Jeff Wright’s Blog One guy’s thoughts on God, His Word, His world, and issues related thereto

Where I’m At

I recently asked to be added to Founders' Ministries Minister Search list. In order to put your name on the list you have to compose a profile of yourself and what you are seeking.

In composing this profile I decided it might serve me well on this blog's "About" page. It will also fill in well for a post, considering that this week has been so hectic.

What follows is my posting to the Founders list. The links didn't go in the email but I thought they might be useful for reference. This writing serves as a summary of where I am on several positions. If any stir questions or comments in your mind I would love to discuss them with you.

Hello,

My name is Jeff Wright. I am 24 years old and the lucky husband of Christie Wright. I was ordained April 21, 2002 at Gum Springs Baptist Church. My most recent church ministry position was as Minister to Students at Pleasant Hill Baptist Church in Lenoir City, TN. I served that congregation for 4 years, resigning in 2005 to pursue further education. Currently I reside in White County, TN which is in the middle of the state. I am currently prayerfully seeking a ministry opportunity in a Southern Baptist church.

To introduce myself doctrinally I would note that I affirm The New Hampshire Baptist Confession of 1833, The Baptist Faith & Message (2000), and the 5 Solas of the Reformation. In the interest of full disclosure I would also note that while I am in harmony with much of Calvinism I do not affirm Limited Atonement. I would be more than happy to discuss any of my doctrinal positions with any inquirers on any item of interest. You can find my thoughts on a wide range of subjects through my website, www.jeffwright.exaltchrist.com.

My ministry priorities are sourced from scripture, summarized in Colossians 1:28-29 and restated by myself in this statement: My aim in ministry is to proclaim the full counsel of God’s Word through clear preaching and teaching so that those without Christ might come to know him and those in Christ might come to completion in Him that the kingdom of God might advance, to the glory of God. Toward that end I believe in expository preaching and the right administration of the ordinances to be the marks of a church and the chief duties of a minister, in conjunction with the requirements found in the New Testament, particularly the Pastoral Epistles.

Educationally I must confess that my zeal for ministry opportunities led me to delay my formal education in the interest of serving in the local church. I have since seen the error of my ways and now see the two as necessarily connected at all times. Because of this delay the greatest deal of my education has come through private inquiry of the great books of the faith. See below for a list of those which have had the greatest impact on my thinking. I am currently enrolled in Liberty University's Distance Learning Program, which I believe to be the program offering the greatest opportunity for off-campus learning, as I seek my Bachelor's degree in Biblical Studies. Upon completion of that degree I intend to enroll in Southern Seminary through on-campus, distance, or extension center programs seeking a Master of Divinity degree.

The individuals who have most impacted my thinking on issues of the faith are Mark Dever, John MacArthur, and the Puritans. The men who I have been privileged to be mentored by are Pastor Steve Weaver of West Broadway Baptist Church in Lenoir City,TN and Pastor Brent Sims of Gum Springs Baptist Church in Walling,TN. I consider 9 Marks of a Healthy Church (Dever), Ashamed of the Gospel (MacArthur), The Reformed Pastor (Baxter), and Lectures to My Students (Spurgeon) to be the works - second to the Scriptures - which have most significantly affected my understanding of ministry.

Methodologically I believe in the baptism of believers upon profession of repentance and faith. I believe that those baptised in such a manner are to be discipled through the local church, strengthened by an active church discipline program, and encouraged to serve to the glory of God as citizens of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ in all areas of society. I also understand a congregation form of church government, served by a plurality of elders, to be the polity model that best conforms to the Biblical data. In all these things I affirm the adage "Unity in the essentials, liberty in the non-essentials, and in all things charity", as expounded upon by R.Albert Mohler in his article entitled "A Call for Theological Triage and Christian Maturity" which I would happily forward to anyone interested.

In regards to what positions I am seeking I must confess that my desires in ministry are wide. I would prayerfully consider any calling (aside from a music ministry, due to lack of giftedness), especially the Pastorate, Minister of Education, and Minister to Students as well as interim opportunities. I desire to have an opportunity to minister in all areas of the congregation and grow in the ministry to which God has called me.

