The Good News of Psalm 110: An Easter Sermon

If you follow me on social media you’ll note that I frequently promote what I’m reading, watching, and listening to. I love to talk about my favorites. My favorite music albums? Abbey Road, by The Beatles; London Town, by Paul McCartney; Tommy, by The Who. My favorite films? Citizen Kane, Lawrence of Arabia, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World. My favorite books? The Alice books, by Lewis Carroll; Hamlet, by William Shakespeare; The Lion, the Witch, the Wardrobe, by C.S. Lewis.

Did you ever wonder which books of the bible were Jesus’ favorites? If we based it on the books he references the most, they would be Exodus, Isaiah, Deuteronomy, and the Psalms. When Jesus wanted to explain who he was, what he was doing, and what the gospel meant, these are books he most often mentioned. In terms of passages, Jesus’ favorite would be Psalm 110. In fact, Psalm 110 is the most quoted and referenced passage in the entire New Testament. You can find it in the following places:  Matthew 22:44; 26:64; Mark 12:36; 14:62; 16:19; Luke 20:42,43; 22:69; Acts 2:34-35; 5:30-31 7:55-56; Romans 8:34; 1 Corinthians 15:24-25; Ephesians 1:20, 22; 2:6; Colossians 3:1Hebrews 1:3, 13; 5:6; 6:20; 7:17, 21; 8:1; 10:12, 13; 12:2; 1 Peter 3:21-22; Revelations 3:21.

Given its frequency you might expect that Jesus and the New Testament writers believed that this particular psalm was quite important to their understanding of what God was doing in and through Jesus. Consider the passage:

The LORD says to my Lord:

“Sit at My right hand

Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.”

The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying,

“Rule in the midst of Your enemies.”

Your people will volunteer freely in the day of Your power;

In holy array, from the womb of the dawn,

Your youth are to You as the dew.

The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind,

“You are a priest forever

According to the order of Melchizedek.” The Lord is at Your right hand;

He will shatter kings in the day of His wrath. He will judge among the nations,

He will fill them with corpses,

He will shatter the chief men over a broad country. He will drink from the brook by the wayside;

Therefore He will lift up His head.

The Hebrew wording of the psalm is difficult, and its metaphors are multi-layered and complex. Like with most foreign language poetry, different scholars will translate it different ways depending on what they think is most essential to the point of poem. It is generally identified as a royal psalm, dealing with the king of Israel, and has affinities with Psalm 2. It seems to be written in celebration of a king’s military victory over foreign enemies. It is either a psalm written by David, written about David, or written in the style David wrote psalms. David, of course, was well-known for being a musician and wrote psalms. There is no reason why he couldn’t have written this particular one.

Regardless, the subject of the psalm is a kingly figure who has been given a place of honor by being enthroned spiritually close to God. In the ancient near east, it was a common idea that the king of a people would be seated next to their invisible god. Furthermore, it was also a common metaphor that a king’s foreign enemies would be made a footstool in defeat, showing the king’s power. In this psalm, the god Yahweh himself is the forger of the king’s power, he is the God of Jerusalem and the king’s power extends from that city, hammering the enemies. All the king’s authority is given by God, as well as life and youth. Interestingly, the king is also a priest, like Melchizedek, who reigns forever. The Lord will thus execute judgment upon the gentile nations and will be lifted above his enemies.

As you can see, there is a lot going on in this passage and much ambiguity. Later Jewish scholars wondered who the figure in the psalm was meant to be. There were various opinions. Naturally, David was a favored interpretation. Others thought it might refer to a king like David. Still others looked at the reference to Melchizedek from Genesis 14 and supposed the psalm was a reference to Abraham’s victory again his enemies in that chapter. Importantly, there was a significant strain of interpretation who speculated it might refer to a specific king, a coming king, who would rule like no other. They read this psalm in the light of 2 Samuel 7 about a promised king whose throne would last forever. They also combined it with Daniel 7 and the vision of a Son of Man who was given dominion over the world by God. So, looking at these passages and others, people in the first century CE began to speculate on whether they referred to the same figure – a coming king – and, if so, who he might be. The common interpretation was that it would be a coming king who would defeat Israel’s enemies.

