Looking back, it’s hard to imagine that scene being repeated in the offices of The Guardian, GQ, or Woman’s Weekly. In the media, everything must look fresh and youthful, as the BBCs recent employment tribunal demonstrated, and as a quick glance at the magazine rack in a supermarket will confirm. Glance through the women’s magazines (and even the men’s!) and you’ll see dozens of tips on how to look young and feel young, but none at all on how to die well.

Tragedy

Of course death is not easy for even Christians to consider. Perhaps more than anyone else we realise the tragedy of death – this unnatural intrusion into a world which God declared was ‘very good’. Every one of us has lost loved ones; most will have lost a parent, spouse or even a child. Just like those who are not converted, when Christians think about death, we think about those we loved, and our happy recollections of all that they contributed to our life are mixed with our sense of loss and grief that they are no longer with us.

But, that said, Christians do not grieve as others do, who have no hope (1 Thess. 4:13). It is that hope that tempers our grief, and enables us to think carefully about death. The Christian can look this great, all-conquering enemy in the eye and say, ‘Death, where is your victory?’ (1 Cor. 15:55).

Hope

Our hope is, of course, that death is not the end. The world says ‘where there is life, there is hope’. The Christian says ‘even in death, there is great hope’. And it really is great hope. I have some friends who believe in re-incarnation – the great ‘circle of life’. But who wants to come back to life, only to suffer the same troubles, the same pain, the same grief, the same tears that we have already experienced? Who wants to be locked in an endless cycle of birth, toil, death, birth, toil, death? That is no hope at all.

But for the Christian, our hope is resurrection. We don’t simply believe that one day we’ll go to heaven. We believe that the whole creation is groaning in eager expectation for the return of Christ. And as part of the creation we groan too – not in despair, but in longing – for the redemption of our bodies (Rom. 8:18-25). Our hope is not simply that we’re going to live forever, but that we will be given new resurrection bodies in order to enjoy the new heavens and the new earth free from pain and the struggles which come through illness and old age.

Transformation

Have you ever spoken to someone who has had a hip- or knee-replacement? When the operation is successful, it can give the recipient a new lease of life. The man who could barely drag himself from the front-door to his car, can now walk to church and enjoy the service pain-free. The grandmother who could hardly find the energy to visit her grandchildren can now play hide-and-seek and even give piggy-backs! But that transformation is nothing compared to the transformation that one day awaits all those whose faith is in Christ. Resurrection is no mere ‘patch-up’ job – we need more than that! Just as our hearts have already been made new, so our bodies will likewise be made new.

Scripture is keen to point out that this hope of Christians is no mere pipe-dream. There is one who has gone before us, and blazed the trail. The Lord Jesus Christ has conquered death. He has received his resurrection body; he is already glorified. Our hope is not that we will have ‘done enough’, not that somehow God will give us a second-chance, but that we will be found in Him.

Life to come

So all this means, not that Christians can think about death, but that we should do so. After all, if we have hope in this life alone, we are to be pitied beyond all men (1 Cor. 15:19). If we fail to look beyond this life, we will miss the joy of meditating on the life to come, and be unable to deal with the grief that will inevitably come our way.

So when we planned the magazine we commissioned articles from John Woolley and Jonathan Pearse on how the truths of the Bible can help us to deal with grief – not with platitudes or mere stoicism, but with simple trust that God is good. And, to help us to help others who are hurting and grieving, we asked Arthur Bentley-Taylor to remind us that we can bring the presence and peace of God to those who are afflicted.

Comfort

We can bring comfort and have hope, because the good news taught by Scripture rests in reality, and Paul Wells was asked to write about Christ’s death on the cross that reconciles us sinners to our God. Our hope is sure, because God’s goodness has already been demonstrated and, his power to raise from the dead is already made clear.

This hope should not merely be of help in our old age or in our hospital bed, but it should transform our lives. Hope in resurrection will give strength to the weak, hope to the dying and courage to the timid. The Boxer Rebellion in 19th century China is a salutary yet uplifting reminder that frequently God’s people have had to be prepared to ask themselves whether they really believe that ‘it is not death to die’. So, to complete the picture Lowri Iorwerth and Gareth Edwards looked at heaven and hell and reflect on the truths (and some of the myths) of the life to come.

As I reflect back on that meeting, and read again the articles we commissioned, I find them both a challenge and a comfort. We worship a God who has conquered death and dealt with its consequences. Blessed be His name!

This article was the editorial of the March 2011 edition of the Evangelical Magazine.

So I wrote a WordPress plugin, using Vimeo’s ever-so-simple API (that’s Application Programming Interface to you). In precisely 36 lines of code,* all my Vimeo videos are now automatically displayed on this site when I load them into the appropriate Vimeo album. And when I change my theme, one tiny change will re-size all my videos across the site. As I said, you’ve got to love APIs.

* And that’s proper code, including error-handling and caching. It could be done with 11 lines.

