INERRANCY, EXEGESIS AND EXPOSITION

Part Four

*

Conjectures and Agreements (Postulates and Propositions)

John propose five logically sequential postulates (hypothesize) that introduce and undergird his main propositions: These five ideas also establish the true biblical basis for the doctrine of inerrancy:

1. GOD IS: (Gen. 1:1, Ps 14, Heb 11:6)
   
2. GOD IS TRUE: (Ex 34:6, Num 23:19, Deut 32:4 Psa 25:10, 31:6, Isa 65:16, Jer 10:8: John 14:6, 17:3, Titus 1:2, Heb 6:18 and I John 5:20-21
   
3. GOD SPEAKS IN HARMONY WITH HIS NATURE : (Num 23:19, I Sam 15:29; Rom 3:4, 2 Tim 2:13, Titus 1:2 and Heb 6:18)
   
4. GOD SPEAKS ONLY TRUTH: (Ps 31:5, 119:43, 142, 151, 160, Prov 30:5, Isa 65:16 John 17:17 and James 1:18.
   
5. GOD SPOKE HIS TRUE WORD AS CONSISTENT WITH HIS TRUE NATURE TO BE COMMUNICATED TO PEOPLE (self-evident truth which is illustrated at 2 Tim. 3:16-17 and Heb 1:1
   

So what are we saying here:

God gave His true Word to be communicated entirely as He gave it. Which means, the whole counsel of God is to be preached. (Matthew 28:20, Acts 5:20 and 20:27.

The whole counsel of God means from Genesis to Revelation. Its God’s counsel that is to be taught, NOT MAN’S, which is generally what we do.

We are to look at the Bible as God’s word and we need then to look at every part of the bible as a whole.
2 God gave His true Word to be communicated exactly as He gave it. It is to be dispensed precisely as it was delivered without the message being altered.

Now this will take some thinking on our part. What does God want us to know about Him and His creation and His Plan for mankind and Himself? Its found in the Word.

Only the exegetical process which yields expository proclamation will accomplish suppositions 1 and 2

God is. And God is truth. What God says is truth. It’s the only 100% truth there is. God only speaks truth. Every word that God speaks in the Bible is Truth because God is., and God is Truth. God could not speak any less then in changeless nature. Thus what the Word says we can be sure its true because God said it. There fore it’s the purpose of the preacher to preach the Word of God as God has had it written down.

Now note much of the preaching you hear (in many of the churches) is not in the Bible. Too often we think that preaching from Ephesians 1:1 to 3 let’s say,+ is not enough for our people to hear if we expect them to be the kind of Christians they could be. He add to the text what we believe is needed to add to their edification.

Where John MacArthur helped me Charity was in this point. Preaching or I like to use the word teaching. Pastor/Teacher I would address my self as. Preaching to my fellow pastors is preaching and teaching is what you do in Sunday School. What they would say about my preaching style is its teaching and not preaching. One preacher said to me, "Bro Charles that was a good lesson you taught to day." He didn’t consider it preaching.

What I learned was to let the Scripture to the teaching for me. So I begin with Matthew on Sunday Morning and Romans on Sunday Evening. What I tried to do was to open the book to Matthew chapter one and see if I could communicate to the people what God was wanting them to hear from the verses.

I didn’t see dancing in Matthew, I didn’t see going to movies was wrong in chapter one. I didn’t see a whole lot of things in chapter one that I had hoped was in there. How was I going to get the people to go soul winning, and come back on Sunday Evening and here me preach from Romans.?

So could I teach the text and then add a little at the end of the sermons? Could I say, "Now here is what I believe God would want us to know about this text as an application? " But it was not in the text at all. I was asking the people to hear something I said rather than what the text said today.

How often have we heard sermons that spoke of things that was not in the text the preacher gave at some point in the sermon? And you are saying, "How did he get that out of Matthew? Well he didn’t he put it there.

My position then became: "IF ITS NOT IN THE TEXT I DON’T SAY IT? And that was very hard at first. Because I had some things I wanted to say, and I couldn’t find it in Matthew or Romans.
Footnote: Charity said I did great preaching (teaching) the text, it was went I thought I needed to say something before I started that got me in trouble. Bad habits were hard to break.