The reference in Psalm 110 to Melchizedek in Genesis 14 is very unusual. It is the only other reference to this figure in all of the Old Testament. He is described as a pagan priest-king of El Elyon, or God Most High, who rules the city of Salem, which later became Jerusalem when the Israelites conquered Palestine. His name or title means “king of righteousness” and is a mysterious figure. In Genesis 14, Abraham has partnered with the kings of Sodom and other cities to defeat enemies and save Abraham’s nephew, Lot. After the coalition is victorious, Melchizedek honors Abraham, saying God Most High has made him victorious. Abraham eventually corrects things, noting that he worships Yahweh El Elyon, or the Lord God Most High. He then refuses to accept the gifts of the pagan king of Sodom, noting his oath to the Lord. Here Abraham shows quite an exemplary character. While he cooperates with pagan government powers for a specific task and shows toleration towards a pagan religion, he nevertheless never abandons his principles in doing so. In fact, he openly states the supremacy of his god, Yahweh. In this sense, he is quite like Daniel, who was forced into serving the kings of Babylon. He did so while never abandoning his religious beliefs or his understanding that there was only one god who he could worship. It is ironic then that Melchizedek lauds Abraham for his military victory over enemies (v. 20) while Psalm 110 is about an Israelite king’s victory over idolatrous pagan enemies.

When you get to the 1^st century CE, you have a Jewish nation being oppressed by pagan gentile enemies, the Romans. The people of God are longing for a king, a Messiah, who will defeat the enemy, liberate them from oppression, and set up an eternal rule. Enter Jesus.

Jesus appears on the scene and begins referring to himself as the Son of Man. Now this title could simply refer to a human being, but it could also refer to the figure of Daniel 7. Jesus then makes cryptic references to the identity of the Psalm 110 figure, identifying him with the coming Messiah (Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42,43). Then during his trial, Jesus triumphantly identifies himself as the Messiah, combining both Psalm 110 and Daniel 7:

“You shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:64; Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69).

It was this declaration that sealed Jesus’ fate. Jesus was openly declaring himself to be the Messiah, the Christ, the King of the Jews, the one who God was giving dominion over the world, and the one who would subject enemies under his feet. It was because of this pronouncement that he was found guilty of being a false prophet and false Messiah and handed over to the pagan enemies. In the most shocking moment in history, Jesus is “coronated” by the Romans.

“Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole Roman cohort around him. They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him. And after twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on his head, and a reed in his right hand; and they knelt down before him and mocked him, saying, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ They spat on him, and took the reed and began to beat him on the head. After they had mocked him, they took the scarlet robe off him and put his own garments back on him, and led him away to crucify him” (Matthew 27:27-31; cf. Mark 15:16-20; John 19:1-5).

Intended by the Romans to be a macabre, mocking parody of the charge against Jesus, the soldiers dress him up as a king with robe, staff, and crown. They then put him on the cross and hang a sign above his head, “This is the king of the Jews” (Matthew 27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; John 19:19). In the most startling, scandalous, ironic event in human history, Jesus becomes King of the Jews and King of the world by being humiliated and executed on a Roman cross: the humiliating death device of the pagan enemy. This was his coronation and enthronement. When Jesus was resurrected it was then evident that God himself had reversed the verdict of the court. God himself had declared that, yes, Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ, the King of the Jews, the one who God was giving dominion over the world, and the one who would subject enemies under his feet. When Jesus stated that he should be understood in light of Psalm 110 and Daniel 7, God himself approved.

Therefore, in light of the resurrection and God’s vindication of Jesus’ claim, Peter, on the day of Pentecost, can proclaim to the crowds, that Jesus has been seated at the right hand of God and been made king over the world, citing Psalm 110 (Acts 2:33-36). Peter will cite this again in 5:30-31 and in 3:21-22 of his first letter. In 7:55-56 of Acts, Stephen will have a vision of this reality. Paul will apply Psalm 110 to Jesus in several of his letters (Romans 8:34; 1 Corinthians 15:24-25; Ephesians 1:20, 22; 2:6; Colossians 3:1). The author of Hebrews will cite 110 throughout his letter, explaining how Jesus is both king and priest like Melchizedek (Hebrews 1:3, 13; 5:6; 6:20; 7:17, 21; 8:1; 10:12, 13; 12:2). But even when Psalm 110, Daniel 7, 2 Samuel 7, or other accompanying passages such as Zechariah 9, Malachi 3-4, and Isaiah 40-55, aren’t referenced explicitly, the idea that Jesus is king over the world permeates the New Testament witness.