You can click on any of the pictures for a bigger version.

Introducing Logos for iPhone

Logos for iPhone is the relative newcomer, but Logos itself has been in the Bible Software market for almost as long as anyone (since 1991). Until recently it has concentrated on the PC, but the last 18 months have seen the company diversify into Mac, iPhone and even online offerings of its product. In November, the whole range was re-launched as Logos 4, which marked a very significant step-up in terms of usability and functionality.

Perhaps the key selling point of Logos is that when you buy Logos resources you can use many of them on any platform. No longer do you have to purchase multiple copies of the same resource just so you can have access to your favourite Bible translation whether you’re at work, home, or on the road. Currently, somewhere around 40% of Logos 10,000 resources (yes, you read that right – about four thousand resources) are available on the iPhone platform. Logos are apparently working on making much the rest available as soon as possible.

Perhaps the only way to put so much data onto such a small device is to work in the ‘cloud’ through an internet connection (WiFi, 3G or GPRS/Edge). By default, Logos resources are only downloaded onto your iPhone in small chunks when you need them. The advantage is that you don’t need hundreds of gigabytes of storage space to have access to your Logos library. The downside is that sometimes you have to wait for the next ‘chunk’ to download before you can read on or open a new resource. Thankfully, Logos have added an offline reading option for paying customers. This allows you to permanently download your favourite resources onto your iPhone, whilst still being able to access everything else over the internet. This gives you the best of both worlds, the only negative being that you can’t simultaneously select multiple resources to download for offline use, so it can be quite a lengthy business if you’re setting the device up and want to activate offline access to a few dozen resources.

Logos has continued this reliance on the cloud throughout much of the rest of the application, which enables features that probably wouldn’t be possible otherwise. You can search through your entire library, for example, even if only a few books are actually on your iPhone for offline use. The search is carried out on Logos’ servers, and the result sent to your phone. Unfortunately there is no offline search however, so if you’re without internet access, searching simply doesn’t work.

But if you’re thinking that you might use a Bible app just for reading and searching, think again. Logos comes with three additional features – each one ported over from the Windows/Mac version – that significantly raise the bar for mobile applications.

The first is the Passage Guide. Enter a verse, or range of verses and press ‘Go’, and within seconds you’ll be given screen that lists all your commentaries that deal with the passage, a list of possible cross references, media resources (e.g. maps), relevant bible topics, and even a list of interesting words. You can click on any of these to explore further. Think of it as a customised table of contents to all the resources you have for any passage in the Bible – right there on your iPhone.

The second feature is the Bible Word Study. Type any word in English, Greek or Hebrew (you can use transliteration if you don’t want to type Greek/Hebrew), and within a few seconds you’ll have relevant links to all your lexicons and dictionaries, and a concordance of every use of that word. One of the best parts of this feature is that you can search for a Greek/Hebrew word, and have the results returned in English. You even get a useful chart showing how that word is translated in your favourite Bible version. This is unique to Logos, not just on the iPhone, but on any platform. The Bible Word Study can be called up from most Bibles (English or original language) by just pressing and holding on the word in question. You also get parsing information and Strong’s numbers.

The third feature are the Reading Plans. You can create reading plans on your PC or Mac, and then have access to them on your iPhone. A reading plan allows you to choose any resource (Bible or other book), and create a plan to read all or part of that resource in a given time. It’s very configurable: for example, you be as specific as specifying to read pages 1-39 of Bunyan’s Grace Abounding, reading every Tuesday and Thursday for three weeks. You can’t create these plans up on the iPhone, but you are able to read the resources there, and mark off when you’re done. This information then syncs across to your desktop machine.

The one potentially major drawback with all these features is that they’re dependent on internet access. If you have no internet connection, they simply aren’t available. In fact, when you’re offline you can do very little apart from just reading the books. When you’re connected though, Logos performs brilliantly.

Introducing OliveTree BibleReader

OliveTree are no newcomers to the mobile Bible market, first releasing software (for the Palm) in 1998. Unlike Logos, they don’t have a desktop version, but you can buy BibleReader for almost any mobile device – as well as they iPhone they support Android, Windows Mobile, Palm, Symbian (Nokia) and Blackberry. Although not all resources are available on all platforms, you don’t need to re-purchase if you later switch to Android or Windows Mobile.

OliveTree don’t have the same range of resources as Logos, but there are still more than 500 to choose from. These are mainly Bibles and Commentaries, with a fair smattering of Christian e-Books. There are also a few dictionaries and lexicons. But if Logos wins the battle over the number of resources, BibleReader wins hands down in terms of speed. Because all your BibleReader resources are stored on your phone, no internet access is required to use the app, and resources open instantly. On my 3GS it can take around 4 seconds to open Logos on a fast WiFi connection. But when I’m in church – without WiFi – it’s around 10 seconds. BibleReader on the other hand opens in 2 seconds, wherever I am. Not only so, but because all my resources are on my phone, searches can be performed instantly, wherever I am. You can only search one resource at a time, however – unlike Logos, there’s no way of searching across your whole library.