Sometimes I think we don’t really believe in the INERRANCY of Scripture. We sometimes don’t think that it is enough just to preach the text in Matthew. Therefore we don’t preach every verse or chapter in a book of the Bible because we can’t make it say what we want to say.

I believe we need to take the Bible and preach/teach the Bible verse by verse on Sunday Morning in our Worship Hour. Yes on occasion we do take time to teach on a specific topic, and that is quite okay of course.

So did I clear that up at all Charity? Drafted by Charles Whisnant, Proof Read, and tries to agree with my points, but sometimes she has trouble.

*

PREACHING THE BOOK GOD WROTE

HOW I CAME TO UNDERSTAND PREACHING THE BOOK GOD WROTE

part two

*

What is the Biblical Method of DOING CHURCH MINISTRY?

*

Some would say Jerry Falwell was wrong in his methodology. Some would say that Jack Hyles was wrong in his methods. Some would say the "Church Growth Movement" is wrong. Some do not like Rick Warren, or Bill Hybels method of church ministry. Some would say the "Emergent" or "Emerging Movement" is wrong. Some really do not like the Robert Schuller Sr.’s Garden Grove Church’s methods. Some don’t like the Andy Stanley or Ed Young, Jr.’s methods. Nor do they like the Calvary Chapel’s Chuck Smith’s method. As a matter of fact if it’s not the fundamental way, it’s not biblical they say. Or if it’s not the Reformed Church’s method it’s not biblical.

*
IS THERE REALLY A BIBLICA METHOD OF DOING CHURCH GOD’S WAY?

*

Yes, just ask any preacher or pastor.

*
Monday’s Shepherd’s Pulpit Magazine’s article May 28th 2007.
Preaching the Book God Wrote by John MacArthur

*
This article by John MacArthur changed my preaching, in the early 1980's.

*
Fundamentalists learned to preach topically and generally preaching was about the preacher’s experiences and ideas. While always believing the Scriptures were inerrant, the idea of relying on what God said about Himself and His doing and about men in relation to Him was not a logical response to how I was preaching.

*
Then John's articles, (plus the Shepherd's Conferences) brought about this idea of teaching the Word of God book by book. The idea of expository preaching allowed me to say to the church body that I believed in the idea of Biblical inerrancy

*
And the best way to find the church's life and power was in the preaching/teaching of God's Word, chapter by chapter, verse by verse, word by word. Rather than giving the preacher’s experiences, let the Word teach God's truths.

*
IF you believe the Bible is really God's Word and is about Him and His purpose for mankind and His Church, you will allow God's Word alone to be the foundation of your teaching to the church.

John writes: "The theological highlight of 20th Century had to be evangelicalism’s intense focus on the doctrine of biblical inerrancy." Much of what was written defending inerrancy in the 70's and 80's represented the most acute theological reasoning our generation has produced.

• Paul D. Feinberg states: "The doctrine of biblical inerrancy is "the claim that when all facts are known, the scriptures in their original autographs and properly interpreted will be shown to be without error in all that they affirm to the degree of precision intended, whether that affirmation relates to doctrine, history, science, geography, geology, etc."

John writes: "Yet it seems our practice commitment to inerrancy is somewhat lacking. The modern evangelical’s commitment to the authority and inerrancy of the Bible doesn’t always flesh out in ministry. Shouldn’t our preaching reflect our conviction that God’s Word is infallibly authoritative? Too often, it doesn’t. In fact, there is a discernable trend in contemporary evangelicalism away from biblical preaching, and a corresponding drift toward experience centered, pragmatic, topical messages in the pulpit."

*

John wrote this in the early 1980's, and it seems we are still deep-seated into this kind of preaching, experience centered, pragmatic, topical messages in the pulpit.

*

"How can this be?" John continues: "Shouldn’t our preaching reflect our conviction that the Bible is the verbally inspired, inerrant Word of God? If we believe that ‘all Scripture is inspired by God’ and inerrant, shouldn’t we be equally committed to the truth that it is ‘profitable for teaching, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be equipped for every good work"? 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Shouldn’t that magnificent truth determine how we preach?"

