Is 'My Body, My Choice' Biblical?

For years, pro-abortionists have argued, "My Body, My Choice." The premise behind such an argument is that a person has total sovereignty over his or her body. Nobody else has any claim. Based on this belief, no person or government can force another to do things or prevent things that involve the body. If this warrant is valid, then no person but the mother should say what happens to the mother's body. But the argument fails to apply to the baby; thus, suggesting the mother has sovereignty over the baby's body too, deciding whether the baby lives or dies. And recently, the same warrant has been invoked in the COVID immunization mandate arguments. But is the warrant valid? More importantly, is the warrant biblical?    

Before moving to the question, we must understand the premise of a warrant.  

According to Annette Rottenberg, the warrant is "an assumption, a belief we take for granted, or a general principle" (Structure of Argument, 1994, 114). She continues, "All our claims, both formal and informal, are grounded in warrants or assumptions that the audience must share with us if our claims are to prove acceptable" (114). The warrant--expressed or unexpressed--serves as the bridge between the claim and the various support or evidence. 

For example, suppose Sally does not want to get the COVID vaccine (the support). In that case, she can claim that the government does not have the authority to mandate a COVID vaccine (the claim), but the claim is accepted based on the warrant that it's Sally's body and, therefore, Sally's choice. But what if the necessary warrant was instead: My Body, Lottery Choice? In this case, it wouldn't matter what Sally wanted because a random lottery would decide who would be vaccinated. The support would be irrelevant to the claim based on a different warrant.  

In addition, the same warrant can be used to bridge supports to many claims. The "my body, my choice" warrant is being used to make claims about both abortion and COVID mandates. But there's more. Welfare or unemployment check recipients could also use the warrant to reject mandatory drug testing. "You can't tell me what I can or can't do to my body with drugs. My body, my choice!"   

But we haven't questioned the warrant. What does the Bible say? (The warrant here is that the Bible is true, authoritative, and the Word of God.) Is a Christian (or anyone for that matter) utterly sovereign over her or his body?  

1 Corinthians 3:23 says, "you belong to Christ." Romans 8:8-11 argues the same, indicating that those who are dead to sin and alive in Christ belong to Christ. James 4:13-17 rebukes the readers for thinking they can make a single decision about life outside of God's sovereignty. 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 says, "You are not your own, for you were bought at a price." Therefore, the Bible shows us that God has sovereignty over our bodies, and he makes the choices for our bodies. Case in point: God has repeatedly indicated that our bodies should not have sex outside of marriage, and doing otherwise is in violation of God's instruction.   

Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 7:4 says, "A wife does not have the right over her own body, but her husband does. In the same way, the husband does not have the right over his own body, but his wife does" (CSB). The idea here is that the marriage vows to become one flesh and give one another to each other also means each person has a say and provides the choice over the body of the spouse.  

Christians are also instructed to submit to governments in every case that does not violate God's mandates. Romans 13:1-4 says, 

"Let everyone submit to the governing authorities, since there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are instituted by God. So then, the one who resists the authority is opposing God's command, and those who oppose it will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have its approval. For it is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry the sword for no reason. For it is God's servant, the avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong" (CSB). 

Obviously, there is a time and place to stand against a corrupt government and trust God with the results. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were tossed into a blazing furnace for not worshiping a statue of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 3). In that case, submission to the earthy king would be sinful against God. Darius threw Daniel into a den of lions for praying to God (Daniel 6). Peter and John refused an order to stop preaching the gospel (Acts 4). Stephen refused to recant before the High Priest (Acts 7). But there is also a time and place to submit to the government. This post is not arguing for either, but pointing out that God uses his sovereignty over man to place sovereign authority in governments over people.  

The Bible shows us that we are not as sovereign over our bodies as we want to think. But also, don't take this to be a claim about abortion or vaccine rights. It's not. Instead, see that it's time Christians stop appealing to the warrant, "My body, my choice," and instead seek a different bridge from support to claim. This warrant is not as true as we might think in our own eyes, and Christians should stop proclaiming it.  

A Christmas Carol and the Shadow of Gospel Transformation

"Marley was dead." These words make up the opening of Charles Dicken's 1843 novel, A Christmas Carol. He was as dead as a doornail and more. So was Scrooge. So was another rich man.  

Jesus told a parable of a nameless rich man (maybe so we might fill our name in the void?) and a poor beggar named Lazarus. Both died. Lazarus went to Abraham's Side (or paradise) and the rich man to hell. In this story, the rich man begged that a person brought back from the dead be dispatched to warn his brothers. Abraham told the rich person that his brothers have all the warnings they need in the Bible. If they ignore the Word of God, they will also ignore any further notification. (See Luke 16:19-31.) In Dicken's story, Marley warned his partner, Scrooge.  

Few are aware that Dickens novelized the story of Jesus for his children. Published 64 years after his death, The Life of Our Lord suggests that Dickens was a Christian. The book is not a systematic theology. It sometimes misses some more prominent theological points; however, it does have an aspect of gospel transmission and discipleship aimed toward the Dickens family.   

The Christmas Carol is not the gospel. There is no mention of Christ's death, burial, or resurrection. However, reading the book hints at a gospel warning and a gospel transformation. There is a great deal about death and life, even if only shown in the temporal. In Stave 3, Scrooge discussed the acts and deeds of the Church with the Spirit of Christmas Present, and the spirit speaks as if Christmas and Christ are one. The Church and "his kind," meaning Christians but symbolized by the giant and his previous 1800 Christmas brothers, are tied together. It is as if you could read the book with Christ in place of Christmas.  

As is often the case in the Church, Dickens over-elevated justice, love, and charity above Christ and the gospel. Yet the point remains: the unexplainable and radical transformation of Scrooge led to the outpouring of Christmas fruit, not just on Christmas day but all the year long and for the remainder of his earthly life. Scrooge was committed to treasuring Christmas and the lessons of the three spirits in his heart forever. And as the book so clearly shows, Scrooge was saved! He received Marley's warning from the dead.  

The shadow of the gospel is present throughout the story, especially if you spend the two and a half hours reading it rather than watching one of the many movie renditions. (Note: possibly one of the closest movies to the unabridged story is Disney's 2009 "A Christmas Carol" featuring the voice of Jim Carey.)  

To start, Scrooge was as dead as Marley.  

It's not that Scrooge will die a lonely, horrible man with no good to show for it; it's that he's already dead. Only, he didn't know it, not at first anyway. The story brought many people proclaiming the wonder of Christmas into Scrooge's life, and he scoffed. "Humbug!" He told his nephew, Fred, that he should keep Christmas in his way, and Scrooge likewise will keep it in his. Is this not how so many speak of Christianity as they reject it and cry, "Humbug!"? Fred pointed out to Scrooge that he doesn't keep Christmas at all. Others came to Scrooge to speak of Christmas, including his clerk, Bob Cratchet. Scrooge rebuffed them all.    

But finally, Marley, a ghost from hell's suffering, came to warn Scrooge. In the book (and some movies), Scrooge was led to a window where he saw many more spirits in the bondage of chains, unable to do any good or make any decision to repent. It is this reality that caused these spirits so much agony. It was too late for them, and they will forever suffer. But it was not too late for Scrooge.    

Scrooge was brought face to face with testimonies, Christmas proclamations, and truths that he failed to see in the past and present. His eyes were opened to his sin. And by the way, Dickens introduced Scrooge as a "squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous, old sinner." The first two Christmas spirits showed Scrooge his sin over and over again. Indeed, he was a sinner! They also offered Scrooge a testimony of Christmas. The Spirit of Christmas Past led Scrooge to a great party where he once tasted the wonder and merriment of Christmas. The Spirit of Christmas Present took Scrooge all over the world. He saw sailors in ships, men in a lighthouse, and miners celebrating Christmas and showing love to one another. They visited hospitals and orphanages. The contrast of Scrooge's stone-cold, lifeless heart against great joy despite challenging circumstances is shocking to both Scrooge and the reader.  

The third spirit was the Grim Reaper for a reason. Dickens built every scene in Stave 4 on the foundation of Scrooge's death. Here, the book offers something our modern culture forces out of the movies and out of our minds. There were two dead bodies in scenes the Spirit of Christmas Yet to Come showed Scrooge. One was of Tiny Tim, lying in his bed, dead. He was uncovered and cherished. Pleasant, even in death. When Bob visited the body in viewing, it was clear that others had been there to call. There was a sign of a kiss left on the boy's forehead. The other body was that of Scrooge. After the reader sees that the people around Scrooge robbed the dead body, even taking the shirt off his back, Dickens takes the reader to visit the corps. It was covered. Nobody was there, and the only people who attended to him stole his possessions.

Scrooge begged the spirit to show him one person who this man in some way blessed. They went to a scene where a man was behind on his mortgage. He went to visit Scrooge but came up empty. He returned home pleased and blessed to report that Scrooge was dead. While the debt would be transferred to another lender, the death brought the family grace to get caught up--something Scrooge would never have given them.   

Two important graves were in the story. One was that of Tiny Tim's. It's green and lovely, and Bob promised to visit it often. The other is that of Scrooge. It's a terrible picture, run down and wretched. Scrooge might think it was Marley's grave if he hadn't known better. The reader laments the tomb of the boy and cries, "No! It can't be!" But regarding the second grave, the reader knows it belongs to Scrooge pages and pages before Scrooge comes to the same realization.  