Serving Him,
Rev. Jeff Wright

So there I am. Think I'm off somewhere? I'd love to discuss it with you.

Jewish Evangelism: Provoking Jealousy?

Does anyone who reads this regularly evangelize those who practice the Jewish religion?

I ask because another one of Paul's comments in Romans 11 makes me wonder about how we evangelize the Jewish community.

You've read this before but for quick reference let me post a "cut-and-paste" excerpt of what I'm talking about.

I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew...

What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened...

I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous.

I think the question is obvious here but in case not let me explain.

It will always be the message of the gospel which brings sinners (of any ethnicity or religious preference) to repentance and faith.

However, in our presentation should we be including discussion of how God is using the Gentiles to provoke the Jews to jealousy regarding their long promised Messiah?

I have an idea of how this looks practically but there could be many expressions, most likely some helpful and others not so.

However, I'm wondering it this is already being practiced by those who regularly evangelize Jews. Rather than posting my ideas I would like to hear from those believers on how (or if) they make use of this insight into God's plan of salvation regarding the Jewish people.

What’s Paul Saying In Romans 11?

I'm reading through Romans right now and have come to Chapter 11. As I do every time I read the epistle I've gotten caught up in the latter part of the Chapter and now turn to you, dear reader, for insight that my bookshelf can't provide.

I get Verses 1-5:

I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew...In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God's gracious choice.

Paul's point is this:
Q: Has God rejected the Jew by sending Christ to the nations?
A: No! I (Paul) am a Jew and a believer in Christ - Jews can still participate in the blessings of God through Christ.

Verses 23-36 aren't as easy for me though.

And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery--so that you will not be wise in your own estimation--that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
"THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB."
THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."

From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience, so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy. For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all. Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!

For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, OR WHO BECAME HIS COUNSELOR? Or WHO HAS FIRST GIVEN TO HIM THAT IT MIGHT BE PAID BACK TO HIM AGAIN? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

I know that this isn't a blanket statement that all ethnic Jews will find salvation and therefore a reason to abstain from evangelizing the Jewish people (contrary to what some within evangelicalism advocate.)

I also have in mind something relating to the "Israel of Israel" but I'm torn because Paul seems to be clearly addressing ethnic Jews.

Beyond this I'm (almost) a true tabula rasa. Enlighten me.

Worshiping A god Of Our Own Making

Anthony Esolen's post entitled The Great God Smiley on Mere Comments today describes the experience of his friend while attending a Mass held in honor of a retiring nun. He describes the shock his friend felt as a service ostensibly centered on Christ was turned into a tribute to the retiring nun, ending in applause for the lady's "ministry."

His comments on the events are penetrating:

Far be it from me to frown when people are as unselfconscious, and as free from vanity, as little children!

But that's not the case in America, and it was not the case at the Mass in Honor of Somebody Besides Jesus Christ. It was vain and silly in the new sense of the word: not childlike, but bratty; not unselfconscious, but self-advertising and narcissistic; a sort of phosphorescent High Churchin' Barbie from Liturgies-R-Us...What is not easy to imagine is the deep atheism that underlies such a travesty of worship -- and the disillusionment of young people who see that, ah well, there isn't really much to this business of religion after all.

Man can make a kewpie doll out of anything; he can turn even his own religion into a stark staring idol. For who do we worship when we cheer ourselves for our own mighty efforts in the field of divinity?

(emphasis mine)

There is so much just in that one quote.

Although it leads this post away from it's original intent, his comments about the effect of such practices on the young observers of events like these brings a friend's ministry to mind.

His youth leadership team, in a passion for greater numbers, are pleading for my friend to move away from the doctrine-laden hymns he uses in worship and replace them with contemporary music (although he uses hymns set to modern instrumentation.) Furthermore, they call for the introduction of interpretive movement into the group's worship services as a door of "ministry" and "worship" for those who wish to participate in such.

Even setting aside theological and rational reasons for why or why not to engage in such activities I am struck by how naive the proponents of these ideas are to youth culture.