John is right, but I think preachers believe they are preaching the Word of God. Personally, I don’t know any preachers who would say they aren’t preaching the Word of God. But often their preaching of the Word doesn’t reflect 2 Timothy 3:16-17.
Paul gives this mandate to Timothy: 2 Timothy 4:1`-2

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season, and out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction."

John points out this: "ANY FORM OF PREACHING THAT IGNORES THE INTENDED PURPOSE AND DESIGN OF GOD IS SERIOUSLY DEFICIENT."

J.I. Packer in his book "Preaching As Biblical Interpretation," Inerrancy And Common Sense, (1980)
Preaching appears in the Bible as a relaying of what God has said about Himself and His doings, and about men in relation to Him, plus a pressing of His commands, promises, warnings, and assurances, with a view to winning the hearer or hearers...to a positive response.

Preaching then should reflects God’s commands, and promises, and warnings, etc. Preaching the Word with the view that the word will win the hearers to a positive response.

To have a positive response from the church body then is by the preaching of the Word of God.

Charity is finally finished proof reading my article. She said "Charles at Seminary they taught the bible verse by verse. Dr. Oldham did for sure. Raymond Barber did the Old Testament also. They taught the bible verse by verse yes. But preaching andteaching to them were two different ideal. Teaching the Bible book by book was for the Sunday School, and Preaching was to be topical.

PREACHING THE BOOK GOD WROTE
HOW I CAME TO UNDERSTAND PREACHING THE BOOK GOD WROTE

*

Part One

*

I don’t know if I get in more trouble saying, "My friend Jerry Falwell," or saying, "I read everything John MacArthur writes and listen to his sermons. "How can I say both names in the same breath you say?" It’s like saying I liked both Dale Earnhardt, Sr. and Jeff Gordon in NASCAR. With that said, I have learned a lot from both men and their ministries. It’s a good thing I don’t say I like Billy Graham. (I like Billy Graham.) I learned from my dad, early in life, you don’t talk about Jerry Falwell, or Billy Graham, or J. Frank Norris and other men of God.) Dad would stop you in your tracks. Whether or not dad approved of them or not he just would not engage in negative talk about them.

*
I must say that the first church I pastored was influenced by the Super Conferences at Thomas Road Baptist Church and Jerry Falwell. I really do not regret that part of our ministry, and there are still some good things that came out of that ministry.

*
I think the idea of the Super Conferences were about church ministry and how to get people to come to the church. They taught how to have a good bus ministry, a good children’s ministry, an adult ministry, and all that is involved in reaching people for Christ.

*
As a result, most of my preaching was involved in trying to get people in the church to buy into the idea of having a church that is reaching people for Christ. Sermons were designed to get members stirred up to go out into the community and get people to come to church. My sermons were designed to get members to be Sunday School teachers, drive a church bus, be a youth worker. I was trying to get the members to reach more people every week to get a good attendance on Sunday. "Let’s build our Sunday School" was the idea, and the best way of doing this was by preaching. Preaching was about getting people to do what I thought they should be doing. *

*
I remember one sermon was about "Bus Ministry in the Bible." I used a passage in the New Testament to illustrate that Jesus wanted us to have a bus to get people to church. "And they brought them to Jesus." Sounded good, and we did have a church member to start a bus ministry

*
I believed the Bible teaches evangelism. I believe Christians are to be involved in reaching people, and I believe the church body should grow. Thus, I was preaching with that purpose in mind.

*
I believed that Christians should live in holiness. Christians should reflect Christ-likeness. And I was good preaching the Law. (Maybe Charles’s law!) I was good, I thought, in telling Christians how to live like Christ. I believed I was Biblical. I believed what I was saying was Biblical in principle.

*
Many fundamental preachers believe they have the responsibility to get their members to serve the local church, have the largest attendance, have the most people saved and baptized, and build the biggest buildings in town. The way they do that is to motivate the members unto good works. The means and methods of churchology differentiates from church to church to accomplish their hope for results.