Like Logos, there are several features in BibleReader that lift it above your typical eBook app.

The first is a built-in app (resource) store. This is done brilliantly well, perhaps better than any other iPhone app I’ve used. All you need to do is link your OliveTree account in with your iTunes account, and then you can purchase new resources through iTunes, in the app, or on OliveTree’s website, and have them instantly available on your phone. If you find yourself in a situation where you need a new book or Bible translation, you can quickly order it, have it billed against your iTunes account, and it will be downloaded and available to read in less than five minutes.

The second feature is split screen reading. In BibleReader you can split your screen into two. For example, it could be useful to have two different bible versions open, or your Bible in one window and a commentary in another, or perhaps a Greek NT in one window and a Greek dictionary in another.

The third feature is user notes and highlighting. This allows you to add notes to any part of the Bible, or to highlight different passages, just as you might in a printed Bible. You can even sync the notes to Evernote so you can view them from your PC, or just to ensure they’re backed up. If you like to take notes whilst you’re reading, this is a great feature.

The fourth feature is morphological searching. This is similar to Logos’ Bible Word Study in that it allows you to search the Greek/Hebrew language texts, and get parsing information for every word. It’s not as pretty as Logos, and you can’t get a list of which English words are used to translate a particular Greek/Hebrew word. However, you do have full morphological searching, which allows you to do searches like “find all the occurrences of πίστις in the genitive singular”. It’s the only mobile Bible app to support searching like this.

Side-by-side comparison

Now we’ve examined the unique features in both applications that set them apart, it’s time to look at how they compare side-by-side.

Features: Both applications are loaded with features, and both will do more than many people thought possible even a year ago. Logos is superior at searching, with its Passage Guide and ability to search across multiple resources, though you can’t restrict your Bible search to particular Bible books. This last function is missing in BibleReader too, though you can restrict your search to just the New or Old Testaments. However, BibleReader’s split-screen reading, better morphology support and user notes just tip the scales in its favour. Not only so, but all of BibleReader’s functions work anywhere. Logos, on the other hand, requires an internet connection to get the best from it (apps like Google Maps and Facebook work in just the same way). With Logos there’ll be times when you’ll lose internet connectivity, and with it access to any books you haven’t downloaded, all search functionality, and all pop-up footnotes or cross references. For that reason, the first round goes clearly to BibleReader.
Logos: 6/10
BibleReader: 9/10

Simplicity: Both apps are very easy to use for anyone used to the iPhone platform. Controls are intuitive and well-organised, and settings kept to a minimum. But Logos just edges ahead – because its Bible Word Study is much easier than BibleReader’s more powerful morphology functions, and particularly because it makes the original language texts more accessible by allowing you to search in Greek/Hebrew yet return results in English.
Logos: 10/10
BibleReader: 9/10

Speed: BibleReader is astonishingly quick, with a rapid load time, and almost every function returning near-instant results. Logos on the other hand, with it’s partial reliance on an internet connection can feel ponderous in comparison. And yet it must not be forgotten that Logos harnesses the power of massive webservers to perform your searching. It means I can search my entire iPhone library of more than 1,500 resources and have the first results returned in less than three seconds. For most users though, they’ll spend more time reading than searching, which is to BibleReader’s advantage.
Logos: 8/10
BibleReader: 10/10

Resources: Here, Logos wins hands down, with an astonishing array of resources of every type imaginable: bibles, commentaries, lexicons, dictionaries, theologies, general reading. Yet there are some surprising omissions, including one that surprises many people: currently Logos does not offer the NIV. Don’t assume that Logos has everything BibleReader has – it doesn’t. How you score this will depend on which resources you actually care about. BibleReader has all of the basics, and several extras. Logos has most of the basics and many, many extras. For me, resources like Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, BDAG and the New International Commentary series swing the advantage clearly in Logos’ favour.
Logos: 9/10
BibleReader: 7/10

Value for money: Both apps are available free, but both benefit from significant investment. If you’re looking for a free app, Logos is best for Bibles (includes ESV, NASB, HCSB, NKJV, NLT and KJV), whilst BibleReader is best for other resources (31 other free resources in Logos, over 100 in BibleReader). When it comes to paying, neither are cheap. The cheapest Logos package is $265, though bear in mind that this includes very powerful software for your Mac or PC as well as the few hundred additional resources you get. It also adds features like offline reading. Once you’ve bought a base package like this, you can add on additional resources at a lower price (usually around 50%-80% of the cost of a print book). BibleReader on the other hand has a much lower entry point because you don’t need to buy a base package, you can just buy whatever add-on resources that you need (though a few small packages are available which may save you a bit of money). But if you want all the bells and whistles such as morphological searching and commentaries, you too will be paying a few hundred dollars. In the end, I’ve decided to call this one a draw. Logos is more expensive, but has the advantage that you’ll probably save money by not needing to re-purchase to get access to Bibles and resources on your PC and Mac. BibleReader has a lower entry-point, but limits you to mobile devices only.
Logos: 7/10
BibleReader: 7/10