Many readers (and viewers) might be tempted to think that Scrooge prevented his death by a moral change of life. Not so! He was dead already and striving to live for himself. He was full of greed and hated Christmas. The ghosts simply brought him to the reality of his own situation. Stave 4 is the funeral of Scrooge. From that point, he would no longer strive to live for his greedy desires but instead live for Christmas. Scrooge belonged to Christmas now! He embodied it all year long and forever because Christmas was the life that lived in him. Stave 4 is calling the reader to view his or her own funeral.      

The result of Stave 5 brings us great joy. Scrooge awoke as if alive for the first time. He laughed and was so out of practice it was awkward. He was giddy. He was "as light as feather." Scrooge was a new man altogether. He sent a giant turkey to Bob Cratchet anonymously. Scrooge raised Bob's salary the next day and committed to caring for Tiny Tim. Not only did he go to see his nephew, but he also went to church. He greeted the people in the streets. He was now a part of the Christmas community.  

In the opening, everything was dark. There was a great fog over London, so thick it oozed in through the keyholes. In Stave 5, the fog has lifted. Everything is bright—joy and love abound.  A Christmas Carol is much like the hymns sung in church (if the leader doesn't skip verses.) It's a story with a dark beginning, a salvation account brought to bear, and a celebration of a glorious, supernatural transformation from death to life. 

The man who Dickens' described as a "covetous, old sinner" was, after he visited with death, now said to be "as good of friend, a good old master, and a good old man as the city ever knew." Dickens went on to write, " It always said of him, that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge." And finally, Charles Dickens called his readers to do the same, charging, "May that be truly said of us, and all of us!"  

Even more than A Christmas Carol was written to warn the reader so one doesn't have to encounter a ghost from the dead, the Bible is the story of life for us. God tells us how we can move from death to life and keep the reconciliation of God in our hearts on Christmas and all the year long, forever. Let us heed the warning. And as Tiny Tim observed, "God Bless Us, Every One!" 

Pop Tarts are Sandwiches? and Other Gospel Foolishness

I have reason to believe that the Apostle Paul argued the gospel with conspiracy theorists, atheists, and people of other religions. And likely, it was frustrating. How many times did he walk away talking with his companions about some guy’s non-sensical line of discussion that went nowhere? I bet it happened a lot.  

In a letter to the church in Corinth, Paul wrote, "The word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but it is the power of God to us who are being saved" (1 Corinthians 1:18). No matter how clear and compelling an argument one makes about the gospel, it still lands as a fool's speech on those whom God is not saving. Jesus shared a parable where a man in hell wanted Abraham to send Lazarus to warn his brothers. Abraham said, "They have Moses and the prophets [meaning the Bible at the time]; they should listen to them" (Luke 16:29). The man pleaded even more and wanted a person raised from the dead to warn them. Because that would be a severe sign and offer a clear and compelling warning, right? But Abraham responded, "If they don't listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded if someone rises from the dead" (Luke 16:31).      

We might read something like the Scriptures mentioned above and struggle to believe that people would consider clear, articulated gospel evidence as foolishness. But after what we've seen in 2020 & 2021, is this such a stretch of the imagination?  

My 12-year-old son, Daniel, was involved in a school debate. The topic: A Pop-Tart is a sandwich. Daniel argued against the claim. He emailed Kellogg's to inquire if they identified their product (the Pop-Tart) as a sandwich. Steve Cahillane, the CEO, said no. Daniel contacted Jimmy John's--professionals of the sandwich--with the same inquiry. Their headquarters also said no and wished him luck with his debate.  

One of the counterarguments was that the Uncrustable is similar to a Pop-Tart, and an Uncrustable is called a sandwich. So Daniel contacted the J. M. Smucker Company and asked if they consider the Pop-Tart a sandwich. To remain politically correct, they said it is up to Kellogg's to give the Pop-Tart its identity. In this case, the Kellogg’s Pop-Tart does not identify as a sandwich.  

Finally, Daniel conducted an online survey that showed pictures of items and then asked the respondents to check all the words they would use to describe the displayed item. For example, Coke and Pepsi products were shown, and then terms like soda, cola, pop, etc. were offered as options. Of 284 respondents, not a single person checked "sandwich" as an option to describe the Pop-Tart, even when asked to check all the words that could apply.  

The evidence is compelling and clear.  

Circumstances canceled the debate, but some of Daniel's friends were still unwilling to concede that a Pop-Tart is not a sandwich when shown all of the evidence. They didn't care.  

Is this example so hard to believe? Is this not the problem with COVID? We have determined what we believe regardless of any evidence. It's the same about our favorite football teams and politics and just about everything else in life. We just don't care about the evidence, no matter how clearly it is articulated. 

How much more complicated will this be in matters of salvation and the gospel? Why are we so surprised to learn that it is God's work to open eyes, soften hearts, and turn people toward the clear, compelling truth of the gospel? Without God doing this work, we remain unconvinced. We want our way to be correct, and no amount of information will change our sinful wants. But God has a way of doing what God does, for God's glory. 

We may not have settled the Pop-Tart/sandwich matter, but it is clear, if God is saving us, the gospel is incredible. If we are not saved, we see the gospel as foolishness. 

Elder, Overseer, or Pastor?

If you were to pick up Thabiti Anyabwile's book, Finding Faithful Elders and Deacons (Crossway, 2012), you would discover interchangeability between the words elder, overseer, and pastor. He writes, "Yet, as a gift to his flock, the Chief Shepherd appoints godly men as under-shepherds to tend the flock that he purchased with his blood (Acts 20:28). We know these under-shepherds by various titles used interchangeably, including: pastors, overseers, bishops, and elders" (49). Do we know? Does the typical Christian see the argument for the interchangeability of pastor, overseer, bishop, and elder? Do we understand the relationship between the Greek words, poumen, episkpos, and presbuteros?  (Transliterated and used in the nominative for ease to the reader. Follow this link for a detailed study of these words in the Bible.)  

Most books on the pastorate or eldership start with the assumption that these words are interchangeable. They may be correct, but it will prove helpful not to assume. Also, if we are convinced that the terms are alike, we must be consistent with that interchangeability.  

How often do we hear arguments about the qualifications for elders and expectations for pastors that do not align? If these terms are interchangeable, we should not see churches with specific requirements for the pastor and a separate set of requirements for an elected "elder board." We should not see churches with pastors who are also elders and other pastors who are not elders. Neither should we see a "lay elder" who is not functioning as a pastor to the church, paid or unpaid. 

If we are convinced that the words are not interchangeable, then we must stop setting expectations and qualifications on elders, overseers, and pastors where the Bible does not mandate. If elder, overseer, and pastor are not the same, then the qualifications for an elder (Titus 1) and the qualifications for an overseer (1 Timothy 3) do not apply to the pastor. Furthermore, if these words are not interchangeable, we should see different and distinct roles and responsibilities for overseers (or bishops), elders (or presbytery), and pastors (shepherds).  

The question for this post is this: Are elder, overseer, and pastor interchangeable terms in the Bible?   

A previous post covered the detailed ground of a word study for the Greek words from which we generally derive the terms elder, overseer, and pastor. Based on that study, this post will use "elder" for the group of words related to presbuteros, "overseer" for the words related to episkpos, and "pastor" for the words related to poimen.  

Before the New Testament, shepherd was one of the words used to identify how God related to his people. In Genesis 48:15, Jacob said, "The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all my life to this day" (CSB). In 49:24, Jacob calls God the Mighty One of Jacob, the Shepherd, the Rock of Israel (CSB). And maybe the most well-known example is the 23rd Psalm. 

Shepherd was also used to identify human leaders, especially those God ordained or instructed to lead his people. While numerous examples are available, Ezekiel 34 provides the best example. This chapter of Ezekiel is a severe pronouncement of judgement against the "shepherds of Israel," who were the spiritual leaders, not Israelites who tended to animals. Ezekiel 34 uses shepherds and a flock to illustrate what God expected the spiritual leaders to do for his people. Furthermore, Jesus pointed to this chapter when he confronted the spiritual leaders of his day (John 10). Jesus identified himself as the Shepherd who will do the right thing for his flock, thus also identifying himself as the same God speaking in Ezekiel 34.  

As recorded in John 21:15-19, Jesus gave Peter a charge through a 3-fold instruction: "Feed my lambs," "Shepherd my sheep," and "Feed my sheep" (CSB). The Chief Shepherd has given a charge to Peter to serve as a shepherd. Pastor is the shepherd word.       

The term "pastor" originated from the Latin word for shepherd. With no knowledge of Latin, one can look at Ezekiel 34:5 and pick out the word "pastor" because it is precisely the same as the English word, "pastor."   

Keep in mind that the more appropriate English translation is not "pastor" but "shepherd." The English words "pastor" and "shepherd" are not perfectly correlated, and technically, they hold different meanings. However, many translators seek words that convey the sense and therefore choose English words that communicate to the English reader. Sometimes they'll choose the word pastor rather than shepherd. Others will keep to the strictest of translations. (See the conclusion of "What's in a Word?" for examples.)    

Therefore, at the points in the Bible where "shepherd" is being used illustratively, it is interchangeable with the word "pastor." Most English speakers affirm this understanding when they say something about a pastor and his flock rather than a shepherd and his flock.   

When reading the various Scriptures that use the shepherd illustration for church leadership or use shepherding as a verb directed at the church leader, it is safe to say the Bible communicates the shepherd or pastor as a church leader (understanding that the flock is talking about the church).  