*
"We would like to see our attendance climb this year 100 people. We would like to see 50 people come to Christ this year. We would like to see a new building that would seat 500 people. We would like to see five new bus routes. And we would like to see 100 teens in our youth ministry."

*
Personally, I do not see having a vision as being wrong. I do not see setting some goals for the church as being wrong. Having a desire to see the church grow in attendance, seeing people saved and baptized, seeing Christians grow in grace and Christ-likeness is good. What I see as error in thinking is saying,"Let’s just see what God is going to do this year," and then sit back and do nothing and just wait for God to do something. That is missing the point, I believe.
*

The issue is how we DO CHURCH MINISTRY AND HOW WE PREACH TO ACCOMPLISH GOD’S PURPOSE FOR THE CHURCH AND HIS CHURCH BODY OF SAINTS.

*

Drafted by Charles and an argument from Charity May 28, 2007

FIVE FOUNDATIONAL TRUTHS - FIVE NON-NEGOTIABLES

IN CHURCH MINISTRY

*

In the Pulpit Magazine today, John MacArthur gives us five foundational truths that a church should be committed to. In 1983 my first Shepherd's Conference, I learned of these five negotiables for the first time. I came back to the church I was pastoring at the time and talked to our men about these foundational truths. From that year on we begin to work from these principles in doing ministry.

*

As a matter of fact, the ministry of our church was formed by the principles that we learned from the Shepherd's Conference. I can testify that these principles work. In applying these principles they will bring about an authentic church. I can say after twenty five years later, the believers in that church are authentic Christians.

*

THE FIVE NON - NEGOTIABLES: FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES

*

1. A HIGH VIEW OF GOD

2 THE ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE

3 SOUND DOCTRINE

4 PERSONAL HOLINESS

5 SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY

THOUSANDS ATTEND JERRY FALWELL FUNERAL

*

Evangelical leaders turn out, but elected officials scarce.

By Andrea Stone: USA Today Wednesday May 23, 2007

* * * * *

Lynchburg, VA. - The black-clad mourners began arriving at 5 a.m., the line stretching for nerly a quarter-mile. They had come to say goodbye to Jerry Falwell, the folksy Southern Baptist minister whose Moral Mojority changed the face of American politics.

*

To them, he was just their spiritual guide.

*

"He was a great, great preacher and he preached theword of God," said Elizabeth Enns, 24, a Lynchburg nurse who graduated from Falwell's Liberty University and brought her 1-year old son, Landon, to the funeral.

*

Falwell, who died of heart failure lasst week at 73 (May 15th) never shield from giving his opinion on moral issues. And that, said Franklin Graham, was what made this "prophet of our generation" divisive.

*

"He believed in the Gospel, That's controversial," said Graham son of of evangelist Billy Graham. "He believed in marriage as a union between a man and a woman. That's controversial."

*

Falwell "was not just some preacher who thought he would dabble in politics. He understood that Christians have a right in this country to be heard." said Jerry Vines, who gave the sermon. "He was criticized and he was villifed and he was unfairly misquoted, but he just kept on smiling and ke kept on speaking the message of morality and the glorious message of Jesus Christ to our culture. And the political landscape of America has been different since that day."

*

About 7,000 people squeezed into Falwell's Thomas Road Baptist Church. An additional 2,000 spilled into Liberty's basketball arena and its football stadium.

More than 33,000 had viewed Falwell's body over four days as it lay in repose.

Falwell spend nearly his entire life in this small town in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, but this was no ordinary country preacher's funeral. Schools closed early. Helicipters, hovered as 17 agencies, including Liberty University's own police department, provided security and kept an eye on protesters:

*

Mourners, were given a funeral program that included photos of Falwell on his wedding day, kneeling in prayer and being lifted on the shoulders of Liberty University students. Of the dozen photos, only one hinted of his national fame: Falwell with President Regan, the first national Republican his consdervative Moal Mojority political group helped elect.