Original language support: Here both packages excel, and offer better original language support than many desktop programs. Logos has the advantage in supporting the original languages from the English texts, which gives all the benefits of an interlinear, whilst retaining the readability of an ordinary bible. It also has better lexicons and dictionaries available. On the other hand, BibleReader is able to support morphological searching within the application. Which is the more important will depend on how you intend to use the app. I think most users will not find themselves in many situations where they need full morphological searching and don’t have access to their desktop machine, so I’m going to give this one to Logos.
Logos: 9/10
BibleReader: 8/10

Readability: One of the important functions of mobile Bible software is that you’ll use it to simply read from. Both apps perform this most basic of functions very well. Both have the ability to add bookmarks to your favourite passages, and both remember your position when you come back to resources later. Both support rotation lock, which prevents the screen switching from portrait to landscape and vice-versa. This can be very handy if you’re reading in bed and you don’t quite have your iPhone level. Logos  has the much better reading plans (BibleReader’s is limited to Bibles only), though you can’t edit them on the iPhone itself. Logos also has a clearer display, though it’s relatively easy to tweak BibleReader’s settings to mimic this. BibleReader has the option of scrolling the text freely up and down – in Logos you can only turn the page (which BibleReader also supports). Scrolling allows you to easily place a sentence in the middle of the screen to better view the context. I’m going to call this one a draw.
Logos: 9/10
BibleReader: 9/10

Conclusion

Both apps are genuinely excellent, and streets ahead of the competition. If you want a full-featured, resource-laden, powerful Bible app for your iPhone, look no further than Logos or BibleReader. I own both, and use both regularly, turning to BibleReader for its speed, and Logos for the extra resources and particularly the interlinears.

But which to choose? BibleReader just edges it in my opinion, but which is best for you will depend very much on how you intend to read and study use the Bible for yourself. If you use a Mac or PC, and want Bible software on your desktop as well as your iPhone, then Logos will be great – so long as you don’t think you’ll need access to the advanced functionality when you’re away from the internet. On the other hand, if you can’t afford the high-entry point for Logos’ best features, and appreciate polished performance and near-instant load times, then BibleReader will be just what you’re looking for – though you’ll miss out on some great features like looking up Greek words from the English text, and integration with your desktop computer.

Both apps are improving all the time, so as new released are made available, I’ll try and keep this review updated. Finally, if you’re an iPhone bible software user, leave a comment and voice your opinion.

Verdict

Logos: 58/70
BibleReader: 59/70

I believe Iain Murray (February 2010) overstates his case for non-’expository’ preaching. First, the preacher’s responsibility is to preach ‘the whole counsel of God’. If I am to preach through a large part of the Bible over a ministry, I will need to preach on texts significantly longer than a single verse (otherwise it would take more than 200 years to get through the 31,000 verses in the Bible).

Second, preachers should model the handling of the scripture from the pulpit. Preaching is very different to private devotion or study. But it is from the pulpit that our congregation will learn how to read the Bible for themselves. Would we want our congregation’s regular devotions to be a meditation on a single verse, plucked apparently at random?

Third, I want unbelievers to be utterly convinced that the gospel application in a sermon is from God’s Word. A great danger with non-‘expository’ preaching is that whilst the sermon’s content may be very biblical, it is not seen to be biblical by the unconverted because the preacher’s text serves only as a spring-board and not as a foundation.

Fourth, I reject the ‘either/or’ antithesis. In being committed to ‘expository’ preaching, I am not rejecting preaching that helps the hearers, is memorable, evangelistic and relies on the Spirit. It is true that attempting to preach in an expository style can expose inadequacies in the preacher. It is true that a running commentary is not a sermon, and that you can be faithful to the Word yet fail to preach, and fail to know the Spirit’s power. But I do not believe only an elite few should attempt to preach in an ‘expository’ way. Mr. Murray’s advice that novice preachers tread carefully is wise. But every Christian should always be maturing and growing. Safe, easy methods that stretch neither the preacher nor the congregation are a recipe for dull sermons, tired preachers and bored congregations.

To tithe, or not to tithe?

But is 10% an appropriate amount? When we look at the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament, we often find God’s people gave a tithe. (By definition a tithe means 10%.) Tithes were given to the Levites (Num. 18) who had responsibility for looking after the tabernacle. They in turn would tithe their tithe to the priests – a special group of Levites who had responsibility for leading, teaching, and officiating at ceremonies. Tithes ensured God’s work would be done, and the whole community benefited.

