Listen To Most Current
Grace Notes Archive
June 2021 (3)
May 2021 (5)
April 2021 (4)
March 2021 (5)
February 2021 (4)
January 2021 (5)
December 2020 (4)
November 2020 (4)
October 2020 (5)
September 2020 (4)
August 2020 (5)
July 2020 (21)
June 2020 (29)
May 2020 (28)
April 2020 (31)
March 2020 (5)
February 2020 (4)
January 2020 (5)
December 2019 (5)
November 2019 (3)
October 2019 (5)
September 2019 (4)
August 2019 (5)
July 2019 (4)
June 2019 (5)
May 2019 (4)
April 2019 (4)
March 2019 (4)
February 2019 (6)
January 2019 (4)
December 2018 (4)
November 2018 (5)
October 2018 (4)
September 2018 (4)
August 2018 (4)
July 2018 (3)
June 2018 (4)
May 2018 (4)
April 2018 (4)
March 2018 (4)
February 2018 (5)
January 2018 (4)
December 2017 (4)
November 2017 (5)
October 2017 (4)
September 2017 (5)
August 2017 (4)
July 2017 (4)
June 2017 (5)
May 2017 (4)
April 2017 (5)
March 2017 (3)
February 2017 (4)
January 2017 (3)
December 2016 (5)
November 2016 (4)
October 2016 (4)
September 2016 (5)
August 2016 (3)
July 2016 (4)
June 2016 (5)
May 2016 (4)
April 2016 (5)
March 2016 (4)
February 2016 (4)
January 2016 (5)
December 2015 (4)
November 2015 (4)
October 2015 (3)
September 2015 (4)
August 2015 (5)
July 2015 (5)
June 2015 (4)
May 2015 (5)
April 2015 (2)
March 2015 (4)
February 2015 (4)
January 2015 (5)
December 2014 (4)
November 2014 (5)
October 2014 (4)
September 2014 (4)
August 2014 (4)
July 2014 (5)
June 2014 (4)
May 2014 (5)
April 2014 (4)
March 2014 (4)
February 2014 (4)
January 2014 (5)
December 2013 (4)
November 2013 (5)
October 2013 (4)
September 2013 (4)
August 2013 (5)
July 2013 (4)
June 2013 (3)
May 2013 (5)
April 2013 (4)
March 2013 (4)
February 2013 (5)
January 2013 (4)
December 2012 (4)
November 2012 (5)
October 2012 (4)
September 2012 (4)
August 2012 (5)
July 2012 (4)
June 2012 (4)
May 2012 (5)
April 2012 (4)
March 2012 (5)
February 2012 (4)
January 2012 (4)
December 2011 (5)
November 2011 (4)
October 2011 (4)
September 2011 (5)
August 2011 (4)
July 2011 (4)
June 2011 (5)
May 2011 (4)
April 2011 (5)
March 2011 (4)
February 2011 (4)
January 2011 (5)
December 2010 (4)
November 2010 (4)
October 2010 (4)
September 2010 (5)
August 2010 (4)
July 2010 (6)
June 2010 (4)
May 2010 (4)
April 2010 (4)
March 2010 (5)
February 2010 (4)
January 2010 (5)
December 2009 (5)
November 2009 (3)
October 2009 (6)
September 2009 (3)
August 2009 (5)
July 2009 (4)
June 2009 (4)
May 2009 (5)
April 2009 (4)
March 2009 (4)
February 2009 (4)
January 2009 (5)
December 2008 (4)
November 2008 (5)
October 2008 (4)
September 2008 (5)
August 2008 (4)
July 2008 (3)
June 2008 (4)
May 2008 (5)
April 2008 (4)
March 2008 (5)
February 2008 (1)
Grace Notes

Current Articles | Categories | Search | Syndication

SUCCESS: FAITHFULLY DECLARING GOD’S TRUTH, NOT EVOKING A POSITIVE RESPONSE
by Philip Owen

A key element of the neo-evangelical movement and the mega-church movement it spawned is the idea that the message of the church must produce a positive response in its hearers, or it has failed.  And when a message is ignored or rejected, it is the responsibility of the messenger (i.e., church or pastor) to formulate another message (or, at least, change the method of presentation) in order to provoke a positive response.  And while it must be acknowledged that some messages are ignored or rejected because or their erroneous foundation and others because of their poor presentation, it is not the responsibility of the church, the pastor, or individual members to deliver a message that is palatable to its hearers.  In fact, just the opposite is often the case:  God’s message faithfully proclaimed often will provoke a negative response.

 

The bottom line is that the success of a ministry is not measured by the quality or quantity of the response but on its faithfulness to the written Word of God.  Our human response to God’s Word is not uniform:  hearers respond personally, individually, and one-at-a-time.  God has always dealt with individuals.  That having been said, it is equally true that general characteristics define an age.  For example, the Protestant Reformation, led by Hus, Wycliffe, and especially Luther in 1521, defined an age of great positive response (but great, even violent opposition) to the Word of God.  More recently in the U.S., Whitefield and Edwards were at the forefront of an age known as the Great Awakening when, starting in 1726, many souls were turned to the truth.  Of course, many ages are characterized by their rebellion and unbelief.  Israel’s period under the judges exemplifies such an age.

 

Regardless of the response, at no time did God direct his messengers to change their message in order to make it more palatable or to provoke a more favorable response.  In fact, God’s commission to Ezekiel was this:  “And thou shalt speak my words unto them [God’s people], whether they will hear or whether they will forbear:  for they are most rebellious” (Ezek. 2:7; see also 2:5; 3:11, 27).  Later in the giving of the commission, the Lord “encouraged” Ezekiel with the assurance that “the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me” (3:7).  Not only was Ezekiel forbidden to make his message more pleasant or positive in order to elicit a more positive response, God identified the rejection of the message, not with a rejection of the messenger or his weakness of presentation, but with a rejection of God Himself.  The clear implication of this is twofold:  (1)  The message of God’s Word must not be altered in order to obtain a more favorable response; (2) Anyone who changes the message, regardless of the seeming merit of his motives, is guilty of rebelling against the Lord.  A positive response to the faithful preaching of God’s Word, glorifies God and blesses the messenger and saves his auditors.  But a message shaped with the sole intent of producing a more positive response dishonors God, dishonors the messenger, and most likely will only confirm the hearers in their sin and rebellion. 

 

A similar view pertains in the New Testament where Matthew gives instructions regarding how to handle problems among brethren.  The offended brother is to go to the offender “and tell him his fault between thee and him alone:  if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained a brother” (18:15).  That would be a positive response from any perspective.  But what if he refuses to hear?  Is the message to be softened or altered?  No, a progression of broadening involvement is enjoined, which, if the offender refuses, results in his being treated “as an heathen man and a publican” (v. 17), in other words, someone to be avoided. 

 

Clearly, God recognizes that the response to His message will not always (even often) be positive.  But the responsibility of a pastor or saint is to faithfully declare the message, leaving the ultimate response to God.  Faithfulness to the Word of God is the measure of success in a servant of God—not the nature of the response.  We are in an age of apostasy (a falling away from the truth).  The tenor of the age is rejection of God’s Word.  Any temptation to alter the message in order to make it more palatable to sinners dishonors God and does a disservice to those in sin.  May we faithfully plant the seed of truth and allow God to bring the increase according to His will.  Changing the message may result in a bumper crop, but it will be a crop of weeds, not of wheat.

 

Actions: E-mail | Permalink

Previous Page | Next Page