*

A video traced the start of Falwell's congregation in 1956 in an old bottling plant to its growth into one of the first megachurches, with 24,000 members; his creation that same year of the Old Time Gospel Hour; and his founding in 1971 of his Christian university, which now has 125,000 alumni.

*

Most of the images of Falwell with national leaders dated from the 1970's and 1980's, when he was at the height of his influence.

*

A generation after he ended evangelicals' wariness about getting involved in politics, there was a noticeable dearth of public figures at his funeral. No 2008 Republican presidential candidates were in the church. Among the former GOP presidential hopefuls, who attended were Alan Keyes, Gary Bauer, and former senator George Allen of Virginia.

*

Republican leaders in Washington said congressional voting kept senators and House members from making the three-hour drive to Lynchburg.

*

Tim Goegiein, the president's liaison to religious conservatives, was not listed in the program but spoke briefly. He called Falwell "a great friend of this administration. A force of nature." He said that in a conversation a month ago, the minister was thankful for being able to train "a new generation" of Christian conservatives, many of whom now work in the Bush administration.

*

Joleen Sharp, 19, a Liberty senior who hopes to attend its law school, said, she expected Falwell's legacy to be felt for years. "There are professionals going in all areas who, once they graduate, are going to be very influntia," she said, holding a Bible.

*

Many at the funeral recalled an approachable, good-humored pastor, not a lightning rod on issues like abortion and gay rights.

*

"Those who did not know him or didn't go to his church didn't know the real Dr. Falwell," said Sabrina Ugron, 36, a Lyncbhurg computer technician who was married by Falwell, who also married her parents. "The real Dr. Falwell was personable, caring, loving, generous, dedicated and a lot of fun. He was funny."

*

Gary Thompson, 43, of Rustburg, VA met Falwell only a couple of times since joining the church in 2000, but he took a vacation day from his heating and air conditioning job to attend the funeral. He said he will always remember "his charism, his unwavering principles on the Bible and sticking up for the truth of God's word."

*

If elected officials were in short supply for the man who shephered Christians to the polls, the funeral presented a who's who of evangelicals.

*

At the end of the 9- minute service, 10 pallbearers wheeled Falwell's black, gold-trimmed coffin to a hearse. The procession passed by a giant "LU" carved atop the mountain Falwell rechristened for his university and took him to a private burial on the grounds of his Christian campus.

• I typed this from the USA newspaper. I could hardly keep my emotions while typing this. Say what you will about Jerry Falwell, but if its not good, do not talk to me about it. I will not address what you didn't like about him, or about what he did in this life.

• Charity and I and my mom (Pauline Whisnant) and sister Ellen and her son sat down with him and his wife for dinner April 15, 2007 at O'Charlie's and he and Macel were two gracious, loving, people we have been around in some time. The above article was well and correctly written.

Charles E Whisnant,

DR. JERRY FALWELL AND DR. JOHN MacARTHUR, JR

Today was the Funeral of Jerry Falwell

I have been in a dialog with Jim over at OldTruth.Com about the Church Growth Movement and the Megachurch methods of doing ministry.

Jim writes:
"As far as TRBC is concerned, I don't want to argue this out on the heels of Jerry Falwell's death. He truly was a good defender of the Gospel on TV, as I acknowledged in an earlier post. But in the end there is only so far I can go in giving a man accolades who essentially defined such men to be heretics as Spurgeon, Edwards, Whitefield, the Puritans, and the founders of the SBC. Charles, those are *your* beliefs that he spoke of as being a heresy as well, and I think if you were as aggressive in fighting wrong ideas from TRBC as you have been in your objections here on Old Truth over the past several weeks, you would come across as being more consistent. Some of your points on large churches are valid, but I think TRBC is far from being a good model for us." Jim at Old Truth

What would I consider the wrong ideas from TRBC?

I really am trying to make a rather serious point without being ungracious or obstinate.
I have no objections with the discussions on Old Truth.

Every church is viewed by another group of churches as been "heretics" and teaching heresy. I have to defend all the time John MacArthur’s position on "the blood of Christ."