But tithes weren’t the only way that the Israelites gave. The poor were cared for, particularly family-members (e.g. Lev. 25:35, Deut. 15:7-11). Many offerings were brought to the tabernacle or temple, entirely separate from the tithe. There was also generous giving at special occasions like the building of the tabernacle (Ex. 35:4-29, 36:3-7).

Most people today view tithes in the Old Testament as obligatory, because God didn’t suggest the Israelites tithed, He commanded it. Yet it doesn’t appear to be a civil obligation. No civil punishment was ever specified, and whilst prophets spoke up when people didn’t tithe, tithing was never legally enforced. In that sense, tithing (even in the Old Testament) should never be considered as a ‘tax’. It was a necessary, but voluntary contribution. When the tithe was forgotten, the Levites and priests were forced into ‘secular’ work (Neh. 13:10), depriving the people of their ministry, to the spiritual and material harm of everyone (see Mal. 3:8-10).

The Bible doesn’t tell us directly why 10% was the figure chosen for the Levites, but the most likely answer is that 10% was what they needed. If eleven tribes give 10% to the twelfth then all tribes have roughly the same. (If the Levites ended up with a little more that was probably because they incurred some expenses in carrying out their work.)

So what lessons should we learn from the Old Testament? First, tithes were used primarily to ensure that God’s work could be done, and that those who served God shared equally in material blessings. Second, tithes were not the only way God’s people gave. Third, whilst tithes were necessary, they were not obligatory. They were gifts, not taxes.

Out with the old?

This is all very well, but we have no Levites or priests, and no tabernacle or temple. We live in the New Covenant, and not the Old. How then should we view tithing today?

There are several broad principles that will help us. The first is that the New Covenant is better than the Old (Heb. 7:22, 8:6). Believers in the New Covenant are greater than Old Covenant believers (Matt. 11:11), and will do greater things than even Jesus did (John 14:12). It is inconceivable that New Covenant believers will give less generously than Old Covenant believers. The second principle is that New Covenant believers are freer than those in the Old Covenant. We have died to the law and are released from it (Rom. 7:4-6). This means it is unthinkable that we would be less free than Old Testament believers.

When we look at the Bible’s teaching concerning giving, it fits precisely with these broader theological principles. First, the New Testament model is not a tenth, but the Macedonians who give ‘beyond their means’, in a ‘wealth of generosity’ that belied their ‘extreme poverty’ (2 Cor. 8:1-15, cf. Luke 21:1-4). Jesus was also critical of the Pharisees (Luke 11:42, cf. 18:12) who very carefully tithed tiny amounts of herbs, but neglected more important duties. Doing our best to ensure that we manage the ‘minimum’ is to completely miss the point. Second, Jesus suggests that ‘sons of the king’ (a description which applies principally to Him, but through Him to all His spiritual family) have no obligation to pay the temple tax (Matt. 17:24-27).

Principles for today

We’re now in a position where we can summarise the principles from the whole of the Bible and apply it to ourselves.

• Christians are under no obligation to give a tithe (10%) of their income. Instead our giving should be sacrificial, and proportional to our means.
• Church leaders may teach that giving is necessary, and should be regular (1 Cor. 16:1-2), but they should not enforce giving, nor monitor individuals’ giving.
• Christians’ regular giving to the church does not release them from a duty of care for the poor, nor from additional giving where there is particular need, either inside or outside the church.
• Those employed by the church should receive a fair wage (the Levites’ income was roughly comparable with those who were giving). Christians should give enough to their local church to ensure they can enjoy the benefits of the church’s ministry. 10% ensured this three millennia ago. The information below may help you think this through today.

Only heretical American televangelists promise that if you give them $100, God will ‘repay’ you with all you need to pay off your debts and buy a speedboat. It’s a terrible distortion of a glorious biblical truth, ‘He… will supply and multiply your seed for sowing and increase the harvest of your righteousness. You will be enriched in every way to be generous in every way…’ (2 Cor. 9:10-11). Giving generously contributes to a righteous character and is a wonderful investment. Generosity’s reward is sanctification, not a speedboat.

But for some, giving generously is not easy. Some Christians even argue that they should not give generously because if they did they’d be breaking the principle that God loves a cheerful giver. What nonsense! The only way to learn the joy of giving is to give.

There will be others who would love to give generously, but they do not control their family budget and the person who does is not a Christian. We should obviously not steal from our spouse, nor act deceptively. But we can give from the part of the budget we do control. And perhaps a non-Christian spouse may be more willing to be generous than we think, particularly when approached prayerfully.

Still others will feel unable to give substantially because their own income is low. Even so, the principles remain. The example of the widow at the temple, and the Macedonians is that we should give out of our poverty. The amount may be less than the rich, but our heart’s desire ought not to be less. This also means that the relatively well-off need to give more, to ease the burden on the poor.

If we don’t give generously, the whole Christian community suffers. How many churches are weak because some members will not give adequately to support the advancement of gospel work? But if we do give, everyone gains. The hungry are fed, the gospel prospers, the giver is enriched, the church is blessed and God is glorified! Lord, teach us to give generously and joyfully.