Now we must ask if the pastor in the church is also the elder or overseer. Are these words interchangeable, or are they uniquely distinct?  

Acts 20:28 is helpful. In Acts 20:17, Paul summoned the elders of the church in Ephesus. Knowing he would never again see these elders, he gave them a charge. He said, "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as overseers, to shepherd the church of God, which he purchased with his own blood" (CSB). Note that Paul was speaking to people who the book of Acts identifies as elders. To these elders, Paul said God appointed them as overseers, thus making them both elders and overseers. He also told them they had a flock and used the shepherd verb, making them pastors. In this single section of Scripture, we see that these leaders in the church in Ephesus were elders, overseers, and pastors.   

While it would be easy to say this Scripture is conclusive, we must ask if one can be a pastor and not an overseer or elder. Can one be an elder but not an overseer or pastor? Can one be an overseer and not an elder or pastor? Or could it be that these roles are stackable? Maybe the pastor is level one, the entry-level? Level two is the elder plus all the responsibilities and authority of the pastor. Level three is the overseer plus the elder and the pastor. Or maybe these roles are a progressive line of promotion. One starts as a pastor. Graduating beyond pastor, one becomes an elder. Finally, the elder is promoted to an overseer.    

The situation in Acts 20:28 helps us take a stab at these questions. Remember that Paul called together the elders, not the overseers. It does not seem that he promoted every elder to be an overseer in the church in Ephesus. And he told them to pastor the flock.  

Furthermore, Paul told Titus to appoint elders in every town. Giving the guidelines for who Titus was to look for, Paul says, "And elder" in verse 6 and then says, "As an overseer of God's household" in verse 7. While Paul did not mention pastors, the task of these elder-overseers sounds nearly precisely like the pastoral instructions for feeding and guarding the flock--i.e., teaching the Word of God and modeling the Christian life.   

Likewise, when Paul instructed Timothy about overseers (1 Timothy 3), he provided similar instructions as Titus received about elders (Titus 1). Paul even asked, "If anyone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of God's church?" (1 Timothy 3:5, CSB). And just like the letter to Titus, Paul did not mention pastors. Were there no instructions or qualifications for pastors in these churches, or were the words for elder, overseer, and pastor used interchangeably?  

Writing to the church in Ephesus, where Paul left Timothy and gave instructions about overseers, Paul told the Ephesians that God had given gifts to the church. Are the gifts elders, overseers, and pastors? In Ephesians 4:11, Paul writes, "And he himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers" (CSB). What are these gifts for, and why is there no mention of overseers or elders? Verses 12-16 show that the purpose of the gifts is to grow and equip the church. Are all of these individuals para-church, working with the elder-overseers, or is the elder-overseer listed among the gifts but called a pastor?  

Only two or three generations after our Lord's charge to Peter to Shepherd Jesus' sheep, Church History shows us that some in the Church may have created a distinction between elder and overseer. It is seen in the writings of Church Fathers like Clement, Polycarp, and Tertullian.  Episkopos (overseer) became bishop, while both presbuteros (elder) and poimen (shepherd/pastor) were interchangeable with elder or pastor. Why might this have happened? 

Two streams of thought may have led to the installation of a bishop over a group of pastors or elders in a given area.  

First, imagine the situation in which Titus found himself. He was on Paul's church planting team in Crete. They got a good work started, but then Paul moved on, leaving Titus to put right what was left undone (Titus 1:5). Let's speculate the possibilities for a moment. Titus knew God's Word and had training from Paul. The elders he was looking for were going to need some theological training. Titus might have shifted into a super-elder position over these new elders. Is it so much of a stretch to imagine? This same line of thinking happens today in some house-church planting models and some campus-model churches. What should we call this super-elder? How about overseer? How about the bishop? But what happens over time when we have a super-bishop over lower bishops? Archbishop? Give it enough time, and eventually, we have a pope. 

The reformers with baptistic theology sought the Scriptures and grew convicted of the local autonomy and governance of the church. They determined that pastor, overseer, and elder were interchangeable terms, not different roles or different levels of authority.  The local church is the flock and the pastor or pastors are also the elders and overseers.  

The second stream of thought had to do with the Apostles. When a dispute regarding circumcision arose (Acts 15), the Church took the matter to the Apostles and elders (Acts 15:6). The Apostles had a role of leadership in the church. Some grew concerned that there was a vacuum of leadership when the ministry of the Apostles ended. Bishops served to fill this void, allowing overseers and elders to operate in distinctly different roles. Eventually, bishops weren't enough, and additional leadership roles were created for the Church.  

But is the Church lacking the ministry of the Apostles? No. The inspired Word of God--written down by the Apostles as Scripture--still serves as a final authority over the elders and the Church. In a sense, pastors in the First Century submitted to the same Apostles as do the pastors of this century when we remember that the Apostles' ministry is the Cannon of New Testament Scripture and continues to serve us today. 

In much the same way as the early Church, the some modern local churches are creating a distinction between pastors and the elders or overseers. Pragmatism is leading the charge. Seeing a need for a lower-level shepherd type leader in the church, a two-tear system separates some pastors from other pastors who are also elders. (This author is guilty of making this mistake in the past.) Rather than looking to the role and meaning of leitourgos and diakonos, these churches separate pastor from elder and overseer. This is dangerous territory.

In the most obvious reading of Scripture, elder, overseer, and pastor appear to be interchangeable.  

It becomes a stretch to suggest a pastor doesn't have to meet the qualification of an elder (Titus 1) or the qualifications of an overseer (1 Timothy 3) when there is no clear qualification list for a pastor. It is concerning to think that the instructions for a pastor wouldn't be the same for an elder or overseer when the health, maturity, and wellbeing of the flock are at stake--especially in light of God's statements in Ezekiel 34. Suppose the bare reading of God's Word sees pastor, elder, and overseer as synonymous. What would be the reason or motivation to look beyond the most straightforward reading to see these roles as separate and distinct? Does that view provide for a lesser standard of a pastor, the one who cares for God's flock? Does Scripture seem to suggest that approach when it comes to the flock Jesus purchased with his blood? (There are words for these other kinds of leaders. Words like leitourgos and diakonos are worth studying, but those words are clearly not interchangeable with pastor, elder, and overseer.)    

Authors like Anyabwile seem correct to assume that the pastor, elder, and overseer are interchangeable terms. And if indeed this is true, then may our actions and titles within our local churches reflect this belief. 

What’s in a Word?: An Exploration of What's Behind Elder, Pastor, Minister, and Deacon

Most of the muddy waters of our understanding about words like Elder, Pastor, Minister, and Deacon have to do with definitions then and definitions now, in two languages. The Bible uses Greek words for leaders in the New Testament Church. Those words require translation if we want to communicate in English. But the meaning of the English words often imports misunderstanding from their use in our world today. It gets complicated. 

Complicating the matters even further is the regular and ongoing eisegesis practiced by many who ought to know better. Eisegesis is the practice of reading one's ideas into a biblical Text while communicating the Text's meaning. Exegesis, on the other hand, is the practice of interpreting what the biblical Text is communicating. When seeking to understand such things as the qualification and function of leaders in the Church, exegesis of the biblical Text is the most proper starting place. There should be no place for eisegesis. 

While this post will not launch into function and qualification, it will attempt to provide a starting place for the words the Bible uses in context to leadership within the Church. By examining how these words are used in the Bible, a foundation for what is and is not being said may help advance our conversation and answer questions. It's important to remember that words have a range of meanings in Greek and English, and context helps us know which word best fits from within that range. The general aim of this examination is the New Testament, specifically the Greek words for leaders in the Church. The Septuagint (LXX) provides commentary, as do lexicons, dictionaries, and Church History, but this post will refrain from turning to these sources, for now. These other resources are extremely helpful and should be consulted but not before an examination of Scripture. Also, transliterations of the words are used for ease to the reader, the Greek reference will be the in the nominative without indicating any declensions to reduce confusion, and a Strongs Key number is provided to assist those without a knowledge of the Greek language, should one want to repeat this study. 

The primary words in question are presbuteros, episkpos, poumen, leitourgos, and diakonos.  

Presbuteros (G4245)

This word, or its four other forms, appears in the Greek New Testament 66 times. The CSB translates it as "ancestors" 1 time, "elder" 3 times, "elders" 57 times, "old" 1 time, and "older" 4 times. In Matthew, Mark, Luke, and parts of Acts, presbuteros is used in reference to the leaders in the Jewish religion or regarding the "tradition of the elders." The CSB translates presbuteros in Jesus' Luke 15:25 parable as "older." John 8:9--which is widely believed to be a late addition to the Bible--uses presbuteros in reference to "older" men. Acts 2:17 quotes the Septuagint and uses the word presbuteros, which the CSB translates as "old."  

The first occurrence of presbuteros in reference to a person in Jesus' New Testament Church comes at Acts 11:30. In this case, Paul and Barnabus were entrusted to take a collection of relief money intended for brothers and sisters in need in Judea to people identified explicitly as the presbuteros.  

The next use of presbuteros comes at Acts 14:23 where Paul and Barnabus appointed presbuteros (plural) in every church they had previously planted in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch. After they appointed the presbuteros, they "committed them to the Lord in which they had believed" (CSB).   

