Although his topic is on encouragement, it relates very well to this thread. How we need to move away from man-cenetered encouragement to God-centered encouragement. We need to see the Creator behind the creature.

If you haven’t checked out Pilgrim Radio, it is great. Although they broadcast on radio waves in some markets, you can catch their programming streamed live on the internet.

I agree totally. I have seen turn outs on colleges for Christian illusionists and the like and when I talk to people afterwards all they can say about the evening was that the magic tricks were “way awesome!”. The person up their may have shared a small devotional at the end of his show but all in all it was just a magic show. I have seen virtually the same group of people sit under the teacher of a man like Paul Washer, and no one talks about the man unless it is to tell of his power full message, or the conviction in which he spoke. When men get up and simply preach the Gospel and are forward in doing so, the Spirit honors that. The Spirit will work in the hearts of men through the Gospel and change them from stone to flesh. I just hope that we can have more traveling preachers and less of the entertainers that we have seen lately.

In Christ
Joe Hussung

I remember you saying that. Yeah, I remember when I first sensed God’s call on my life, he began developing a passion to study and apply myself to the doctrines of God’s Word. Before that, I never read a book but was a committed jock. I still love playing sports, but my time and attention has been channeled into the work that God has called me, and that has made all the difference.

Agreed. The problem is how to present the truth in such a way that the heart is “cut,” to use the word from Acts. In fact, as I reflect on the gospels a bit, I think Jesus had a great idea with parables in this respect — it was something people could relate to on a heart level, since they likely hit close to home. The disciples, on the other hand, wanted the head knowledge and were frustrated that they weren’t getting it. Jesus, of course, related to them head-first, but it seems his practice was to speak to the heart first publicly, then in private with the disciples he spoke head-first.

Of course, this leads to a further problem we’ve all groused about; namely being contextual in a way that is faithful and honorable to the truth instead of something like “clown ministry.” So I think we can safely say we’re not worrying about that in this discussion; rather the question for us is how do we do justice to the truth when preaching or witnessing “heart-first?”

If you are interested in reading more about the head and heart relationship, you ought to check out Mark Dever’s work on Richard Sibbes. He has a nice section which deals with where Sibbes stood on this issue (in “an affectionate theologian”). Of course, then there is Edwards and Religious Affections. Both of these men would say that religion (i.e. true Christianity) is fundamentally of the heart and affections, but there are very few if any other figures in church history who placed a higher commitment to teaching and explaining the truth than these guys. So I would agree that it is both.

However, I do think there is a point to make that truth understood inflames the affections. In other words, truth affects your affections. Turn that around, though, can it be said that your affections influence the truth? I would argue that it doesn’t. The truth is truth whether you like it or not. So then, I think it would be fair to say that communicating the truth of the gospel to deceived sinners is of first importance, and in an age where propositional truth has fallen in disrepute in our postmodern generation, we need to stand for the truth and veracity of Scripture, and in a deeper sense, the correspondence theory of truth, viz., that it corresponds to reality.

Maybe Barna should do a survey…hummmmmmmmmm