Postscript: What does my church need from me?

I can’t tell you what your church needs from you, because the Bible says ‘each one must give as he has decided in his heart’ (2 Cor. 9:7). These questions will help you know roughly what your church needs, but only you can decide what to give.

• Look at your church expenses budget. If necessary add anything the leaders feel would benefit the work, or require to ensure the pastor’s family’s income is no less than the average family.* Let’s imagine a church with a current income of £50,000, but which would really benefit from another £10,000 so it could afford to employ a part-time assistant.
• Divide the total by the number of households where a church member controls the family budget. Perhaps there are 50 members representing 30 families but in several of these families the head of household does not attend, leaving 20 families to be considered. We then divide the £60,000 needed by the church by 20 families, giving £3,000 per family.
• What is that figure as a percentage of the average family’s income? In the UK, you can look up the average household income for your area at www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk – it may be higher than you think! Where I live it is £27,000, the average for Wales is £28,000. So £3,000 would be 10.7% of £28,000.
• Take that percentage and use it on your own family’s income to calculate a ball-park figure to help you pray through what to give. Remember that God doesn’t want us to calculate our ‘tithe’ to the exact penny to ensure we give only the amount that is ‘required’!

* This is not a hint to my own church who are already generous towards me!

This post was first written for the Evangelical Magazine.

Quick Admin Links

Quite possibly the most simple and useful WordPress plug-in you never knew you needed! Quick Admin Links is a small widget. Put it at the top of your sidebar, and it adds some useful admin links on every page, allowing you to add new posts/pages, edit existing posts/pages, go to the admin, or log out. If your theme doesn’t already include edit buttons, and you notice a typo in your post, you have to click on “Site Admin”, then “Manage”, then “Posts”, then type in some search terms, and click “Search”, then click on the post you’re looking for. With Quick Admin Links, you can go straight from your post to the edit screen in just one click.

Style Tweaker

If you’re anything like me, you’re never quite satisfied with WordPress themes, and like to tweak the CSS. Style Tweaker allows you easily edit CSS without uploading files. You can also use it to test CSS before launching it to the world. You can add CSS to the entire website, regardless of what theme is being used, or add it to just the current theme. You can even add CSS that displays only when you are logged on – very useful when you’re playing with a new look, and it’s not quite ready for public viewing.

It was particularly good to be able to worship with evangelical anglicans. Both of the churches we visited are firmly at the centre of true evangelicalism, and are fully committed to the authority of Scripture, and a biblical understanding of justification by faith alone. In both, the sermons were helpful, and (as you’d expect) expounded the Scriptures clearly. Rico Tice’s powerful preaching on the plagues in Egypt was a particular highlight – I could happily have listened for several minutes longer.

Unfortunately, however, the most significant impression left on me from the two services was the contradictions that seem inevitable within evangelical anglicanism. Welsh evangelicalism and evangelical anglicanism have not exactly seen eye to eye, particular since John Stott and Martyn Lloyd-Jones very publically disagreed on how evangelicals should respond to the liberal denominations they find themselves in (oversimplifying, Lloyd-Jones said they should get out, Stott said they should stay in). It is only recently that those barriers are beginning to come down, so I welcomed the opportunity to express that unity, albeit in a very small way.

Since 1966, most evangelical anglicans have been committed to reforming anglicanism from within. The statement of the 1967 National Evangelical Anglical Congress (heavily influenced by Stott) says, ‘We are increasingly anxious to play our part in the Church of England… it is reform we desire, not separation’.

But the fundamental debate in 1966 was not really on whether evangelicals should secede from their denominations. The differences really centred around the question “What is a church?”, and even more fundamentally, “What is a Christian?”. Christianity Explored (written by Rico Tice during his time at All Souls) answers this latter question brilliantly. But (tragically in my view), evangelical anglicanism typically fudges the answer to that question in many of rituals and services. This was demonstrated in both churches I visited last Sunday.

At Grace Church, Hackney the service included a liturgical prayer of confession. In it the congregation were encouraged to “turn back to the Lord”, then prayed for forgiveness. These prayers were concluded with the priest saying “I declare to you in the name of Jesus Christ that you are forgiven.” This is an extremely bold statement to say the least, carrying with it the great danger that the congregation will assume that confession (without either repentance or faith) is all that is required for salvation and forgiveness.

If anything, the situation in All Souls was worse. The particular service we joined happened to include a baptism of an infant. There is always a danger that baptismal services (of unbelievers or believers) can be misunderstood, and therefore clarity is paramount.

Sadly, there was no clarity at All Souls, instead ambiguity was the order of the day. During the service, the tiny child is encouraged by the congregation to “continue as a faithful soldier” (implying the child is already a solider of Christ). The minster later pronounced that “God has received you by baptism into his Church”. This was followed by this declaration from the congregation:

We welcome you into the fellowship of faith in Christ. We pray that you will grow up in this Christian family to trust Christ with us. We are all one in Christ Jesus. We belong to him through faith, heirs of the promise of the Spirit of peace.