Men and women acting out Christian themes in robes or waving sticks to the story behind a Christian song alongside more cheesy, superficial music are not the means by which an unchurched student will be won to the gospel. Indeed, those are the very things such students most ridicule. I must confess that, even as a well-churched believer, I have a hard time dealing with such things. How much more so an unbeliever who has no love for the brethren to motivate him to charity toward the participants.

In the end, what these leaders are calling for is not that which appeals to the students. They are calling for what appeals to their own preferences, as much to the detriment of the stated end as to its benefit.

But I digress...

Esolen's question (...who do we worship when we cheer ourselves for our own mighty efforts in the field of divinity?) has application not just to the Mass but also in our Protestant services.

Our worship often includes applauding those who sing "special music." And who hasn't seen a time for the honoring of individuals included in our services (veterans, long-serving teachers, etc) - services intended to be about glorifying God?

Those things, in and of themselves, are not evil. In fact, they can be very beneficial. However, we would do well to question whether or not they are appropriate in a setting dedicated to the praise of Christ.

Elosen eventually answers his own question in the remainder of the post:

On some days I think it is simply ourselves; but, to be generous to the worshipers, I guess it might be the Great God Smiley, the vacuous face in the sky who likes everybody all the time, and will make everything all better, in some fashion or other that we needn't trouble about. Smiley is good by definition, mainly because he never asks us to be other than what we already are, which is good. Smiley is our mascot god. It is not a terrible thing to fall into the hands of Smiley; Smiley ain't got no hands, which is no great loss, since we're already all saved anyway and don't particularly care for a god who can grasp us. Sin? Smiley the Selfsame keeps on smiling.

And here Elosen exposes us. We don't worship the God we know to be there, according to how He would direct our worship.

We create a god who wants to be worshiped the way we want to worship. And why not? The god of our invention doesn't call for reverence - he's so pleased by our efforts that he doesn't even care if we set the agenda for him. As Elosen says, Smiley the Selfsame keeps on smiling, at least in our own idolatrous hearts.

And what of the God of the Bible?

He has the look of a man who knows all of us, our failings, our petty lusts, our fears, our halfhearted faith, our feeble love, and our wan hope. He knows us all and each, and loves us; he must be infinitely patient with us, because we are weak and foolish. Yet he calls us to holiness nonetheless. He knows us, but nobody knows Him -- the one Man in history whom no one will ever really understand. He was fully human -- more human than we are, because he was innocent; and as a fully human being among us semi-shadows he felt loneliness. The apostles disappointed him all the time; we disappoint him; we leave him alone in the garden to suffer by himself.

I would add that He calls us to reverence,an essential part of which is knowing what He has revealed regarding how His people are to worship Him and obeying that revelation in our practice.

Indeed whenever our devotions are not turned toward His face, we leave Him alone in the garden -- and become functional atheists, pretending to adore some Moloch or Smiley we know does not really exist.

Indeed. Will we ever worship perfectly? Not this side of Heaven. And that is precisely why Christ (and his perfect worship & obedience) are our only hope.

Keeping this in mind we must also keep before our thinking the truth that we, as humans, have a tendency toward idolatry - idols that might bear a superficial resemblance to the God of the Bible but idols nonetheless.

Our Inescapable Concern for Truth

My friend Matt sent me the following quote today.

Our concern with truth is an inevitable expression of our concern with God. If God exists, then he is the measure of all things, and what he thinks about all things is the measure of what we should think. Not to care about truth is not to care about God.

John Piper, A Godward Life

I wrote back to thank him for passing it along. I also told him that I believe that it is quite possible that the biggest failure amongst individual Christians and the church at large is the failure to live out the truth behind that quote.

Let me explain (hopefully without turning this into a gripe post):
We (as Christians) know that God has spoken. However, we fail to ask ourselves what consequences His Word has on our lives.

An easy example:
The Bible clearly lists what God requires of the man who would pastor. Yet to what standard do we most often see those men held to? Anything but the Bible's teaching. Numerical growth, personal charisma, conformity to popular opinion all tend to rise to the top of "qualifications" used to evaluate ministers and ministries.

And this is also a perfect example of why theology is so important. I most often hear theology" presented as (at best) a trivial pursuit or (at worst) a sign of legalism.