A conflict involving how Christians are to understand circumcision brings us to the next uses of presbuteros. In Acts 15:2, Paul, Barnabus, and others were appointed to go to Jerusalem to present the matter before the Apostles and presbuteros. This verse tells us that Apostles and presbuteros are not the same people. Acts 15:4 records that the church, Apostles, and the presbuteros welcomed them and heard a report. This verse also informs us that the people of the church, the Apostles, and the presbuteros are not the same. The following four uses of presbuteros repeat the pattern in Acts 15:2. 

The use of presbuteros in Acts 20:17 is exceptionally informative. First, Paul summoned the presbuteros (plural) of the church in Ephesus. In his instruction to the presbuteros in Ephesus, he told them in Acts 20:28: "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as overseers [episkopos] to shepherd [poimaino (G4165)] the church of God, which he purchased with his own blood" (CSB).  

It's worth noting that Paul does not use presbuteros in 1 Timothy 3. He uses the word episkope (G1984) and episkopos (G1985). However, Paul uses presbuteros four times in 1 Timothy 5. The first use is found in 1 Timothy 5:1 and is tied to the second use found in 1 Timothy 5:2. These uses seem to have to do with age. Noteworthy is Paul's statement in 1 Timothy 5:17. The CSB states, "The elders [presbuteros, plural] who are good leaders are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching."

Paul's use of presbuteros in Titus 1:5 is exceptionally informative in light of Titus 1:7. In Titus 1:5, Paul says, "The reason I left you in Crete was to set right what was left undone and, as I directed you, to appoint elders [presbuteros, plural] in every town" (CSB). Then Paul shifts to the qualifications of the presbuteros.  In Titus 1:7 he says, "As an overseer [episkopos (G1985)] of God's household, he must be [. . .]" (CSB). Paul seems to use the two words interchangeably in this paragraph. Furthermore, the qualifications in Titus 1 look strikingly similar to those discussed in 1 Timothy 3. In 1 Timothy 3, Paul uses episkpos and episkope rather than presbuteros. 

James uses presbuteros in James 5:14 when he says the sick should call for the presbuteros of the church to pray for them. 

Peter's use of the word presbuteros is informative. In 1 Peter 5:1-5, Peter exhorts the presbuteros (plural) to pamaino (G 4165, shepherd) the local flock, not episkopeo (G1983, overseeing) out of compulsion. He gives further instruction that these presbuteros should not lord over those entrusted to them. In the same paragraph, 1 Peter 5:7, Peter shifts his attention to the young people, telling them to be subject to the presbuteros. 

John refers to himself as presbuteros in 2 & 3 John. He also uses the word presbuteros to discuss the 24 presbuteros around the throne of God in the book of Revelation.    

A similar word that’s fruitful for this study is presbuterion (G4244). Presbuterion is used three times in the New Testament. It refers to an order or council of leaders. In Luke 22:66 it points to the body of leaders who sought to put Jesus on trial. In Acts 22:5 it refers to a council of Jewish leaders who appointed Saul to the task of finding and arresting Christians in Damascus. And in 1 Timothy 4:14, it refers to the council of leaders who gave Timothy a gift through the laying on of hands.

Episkpos (G1985)

Episkpos appears five times in the New Testament. The CSB translates it as "overseer." Four of those times refer to a person in leadership in the Church. In 1 Peter 2:25, Peter uses episkpos in reference to Jesus. 

Acts 20:28 uses episkpos in reference to the presbuteros Paul is instructing to poimaino (G4165) the church. In other words, the hearers in this verse are presbuteros, being told to episkpos as they pomaino the flock appointed to them by God. This verse closely ties together presbuteros, episkpos, and poimaino, making Acts 20:28 a significate verse for our understanding of these words.  

In 1 Timothy 3:2, Paul instructs that an episkpos must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, self-controlled, sensible, respectable, hospitable, able to teach [. . .]" (CSB). 1 Timothy 3:5 suggests the episkpos is expected to "take care of God's church" (CSB). Paul also used episkpos in a similar list of qualifications in Titus 1:7. The similarities of these qualification lists link episkpos and presbuteros in some way.  

Two similar words are used somewhat like episkpos.  They are episkopeo (G1983) and episkope (G1984).  

Episkopeo is a verb used twice: Hebrews 12:15 and 1 Peter 5:2 (discussed in more detail in the presbuteos section above).  

Espikope has a complicated range of meanings. Luke 19:44 and 1 Peter 2:12 use espikope in reference to God appearing and visiting. Acts 1:20 uses espikope quoting the Septugent and making the case for Judas to be replaced. "Let another take his office [espikope]" (CSB). 

The final use of episkope is found in 1 Timothy 3:1. Here, Paul writes, "The saying is trustworthy: 'If anyone aspires to be an overseer [episkope], he desires a noble work.'" In the following sentence (1 Timothy 3:2), Paul uses episkopos. (See the discussion on 1 Timothy 3:1 above.)    

Poimen (G4166)

This word appears 17 times in the New Testament. The CSB translates it as "shepherd" all but one time. In Ephesians 4:11, it is translated as "pastor." Four of the uses of poimen are in reference to actual people who were tending to animals. All four such uses are found in Luke 2. Twelve uses of poimen are illustrative as analogies or metaphors.  

In Ephesians 4:11, Paul uses poimen in a way that has caused some translative controversy. He writes, "And he himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors [poimen] and teachers [didaskalos, G1320]. The article and the absence of the article lead many scholars to believe that there are four distinctly identified groups here. In this case, the pastor and teacher are one group, like poimen-didaskalos or pastor-teacher. However, it may be that poimen and teachers are distinct, and there are five separate groups of people for the Church. Paul discusses the maturity of the Church and the value of these four groups to the Church. Was it intentional that the presbuteros or episkopos were not mentioned, or is the poimen connected in some way to the presbuteros or episkopos? 

The verb that's similar to the noun, poimen is pomaino (G4165).  Pomaino is used 11 times in the New Testament. The CSB translates pomiano as "shepherd" or "shepherds" nine times.  Pomiano in Luke 7:17 refers to the tending of animals. All other uses of pomiano are about humans and used as illustrations.   Pomiano in Revelation 7:17 and 12:5 are translated as "rule" (as in "to rule") in the CSB.  

In John 21:15-19, Jesus gives Peter three charges: "Feed my lambs," "Shepherd [pomiano] my sheep," and "Feed my sheep."  

Pomiano is used in conjunction with presbuteros and episkpos in Acts 20:28. Paul called for the episkpos, to which he charged: "Be on guard for yourselves and for all your flock of which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as overseers [episkpos], to shepherd [poimaino] the church of God, which he purchased with his own blood" (CSB).  

Leitourgos (G3011)

Leitourgos makes five appearances in the New Testament. The CSB translates it as "servant" in Romans 13:6 and Hebrews 1:7. In the remaining three verses (Romans 15:16, Philippians 2:25, and Hebrews 8:2), leitourgos is translated as "minister."   

In Romans 15:16, Paul refers to himself as a leitourgos "of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, serving as a priest of the gospel of God" (CSB). In Philippians 2:25, Paul identifies Epaphroditus as "my brother, coworker, and fellow soldier, as well as your messenger and minister [leitourgos] to my need" (CSB).  

Three additional words are similar to leitourgos and worth examination. The first is leitourgeo (G3008). This word appears in Acts 13:2, Romans 15:27, and Hebrews 10:11. In Acts 13:2, leitourgos seems to be in reference to the behavior or spiritual activity of worship in which the prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch were engaged. In Romans 13:2, Paul uses leitourgeo to refer to serving to a group of people. In Hebrews 10:11, leitourgeo explains the task the priests were doing as they offered sacrifices day after day.  

Leitorgia (G3009) is another simular word. It appears six times in the New Testament and the CSB translates it as ministry, service, or worship. In Luke 1:23, leitorgia referrers to Zacharia's service in the Temple. 2 Corinthians 9:12 is particularly helpful because it connects diokonia (G1248) with leitourgia.  The verse reads, "For the ministry [diokonia] of this service [leitorgia] is not only supplying the needs of the saints but is also overflowing in many expressions of thanks to God" (CSB).  

Finally, leitourgikos (G3010) only appears once in the New Testament. Hebrews 1:14 uses leitourgikos to explain the function or work of angels. 

Diakonos (G3011)

Diakonos is a noun. It is closely related to two verbs: diakoneo (G1247) and diakonia (G1248). 

Diakonos appears 26 times in the Bible. The CSB translates it as "attendants" once, "Deacons" twice, "deacons" once, "minister" twice, "ministers" twice, "servant" 14 times, and "servants" six times. 

In Matthew 22:13, Jesus uses diakonos in a parable, identifying the people who would throw the man without a wedding garment into the outer darkness." Jesus told the Twelve, "If anyone wants to be first, he must be last and servant [diakonos] of all" (Matthew 9:35, CSB). In John 2:5, Jesus' mother instructed the wedding servants who would fill up the water jars and John calls them diakonos.  In Romans 15:8 Jesus is refered to as diakonos.   Romans 16:1 referes to Phoebe a diakonos; she is a "servant [diakonos] of the church in Cenchreae. Apollos and Paul are called diakonos in 1 Corinthians 3:5. Tychicus is called a diakonos in Ephesians 6:21 and Colossians 4:7.  

We could examine another Greek word for servant (doulos, G1401) except the reason for the study of diakonos has much to do with its use in Phillipains 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:8, and 1 Timothy 3:12.  