I listen to preachers often about how he is wrong on "Lordship Salvation," and his position on Revelation. Even the other day someone said he holds one position on music and then allows it in the Youth ministry. Of course, he has never called a group of people "heretics" for believing in the Reformed Covenant Positions. I personally hold to the positions that John MacArthur holds, thus I don’t think he is a heretic.

With that said, you might say, "How can you mention TRBC and Grace Community Church in the same breath?" Do they have anything in common with each other that would make them look like they are alike?

John MacArthur said at the Shepherd’s Conference in 2007 "Every Reformed Calvinist should not be a Amillennialist" He further asserted that, of all people, Calvinists should be the most enthusiastic about premillennialism. And Jerry Falwell said, those who believe in Calvinism are teaching heresy. And he said we do not teach that here at Liberty, but I know too many people at Liberty and teachers at Liberty who do believe and teach the doctrine of grace.

Both John and Jerry preached on the danger of the Emerging Church Movement.

Both have Sunday School, both have only a Sunday Morning Worship Service ( not Saturday night), both have Sunday Evening Service. Both do not have the Lord’s Supper every Sunday. Both are on TV and Radio. Both agree on Israel and the Revelation. Both have the same position on the Bible.

Everywhere they go to speak they have men who travel with them, maybe not body guards but they make sure they are protected. They both have a College/University.

Now with all that said, would I rather go to Grace or TRBC? Would I rather hear John or Jerry preach? Would I rather send my students to Liberty or the Master’s College? I am glad there are more than two choices. Would I pattern my ministry after Jerry’s or John’s? Do I like Eldership over Congregational Rule, or Pastor/Deacon Rule? Do I teach regeneration before faith, or faith before regeneration?

Is a church not biblical if they do not have Eldership Policy? Is a church biblically wrong if the pastor does not preach expositionally? Is a church biblically wrong if the pastor gives a open invitation to come to Christ? Is a pastor wrong if he has a body guard? (Jack Hyles had one every time he was in the church). Is the church wrong if they don’t have the Lord’s Supper every Sunday. What if the pastor does not teach out of the KJV? And what if the church allows Southern Gospel Singers to sing on Sunday, is that biblically wrong? Do I prefer one over the other? Very much so. Do I think both are wrong, no?

John or Jerry don’t cuss when they preach. They don’t drink beer when they go out to eat. When they preach they always wear a suit and a tie. They both believe in the total authority of Scripture.

One is a Fundamentalist and the other is Evangelical. Would I do all that either one does?
In the first place, I couldn’t attempt to do what the Lord has allowed them to do.

Who is to say that there are more unbelievers in one of their churches. My wife said, "Charles, the way you teach about salvation, do you believe any member of our church is really born again?" How many in our churches have made decisions for Christ and are really superficial Christians? Spurgeon was afraid a lot of those were in the Tabernacle.

Could I mention in the same breath Dan Kimbell and Perry Noble with John Piper and Mark Dever? Don’t ask Phil Johnson that question.

My wife said, "Charles, you find fault with something in about every church you attend, is there any church you really like? Charles


Drafted by Charles E. Whisnant May 22, 2007 The Funeral of Jerry Fallwell Today at Lynchburg VA

BUT THERE’S GROWTH AND THERE’S GROWTH

It is hard for pastors NOT to be mesmerized by church growth. Who doesn’t want their church congregation to grow? I would love to preach to 500 rather than 50 anytime on Sunday. Who doesn’t want to see numbers and budgets increasing year by year? And who isn’t greatly interested when the latest growth model comes along–the latest research, the latest insight that promises us the key to such growth? If the pastor is worth his salt he is interested (my opinion only).

But there’s growth and there’s growth.

I am going to relate my history of learning about how church growth was related to me over the years.

For every example of a church that is larger for the wrong reason, I could give you an example of a small church (less than an hundred) that is small for the wrong reasons. What’s my point?
So what are the points in which a larger church can be biblically larger and a smaller church being biblically small?

I don’t know many pastors/elders who set out to see that their church does not grow.

