ChuckLawless.com is a blog about Missions, Evangelism and Biblical Church Growth

The Great Commission demands that we share the gospel with family and friends, but rarely do people turn to Christ as quickly as we would like. Have you ever prayed for somebody so long that you wondered if God were still listening? Are you now praying for someone, but your faith is wavering because God seemingly does not care about your loved one? 

It is easy to give up when we have prayed for others for many years.  Our prayers are passionate and focused at the beginning, but they often become repetitious and wandering as the years go by.  We speak the right language - we are “just trusting God to save our loved ones in his time” - but these words are more religious jargon than heartfelt belief.  Truth be known, we come dangerously close to giving up on the God who gave us the Great Commission. 

That response is not entirely surprising. When we long for someone we love to follow Jesus, that love motivates us to pray.  We unashamedly intercede because nothing else matters like the salvation of a family member or friend.  Surely no one who really loves others would stop praying for them until they get saved.  

It is also that love, though, that makes us impatient with God.  We know that God does not want anyone to perish (2 Pet. 3:9).  If he loves our family members more than we do (as we know he does), then why does he not save them now?  Why is he not listening to our prayers?  Our love for others makes any delay seem that much longer. 

The problem is even deeper, however. Perhaps - and this possibility should arrest us - we sometimes “give up” praying because we convince ourselves that our loved ones are not really lost.  The longer we pray for others without a response, the easier it is for false teaching to creep in.  “After all,” we think, “our loved ones are good people. Maybe they really know God in their own way.”  The urgency of prayer wanes if our theology of lostness no longer demands God’s intervention. 

In addition, many of our churches so seldom see non-believers come to Christ that we have come to expect little response to our praying.  Others have prayed, but their loved ones have not followed Christ either.  Some have even prayed for years to no avail.  The names of non-believers on our church’s prayer list - if they are there at all - have been there so long that we skip over them when we pray.

Gone are the days when church members groaned through the night on behalf of those who do not yet know Jesus.  The stories of gut-wrenching, pew-grabbing intercessory prayer have become church history highlights rather than present-tense pursuits of the people of God.  When doing the Great Commission is more about programs than about prayer, we should not be surprised that the few who do pray give up easily. 

What is the answer?  One by one, person-by-person, believer-by-believer, we must intentionally decide to keep praying.  God is still the God who came to earth to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10).  We still need others praying for us to be effective witnesses (Eph. 6:18-20, Col. 4:2-4) even as we intercede for non-believers (Rom. 9:1-3, 10:1; 1 Tim. 2:1-4).  God’s plan simply has not changed. 

I became a follower of Christ in the summer of 1974.  My pastor quickly taught me to pray for my immediate family, who were not believers.  I understood little about prayer, but I knew that I wanted my loved ones to experience the joy that God gave me.  “God, save them!” was the childlike cry of my heart. 

I wish I could say that my zeal for that intercession has always remained strong. If I am honest, I must admit that my enthusiasm has decreased at times.  Never has my theology changed, however, and I remain convinced by scripture that anyone without explicit faith in Jesus is destined for damnation.  As I have traveled in my role as Dean of the Billy Graham School, I have asked Christians around the world to join me in praying for my family. 

Just a few months ago, God graciously responded to those prayers.  My father, at age 71, responded in repentance and faith to the gospel of Jesus Christ.  My wife and I had the great privilege of watching as my younger brother baptized our father into God’s church. 

For thirty-six years, we had been praying.  For thirty-six years, God had been silently hearing.  In his right time, he overwhelmed my father with his love.  The point is this: God is still the Great Commission God who hears the prayers of his people.  Do not give up on him.

With most of the churches in North America in plateau or decline, this book is a timely book written by the veteran pastor of Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham, AL. From Embers to a Flame by Harry Reeder offers guidance from a shepherd whose ministry reflects his effectiveness as a revitalizing leader. 

Paul’s writings to Timothy serve as the primary biblical basis for Reeder’s revitalization strategy, summarized simply as remember the past, repent from sin, and recover the first things.  The first “things” begin with the gospel and include grace, prayer, and the Word.  The church that longs for revitalization is amazed by grace, commits itself to prayer, and preaches the good news of salvation. 