In Phillipains 1:1, Paul writes the letter "To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers [episkpos] and deacons [diakonos]" (CSB). This use of diakonos either identifies a specific group of people with all the saints who need special acknowledgment or Paul is aware that a portion of the saints are missing something and should not be identified with the word diakonos. 

In 1 Timothy 3, Paul provides a qualification list for diakonos. In 1 Timothy 3:8 he says, "Deacons [diakonos], likewise should be worthy of respect, not hypocritical, not drinking a lof of wine, not greedy for money" (CSB). The list goes on. In 1 Timothy 3:10 he says, "They must also be tested first; if they prove blameless, then they can serve as deacons [diakoneo (G1247)]" (CSB). In 1 Timothy 3:12 he writes, "Deacons [diakonos] are to be husbands of one wife, managing their children and their own households competently" (CSB). He goes on to say, "For those who have served well as deacons [diakoneo (G12470] acquire a good standing for themselves and great boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus" (CSB). Paul's use of diakonos and diakoneo seem different than the many other uses. Would anyone who wanted to serve in any way need to meet these qualifications? Does this line of thinking apply to the servants at the wedding in Cana?  

Diakonia (G1248) appears 32 times in the New Testament. Being closely related to diakonos, diakonia seems to be the word for the task or work of the diakonos. For example, Acts 6:1 says some widows were being overlooked in the daily diakonia. In Acts 12:25, Paul and Barnabas finished their diakonia before heading back to Jerusalem. In Acts 6:4 the Apostles announce that they will dedicate themselves to prayer and the diakonia of the word. 2 Corinthians 5:18 mentions the diakonia of reconciliation. The Apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers in Ephesians 4:11 are gifts to equip the saints for the work of diakonia in Ephesians 4:12. 

Diakoneo (G1247) is very simular to diakonia. The majority of its 31 uses are about serving or service to others. However, Paul uses diakoneo in 1 Timothy 3 to identify someone who has served in some way prior to being diakoneo. 1 Timothy 3:10 says, "They must also be tested first; if they prove blameless, then they can serve as deacons [diakoneo]" (CSB).  The construction of this sentence in Greek is far fewer words, and there is not an exact word-for-word match for serve. It's somewhat built into the Greek words and word construction. 1 Timothy 3:13 says, "For those who have served well as deacons [diakoneo] acquire a good standing for themselves and great boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus" (CSB). This sentence construction is a bit like 1 Timothy 3:10.    

This word study is not exhaustive, but it is a helpful start. 

If we are to clear up the muddy waters of titles and roles, we must ask what words are synonymous and what words are distinctly different.  

Does the Bible refer to presbuteros, episkpos, and poimen as the same person and role? Can one be a person in the Bible who is presbuteros but not an episkpos or poimen? How about a poimen who is not presbuteros or episkpos? What does the Bible best seem to suggest?  

There appears to be a strong connection between presbuteros, episkpos, and poimen.  Many have determined that all three of these words refer to the same role in the Church. Some, however, have determined that there may be two positions: leaders within a local church and a higher position of one who leads multiple churches in a given area.  

Leitourgos does not appear to be clearly connected with presbuteros, episkpos, or poimen. While not used often, it seems to be used to indicate one who is serving but is not a presbuteros, episkpos, or poimen. There are some verses that seem to differentiate the group of presbuteros, episkpos, and poimen from diakonos.   From here, the reader should draw some initial conclusions. Then other resources and translations should be consulted.  

To conclude this post, a review of the translations choices from a selection of crucial verses may be thought-provoking and informative. 

Presbuteros (G4245)

Acts 20:17
CSB - elders
ESV - elders
NET - elders
NASB 2020 - elders
KJV - elders
NKJV - elders
NIV 2011 - elders
NRSV - elders

Titus 1:5
CSB - elders
ESV - elders
NET - elders
NASB 2020 - elders 
KJV - elders
NKJV - elders
NIV 2011 - elders
NRSV - elders

Episkopos (G1985)

Acts 20:28
CSB - overseer
ESV - overseer
NET - overseer
NASB 2020 - overseer
KJV - overseer
NKJV - overseer
NIV 2011 - overseer
NRSV - overseer

1 Timothy 3:2
CSB - overseer
ESV - overseer
NET - overseer
NASB 2020 - overseer
KJV - bishop
NKJV - bishop
NIV 2011 - overseer
NRSV - bishop

Titus 1:7
CSB - overseer
ESV - overseer
NET - overseer
NASB 2020 - overseer
KJV - bishop
NKJV - bishop
NIV 2011 - overseer
NRSV - bishop

Poimen (G4166)

Ephesians 4:11
CSB - pastors
ESV - shepherds
NET - pastors
NASB 2020 - pastors
KJV - pastors
NKJV - pastors
NIV 2011 - pastors
NRSV - pastors

Poimaino (G4165)

Acts 20:28
CSB - shepherd
ESV - care
NET - shepherd
NASB 2020 - shepherd
KJV - feed
NKJV - shepherd
NIV 2011 - be shepherds
NRSV - shepherd 

Leitourgos (G3011)

Philippians 2:25
CSB - minister
ESV - minister
NET - minister
NASB 2020 - minister
KJV - minister
NKJV - minister
NIV 2011 - who you sent to take care of
NRSV - minister

Diakonos (G1249)

Philippians 1:1
CSB - deacons
ESV - deacons
NET - deacons
NASB 2020 - deacons
KJV - deacons
NKJV - deacons
NIV 2011 - deacons
NRSV - deacons

Romans 16:1
CSB - servant
ESV - servant
NET - servant
NASB 2020 - servant
KJV - servant
NKJV - servant
NIV 2011 - deacon
NRSV - deacon

Gentle and Lowly by Dane Ortlund

There’s a great deal of buzz about Dan Ortland’s Gentle and Lowly: The Heart of Christ for Sinners and Suffers (Crossway, 2020). For the most part, the talk is extremely positive and complementary. Yet, there have a handful of reviews criticizing Ortland, and arguing that God is coming again in great judgement and wrath. Unfortunately, the negative reviews seem to miss the Scripture Ortlund is discussing regarding those who are in Christ and who will escape the judgement unbelievers will face. That’s the point of God’s heart, as Ortlund argues page after page in this book. It seems those reviewers may have read the title only. Sadly, they’ve come after the book with a hypercritical eye and a hot anger that seems to fuel the internet lately. However, the greater majority of readers have found wonderful blessing from reading Gentle and Lowly.

Writing to believers in Christ, Ortlund seeks to show God’s heart for redeemed people. Too often, Christians, now bought by the blood of Jesus Christ, still seek to appease God as if they remain under the wrath of God’s judgement. They try to work out and earn God’s love for themselves, yet they have no place or ability to work out that which God has already won. Ortland examines Scripture in the style and approach of the Puritans. Wringing out every drop from every word of a single verse, this book becomes a wonderful encouragement for the believer to draw even closer to a God who loves them.

There are many ways to got a great deal out of Ortlud’s Gentle and Lowly. Here’s a brief video discussing some ideas:

We encourage you pick up a copy of Dane Ortlund’s Gentle and Lowly: The Heart of Christ for Sinners and Suffers wherever you buy your favorite books. Or make it easy on yourself and follow the link.

To find more book discussions and videos like this one, please visit our blog and our book recommended page.

SBU: "Lukus Counterman's Preachers"

Join Salty Believer Unscripted as Lukus Counterman and Bryan Catherman discuss preaching and Lukus’ favorite preachers. Lukus explains why he listens to those he does and the value of listening to others.

Lukus Counterman is the pastor of Gospel Grace Church in Salt Lake City. He’s also a professor for the Salt Lake School of Theology.

Listen to this episode of Salty Believer Unscripted here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO | Audible

SBU: "Joseph Vest's Preachers"

Joseph Vest joined Bryan Catherman to discuss his favorite preachers. In this series, we’re talking to preachers about the preachers they listen to through out the week. Joseph has been a long-time lead preacher. Check out this episode here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO

SBU: "Brett Brandewie's Preachers"

Brett Brandewie joined Bryan Catherman to discuss the preachers Brett listens too. Brett is the High School Pastor at Ingleside Baptst Church in Macon, Georgia. Unlike some of the other pick discussed during this series, Brett leans toward the shorter but more-punchy preachers. Listen to this episode of Salty Believer Unscripted here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO

SBU: "Chad Mize's Preachers"

Chad Mize sat down with Bryan Catherman over Zoom to discuss preachers on this episode of Salty Believer Unscripted. Unlike previous discussions in this series, Chad had a unique perspective because of his connections to cross-cultural preachers and preachers in other parts of the world. He also discussed the value of a season when Forest Hills Baptist Church had a series of other preachers while they were in a pastoral search season. Listen to this episode of Salty Believer Unscripted here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO

"Why I Trust the Bible" by William Mounce

Mounce, William. Why I Trust the Bible: Answers to Real Questions and Doubts People Have About the Bible. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2021.

Dr. William Mounce's new book, Why I Trust the Bible: Answers to Real Questions and Doubts People Have About the Bible, is a bit different than his typical work. This book is not specific to learning biblical Greek. Instead, it's a series of arguments for the reliability of the Bible with a much broader audience in mind.   Mounce addresses this historicity of Jesus, contradictions in the Bible, how we have the biblical canon, issues of textual criticism, aspect of translation, and how the Old Testament supports our trust in the Bible more than you might think.  