First and foremost, the Gospel is the good news of the coming of the Kingdom of God with Jesus as its king (Matthew 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; Mark 1:14-15; Luke 4:43; 8:1; 16:16; Acts 8:12; 20:25; 28:31). It is the proclamation that God has enthroned Jesus as King of the world, following his death and resurrection. Having been made king over the world, all power and authority has been given to him (Matthew 28:18) and all powers and authorities have been subjected to him (Ephesians 1:20-22; Philippians 2:8-11; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Colossians 1:13; 2:10, 15; Jude 1:25; Revelation 2:26-27; 12:10; Matthew 9:8; 21:23; Mark 3:15; John 5:27; 17:2; Psalm 110). 1 Corinthians 15:24-27 is very explicit that Jesus will reign until he has put all things into final subjection. And, as is clear from 1 Corinthians 15, Ephesians, Philippians 2, the four Gospels, and 1 Peter, Christians are expected to take part in this process of subjecting the powers of the world to Christ’s Lordship. We are called to be faithful, Spirit-directed and Spirit-infused servants to bring idolatrous powers through sanctification and repentance back into allegiance of God’s leadership in Christ. In doing so, 1 Corinthians 15 also tells us that, in light of the Resurrection, the work Christians do in the Lord is not in vain (v. 58). God is using all our obedient work for the Kingdom purpose of bringing everything, all the corrupt powers, rulers, and institutions, into submissive obedience.

Indeed, in citing Psalm 110 in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul can refer to these powers, all these corrupt rulers and authorities, even death itself as the enemies. In Romans 5, Paul can go so far as to refer to sin and death as false rulers reigning and oppressing humanity. And that’s important. In light of Psalm 110, the enemies that Jesus defeated on the cross were sin, death, and the fallen powers that oppressing humanity. Now these oppressors were of humanity’s own making. We, through our sin, brought death into the world and corrupted the powers that govern humanity, imprisoning ourselves in cages of our own construction. Nevertheless, Jesus had to defeat sin, death, and powers to free humanity.

Again, the Jews of the first century were expecting a Christ who would defeat the pagan Roman enemies. Jesus shows up and says, “Love your enemies” (Matthew 5:44; Luke 6:27). Why? Though the Romans were indeed oppressors, Jesus understood that the real enemy was sin and evil, something deeper and more problematic than Rome itself. The same enemy that infected Roman oppressors also infected their victims. This is why Paul can say in Romans 1 and more specifically 3:23 that “all sinned and fell short of God’s glory.” Even more explicit, in Romans 5:10, Paul says that while we were still enemies, we were reconciled to God through Jesus’ death. We ourselves are enemies needing to be subjected to the rule and reign of Jesus. What it means to be a Christian is hearing the good news that Jesus is king and following him in faithfulness, trusting obedience, and allegiance to his rule. We turn away from our way of doing things, submit ourselves to his Lordship, and becoming obedient to his direction. And, as stated above, part of that obedience is bringing other individuals and the fallen institutions of the world, into obedience under Christ. We, who were once enemies, now enabled by the Spirit of Jesus, are to love, pray, suffer, and obey, in order to bring other enemies under Jesus’ rule. We are to volunteer freely in the day of his power as he rules in the midst of his enemies.

Now what does this mean for us?

First, we should be excited to share this. I myself have very few interests, but I am excitedly passionate about them. I want to talk about my favorite books, music, and films. I love discussing great restaurants and making great new recipes. At the same time, I’m even more passionate about the Gospel. It’s the solution! It’s the endgame! God is victorious in Jesus, and he is enacting that victory through his followers. The good news of the Gospel and the application of Psalm 110 to Jesus is the most important thing in the world. Yet, too often sin, delusion, and distraction has obscured and watered down this message in blindness, confusion, or a truncated message of personal escape from this world. We need to proclaim the good news of Jesus’ kingship with passion and excitement. This is the Easter victory.

Second, if we haven’t already done so, we should give our faithfulness, our trusting obedience, our allegiance to Jesus. If Jesus’ enthronement means anything, it definitely means that he is king over the world and no one else is; not Mohammed, not Moses, not Krishna, not Caesar, not anything else, including and especially ourselves. Everyone who wants to be saved or rescued from the powers of sin, death, and oppression, must show allegiance to Jesus (Acts 4:12). This is an exclusive claim that cannot yield to fashionable pluralism. While believers, like Abraham and Daniel, can be tolerant towards and even cooperative with other religions and governments, ultimately it is the unescapable and primary conviction of Christianity that all other religions are false and that all government must show allegiance to Jesus. If you haven’t already done so, give your allegiance to Jesus in the strong conviction of following him and his teachings in obedience.