This illustrates perfectly the failure of evangelical anglicanism to grasp the nettle, and ensure that their correct beliefs of what a Christian is are seen in all the rituals and liturgy they proclaim. How can it be helpful to declare that an unbelieving infant is in “the fellowship of faith”, “in this Christian family” and “in his Church”? How does this square with the wonderfully clear teaching of Christianity Explored, or the clear gospel preaching of Proclamation Trust stalwarts such as Dick Lucas?

On the day after these two services, I read of Griffith Jones, a Welsh evangelical of the early eighteenth century, who was also very much committed to anglicanism. Griffith Jones was criticised by many Welsh non-conformists for remaining within the anglican church, and criticised by many anglicans for being too evangelical! One anglican clergyman published a leaflet condemning him. Among the criticisms directed at him was that “he secretly corresponded with the Methodists” and that he believed “there were many precious lambs of Christ among the various denominations”. But more relevant to our discussion are two other criticisms:

• That he explains away the precious doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and insists that neither baptism, nor any other thing can make anyone a Christian, without saving faith in Christ.
• That he made changes to the litany and ommitted large sections of the Service, in order to have time for his own prayers and sermons.

I know that I have many brothers and sisters in the Church of England. I know that there are many with whom I would agree on all the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. But I long to see those doctines expressed in every area of church life – not just in the preaching, not just in Christianity Explored courses, but also in the rites and rituals, and in the liturgy of every day church life. Frankly, like Lloyd-Jones, I am not convinced it is possible to do this within anglicanism. Others disagree. But, for once, I would be delighted to be proved wrong. If I am, then it will be possible to achieve both dreams: genuine unity between non-conformists and anglicans, and reformation of the church of England.

Surely churches who will receive these ministers will want to bear some of the burden for training them. If this is the case, the figures above would seem to suggest that churches with ministers ought to be setting aside around £750-£850 a year to ensure that when the time comes for them to call a new pastor, they have contributed sufficient funds to train one.

Although I’m suggesting that churches invest £750-£850 per year towards training men for the ministry, this does put a substantially larger burden on smaller churches. It’s probably better to express such an amount in terms of a percentage of a church’s income to avoid this disparity. If the average income of our churches is £40-£50,000 when this would be just 2% of our income.

Is it too much to suggest that each of our churches invests 2% of our annual income in training men for the pastoral ministry?

How should such a scheme work? Ideally, I suppose, a fund would be set up where churches could commit an annual donation, and then apply for a grant when they send someone to college. In this way, our independent churches can become what biblically they really are, inter-dependent churches.

But frankly, we’re probably a long way from that. At the moment, whilst there is a crisis of funding, we need to give directly to colleges or to students to meet the need now. Perhaps in a few years time, when bank balances are more healthy and necessary investment has been met, an independent fund could then be set up.

Short-term and long-term gain

Of course, there’s no reason why churches who support training should not benefit in the short-term as well as the long term. There are at least two ways that churches can benefit from their investment in the short-term.

The first is to support the student. The biggest proportion of the costs of training are not course expenses, but living expenses. If students did not have to worry about living expenses, they could easily cover their course expenses. So why not look to support students directly? Churches based near to a college could sponsor a student – not for their full support amount, but as a contribution towards it. The student could be based at the church during term-time, and the church would feel the benefit of having an additional keen and gifted member (possibly with his family). Moreover, the church could get directly involved in his training through mentoring, and providing opportunities within the church for preaching or pastoral work. It’s a win-win situation. Colleges may well be able to provide names of men who could be interested in such an arrangement.

The second is to support the college. Many of the costs of running a college are relatively fixed. In other words, the more students in attendance, the easier finances become. So rather than giving to a college, why not look to see if you too can gain from your investment? Are there elders in the church who would benefit from taking some distance learning modules in theology, preaching or pastoral methods? Are there ladies or youth workers who could benefit from some biblical input into their work? Why not get them a little training at a bible college? Would your pastor benefit from some further study, say an MA in Pastoral studies? Why not release him to do a part-time course? Most Bible colleges are delighted to have godly, committed people taking courses with them – and part-time students who are training for ‘lay’ work within the church also helps them to keep their costs lower for students training for full-time work.

I’m not suggesting that we should never support colleges unless we can get something out of it. Scripture forbids such a thought. But I am suggesting that in addition to a small amount of ‘unconditional’ giving, some strategic investment in training can bring an immediate and tangible benefit to the church.

The very best way of meeting the need

So far I’ve suggested three ways in which churches can help to meet the need of theological training in the future: (1) Through ‘unconditional giving’. (2) Through supporting a student. (3) By sending key church leaders to study part-time.

