcements at The Village. I like to be the one who does it because the guests that are there will hear me teach after the worship so I like to introduce myself before we get started. Every week I purposefully say the same thing to our first time guests. It goes something like this:

“Good Morning. My name is Matt Chandler I am the Lead Pastor/Teaching Pastor here at The Village. If this is your first time visiting with us I want to welcome you. I am guessing that if this is your first time here you are in one of two lanes. The first lane is that you are a believer with a background in church and you’re new to the area or are just checking out our community. If at some point in the next hour or so your heart and mind are moved and you want to know more about us, you can fill out one of the cards in the seatback in front of you and either drop it in the joy boxes or, and this would be our preference, walk across the parking lot to the white portable buildings and there are some men and women over there that can answer any of the questions you might have about the church. The second lane is that you’re here today and you aren’t a Christian and don’t have a background in Church or not a recent one anyway. I want to welcome you. This is a safe place for you to have some doubts about what we are saying to be skeptical and curious. There are no doors that are closed for you here so explore as much as you want. Go to a home group, check out Recovery, help us mentor local students, hop on a plane to South America or Africa and help us, help others. As a former agnostic myself, I have a great deal of respect for the genuine seeker. If we can help answer any of your questions or serve you in anyway let us know.”

Over the last few years, people who have given their testimonies in the baptistery have commented on the welcome. It disarmed their fear and anxiety about being in a church for the first time. I want to encourage you to do church deeply. Preach to Christians, sing God-centered, Christ-exalting songs, participate in Communion, read the creeds, but do all of it with the lost people among you in mind.

This reminds me of what Tim Keller says about a characteristic of the missional church.

October 12, 2009

Ed Stetzer on methodology, denominational policies, cooperation, and mission

Filed under: mission — pjtibayan @ 10:14 am

Ed Stetzer said:

We should not resort to enshrining our methodological preferences into denominational policies.  Policies not rooted in common confession unnecessarily divide.  Demanding uniformity in matters of preference will decimate cooperation in matters of mission.  Let me say it again: demanding uniformity in matters of preference will decimate cooperation in matters of mission.

I think this is insightful and wise.  I pray that the SBC and other denominations would heed such wisdom.  I need to think more on where the line of methodology and theology is.  Methodology should be theologically valid.  Theology should be methodologically practiced.  But I don’t think the categories of methodology and theology are in air-tight compartments which is why this discussion and debate should continue.

Stetzer also wisely said:

The circle of Southern Baptist cooperation must line up with the circle of our confession or else everyone and every agency does what is right in his or her own eyes and the result is a confused and ultimately divided convention.

October 8, 2009

Church planting and the model you adopt

Filed under: church, church growth, church planting — pjtibayan @ 11:35 am

I’ve been helped by thinking about things like this that Stetzer said:

If you are more excited by the “how” than the “who,” then you are being distracted. I must be sure that I do not fall in love with someone else’s ministry model and mission. If you listen to other churches’ success stories, you can become distracted by the model. Ministry pornography is an unrealistic depiction of something that you never going to have that distracts you from what you are supposed to do. The “how” of church planting is in many ways determined by the “who,” “when,” and “where” of culture. Too many church planters plant a church in their head and not in their communities. If you aren’t asking “how” you should plant, you have a problem.

I agree for the most part and have found myself too married to certain things CHBC did that I should not be doing in terms of particular forms.  I’d like to make a significant qualification to Stetzer’s statement however.  He said: “The ‘how’ of church planting is in many ways determined by the ‘who,’ ‘when,’ and ‘where’ of culture.”  I’d modify that to say: “The ‘how’ of church planting is in many ways determined by the ‘what’ of Scripture and the ‘who,’ ‘when,’ and ‘where’ of culture.”

I’m certain Stetzer wouldn’t disagree and believes that himself.  That’s why he says, “in many ways.”

October 6, 2009

16 principles of a healthy church replant

Filed under: church, church growth, church health, church planting, church reform — pjtibayan @ 11:39 am

16 principles of a healthy church replant:

They have to come to peace with dying

-Find a “proxy”

Get them excited about new life

Bring small changes.

Bring radical changes.

Bring new people from day one.

Build a new launch team with new people.

Get the “old folks” excited about them.

Set a day for the launch and a day for the memorial service.

Be careful with “shady” offers.

Don’t be afraid to lose people.

Fight “well intentioned dragons” smart.

Keep new things coming.

Keep thanking  ”the old folks”.

Pound the Vision.

Preach the Gospel every Sunday.

Read the whole thing.

October 5, 2009

Jeff Vanderstelt’s simple definition of the church and a thought

Filed under: church, ecclesiology — pjtibayan @ 5:08 pm

Jeff writes:

The Church is God’s People (who we are) saved by God’s Power (what He has done and is doing) for God’s Purposes (the good works he created us in Jesus Christ to do).

Read the whole thing because his set up for that definition is really good.  I don’t know if Jeff wrote this post in response to my question (see comment #3), but the defining of what a church is is very important to me as a pastor of a new church.  It defines who we are and what we’re continuing to grow in being and doing.  His old definition of “church” that I heard in some audio teaching of his (which I’ll never find because I’ve listened to almost everything on ecclesiology from him that I could get my hands on) was: “A gospel people who believe the gospel, who are a formed community around the gospel, and who demonstrate the gospel in everyday ways of life so that the world might know that the Father sent the Son.”  I post several definitions of what a church is by some people here because it significantly effects how we pastor and plant churches.

I appreciate Jeff’s ministry and have learned a ton from him.  I raise this question to his definition not as a critic who questions for the sake of criticism but as a student trying to figure out if my definition of church needs to change for the good of CrossView Church where I’ve been called to lead.  My question to Jeff regarding this definition is, “Does this define the local church as well?”  Maybe in the details and complexities, which Jeff intentionally and wisely left out for the sake of brevity and clarity I assume, there is help to distinguish between two Christians being friends, and being in the same church, and a distinction which clarifies when we’re two Christian brothers from two distinct churches. an


Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.