Answer

Dear *****,

This is a good question. I find it interesting to observe (over a good number of years) that while churches are all too often slow to deal with sin in the church, sinning church members are often much quicker to leave the church on their own (before discipline can occur).

Church discipline (in its most drastic form -- expulsion from the church) removes the sinner (who claims to be a saint -- 1 Corinthians 5:9-13) from the church, and thus from its benefits and protections. A person who claims to be a Christian, and yet does not fellowship in and with a church is sinning (Hebrews 10:25). In effect, the person who withdraws from the church (or refuses to be a part of a church) has already placed themselves under God’s discipline.

Having said this, I note from 1 Corinthians chapter 5 that Paul personally exercises church discipline from afar (1 Corinthians 5:3), serving as an example to the church.

I believe it is clear in Scripture that church discipline requires both individual and corporate (the entire church) action. For example, Matthew 18:15-20 instructs the individual who becomes aware of the sin of another to confront the sinner with their sin. If repentance does not result, 2 or 3 others should be included in the rebuke. And ultimately, if repentance is refused, the entire church must become involved. Once discipline is exercised by the church, every member of the church is required to follow through with the action of the church. Eating and having fellowship with such a person on a personal level should cease, in my opinion, but always with the hope of repentance and restoration. That does not mean there can be absolutely no contact with this person, but it would be greatly restricted (Matthew 18:17).

In the case which you have presented, I believe that discipline should be exercised on a personal level, and that he or she should first be confronted regarding their sin, and then should be dealt with as Matthew 18:15-20 and 1 Corinthians 5 indicate, on an individual basis.

While a willful sinner may attempt to give the impression that a rebuke has no impact on them, it is, I think, worthwhile to warn them that in Paul’s words, church discipline is “turning the wayward sinner over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh” -- 1 Corinthians 5:5. This means that bad things may result. This might get their attention, and may very well come to mind if and when their life begins to fall apart.

I remember an occasion when I was involved in the discipline of an individual who was not part of our church. As the ambulance was hauling this fellow off after a heart attack, he yelled out, “And tell ____________ that this is not God’s discipline!”

I hope this helps,

Bob Deffinbaugh

Introduction

Because leadership is always so determinative on the well being and spiritual growth of the body of Christ, one of the first things the Apostle Paul saw to was the appointment of elders in every church as under-shepherds of God’s people (Act 14:23; Tit. 1).

Two key New Testament passages (1 Tim. 3:1-13 and Tit. 1:5-9) provide us with the essential qualifications that such men must demonstrate in order to be qualified to serve the local church. Rather than a detailed exegesis of all the qualifications of these two passages, the purpose of this study is to provide a brief overview of the qualifications for study and reflection in coming to grips with the main concepts in preparation for evaluating possible candidates for the offices of elders and deacons.

In addition, there are a number of crucial principles that I have found very important for understanding and applying these biblical texts which set forth these qualifications. These are concepts that are pertinent to the passages in view because they have their roots in the New Testament as a whole and bear directly on what the Bible says about leadership.

Understanding and Applying
the Qualifications of Elders and Deacons

The Nature of the Qualifications

An important question that needs to be asked and answered pertains to the exact nature of these qualifications. What exactly are these qualifications?

(1) They are moral qualities or qualities of high moral character. But they are more.

(2) They are the marks of leadership, marks which demonstrate a man’s capacity to leads others in the Christian life.

(3) As those qualities that mark a man for leadership, they are primarily the marks of spiritual maturity, the marks of one who has grown in Christ and has experienced the life-changing power of the Lord through the ministry of the Spirit of God and the Word of God.

Primarily they are marks of maturity. This certainly fits the context which warns against choosing a “new convert” (1 Tim. 3:6).

But by way of further definition there are three more things about these qualifications as marks of maturity that are important in grasping the nature of these qualifications.

(1) They are goals and they provide us with a target, something we should all set our sights on. Since all believers should grow and mature in the Lord, these qualifications should be the goal of every believer, not just elders and deacons. These are goals we will all strive for if we mean business with Jesus Christ. In essence this should be our aim because as these marks are realized, we will also be accomplishing the other goals God has for our lives (cf. Phil. 3:12-15; cf. also 1 Tim. 1:5-6). In a context concerned with having the right goals in ministry, Paul warns Timothy about those men who wanted to be teachers, but who had strayed from the goal of 1 Timothy 1:5-6. In verse 6, the Greek word for “straying,” astocheo, means “to fail to aim carefully, and thus to miss the mark.” They were disqualified because they were aiming at the wrong goals.

(2) Next, these qualifications are marks of identification and confirmation. They make the person who possesses these qualities a marked person with the brand of Jesus Christ emblazoned across their lives. Today, the church has lost its distinctiveness because, far too often, you can’t tell believers from unbelievers—and I am not talking about manner of dress. Rather, I am referring to values, priorities, pursuits, and godly character.