Third, while it’s essential to show allegiance to Jesus and become an obedient follower of his teachings, we should fulfill our spirit-empowered mission of bringing the people and powers of this world in allegiance to Christ. On the one hand, this is about making followers of people and teaching them to live moral and God-honoring lives according to Jesus. On the other hand, it is about bringing power and institutions under the control of Jesus. It is about engaging the powers by fighting against violence, oppression, racism, sexism, poverty, economic injustice, expansive government, inequality before the law, privilege, nepotism, idolatry, abuse, inhumane treatment, abortion on demand, illness, illiberalism, environmental damage, and lies. Sin is both personal and societal and it must ultimately be brought to subjection under the feet of Christ so that the world might be reconciled to God.

Finally, as Paul states in 1 Corinthians 15:58, in light of the resurrection of Jesus and his victory, we should understand that our participation in that ultimate victory means that what we do now in obedience to him is not done in vain. It is not worthless. It is not an empty whistling into the wind. Our work in Jesus matters; it has eternal significance. When we witness to someone, when we share the good news of Jesus, when we fight against injustice, when we help the poor and needy, when we engage the powers by using the Kingdom methods of love, forgiveness, submission, servanthood, suffering, sacrifice, and turn-the-other-cheek justice, God is using all that work for his purposes in Jesus. We just have to be prayerfully obedient to his direction on the best ways to act.

This is why we celebrate Easter. This is why the first disciples were so excited. This is why they gave up everything, threw fear of death and persecution to the wind, and told everyone what God had done. This is what drove Paul of Tarsus back to the Old Testament Scriptures to reexamine Psalm 110, Daniel 7 and the other passages to see how God had been faithful to his promises to defeat sin and death and had done so in Jesus. The resurrection proved it! That’s Easter.

Did Jesus Intend to Grab People's Attention When He Taught?

I was recently asked the following question:

“Can you show me with chapter and verse where the intent of those acts [i.e., the miracles and parables of Jesus] was to grab attention?”

The context of this question comes in response to my rugged defense of Ed Young’s ministerial and preaching methodology. I will explain later why I believe such a defense is important. Nevertheless, in brief, my defense is in response to accusations that Young’s methodology is unbiblical. As I’ve shown over many years, Young’s approach is highly and fundamentally biblical. Significantly, accusers never counter my argument of the biblical evidence with their own evidence from Scripture. Indeed, theirs is a silent and begrudging admission that my argument is sound and that Young’s methodology is biblical. Rather, the response is an unspoken “okay, yes, Young’s approach is technically biblical,” followed by a spoken, “but Young is doing it for unbiblical reasons.” When I’ve countered with evidence from Young’s books and his interviews about his stated biblical reasons for what he is doing, the accusers respond by either stubbornly refusing to look at the evidence or stating that Young doesn’t mean it. Both responses are implicit accusations that Young is lying about his intended rationale, but both come from individuals who were previously ignorant of the biblical foundation of Young’s methodology. Thus, the mentality of the accusers runs as follows: “I don’t care what the Bible says, or what Young’s stated intentions are, or what the results are; Young is wrong.” I shall get to the subject of Young’s results later.

Nevertheless, the above question intrigued me, and I felt it deserved a more thorough response. It’s a good question. If Young’s stated approach is to grab people’s attention in order to preach the gospel, and if, as I maintain, this is a biblical approach used by Jesus, what is the evidence for it? Now assuming that the above question is hypothetical, in order to maintain there is no evidence of intent, you have to argue that either Jesus was a poor preacher (an ineffective communicator) or that he didn’t know what he was doing.

First, every preacher, every teacher, every prophet, every speaker, tries to grab the attention of his or her audience in order to communicate. That’s the entire point. And to do so you use examples, you use illustrations, you use a plethora of rhetorical devices at your disposal to get people to see and hear the meaning you’re trying to communicate. Jesus used numerous rhetorical devices:  chiasm (Matthew 19:30), allusion (John 8:58), hyperbole (Mark 9:43), paradox (Matthew 16:25), parallelism (Matthew 7:7-8), simile (Matthew 28:3), typology (John 3:14-15), wordplay (Matthew 16:18), and many others so that people would see and hear what he was saying. Seeing and hearing. That’s the key. For preachers, it’s about communicating the truth of the gospel with the specific intent of creating two results. The first result is repentance. The second result ... we will come to later. Both require grabbing people’s attention so that they will see and hear. And here is the point: Nobody thinks that Jesus wasn’t a masterful communicator. Everyone, including the hardest liberal scholars who believe most of the Gospels were made up, still believe that Jesus was a master communicator who was able to grip his audience’s attention and transform their thinking by his words, parables, and symbolic actions. As David Wenham notes:

“Anyone can devise banal and/or inappropriate sermon illustrations. Jesus' parables are consistently appropriate and powerful, capturing the listeners' attention and then bringing them face to face with some aspect of his message which would be far less effectively communicated through non-pictorial language. Sometimes the power of the parable lies simply in the use of a thought-provoking analogy, such as that of the new wine in the old wineskins. Sometimes it is in the unusual twist and challenge that a story contains, as in the parable of the good Samaritan, which has particular biting force because it is a Samaritan, a religious and social outcast, who is the kind hero, or in the parable of the labourers in the vineyard, who work for different periods of time but all receive the same wage. Sometimes the story is one that stimulates thought and leaves people to make their own connections, as with the parable of the prodigal son, with its powerful portrayal of the runaway son, the loving father and the righteous elder brother.” (The Parables of Jesus, pp. 13-14)

So, based on an examination of Jesus’ teaching and preaching methodology, what was the result?

Matthew 4:24-25; 7:28; 8:1; 9:35-36; 12:14, 23, 46; 13:2, 34, 36, 54: 14:2, 13-23, 35; 15:10, 30-39, 17:14; 19:2, 25; 20:29, 31; 21:8-11, 12-16, 23, 45-46; 22:22, 33-34; 23:1; Mark 1:21-28, 33, 45; 2:1-2, 12-13; 3:7-10, 20, 32; 4:1-2, 26; 5:14-16, 20-21, 24, 31; 6:14, 33-34, 45, 53-56; 7:14, 17, 24, 33, 37; 8:1-2, 6, 9, 11, 34; 9:14-15, 25; 10:13, 17, 26, 32, 46; 11:8-11, 15-18, 27-28; 12:12, 37; Luke 4:28-29, 32, 36-37, 40-43; 5:1-3, 15-19, 26, 29; 6:17-19; 7:11, 16-18; 8:4, 19, 34-40, 42, 45; 9:7, 11-12; 11:14, 27, 29; 12:1, 13, 54; 13:17, 31; 14:1, 25; 15:1; 18:15, 36-41; 19:4, 37-38, 48; 20:45; John 2:2; 3:1-2, 26; 4:1, 30, 39-42, 53; 5:16; 6:2, 5, 14, 22-24; 7:12, 15, 31-32, 40-46; 8:30, 59; 9:11-34; 10:19, 24, 31, 39, 41-42; 11:45-57; 12:9-19, 29, 34.

The Scriptural evidence is that Jesus’ teaching and preaching methodology resulted in people’s attention being grabbed. I would submit that Jesus was an effective communicator who had the ability to cause people to see and hear what he was saying.

Second, even if Jesus was an effective communicator who grabbed people’s attention, was it his intent to do so? Perhaps he wasn’t intentional about his approach. Perhaps he wasn’t trying to get people’s attention when he proclaimed the Gospel. Perhaps God-incarnate didn’t know what he was doing when he employed a specific methodology that resulted in people’s attention being grabbed. In truth, even hardcore liberal scholars who deny Jesus’ deity believe he intentionally employed his methodology to grab people’s attention so that he might effectively communicate. Indeed, Jesus himself said he did what he did so that people might believe (John 10:37-38). Elsewhere, Jesus pointed to his actions as evidence for his Messiahship (Matthew 11:2-5; Luke 7:22; John 2:11; 14:11; Acts 2:22). Importantly, in the Gospels, those who believe the gospel are said to see and hear. Those who do not are said to be blind and deaf. Seeing and hearing.

Therefore, we come to Jesus’ stated intention for why he taught in parables:

“Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,

You will keep on hearing, but will not understand;

You will keep on seeing, but will not perceive;

For the heart of this people has become dull,

With their ears they scarcely hear,

And they have closed their eyes,

Otherwise they would see with their eyes,

Hear with their ears,

And understand with their heart and return,

And I would heal them.’