The strengths of this book are numerous.  First, Reeder rightly emphasizes the significance of church leaders, while also understanding that God alone revitalizes the church. Preachers will be especially challenged by his description of the “man preaching” based on 2 Timothy 4:1-5.  Leaders are to educate believers, embody gospel truth, empower others to serve, and evaluate the work of leaders trained.  Moreover, revitalization demands that pastoral leaders model repentance by turning from their own sin.  

Second, Reeder emphasizes the task of evangelism, even challenging those churches that focus on growing deeper in reaction to the “superficiality of the day” (30).  Noting that churches that are “a mile wide and an inch deep” are problematic, he also takes issue with churches that are “a mile deep and an inch wide” at the expense of evangelizing the lost.  True believers will seek the lost, says Reeder, but evangelism must still be intentional.  In fact, his description of intentional evangelistic approaches is one of the strongest components of this work.   

Third, this book is principle driven, but it does not ignore the practical.  Indeed, this work is at times surprisingly practical given Reeder’s occasional criticisms of pragmatic church growth.  His focus on church health echoes Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven Church concept.  His calls for mission statements, vision statements, and numerical goals are commonly found in other writings.  The interested pastor will also find ideas here for celebrating a church’s history, suggestions for a leadership development curriculum, a list of leadership principles and practices, and guidelines for starting a small group discipleship ministry.  Regrettably, only brief attention is given to the necessity and practice of church discipline – a most important topic in church revitalization. 

Additionally, Reeder’s interest in military history and sports is evident in illustrations throughout this work. These illustrations not only will appeal to men, but they also subtly remind the reader that church revitalization is not easy; revitalization will not occur without spiritual warfare and struggle.  On the other hand, Reeder writes, “you and Jesus Christ make an invincible team, and evil can never win as long as He is with you” (p. 81). 

This book is not, however, without weaknesses.  The repetitive use of alliteration reveals the author as first a preacher, but its usage is at times overdone.  Statistics and illustrations are sometimes outdated, as is often the case in a revision.  An appendix, “Revisiting the Prayer of Jabez,” is a balanced discussion of this popular prayer, but its connection to the remainder of the book is a bit forced.  Nevertheless, this book is a worthy read for any church leader who longs for church revitalization.

Time magazine’s recent cover article, “The 100 Most Influential People in the World,” is a fascinating look at people—male and female, young and old, North American and international, recognized and unrecognized—who are making significant contributions to their respective fields.  Time editors and readers voted on the 100 honorees, and the recipients are arbitrarily categorized as leaders, artists, thinkers and heroes.

Recipients vary from singer Lady Gaga to U.S. President Barack Obama to Chinese blogger Han Han to golfer Phil Mickelson. In the list are politicians, businesspersons, soldiers, musicians/singers, economists, TV and stage personalities, humanitarians, comedians, writers, designers, restaurateurs, scientists, physicians, philanthropists, educators, philosophers, lawyers, sports personalities, and a firefighter.  The article does not often list religious affiliation, but I suspect that among the list are those who claim Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Atheism, or any number of other belief systems as their faith. 

Several thoughts come to mind as I read this list.  I am first reminded that the world in need of the gospel is much larger than my daily Kentucky world. Included among these influencers are representatives from the United States, Brazil, Taiwan, Japan, France, Palestine, West Africa, Turkey, India, China, Canada, Russia, Ukraine, South Africa, Burma, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen. In fact, at least 40 of the 100 influencers are internationals. The fact that East Asians and Africans are the most represented among the internationals should surprise only those who have not recognized ongoing geopolitical shifts around the world. The human race is much bigger than any of us—yet our Great Commission mandate to get the gospel to this ever changing and always growing world remains (Matt. 28:18-20).