Why I Trust the Bible is an accessible introduction to a selection of apologetic matters but goes deeper and beyond an introduction. For one seeking to explore these topics--for the first time or deeper study--Mounce does an outstanding job with each of these arguments. Each chapter (corresponding to a question) is well-argued and contains an excellent bibliography of references. Even without any theological knowledge, the book is easy to read, and it stands upon excellent theological study and solid academic work. 

While I highly recommend Why I Trust the Bible, I found the scope of the "questions" and "doubts" limited. As a pastor, there are many questions about the historical Jesus, contradictions, how we got the revelation of God, and issues of translations. Sure. But they often come as more of an attempt to reject the Bible. Mounce's answers are excellent but address the reality of the situation rather than the questioner's heart. Therefore, this book is better suited for the person who handles the questions and doubts of others. It provides the foundation and information to the pastor, Sunday school, teacher, friend, or family member in doubt.  Why I Trust the Bible is also a helpful book for the seminary student, budding apologists, and preachers of God's Word. The chapters on textual criticism supply a fantastic framework (complete with charts and history). As we would expect from Bill Mounce, these chapters are a resource every pastor should have on his shelf, ready for when the tough challenges come.    

Here’s a video review with additional thoughts:

Why I Trust the Bible is new, and you can buy it wherever you purchase your favorite books. (Or you can click this link.) 

"How to Reach the West Again" by Tim Keller

How to Reach the West Again: Six Essential Elements of a Missionary Encounter. Timothy Keller. Redeemer City to City: New York, NY, 2020.

Tim Keller's 58-page booklet, How to Reach the West Again, is a mission strategy with a clear prognosis of a problem and a discussion of how to solve said problem. As is typically the case with Keller, the dilemma is convincingly written. Keller's solution is a big-city plan as well thought out as any New Yorker serving in big-city challenges could develop. But there's a bigger problem. The presence, working, and power of God are assumed, almost right out of Keller's solution.  

As is typical with many books on mission strategy, dependence upon God is taken for granted so much so that it's nearly forgotten. In the discussion of the problem, there's no mention of the possibility that God is hardening a culture before he judges that culture. Keller argues that the Church is not sharing the gospel in a relevant way, and he recommends we repackage the message better so that people will want to hear, but there's little dependence on the power of the message itself (p 18-25). Keller wrote a book titled Prayer, but prayer is not a part of his suggested solution. Arguing that the answer for the Church is to return to the methods and practices of the First through Fourth Century Christians, he fails to mention the appearance of weakness held by the early Church. There was no mention of persecution and martyrdom. The book contained no discussion of the hard-fought battles for correct theology within the Church. The early councils and confessions were absent from the pages. And his theology does not match that of the Early Church, who were desperately dependent upon God over cultural engagement and Christian presence in the big cities of worldly influence. 

I wanted to like this little book, and I did, at first. The words sounded though out and right until I reached the end and felt something lacking. 

It's the same worldly song and dance. To summarize Keller, the Church today needs to focus on being multi-racial and multi-ethnic, highly committed to caring for the poor and marginalized, forgiving, non-political, against abortion, and teaching an entirely different sex ethic. These things are the byproducts of the transformation of salvation, the cross, and Christ crucified. The Church needs to be about the message of reconciliation of man to God, and then Christians will be capable of such things. Keller's goals are among many evidence of a radically changed soul, a regenerated heart, and a not conformed to this world mind, yet they are not the gospel's chief goals or primary destination. They are good, but they are not first.   

Keller's tips are helpful but should come second to a charge that we should be telling the truth about God, boldly and often. We must trust that the power of salvation is found in God's Word (Romans 1:16), and people get saved by hearing the gospel (Romans 10:14-21). Christians should set themselves to God's plan and strategy for reaching God's Kingdom people, not plan God out and pat ourselves on the back for our perceived limited success, if any.  

How to Reach the West Again lacks solid biblical teaching in favor of cultural and man-strategy. The tips may be helpful for the missionary and the Church, but they are not first from God and his Word, and then a look at potential best practices. The only mention of Christ is found in the section on repackaging the gospel, and even then, Jesus is shared like an add-on or afterthought.    

I am disappointed with this book. If I did everything suggested and if all the Church in the West did this plan flawlessly, we'd still be right where we are today, or maybe even worse off. Not because Keller's advice itself is wrong, but because the starting place is with man. Twenty more pages may have made all the difference. Starting with God in a book about being an ambassador of God makes sense. Maybe the conclusions would have been different, maybe not, but it would have held more biblical authority in a world that's lacking God. Sadly, this is not a book I can recommend to others. 

The Preacher's Preachers: Matt Keller's Picks

Matt Keller, the Family Pastor of First Baptist Church of Floresville, TX joined Bryan Catherman to chat about the preachers he listens to on a regular basis. It turns out, Matt listens (or has listened) to some of the more popular preachers, but he also listens to preachers who have made an impact upon Matt’s life through personal relationships. Listen to this episode of Salty Believer Unscripted here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO

What Do We Do When the Taliban Celebrate?

A few days shy of 20 years ago, the Taliban carried out an attack on America that cost 2,977 American's their lives.  They reduced the World Trade Center to rubble and tears.  The headquarters of "the world's most powerful military" had a black eye and didn't even know from where it came.  In the coming weeks, America launched a war against the Taliban.  A year later, that war expanded into Iraq and eventually became a war against Al Qaeda.  Thousands of Americans were killed, and many thousands more were injured.  Today, both the Taliban and Al Qaeda have declared victory while America retreats into itself, dazed and confused. 

How are Christians to understand these events? 

If we are into the prosperity-gospel (a false gospel), we must conclude that God no longer loves America.  If we were into Christian nationalism (a false gospel), we would need to rally the troops, pull up our bootstraps, and get America back on top of the world.  As cultural Christians (no gospel at all), we point to collapsing moralism in our nation and seek to return to our caricature of the 1950s.

Or, if we know our Bibles and are honest with ourselves, we recognize idolatry.  The false god of military security is exposed and ashamed.  The idol named national pride is humiliated, and we are brought low.  

If we know our Bible, we understand that God has used wicked nations to humble other nations.  We know God has scattered his people to strip them raw and call them back to himself in better health, as God heals them through sanctification.  We remember that the early Church was persecuted to get people moving into all the world for God's glory and the love of others.   We recall Jesus restoring Peter after Peter's lowest moment.  As we read Scripture, we discover that God raised wicked leaders to judge sinful people, but we also recollect God sent messengers to warn the sinners to repent.  And let us certainly not forget the two disciples on the road to Emmaus who were confused by the crucifixion of Christ.  To them, Jesus appeared and reminded them of the centrality of the cross. He showed them that Jesus is in the center of it all and that there's a much bigger story of redemption playing out. 

While confusing and painful, what we see today is not a surprise to God.  And in fact, he's sovereign over it and will use it for his glory.  He will ordain these events for the good of his people.  But before you think of yourself, consider that what we are seeing may be for persecution in Afghanistan to grow his Church there.  Maybe this is to puff up and harden the Taliban as they openly reject Jesus.  Or perhaps this is for the hurting widow, finally turning to God to ask if her husband died in vain.  It may be for the confused veteran.  Or maybe it's for you, allowing yet another false hope and fake security to break in your life, causing you to depend on God.  Likely, it's for all of the above, and much more.    

What do we do with this?

Repent.  Humble yourself and turn to Jesus.  Remember that if you are a redeemed and adopted child of God, this world is not your home.  It's not your destination.  You're just passing through.  Find your hope in Christ.  Pick up your Bible and read.  Pray.  Fellowship with other believers weekly in worship gatherings, or more often if you can.  Sing praises, prayers, intercessions, and confessions to God.  Commit to loving the brothers and sisters in your local church. Seek opportunities to tell others who are confused and lost where to find hope and healing.  See how God may be working here and paise him, for he is good, and he's working all of this out in your life for your good.  Pray for the persecuted church in Afghanistan and pray for the Taliban.  And pray for our nation too.

The Preacher's Preachers: Our Picks

In the previous episode of Salty Believer Unscripted, we introduced our newest series, “The Preacher’s Preachers.” In this episode, Bryan Catherman, Josiah Walker, and Robbie Tschorn share their picks. Other than in-person on the Lord’s Day, who do they seek out to hear the preached Word of God?

Listen to this episode, “Our Picks” here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO

SBU: The Preacher's Preachers

We’re excited to start a new Salty Believer Unscripted series. We’re calling it, “The Preacher’s Preachers.” In this series, we’ll be discussing why it’s important for preachers to listen to the preached Word of God from other faithful preachers. And we’ll be asking who the preachers seek out. To whom do they listen? Why?

We believe this series will make the case for the importance of the preached Word, while also introducing both preachers and non-preachers to other preaching. It’s highly likely we’ll hear about faithful preachers who aren’t in the popular circles at the moment. It’s also possible we might shift our thinking about who we should listen to and why.

In this first episode, Bryan Catherman, Josiah Walker, and Robbie Tschorn discuss why they feel it’s so important for preachers to listen to other preachers. Listen to the introduction to this new series here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO

Is the "Full" Armor Incomplete?

The chart in my kid's study Bible is helpful, but when the Biblical instruction is to put on the FULL or take up the WHOLE armor of God, the standard chart may come up short. Thanks to Dr. Bill Mounce, I'm again reminded of the importance of study that doesn't assume an end to the riches that we can mine from God's Word.