But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.” (Matthew 13:10-17)

So, Jesus states that his intention is to grab people’s attention with his parables for two results: first, so that they may see and hear, and second so that others may not. What were the results of his intention? First, many people saw, heard, believed, and repented. Second, many people refused to listen, refused to hear, refused to believe, and refused to repent. Indeed, when the latter group saw the ministry success Jesus was having, they resented it. They got mad when people’s lives were changed (Matthew 12:13-14; 21:15-6; Mark 3:6; Luke 5:21; 6:11; 13:14; John 5:16). They publicly claimed that God could not be behind the success of Jesus’ ministry and blasphemed the Holy Spirit in the process (Matthew 12:24-37; Mark 3:22-30; Luke 11:15-20; John 7:20; 10:19-21). All Jesus could do was weep (Matthew 11:20–24). In truth, the spiritually blind and the spiritually deaf didn’t like how Jesus was achieving his ministerial success and so rejected the legitimacy of his results.

Now I attended Fellowship Church for a number of years. I served in their ministries and went through their New Member’s Class. I participated in their Small Groups. I got to know and became friends with their pastors and staff. I’ve read Ed Young’s books. I’ve read interviews where he explains his methodology and the Biblical basis for it. I’ve listened and seen countless numbers of his sermons. The Spirit spoke to me in a very clear and decisive way through one of his sermons. I’ve attended numerous baptisms at Fellowship. I’ve heard numerous sermons on repentance and seen numerous people repent. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Yet, the accusers haven’t seen or heard. Indeed, they refuse to do so. They claim either that they don’t need to know the reason for Young’s methodology or that he is lying about his intentions for employing it. They look at the results of Fellowship Church’s ministry (2,000 baptisms a year) and claim it is illegitimate and, therefore, not from God. What is more, the hate of Ed Young is now so blind, that in order to delegitimize the success of his methodology, some are having to result to questioning whether Jesus actually knew what he was doing when he used similar methods.

Now why is this important?

There is nothing wrong with critiquing someone’s theology or methodology. I do so myself. See here, here, and here. Yet, if one is going to do so, 1) you better have adequate knowledge to do so, and 2) you better not blaspheme the Holy Spirit in the process.

In truth, my defense of Ed Young’s methodology is not a defense of Ed Young himself. He doesn’t need defending. The spiritually blind and the spiritually deaf are not hampering the effectiveness of his ministry. Rather, I defend his methodology because I am absolutely dedicated to the Gospel and want to see the advance of the mission to evangelize, to disciple, and to subject the powers under Christ’s lordship. That’s the mission. That’s the goal. So when I see fellow Christians (not unbelievers!) denigrating a methodology that is actually achieving the goals of the Kingdom of God in a spectacular fashion, yes, I’m going to speak up for the Gospel. I want to see missional success in ministry, and I want others to use what is actually working to achieve that success. What I'm seeing is not honest critique from knowledgeable individuals, but Christian leaders wallowing in their ignorance and ministerial failure with mockery while claiming the results of God’s work is invalid. Such behavior would be more shocking if it wasn’t so common. People forget how much many fundamentalist and fundamentalist leaders despised Billy Graham and his ministerial success. They accused him of worldliness, ecumenicalism, universalism, and being popular. They looked at how he was respected by the world, how he was able draw large crowds, how was able to grab people’s attention with his methodology, how we was able to evangelize thousands, and they claimed his work was illegitimate. They were blind and deaf to what God was doing.

So, yes, Jesus’ intent was to grab attention so that he could speak he truth (Matthew 13:10-17). He did so in order that people would either open their eyes in repentance or blind themselves to judgment.  

A Quick Diatribe

Over the past 5 years, the ministries which I lead reached almost 400 people for Christ - 396 conversions to be exact. That doesn’t include hundreds who made “re-dedications” and thousands who were discipled.

There were many factors that contributed to these successes for the Kingdom of God. Two of the most important was that I intentionally took the theology of N.T. Wright and applied it using the methodology of Ed Young.

Both Wright, Young, and those like them, with similar theologies and methodologies, have had tremendous and proven ministerial success for the Kingdom of God. But they are mocked and criticized. And not by the world, but by other Christians – mostly other Christian leaders.

Here’s the point: There are better theologies and better methodologies out there that are having tremendous, proven success for the Kingdom of God, yet Christian leaders are opening rejecting and ridiculing them and their practitioners.

At a time when the SBC is in a tremendous and predictable decline, ministers within it are publicly mocking the very ones who are actually producing the overwhelming bulk of the results.

It’s almost as if whatever’s motivating this criticism, mockery, and grumbling wants to discourage such success from occurring elsewhere. It’s almost as if Christian ministers are being unwittingly manipulated into hindering the Gospel. Funny that.