We must do the Great Commission because all human beings—regardless of their achievements—are still eternally lost without a relationship with Jesus Christ.  People all around the globe are doing good things like promoting progress in Africa and Haiti, standing against oppressive regimes, seeking cures for deadly diseases, advancing reforms in education, counseling and feeding the poor, and championing basic human rights.  Such acts are certainly honorable and worthy of the attention of a major news magazine—but they do not earn salvation. That is, in all of our “goodness,” we remain sinners in need of a Savior (Rom. 3:23). 

Think, though, about the ramifications if some of these influencers became followers of Jesus.  Time editor Rick Stengel rightly points out, “The Time 100 is not about the influence of power but the power of influence”;[1] in that sense, what influence these leaders might have if following Jesus were their passion!  

I understand, of course, that some may already follow Christ, and many would have no desire to do so. Just imagine what might happen, however . . . 

• American military personnel sharing Christ in live or die situations
• the salvation of a Japanese leader opening the door to revival in that hard-soil nation
• converted French leaders/influencers calling Western Europe back to God
• Hollywood moguls using their publicity machines to tell stories of their lives changed through Christ
• Indian believers illustrating Christian unity and strength for a fractured nation
• global philanthropists committing their resources toward the spread of the gospel
• Iranian and Iraqi believers living for the one and only true God
• and on and on the stories could go. 

How might such conversions happen, though? There is only one way: somebody must tell the influencers about Jesus (Rom. 10:14). 

This is where this edition of Time most captures my thinking. In many ways, this list of “influencers” is a list of unknowns. Even the editor admits such: “You might not have heard their names before.”  He continues, though: “but their innovations and efforts will help change the world for years to come.”[2]  We may not recognize or remember long the names of some of the world’s most influential people, but the fruit of their labor may well outlast them.

Somehow, that just seems right in God’s economy.  Think about the Great Commission believers who daily proclaim Christ around the world.  They are salt and light to a lost world (Matt. 5:13-16), telling the Good News without concern for worldly recognition. Sometimes only their immediate family and friends recognize their names.  In some cases, only a few others know where they are serving geographically.  These believers will likely never be featured in a national magazine.  For some, to paint their portrait across the cover of Time magazine might, in fact, be dangerous.  But, these “unknowns” are willing to remain unknown, giving their lives so that Jesus alone might be known.  We might not know their names, but “their efforts will help change the world for years to come.” 

Their efforts will, in fact, change eternity – and that’s the kind of influence that really matters.  

That’s Great Commission influence. 

---

I don’t recall fearing writing a blog, but this one scares me.  

This week, Time magazine published its annual special issue, “10 Ideas for the Next 10 Years.”[1]  Trend number 9 — “The Twilight of the Elites” — caught my attention not because of its title, but because of its subtitle: “Why we have entered the post-trust era.” 

The article starts ominously enough:

In the past decade, nearly every pillar institution in American society — whether it’s General Motors, Congress, Wall Street, Major League Baseball, the Catholic Church or the mainstream media — has revealed itself to be corrupt, incompetent, or both. And at the root of these failures are the people who run these institutions, the bright and industrious minds who occupy the commanding heights of our meritocratic order. In exchange for their power, status and remuneration, they are supposed to make sure everything operates smoothly. But after a cascade of scandals and catastrophes, that implicit social contract lies in ruins, replaced by mass skepticism, contempt and disillusionment.

From there, author Christopher Hayes, the Washington editor of the Nation, critically evaluates why it is that “so much of the country’s leadership in so many different walks of life performed so terribly over this decade.” While recognizing that no single theory can explain this failure, he nevertheless finds these themes to be recurrent in the failures: the concentration of power in a single person and the erosion of transparency and accountability in the system.   

Hayes finds this problem evident in various walks of life, including the Catholic Church.  Citing the work of Terry McKiernan, who founded “Bishop Accountability” in the wake of sexual abuse allegations in the Church, he concludes that obsessive secrecy and the hierarchical nature of the Church contributed to the crisis. McKiernan is even more direct: “I’m not surprised that people doing unexamined things do bad things.” 

The problem is larger, though, than distrust of leaders, says Hayes.  We live in a complicated society that rightly demands expertise and leadership and elites at times–but if a culture cannot trust its leaders, the result is a loss of authority even when that authority is desperately needed. That is, all leaders pay a price when other leaders fall.