The chart (or Sunday School poster) we're familiar with is a medieval night, although some use a roman soldier. Arrows point out the helmet, breastplate, belt, shield, sandals, and sword. However, a close look at Scripture may suggest the poster about the whole armor of God is incomplete.

Ephesians 6:10-20 is the Scripture in question, although the charts and poster generally only look at verses 14-17. The context (as seen in verse 10) is a charge to Christians that we are to be strengthened by the Lord. To help us get a mental picture, verse 11 starts an illustration of a warrior, ready for battle.

Verse 12 expresses why we should think it this "battle" mentality. It says, "For" (or "because" is a reasonable translation except that it's not acceptable to start an English sentence with "because") "our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this darkness, against evil, spiritual forces in the heavens." I once heard someone say, if you can see them, they are not your enemy (because they are of flesh and blood).

Verse 13 gets back to the illustration, even reminding the reader with another "because of this statement." The verse concludes with a statement that it is with this "full armor" in which we stand, ready for the battle.

Verse 14 (where the poster typically starts) tells us how we stand.

The word "stand" in verse 13 is indicative, meaning it has a modification that lets us know it's a statement of information or explanation. The word that starts verse 14, "Stand," is indicative, meaning it is modified to show command or instruction. How do we stand in the vast strength of the Lord (from verse 10)? The rest of the paragraph tells us how we obey the command.

Generally speaking, I thought the armor illustration was complete. It's not. Two more things were not explained in the illustration but are critical parts of the "how."

A series of participles follow verse 14. A participle is an adjective (a word helping to explain) that is formed from a verb. Included in this series is verse 18! It's a tricky translation that causes us English readers to miss that prayer and keeping alert are part of the complete set of tools that strengthen us in the Lord and allow us to stand in battle.

Pray and staying alert are set apart in some ways, but they are still modified as participles and still a part of this list. It could be that they didn't have an easy piece of armor or weapon that correlated with these last two items. Or maybe it's because they are more over-arching, or perhaps they undergird the full "battle-rattle." In any case, these critical resources for us are usually left off the charts and posters. And then, when we are in the battle, we don't think about them.

The ESV translation keeps verses 17 and 18 in the same sentence. The KJV and the ASV put a colon following verse 17 as if to indicate the connection. The NKJV smooths it out slightly, moving to a semi-colon. This approach may help us see the link better than the posters and charts. Or what could really be helpful is the addition of prayer and alertness to our Sunday School posters, even if they don't point to a specific part of the soldier's armor.

Until then, be strengthened and stand firm in the Lord.

Building Healthy Churches: Church Membership

As we continue through our Building Healthy Churches podcast series, Josiah Walker and Bryan Catherman discuss Johathan Leeman’s book, Church Membership: How the World Knows Who Represents Jesus. This book is part of the 9Marks Building Healthy Church series and the focus of this week’s podcast. Listen here:

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO

What is Mormonism? A Look Through an Evangelical Lens

Imagine two 19-year-olds in white shirts, ties, and Mormon name badges standing on your doorstep, hoping to discuss their faith with you. You tell them you're an Evangelical Christian, or maybe you tell them you're a Baptist, or Presbyterian, or something along those lines. It's doubtful they agree that your faith and theirs are the same. And so begins the dance. Your attempt to convert them to biblical Christianity and their attempt to convert you to Mormonism (aka the faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) follows. There are differences—profound differences with severe consequences. 

This post attempts to look at the basics of the LDS faith, history, and belief using primary sources. For this objective, a primary source is a source produced and provided by the LDS Church or an LDS person. More specifically, these sources are recent videos created by the LDS Church to explain aspects of Mormonism. An LDS person made one of the videos, but most Mormons would likely agree and find it beneficial to summarize the Book of Mormon. Writings from the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Convents, and Pearl of Great Price (LDS Scriptures) are also used. The Bible and historical Christian Creeds will be provided for contrast and discussion. In addition, this post is best viewed on a desktop or in desktop mode.

For the sake of this post, "LDS" or "Mormon" refers specifically to the prominent religious organization founded by Joseph Smith and presently headquartered in downtown Salt Lake City, Utah. There are many other groups making claims to these terms. This post has no desire to examine or refute those claims but seeks to keep the scope of this examination limited to the most apparent LDS group.

To get the most out of this post, watch the videos, read the supplementary material and Scripture references, and consider the questions and statements provided along with most of the videos. This study will take some time and may require that you take it in parts over a season. Please bear in mind that this post examines Mormonism from an Evangelical Christian perspective. Subsequently, Mormonism will be examined through the lens of biblical Christianity, which views the Bible as God's inspired, inerrant, infallible Word. 

---

Who was Joseph Smith?

1. Read Joseph Smith’s account of this event, printed in Chapter 1 of the History of the Church, Vol 1, contained in the Pearl of Great Price and considered equal with Scripture. Specifically, note verses 12-19:

“12 Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart. I reflected on it again and again, knowing that if any person needed wisdom from God, I did; for how to act I did not know, and unless I could get more wisdom than I then had, I would never know; for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible.

”13 At length I came to the conclusion that I must either remain in darkness and confusion, or else I must do as James directs, that is, ask of God. I at length came to the determination to ‘ask of God,’ concluding that if he gave wisdom to them that lacked wisdom, and would give liberally, and not upbraid, I might venture.

”14 So, in accordance with this, my determination to ask of God, I retired to the woods to make the attempt. It was on the morning of a beautiful, clear day, early in the spring of eighteen hundred and twenty. It was the first time in my life that I had made such an attempt, for amidst all my anxieties I had never as yet made the attempt to pray vocally.

”15 After I had retired to the place where I had previously designed to go, having looked around me, and finding myself alone, I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.

”16 But, exerting all my powers to call upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into despair and abandon myself to destruction—not to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any being—just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me.

”17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

”18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.

”19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: ‘they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.’”

2. Notice Joseph’s response to coming face to face with God (the Father and the Son as two separate entities with bodies). As soon as his body and tongue were loosed from what he seems to suggest later in Chapter 1 was the devil or a demon, he went right to his question about which of three churches he should join. What is the response of every person in the Bible when coming face to face with God?

3. Notice that verse 19 says all the different sects of Christianity were wrong, and all of their “creeds were an abomination in his sight.” The Baptists, Methodists, and the Presbyterians held to creeds like the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Westminster Confession, the Heidelberg Confession, 1689 London Baptist Confession, among others. These creeds haven’t changed, nor have the churches that still hold to them today. What does this say about LDS belief if all of these creeds (and the churches that believe that these creeds best articulate what the Bible says) are an abomination? What does it suggest that Mormonism rejects these creeds?

4. Read Galatians 1:6-9. Consider how one should respond to a gospel that is different than the one of the Bible?

---

Was the Church Lost and Need Restored?

1. The LDS Church claims the witness of Christ and his Bride were removed entirely from the earth after the death of the first apostles. How does this claim line up with Scriptures such as Matthew 5:18, Matthew 28:20, Matthew 24:35, Matthew 24:10-13, Luke 19:39-40, and 2 Thessalonians 2:3?

2. This video suggests that the gospel and salvation were lost between the apostles' time and Joseph Smith's. If correct, nothing we have written in this period could lead to salvation, and salvation only comes by way of something Joseph Smith had, namely, his truth, the structure of the LDS church, and the priesthood authority. Does the Joseph Smith gospel line up with what the apostles of the Bible wrote, or is the Mormon gospel different than the biblical gospel?

4. Some of the hymns in the LDS Hymnal were written by Saint Francis of Assisi, Philip Brooks, William Cowper, Issac Watts, Charles Wesley, and Martin Luther. These men all lived in what would have been the time when the Church was lost (the apostasy). Do these gospel songs suggest the witness of Christ was lost?

5. The video states that the foundation of truth is transmitted through apostles and prophets and they are God’s only official spokesmen. Mormons believe that after the last apostle died, there were no spokespeople. Who does 2 Corinthians 5:16-6:2 say the messengers of God's truth are?

---

Where Did the Book of Mormon Come From?

1. While there is a great many questions that should be asked about the Book of Mormon, the gold plates, the process of revelation (rather than translation), the weight of the plates, specifically how many people claimed they saw the gold plates until the end of their lives, the lack of other evidence, how these ended up in North America if the account is in South America, and so-on, these question may greatly distract us from our survey. These various questions may serve for additional study about Mormonism. Simply consider what you have seen.

2. The narrator in this video states that “the gold plates are tangible evidence linking the translated book of Mormon to the ancients prophets who wrote it.” How credible are these plates as “tangible evidence” when there are no plates to examine, but only the claims of founding members of the LDS church?

3. The video says that Mormon introduced the Book of Mormon by writing, “Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God. . .” In “The Restoration” video, it’s said that God and Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith. The “Godhead” video denies the Trinity and demonstrates that Jesus is a created being, thus not eternal. Furthermore, if the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are not one God, how can Mormons affirm the Bible’s teaching that there is only one God? How can Mormons have “no other God’s before me” (the first of the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:3) if they deny the Trinity but identify both the Father and Jesus as God, even if Jesus (or even the Father) are created beings?

---

How was the Book of Mormon ‘Translated’?

1. Knowing how this book came about, does the claim of seer stones and a hat lend greater credibility to translation, that is, transitioning the words and meaning from one language to another? What typically goes into translation work? Can this be called translation or should it be referred to something else?