We are sitting in a Seminary class room: Church Building 101. I am sitting in Christian Education at Hyles Anderson College. How Should Church Ministry Be? I go to the Super Conference at Thomas Road Baptist Church, in Lynchburg, Virginia: "Building a Bus/Children’s Ministry." Of course, there were a number of conferences. The Pastor’s School at Hammond, Indiana. "How To GO Soul-Winning." Only to name a few Bible/Church conferences I have attended over the years. Hyles/Falwell/Roberson/Rice/Malone/ I could mention others.

Footnote: Tom Malone, Lee Roberson and Jerry Falwell have died this year 2007

Young preachers coming out of independent Baptist schools have a desire to serve the Lord. We were Baptist only preachers, who did not know Reformed preachers existed. (1947-1980).

Now in those days, starting a church in a town was what preachers were encouraged to do. You would go to a town, find a building and then start knocking on doors inviting people to come visit the new church. Sometimes you also inviting them to come to Christ. There were many preachers who did just that.

Today in those same Seminaries and Colleges, they still teach the same idea of Church Ministry.

I don’t remember if in any of those classes the point was "How To Build A Church of 1000 People." We believed if we did what we were taught, we would have a church of a 1000.

Of course more of us never saw 500 in our churches. Of course, that was so disappointing to us. We had yet to learn why we were pastors/teachers, I think.

I never went to a Pastor’s/Church Conference where that local church had 200 in attendance. Can you imagine going to a Church Conference where the attendance was 50 in Sunday School?

You were always challenged to go back to your church and town and build a church like theirs.

I remember being in Hyles-Anderson College and First Baptist Church, and I left to go pastor a church in Altoona, Kansas, the First Baptist Church, on Main Street. I was rather excited that first Sunday. The church building was the size of one of the Sunday School classes at Hammond. The town had a total of about 500 people. I had to have a mindset adjustment.

I had seen 20,000 people come to church on one Sunday, and the next Sunday there were only 12,000 in the whole 40 square mile county!. I had to have an alignment in my brain cells. I could leave this town and church or find a way to do ministry in a different way.

My mindset adjustment came when I attended my first Shepherd’s Conference at Grace Community Church. The Conference in 1983 and in 1990 took only 250 men in those years. I remember that first year and in the first session, the speaker said, "If you are here to learn how to build a larger church you are in the wrong conference." I said, "Did I come to the wrong conference? This is why I am here-- to learn to build a large church." Grace Community was a very large church. So what was the point of coming to this Conference?.

The main idea of the Shepherd’s Conference was this. How To Be A Godly Pastor/Teacher. The idea was not how to build a large church but how to have a church ministry that is pleasing to the Lord. What kind of Church ministry does the Lord teach that we should have?
You be the kind of person you should be, you do the kind of ministry that the Lord has called you to do, you preach/teach the way the Lord called you to do it, and then you allow the Lord to do the rest in the place you are called to minister. Oh! That works!!

So I went back to Altoona, Kansas thinking "Oh, this is what kind of person I should be, doing this kind of ministry, and then we will see what the Lord will do!" I can tell you that was scarey. Because my mindset about ministry was nothing like what I had learned at the Shepherd’s Conference. From Jack Hyles/.Jerry Falwell to John MacArthur, are you kidding!

First I had to change my idea of what kind of preaching I should do. Hyles or MacArthur? What kind of ministry should we have. Soul Winning or Church Discipleship? You mean no more contests to see how many we could get to come to Sunday School! You mean no more giving away hats to kids to ride the bus? What would the church become? And maybe we would never have 1000 in Sunday School. (Let alone 200).

The primary focus may not have been on "numbers" but you desired to see new people come to the church. You were there in that town with a purpose, and since in Altoona, there were only three churches in the first place, we were interested in reaching people with the Word .

I think the difference in my mindset was this: The purpose of the local church was for the discipling of believers, for the fellowship of believers, and the worshiping of believers. So what we did on the inside of the church was for believers.

My focus as a pastor/teacher became the teaching of the Word of God, and the training of believers in the church. The focus was off getting a crowd, and on building believers up to do the work of the ministry: (Ephesians 4:12-16).

Drafted by Charles E. Whisnant and Proof Checked by Charity Whisnant May 21, 2007