Mark Driscoll, preaching pastor at Mars Hill Church in Seattle, is a contributor, and today I saw one of his posts, a brief bio of Martin Luther and his powerful influence on Christianity. Two things really made me smile: near the end of the post, the reference to Luther’s influences today with no mention of Lutheran churches, and this image that headlined the post:

Martin Luther is a Calvinist? Never would've guessed.

Maybe not the best juxaposition of category and subject.

ESV Study Bible

If you’re looking for a good study Bible, look no further than the recently released ESV (English Standard Version) Study Bible, published by Crossway. It’s a great Bible filled with notes, references, and all kinds of material that will help deepen your understanding of God’s Word.

The icing frosting on the cake is that when you buy the paper version of this study Bible, you get access to the online tool at esvstudybible.org, which has not only the same material as the paper version, plus more, it also has space on the site for you to make your own notes as you read and study.

A most excellent tool for studying Scripture.

The big catch, though, is that, while it can be very easy for users, you really need a very tech-savvy person or team to put it all together. The basics are easy to grasp, but because it’s so powerful and modular, the “under-the-hood” work can get complicated very quickly.

The second-biggest catch is that, because it’s open-source, it relies on a multitude of maintainers to keeping things working smoothly. It works on the concepts of modules, which are like puzzle pieces that contain features, and are arranged all together to complete the picture. There is a “core” set of modules, and all kinds of optional ones that enhance and deepen the framework.

And the biggest problem with the modules can be the documentation. Because this software is written “by developers for developers”, the module instructions often assume a prior level of knowledge, and even assume things within the documentation, which can lead to a lot of missed steps and frustration for site administrators. Not that prior knowledge isn’t good, but by assuming it, you can actually miss the point.

Church leaders, does this ring a bell at all?

The church can be very much like this. Like Drupal, there is no cost to the “end-user” (though it cost Jesus everything). It is the most powerful force in the world, moving forward by the work of Gospel proclamation and the Holy Spirit-directed response in people’s lives. It takes multiple people with multiple gifts to fulfill its mission.

But it also can be very confusing and frustrating for people when church leaders (read: people like me) make assumptions about what people should know and/or do. Because we so often treat church as “by church leaders for church leaders”, we can very quickly turn our communication of the Gospel into vague platitudes, or worse, miss the point altogether because of the assumptions we make.

There are multiple examples: preaching, music, how we approach discipleship, church government, and more. Now please hear me – this is not the same argument as being “seeker-friendly” or “dumbing things down”. It’s actually the opposite. As a church leader, I’m not at all in favor of being seeker-friendly, because I believe that the Gospel creates intrigue in the hearts of people, and leads people to want to know more (just like in Acts 17:16-34). Being “seeker-friendly” has as its goal wanting to make people comfortable and not offend them, which, IM(NSH)O, misses the whole point. (Ok, tangent over.)

Since that’s maybe a little abstract, let me use a concrete example from church leadership. Referring to the story of David and Goliath by saying “and we all know the story of David and Goliath” makes certain assumptions; namely, that people know the basic premises of the story, and what the point of the story is. But those are not assumptions we can make, especially in this era where Biblical illiteracy is growing quickly. Rather, by taking a minute to explain that we simply think (and sadly, our culture thinks simply) of this being the ultimate underdog story, where the little guy faced the big bad giant and prevailed. Well, that’s true in the Biblical account, but now every sports matchup or lawsuit where there’s a “little guy” and “big guy” is described as a David-vs-Goliath story. Which misses the whole point.

I understand why we tend towards speaking like this. We don’t want to exclude anyone. If someone didn’t know the story, it would allow them to smile and nod along with everyone else just like Joey does on Friends, even when most of the time he doesn’t get the jokes. But, like Seth Godin points out, exclusion isn’t a bad thing, it’s a reality. And the goal of the church is not to exclude, but to expand the tribe of people called Christians, so that fewer and fewer people are excluded (1 Timothy 2:1-4). But by trying to be inclusive, we miss an opportunity.

See, the whole point of David’s victory over Goliath is not that David got lucky, or that small=good and big=evil. It’s that God delivered His people from their enemies. There was no earthly way David beats Goliath; it was only by the hand of God. This is a story of grace and God’s power, not about human effort and taking down the “big bad” things of the world. It leads us to then speak of Jesus, whom David typifies in this story, who saved His people not from an earthly giant and enslavement to a nation, but from a spiritual enemy and enslavement to sin.

Because most people think of David-and-Goliath in our culture’s human terms, not assuming people know the story doesn’t insult anyone’s intelligence. It deepens their understanding. And the great irony of this is that, by not making the assumption, one can actually help both “seekers” and strong Christians deepen their understanding at the same time. Whereas, by making the assumption, not only do we not teach the “seeker” anything, we reinforce the “insider” mentality of the church.

So what church leaders (and Drupal module writers) need to realize is that, by not making these assumptions, it’s not dumbing things down. It’s the very opposite; it deepens and strengthens those we intend to reach by allowing them to discover the fullness of what the Gospel is (and what their module can do). By not assuming things, we actually reach both the seeker and the Christian. In the Drupal world, not assuming things actually helps deepen my understanding of what the module does and how it works together in the whole Drupal system. The same is true of the church, and can help us as church leaders as we seek to help people to grow and mature in Christ, together with the whole body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-16).

But the best part of the book is not in his answers, excellent though those are. It is the way he frames the discussion in the opening sections, imploring non-believers to honestly consider the answers to their objections, but at the same time imploring Christians to honestly consider the objections and questions. It is this tone of respect that has been sorely lacking in the perceptions of many over the past many years.

Pastor Keller’s book is the embodiment of 1 Peter 3:15-17 – it helps Christians give answers for the hope they have (v. 15) but just as important it does it with gentleness and respect (v. 16-17). Verse 15 is not enough to show Christ’s love to the world. Christians will gain an audience with non-Christians only when it is evident that respect is present no matter what.

The book is set up in two major parts. The first deals with the 7 most popular objections to Christianity that he’s faced in his ministry, and seeks to both understand and answer not just the objections themselves, but the underlying beliefs as well. He does a very good job of answering them from a Christian perspective and calling out the fallacies on both sides when they show up. The second part is aimed at not just answering objections against Christianity, but making a strong case for it. As he states it,

“It is one thing to argue that there are no sufficient reasons for disbelieving Christianity. It is another to argue that there are sufficient reasons for believing it.”

I believe he achieves both his goals, and I would heartily recommend the book to anyone who wants to learn more about the Christian faith, whether you’re a Christian or not. It’s a great book, and one that can help a lot of Christians not only live out that directive from 1 Peter, but to maybe honestly wrestle with some of these issues for the first time.

Well worth not only a read, but worth spending some significant time with a pencil and highlighter in your hand while you read.

So when I saw this article today from Todd Rhoades’  Twitter feed (@toddrhoades), I found a perfect illustration of the kind of thing that, as a Christian, makes me angry, and helps to confirm in me the truth of the statement that They Like Jesus but Not the Church and that often times in the church, Christians act in the most unChristian ways.

Please read the article, form your opinion, and then come back for a closing comment.

now you’re reading the article…

…ok now you’re done…

Note to church-going folk: If you are going to believe that people should not work on Sundays,

Do. Not. Go. To. A. Place. Where. People. Must. Work. To. Serve. You. Food.

And you wonder why Jesus gets a bad reputation.

Except you probably don’t. Wonder, that is. Sometimes it’s pretty clear.