There is so much here for the evangelical church. First, we ignore this trend only to our peril. How many agonizing stories do we know — the evangelist whose immorality cost him his ministry, the pastor whose financial dealings cast a web that entangled him, the church leader whose unchecked arrogance led to corrupt living — that were marked by secrecy and no accountability? 

Perhaps more alarming, how many stories do we not know yet?  How many leaders, invested in building their own kingdoms, believe that their success has inoculated them against failure? The evil one who tempted Jesus still offers us a kingdom if we bow to the altar of self. 

Second, the accountability inherent in the Body of Christ is non-negotiable, even for leaders–in fact, especially for leaders.  The qualifications for elders and deacons in 1 Timothy 3 not only assume examination and accountability; they demand it. Moreover, those qualifications are not simply a checklist to examine a pastoral candidate.  They are stated expectations for the leader as he lives today, tomorrow, and the future.   

I am not one who believes that the Scriptures require a plurality of elders as the single model of a NT church, but the wisdom of shared leadership is clear here. Power centered in a single person breeds demonized independence that is nothing short of idolatry of the self.  There are good reasons that the Body of Christ is “not one part, but many” (1 Cor. 12:14) –one of which is accountability. Or, as Hayes concludes in his article when speaking primarily of secular institutions, “The elites’ failures of the past decade should teach us that institutions of all kinds need input from below.” 

Third, the attitude of “we trust him just because he’s our leader” no longer works. Indeed, if Hayes is right, the more common attitude today is, “We cannot trust him just because he’s our leader.” From a secular perspective, unearned “trust” has fostered the failures that are the source of Hayes’ article. From a Christian perspective, the issue is even more basic. “Trust” separated from open vulnerability and intentional accountability is hardly Christian at all; rather, it is an open door for an enemy who himself sought to dethrone the One to whom we are all accountable (Isa. 14:13-14).  Sin crouches at the door (Gen. 4:7) when leaders are permitted to live unexamined lives. 

So, what frightens me about writing this blog? Fear that I have misread the Time article? No.  Fear that a reader will not like what I’ve said? Absolutely not.  Fear that I will be perceived as attacking a person? Not at all, as I know my motives. Fear that leaders who need to see themselves in this mirror will miss the needed reflection? Perhaps, but that’s not my primary fear.    

What I fear is that I will not see my own tendencies to lead without accountability and responsibility. I fear that I will see the speck in others’ eyes but not see the log of elitism in my own (Matt. 7:1-5). God help me. 

   

 

---

[1] Christopher Hayes, “The Twilight of the Elites,” Time (22 March 2010), 56-58.

In my current roles, I have had the privilege of educating young SBC ministers, assisting state conventions in conferences, working alongside the North American Mission Board (NAMB) in training leaders, and consulting with the International Mission Board (IMB) in theological education.  Our denomination has much room for improvement, but I am more excited today about Southern Baptists than I have ever been - and the GCR Task Force progress report is one reason for my excitement.  Southern Baptists must still address a final report when meeting in Orlando in June 2010, but this progress report is filled with possibility and hope. 

First, the report begins with a call to repentance over our disunity, arrogance, selfishness, and caustic rhetoric.  Southern Baptists have unfortunately assumed that our size is evidence of God’s blessings on us, and seldom have we been accused of humility.  The GCRTF report is a jolting call to repent of our belief that the evangelical world somehow revolves around us. We have no right to think such about ourselves, especially when our own denomination is in decline.    

Second, the report calls for a return to the primacy of the local church.  A Great Commission Resurgence will occur only when local churches led by God-called pastors grieve over lostness and share the gospel message with people outside of the church.  That is, a GC Resurgence begins and ends with my personal willingness to be obedient to the GC task.  Waiting for the denomination to “vote in” a resurgence is not only an abdication of personal responsibility, but it is also a guarantee that no resurgence will take place.    

Third, the report calls for funneling more Cooperative Program funds to the task of international missions.  A one percent increase may seem insignificant, but the increased dollars are both symbolic and real.  For the first time in our denominational history, we will have affirmed that more than one-half of our cooperative giving goes to international missions.  Moreover, a one-percent increase will surely result in more real dollars given to missions - a positive that we must celebrate.   