2. In addition to translating the gold plates, Joseph Smith also claims to have re-translated parts of the Bible. It’s highly unlikely he had any Greek manuscripts when he retranslated John 1, but instead consulted the stones. Consider the theological significance of his changes to John 1:1. It reads, “In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.”

3. Find the complete Joseph Smith Translation (JST) and examine many other changes to the Bible. Follow this link to the document on the LDC Church website.

---

An 8-Minute Summary of the Book of Mormon

This video was produced by a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, but the video is not owned by or an official video of the LDS Church. It is well done and helpful; however, it is not actually a primary source. The best primary source would be to read the entire Book of Mormon.

1. See if you can find any mention of Mulek in the Bible? Why was this son of a King not mentioned with the other sons in the biblical record?

2. Why do you suppose there is no discovered archeological sites of these large civilizations or battles?

---

What is the Book of Abraham?

1. The introduction to the book of Abraham reads, “A Translation of some ancient Records that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt. The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus.” How can we reconcile this introduction with what scholars have later determined these scroll fragments actually say?

2. Take some time to read the book of Abraham. Note the repeated use of Gods (plural) and the council of the gods in the creation account recorded in chapters 4 and 5. Also, examine the facsimiles and their explanation.

The 13 Articles of Faith.

1. The 13 Articles of Faith are the fundamental foundation of the LDS religion and belief. Take a few moments to read the Articles of Faith.

2. Article 2 states, “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.” How does this article line up with Scripture, specifically passages like Romans 5:12-21, Ephesians 2:1-3, 1 Corinthians 15:20-49?

3. Article 3 explains the way of salvation in the Mormon faith. It reads, “We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be save, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.” How does this square with what the Bible states is the way to salvation?

4. Article 8 states, “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe in the book of Mormon to be the word of God.” The translation qualifier is reasonable and used by evangelicals as well; however, there are a great many new translations (or revelations) from Joseph Smith that produce a translation from no manuscripts at all. How can we evaluate Joseph Smith’s translations if they came from unverifiable revelation through stones that are no longer on the earth? Is this translation more or less trustworthy?

5. Article 10 states, “We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.” How does a new Jerusalem built on the American continent line up with the biblical narrative?

Who is God and What is the Godhead?

1. Mormons reject the doctrine of the Trinity? Throughout history, those who reject the Trinity are determined to be outside of Christianity. Should the LDS be consider part of Christianity or outside Christian belief?

2. The video mentions that the Heavenly Father wants his children to have all that he has. While not expressly stated, does this include the incommunicable attributes reserved only for God? Many Mormons believe that exhalation includes becoming like God, even in becoming a gods themselves. Compare this idea with the temptation claims in Genesis 3.

3. Is the “Plan of Happiness” found in the Bible? What is this plan?

4. The first video explains Scripture like Deuteronomy 6:4, Mark 12:32, Galatians 3:20, Zechariah 14:9, 1 Corinthians 8:4-6, and John 10:30-38 as being something different than the long-standing view of the Trinity. What do you think about this Mormon interpretation of these verses and the idea of the Trinity?

5. How does Joseph Smith’s claims about seeing two distinct people in bodily form line up with John 1:18, John 6:46 and John 4:24?

6. This first video states that Jesus Christ was a created being, and therefore, not eternal. He has a beginning. There was a time when there was no Jesus. How does this align with biblical teaching and orthodox Christianity? What was the Godhead before Christ was created, if this video is correct?

7. Who are the “heavenly parents” mentioned, that is, those who birthed Jesus in heaven?

8. The second video states that God’s goal is to help us find happiness in this life and the next. Is this God’s chief goal for mankind? If not, what is?

Where did We Come From?

1. Jeremiah 1:5 is translated differently in many translations. Read this verse in a few translations and ask if the interpretation of a pre-existence of people apart from their bodies lines up with the rest of the Bible. Are there any other verses in the Bible to support such an interpretation?

2. In Job 38:4, God asks Job were e was when God created the earth. The answer to the rhetorical line of questioning is that Job wasn’t there. Therefore, if humans were created in a pre-existent form it would be after the earth was created. Why would God sent these people into a state of wrath, condemnation, and separation from God?

3. While the Bible teaches that all humanity is God’s creation, what does the Bible say about who God’s children are? Are all people created as God’s children? Consider John 1:12, Galatians 3:26, and Romans 9:8.

4. What do you think it means that these videos suggest that humans will exist in a “state like God” forever? Why does each person need to receive a physical body to become more like Heavenly Father?

What is the Mormon Plan of Salvation?

1. Can you find the “Plan of Happiness” in the Bible?

2. If left to our own choices apart from God’s intervention, will we choose God in our sinful state? (Consider Romans 8:7-9, John 6:65, and Romans 3:23.)

3. The second Article of the LDS faith states, “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.” How does this article of faith square with the video’s use of 1 Corinthians 15:22?

4. The LDS plan of salvation was presented to the people in the pre-existence. The video states that death is a required and necessary part of God’s original plan for the world. What is the reason for death in the Bible? (Consider Genesis 3.)

5. The video states, “If we have repented of our sins, then we will be forgiven for our past mistakes.” There is no mention of belief. Does this suggest a works-based video of salvation?

6. Does John 14:2 speak of three levels or degrees of heaven when read in this Passage in context?

7. What do you suppose it means when the video says, “Those people who merit life in the Celestial Kingdom will live with and be like God forever in a state of glory and happiness?”

8. Read 1 Peter 4:1-6. Consider that this Passage refers to those who live and have life in Christ, who were once dead in their trespass but now reborn and alive in salvation. In contrast, the dead are those described in verse 3. The gospel was preached to the dead so they might live. (Consider Ephesians 2:1-2 and Romans 8:9-11.) Does this Passage mean that we will have a second chance for salvation after we have physically died?

9. Notice that the video suggests that making good decisions and doing the right things result in a closer relationship with God, forgiveness through Jesus Christ because of his atonement, and eternal life.

10. Read 1 Corinthians 15:35-49. In context, is Paul discussion three levels of heaven or is he explaining that there are things of greater magnificence than other things?

11. What does the third video mean that exaltation “is an opportunity for one’s further progression, to be like God and Jesus and is a reward to the highest level of faithfulness to the commandments of God?”

What About Baptism for the Dead?

1. Where does the Bible discuss the proper authority to preform baptisms?

2. If baptism for the dead is critical for the exhalation of those who were not baptized, why is this not discussed more in the Bible? Why did the early Church not do this?

3. What would happen if a proxy (or stand in) and the baptizer were not in proper authority (living under false pretenses or something of this nature) but conducted a baptism for a dead loved one? They recorded it and fully believed the person was proxy baptized with proper authority. Is it possible that the the dead person would be in a lower level of heaven, unable to do more because the baptism was not conducted correctly, and there would be no further recourse?

4. In 1 Corinthians 15:12-24, Paul is making an argument against Christians who do not believe there will be a resurrection. Part of his argument uses an example of people who are conducting baptisms for the dead. He says what’s the point if there’s no resurrection. He does not make an argument that there should be baptisms for the dead. This is the only place there is any mention of such behavior in the Bible or in Church history. What do you make of a major religious practice coming from such a minor discussion in Scripture.

Modern-Day Prophets?

1. Consider Hebrews 1:1. Does the Bible suggest that prophets are still necessary today?

2. Consider 1 Timothy 2:5-6. Does the Bible suggest that we still need a prophet to serve as mediator between us and God?

3. Does this video suggest that Mormons don not believe that the Spirit is given to all Christians. Consider Acts 2:17.

4. Jesus is our perfect Prophet, Priest, and King. This suggests that Christians have a Prophet and Head of the Church— Jesus! Does the Bible tell us we need any other prophet today, other than Jesus?

Why Don’t Mormons Drink Coffee?

1. What do you think about prophetic messages were given to Joseph Smith based on current events, to include concerns from Emma, his wife?

2. Doctrine and Covenant 89 is known as the word of wisdom. D&C 89:9 reads, “And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.” Mormons interpret this to mean many different things involving coffee. Does this suggest that cold coffee is okay? Decaffeinated tea? What if it’s hot? What about hot chocolate?

3. Consider what the Bible says about food laws and practices. (See Mark 7:19 and Acts 10:17.)

How is the Mormon Church Organized?

1. Do you believe Jesus, at the head of his Church, would allow it to fall into disarray so quickly after his ascension to heaven?

2. The LDS Church claims the witness of Christ and his Bride were completely removed from the earth after the death of the first apostles. How does this claim line up with Scriptures such as Matthew 5:18, Matthew 28:20, Matthew 24:35, Matthew 24:10-13, Luke 19:39-40, and 2 Thessalonians 2:3?

3. Can you find any Scripture that identifies Adam as the first prophet?

Salt Lake School of Theology (SLST)

In this episode of Salty Believer Unscripted, Jared Jenkins and Bryan Catherman discuss the Salt Lake School of Theology. SLTS is a teaching site that can offer a fully accredited Masters of Theological Education from Gateway Seminary, among many other educational tracks. Listen to this episode here:

Find more info about Salt Lake School of Theology here: SLTS.

Find more podcasts like this, as well as many interviews with Christian pastors, professors, authors, and others from all across the US and Canada on our Salty Believer Unscripted page. And be sure to subscribe to the Salty Believer Unscripted on your favorite podcast app, or use these links:
RSS Feed | Spotify | iTunes | Google Play Music | TuneIn | Stitcher | iHeartRADIO