Yet theology is an attempt to bring all of God's revelation together and find out how the individual truths of God's Word works in relationship with the entire body of His revelation.

Indeed, Christ's words in John 14:6 compel us to pursue Truth (in the most comprehensive manner possible) as a beloved friend.

May Christ grant that His people would do so more and more.

Beggars All – Luther, Zwingli, & Calvin On Communion

You've seen the discussion here over credobaptism or paedobaptism.

Now let me point you to a discussion on the debate between two of the greatest Reformers over the issue of consubstantiation or memorialism.

We've discussed the issue here before but never as well as James Swan is doing.

Post 1: The Positions Defined
Post 2: The Written Debate
Post 3: Face To Face
4. John Calvin's View of the Lord's Supper

These posts have been immensely informative for me and I pass them along for your enjoyment and edification.

Welty, Household Baptisms, and Baptism

Here's the last quote from Greg Welty's A Critical Evaluation of Paedobaptism found in the Founder's Ministries Online Library.

5) Household baptisms, of which there seem to be four in the New Testament. It will be discussed later how paedobaptists never consistently practice the same kind of "household baptism" policy they claim to find in the New Testament.

A) With respect to Cornelius' household (Acts 10:46-48), Peter's explicit warrant for baptizing this household is that "they have received the Holy Spirit just as we have," NOT "the covenant head of the household has converted." Indeed, Luke explicitly records that while Peter was preaching to them, "the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message." Unless we are willing to posit the reception of the Spirit, and speaking in tongues, for unbelievers, we must conclude that this was a household conversion, on the part of the individuals who composed it, and for that reason it was also a household baptism.

B) With respect to Lydia's household (Acts 16:15), baptists admit that evidence of an explicit profession of faith among all household members is lacking. But baptists also argue that nothing in the passage implies Lydia was a married woman with nursing children, for she traveled on business some 300 miles from her native city; she felt the liberty, as head of the house, to invite men into her home; Luke speaks of her household being baptized, and of the importunity with which she constrained the apostles to abide in her house, no mention being made of her husband. Thus the most likely hypothesis is that she had no husband, and therefore no children. If Lydia had no children, she has no significance for infant baptism either. To read infants into the text thus goes contrary to the context (and to read the baptism of adults into the text, apart from their conversion, goes contrary to paedobaptist practice, as examined below).

C) With respect to the Philippian jailer's household (Acts 16:33), note that in the preceding verse (v. 32), the entire household heard the message of the gospel: "Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in the house." Interpreters are divided on how to interpret the Greek singular participle of the succeeding verse (v. 34): did the jailer rejoice with his whole house, having believed in God? (paedobaptist interpretation), or did the jailer rejoice, having believed in God with his whole house (baptist interpretation)? Note that even if the paedobaptist interpretation is taken (which is quite unnecessary), it implies the baptist view that the entire household believed. For it would be exceeding strange if (1) the whole household heard the gospel, (2) the jailer believed the gospel but the others rejected it, and (3) the whole household rejoiced that the head of the household believed while they themselves rejected the same message! Only the baptist view avoids such absurdity. "Taken at its face value, the account in Acts sets before us a hearing, believing, rejoicing household that received baptism."(7)

D) With respect to Stephanas' household (1 Corinthians 1:16), Paul does indeed state that he baptized the household of Stephanas. But he also informs us "that the household of Stephanas were the first converts [aparchê, firstfruits] in Achaia, and they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints" (1 Corinthians 16:15). This is positive evidence that a household conversion occurred, and not merely a household baptism. As Jewett puts it, "When Paul declares, 'I baptized the house of Stephanas,' and later adds that they 'set themselves to minister to the saints,' . . . how plausible is it to make the circle of his meaning larger in the one instance than in the other? 'I baptized all the house of Stephanas, of which some have ministered to the saints' is the way we should have to understand the apostle if we are to see clear evidence for infant baptism in this passage. Such an interpretation is possible, but it is a rather thin thread on which to hang the practice of bringing infants to baptism."

(italicized emphasis in original)

There you go. Welty's last example of Paedobaptist Misuse of Key Biblical Texts. There is quite a bit there so I'll leave off any questions I might normally post. Comment on anything that grabs your attention.