But there is another way that is often forgotten – and it is perhaps the best way of all.

The best way of supporting the training of ministers is to pray that God would raise up young men for the ministry, and men and women for the mission field. Then to put time, energy, love and prayer into all young people who can be persuaded by all biblical means to come to the church’s evangelistic ministries. Then to work with all those whom the Lord converts, discipling and teaching them. Then to look out for those the Lord is particularly gifting, and investing in them, mentoring them, giving them opportunities to serve, gently correcting their mistakes and listening to their ideas. Then to test those who begin to feel the Lord’s call in their lives, slowly stretching them, encouraging them and beginning to train them in the Scriptures. Then to set apart for full-time training those who know God’s hand upon them, doing all that you can to support them in serving Him to the greatest extent they are able. That’s the very best way of helping to meet the need of theological training in the future. If such men and women were being regularly sent to our theological colleges from our churches we would not be in danger of a training crisis.

We believe that God is sovereign. We believe that it is God who converts, God who calls, and it is God who equips. And we believe that God’s normal way of converting and calling and equipping is to use churches. Churches like yours and churches like mine. So under God, let us, as churches, take responsibility for the current problems, and the future solutions. Let us give, let us support existing students, let us utilise training resources for our own churches. And most of all, let us use every means that God has given us to prepare men and women to serve Him with all their hearts, with all their minds, with all their soul and with all their strength.

That means that many students are going into debt in order to fund their training. Many others are forced to ask their wives to work (sometimes full-time) during the training period, perhaps when they would like their wives to train with them. Others spend years employed in secular work, simply saving up the money that they will require. Still others don’t go to college at all, or take a much shorter course than they really need. Can this really be right?

Undoubtedly there are many students who are able to be trained within their own churches, with some input from a part-time course, such as the one offered by the Evangelical Movement of Wales. For some, this is an excellent option, and I don’t want to suggest that full-time residential study is the only way to study, or that it is necessary for everyone. But whether a student is based in his local church or on a bible-college campus, makes little difference to the problem. Surely it must be apparent that training for the pastoral ministry is not normally something that a man should attempt to squeeze in to a few hours a week around a full-time job, his church responsibilities, being increasingly involved in regular preaching , and looking after his wife and children. Even if the student stays based at his own church it is surely best that he devotes a major portion of his time (and hence his income) to training. Even without course fees, living expenses for a two-three year training period could easily top £25,000 – more if he is married.

So whichever way we look at it, full-time training men for the ministry is an expensive business if we are to do it well. At the very cheapest end of the scale a single man who can be trained solely within a church it will need to find perhaps £25,000. For the student who is married, and whose church can’t provide full-time training, the figure is nearer £50,000 from him, and another £7,500 from the college.

The role of the denominations

Where is all this money going to come from? It’s worth remembering that this difficulty in financing training is a more serious problem than it has been for many years. Previous generations often found funding for theological training available from the Presbyterian Church or the Baptist Union. Now that (within Wales at least) most evangelicals training for pastoral ministry are no longer in denominational churches, that route is no longer available. And until around ten years ago, Local Education Authorities would pay a grant to degree candidates, even at independent Bible Colleges. With the introduction of student loans, that avenue too has closed. The rapidly increasing costs of housing, fuel and food are only compounding the problem.

Within many denominations, the problem is much less acute. So within the Church of England, for example, men who are accepted as ordinands have their tuition fees and college maintenance fees paid in full by the Ministry Division of the Church of England each year (usually around £10,000). They will also have a personal grant of over £1,500 (rising to around £10,000 where the student is married and has children) paid for by his diocese. This means a married student is likely to receive over £45,000 during a three year course, single students a little over £30,000. In 2007 the Anglican Church contributed a total £16.5 million towards ordinand training. At a time when many free churches are struggling to find trained men to pastor them, it’s perhaps not a surprise that the Church Times (13 July 2007) reported that the Church of England anticipated having more ordinands applying for training in 2008 than at any time in the last forty years.

A way forward?

I don’t want to make the situation sound hopeless. It’s not. In a later post, I’ll explore some of the solutions to these problems. But one thing is clear. It is primarily the responsibility of churches to ensure that the men who will be leading the church in the next generation (and the present one) are sufficiently well-trained. As Kerry Orchard, Development Manager at WEST, told me, “the church has a responsibility to invest in proper leadership training. Why should a man set apart as a teacher of the flock have inferior preparation for this lofty task than his church members have in their jobs?”

It seems within independency, at least, that is happening only rarely. Gifts from churches to LTS, for example, totalled just 8% of their income for 2007. In 2006, it was 6.5%. Even assuming that much more was given to individual students from their sending churches, these are frighteningly small amounts.

Perhaps – particularly if you are a church leader – you could consider how much support your congregation has invested in training men for pastoral ministry, and towards training men and women for evangelism and mission work. And perhaps we might all pray and ask God whether He would have us do more.