Fourth, the task force recognizes that North America is changing and has challenged NAMB and the IMB to cooperate in reaching our continent.  God is bringing the world to our continent - most often, to our cities - where the Great Commission task is so large that both mission agencies will have much to do in assisting our churches to reach our contexts.  God alone knows how much more we could do if our agencies and entities worked together under a common vision rather than duplicating efforts and competing against each other. 

Fifth, the report emphasizes the necessity of training missional leaders to reach our world.  While the task force has proposed that NAMB and LifeWay share the duty to help “heighten our commitment to equip current pastors to missional leadership,” all of us must accept this responsibility.  As a seminary professor and dean, I can affirm that we are producing men and women who believe the Word.  I fear, though, that we are not as intentional about producing strong missional leaders.  Our graduates seldom struggle because their theology is bad, but they do not always know how to relate to their context as a mission field.  Leaders with a healthy understanding of contextualization are a must if Southern Baptists are going to reverse our decline. 

Sixth, the task force affirms the Cooperative Program while also celebrating “Great Commission Giving” beyond the CP.  I am convinced that cooperative giving is still the best way to support the global cause of Christ, and I am grateful every day for the benefits I have reaped because of the Cooperative Program.  At the same time, though, I rejoice as more local churches prayerfully and seriously seek the best way to support missions causes.  A “both-and” approach to giving toward Great Commission causes (rather than “either-or”  between the CP and Great Commission Giving) may well result in even more dollars supporting the work of missions at all levels of Southern Baptist life.     

Seventh, the report calls for continued honest evaluation of our current work.  Four billion people around the world have little or no access to the gospel. More than 250 million people in North America are not believers. Meanwhile, Southern Baptists baptized no more in 2008 than we did in 1950.  Honest, gut-wrenching, God-honoring evaluation of our structures, processes, and programs is thus in order.  This process is difficult and never-ending - but only through accountability can we improve our Great Commission efforts.   

What, then, should we do in response to this progress report?  Because Southern Baptists will be changed only through the power of God, prayer is a non-negotiable response.  I invite you to join me in praying these prayers: 

I pray that I will be ever aware of my own arrogance. As an older Southern Baptist, I must not get frustrated with younger Southern Baptists who are calling for change; instead, I must hear them even while helping them to stay properly focused.  Younger Southern Baptists who continue to call for correction must do so with gratitude to God for the rich heritage of this Convention.  All of us must humbly pray for the Great Commission Task Force as they continue their work on this report. 

I pray that I can genuinely say, “Not my will, but God’s be done.”  For some Southern Baptists, the suggestions of this report may go too far.  For others, they may not go far enough.  In either case, though, this report is not about what I want.  Any unwillingness to change for the sake of the gospel will result only in status quo - and status quo will not work anymore for this denomination.      

I pray that I will be patient with this process.  The SBC will consider this report in Orlando in June, but any proposed changes will take time.  Ours is a large denominational ship that is not turned quickly.  Patience is imperative, as impatience can result in poor implementation of otherwise good plans.  Now is not the time to jump ship because changes are not occurring quickly enough; instead, it is time to jump in, help us steer the ship, and rejoice over every move in the right direction. 

I pray that the discussions at the SBC meeting in June will be God-honoring.  Change is seldom easy, especially when structures and processes to which we have become accustomed are challenged. This report calls for an intense Great Commission focus that will require hard choices.  I am praying now that the world will see us discuss the issues with fervor while still rallying around the Great Commission.  Anything less will harm our witness. 

I pray that the Great Commission Resurgence begins with me now. To be sure, this final prayer sounds “preachy.”  The point, though, is this: no report from any committee will in itself produce a Great Commission Resurgence.  A genuine GCR will begin when I pray for a lost world, give sacrificially to God’s work, and personally tell others about Jesus.  A resurgence will grow as I disciple others to do the same.  To begin these tasks, I need not wait until the SBC gathers in June.