John Calvin, Missionary and Church Planter

So long as some Christians have called themselves Calvinists, other Christians have probably alleged that Calvinists care little about evangelism, missions, and church planting. The critique isn't new. But only recently have we learned the extent of the zeal and effectiveness of the early reformers in evangelism, missions, and church planting. Elias Medeiros, Harriet Barbour professor of missions at Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi, will lead a workshop on The Reformer's Commitment to the Propagation of the Gospel to All Nations at TGC's National Conference in April, likely presenting this wider understanding.

But in this short article, I want to give a small taste of John Calvin's missionary and church planting zeal in particular. If you want to get a sense of Calvin's theology of missions and activity, you can read Calvin's sermon on 2 Timothy 1:8-9, "The Call to Witness," Herman J. Selderhuis's John Calvin: A Pilgrim's Life, and Frank James III's series of lectures, The Calvin I Never Knew. From these works, I have compiled several fascinating, surprising, and convicting facts about the missionary and church planting movement John Calvin launched in France and throughout Europe.

Calvin, Equipper and Sender of Missionaries

 

In the 1550s the population of Geneva doubled as refugees, many of them from France, poured in. Many of them sat under Calvin's preaching five times each week.

They heard sermons like this one on 2 Timothy 1:8-9, where he said:

If the gospel be not preached, Jesus Christ is, as it were, buried. Therefore, let us stand as witnesses, and do him this honor, when we see all the world so far out of the way; and remain steadfast in this wholesome doctrine. . . . Let us here observe that St. Paul condemns our unthankfulness, if we be so unfaithful to God, as not to bear witness of his gospel; seeing he hath called us to it.  Continue at John Starke

You're a Calvinist, Right?

I've been reading Fred Sanders's blog for a long time, and when his book, The Deep Things of God, came out, I was eager to read it. He's a good writer, he loves and quotes the Puritans, he's a reasonable thinker, and he knows how to do careful exegesis.

He's also a Wesleyan.

I don't mean to declare that so menacingly. But the first time I learned Sanders---associate professor at the Torrey Honors Institute of Biola University---was a Wesleyan, I was a bit surprised. It's not that Wesleyans and Arminians can't be careful interpreters and reasonable thinkers---I just don't often resonate with their writings and conclusions quite the way I do with Sanders'.

And so, I had to know: For a guy who loves, quotes, and depends upon Calvin and Calvinists, why isn't Fred Sanders a Calvinist? We corresponded, and he explained the one thing he wished Calvinists would stop accusing Wesleyans of doing and why Wesleyanism is only the opposite of Calvinism in a very small thought-world.

A good many Calvinists grew up in the Reformed tradition, but many of us became Calvinists later in life, when we had to make our faith our own and make sense of what the Bible says for ourselves. How did you become a Wesleyan? What about the tradition attracts you?

I grew up as a free-range evangelical, in pentecostal and baptistic churches of various kinds. But I actually got saved as a teenager when a revival broke out in the youth group at the local United Methodist church. I got an MDiv at Asbury Theological Seminary, a great interdenominational school with definite Methodist roots. So my conversion and my early theological training were in Wesley territory.   Continue at John Starke

The Incarnation Is About a Person, Not a Mission

For several weeks now, I’ve talked and corresponded with ministry leaders and pastors who are thinking hard about the mission of the church and evangelism. Our conversations have centered around the word incarnational, a common way for many to characterize their ministry today.

I suggest we abandon this usage and will make that case in this article. But I realize these church leaders are doing praiseworthy work in difficult places, places where many of us would hesitate to bring our families. And I want to let those who use the term speak for themselves so my response accounts for the best arguments for describing our ministry as incarnational.

From the Incarnation to Incarnational 

The fact that so many are attempting to work out the theological significance of God becoming man is, at first glance, noteworthy and encouraging. There is a refreshing lack of business/CEO talk in all of it. Alan Hirsch, author of several books including The Forgotten Ways and Untamed, wants to put the incarnation back into the imagination of the church’s mission. For Hirsch, incarnational gives us a more theologically rich vision than what sociological terms like contextualization and enculturation can provide. He says, “If missional means going out (being sent into the world), then incarnational means going deep down into the culture.” Hirsch elaborates: Keep Reading...

Revisiting Baptism and Young Children

I’ve considered this question before. As Baptists, when should we baptize our children? A few blog posts recently give reasons why we should or should not delay baptism until our children are more mature (apx. ages 10-12).

First, Trevin Wax gave 4 points on his position relating to this question (which is that we should delay baptizing children until they are around 10 years old or so).

John Starke at The Gospel Coalition Blog then gave 4 reasons why we should baptize small children.

On the heels of these posts, Mike Gilbart-Smith at 9 Marks Blog posted his own “9 reasons why we should not baptize young children“. Keep Reading>>>

Should We Baptize Small Children? Yes

The question among Baptists over whether to baptize small children is sensitive, and I’ve gone back and forth on it. There are several pastoral difficulties, and parents face many questions that they don’t often feel equipped to answer. Local churches who take conversion and church membership seriously have often taken a more conservative stance by implementing a certain age (say, 10, 15, or 18) before baptizing a child in order to guard against giving a young child false assurance or baptizing someone who isn’t truly converted.

Trevin Wax recently brought up the question and makes the case that “there is wisdom in delaying baptism for young children” (emphasis mine). He follows the lead of W.A. Criswell, who “encouraged and affirmed childhood decisions for Christ, but postponed baptism until a child was around 10 years of age.” So if your child professes faith at 6, the encouragement would be to wait until 10 to finally baptize him. Some churches wait longer, even until the child is out from under the direct influence and authority of parents. Keep Reading>>>

Preaching Christmas: What Do You Recommend?

Letter to a (Frustrated) Single Young Woman

The Future of the Mainline