(3) Finally, as marks of identification and confirmation, they also make the possessors of these qualities examples, patterns to follow. They demonstrate the reality of Christ in our lives which enables us to be influential in the right way.

In keeping with these thoughts, especially the concept that these qualities are targets we should all set our sights on, let’s look at 1 Timothy 3:1 and the phrase, “aspire to the office of overseer.”

What It Means to Aspire to
the Office of Overseer (1 Tim. 3:1)

Paul’s statement about aspiring to the office of overseer may sound strange to many. In plain and simple terms this involves a form of ambition, an aspiration, a drive, a target to shoot at. But what exactly does this mean?

“Aspire” is a very strong word. In the Greek text, it’s the middle voice of orego which means “to stretch yourself out, to personally reach out for,” and so it came to mean “to aspire.” In plain and simple terms, it refers to ambition, to that which drives or motivates a person. Ambition comes from a Latin word meaning “canvassing for promotion.”

In our day, ambition is usually connected with some form of self-seeking motivated by selfish desires. It generally refers to a person with some very self-centered, hidden agendas. Such ambition in leaders and in any Christian is a curse to be avoided because leaders with such agendas will always end up manipulating and using others for selfish ends.

Leaders must follow the warning the prophet Jeremiah gave to Baruch in Jeremiah 45:5, “Are you seeking great things for yourself? Do not seek them.”

But there is a biblical and sanctified ambition and one that is essential to good leadership, one that is a mark of maturity, a mark that should be a part of each of our lives. So, what is biblical ambition?

(1) It is an ambition that has been cleansed of self-seeking, one that seeks only the glory of God and the well being of others.

(2) It is an ambition that seeks not position, praise, power, prestige, or popularity, but service to God and ministry to men.

(3) It is an ambition that has at its center the three important Es which define the purpose of the church: the Exaltation of God, the Edification of the body of Christ, and the Evangelization of the lost.

Why? How? Because if we are truly maturing in Christ, we should be learning to seek our security, significance, and satisfaction from the Lord rather than from people, position, power, and praise, etc. For a beautiful commentary on this study read 1 Thessalonians 2:1-20.

With all this in mind, let’s note two things about 1 Tim. 3.

First, notice that Paul does not use the term elder in this passage, and that is significant. Acts 20 clearly shows that the words elder and overseer refer to the same office. Elders are the overseers, for Acts 20 elders are defined as overseers (cf. Acts 20:17 with vs. 28).

What’s the difference between the two terms?

(1) The term elder, stresses the dignity and position of this ministry in the church.

(2) On the other hand, overseer stresses the function and work of an elder.

In 1 Tim. 3:1, Paul carefully chose to use episkope, the “office or charge of oversight.” But why? Because this word stresses the ministry function and nature of this office as a charge from God and not the element of position.

God is not looking for men who are aspiring for position. Jesus made this clear to the disciples. The church needs men who want to serve the body for the glory of God and the blessing of others.

Second, note the next statement of verse one. “It is a fine work he desires to do.” Underline the word work. Work is the Greek ergon which means “work, deed, action, task, enterprise, undertaking.”

The emphasis is clearly not on aspiring to a position or a place of prestige, but on the function and work of overseeing, an aspiration which is to have its root in godly and pastoral love for the well-being of God’s people rather than personal and selfish agendas. It is this that Paul asserts as trustworthy or honorable.

It should be our prayer that we all would set our sights on spiritual maturity, but as we do, let’s be careful of our motives. The purpose of maturity is not to make us more comfortable and secure, or land us with a position in the church. Its purpose is to make us more like the Lord Jesus and effective as His representatives in a lost and dying world.

Oswald Sanders, in his classic book on leadership entitled Spiritual Leadership, has some fitting remarks: “The true spiritual leader is concerned infinitely more with the service he can render God and his fellowmen than with the benefits and pleasures he can extract from life. He aims to put more into life than he takes out of it.”¹

The greatest need is not for leaders, but for saints and servants. Unless that is held in the foreground of our thinking, the whole idea of leadership and leadership training becomes dangerous.²

Since these qualities provide us with a target we should all aim for, let me bring up another principle.

The Principle of the Relative
Nature of the Marks of Maturity

If a man is honest about his life on the inside, when he reads these qualifications his response may be, “who can ever truly be qualified? Who can completely fulfill all these qualifications?” And these kinds of feelings will often cause a man to shrink back from what could be God’s will when he very well may be qualified.

The principle is simply this: No one is perfect. No one, other than the Lord Jesus, ever hits the direct center of the bull’s eye. In fact, I am convinced no one ever really gets close enough to hit the bull’s eye.

You see, one of the most fundamental principles of Scripture is that we all fall short of God’s glory and perfection. While godly maturity and Christlikeness should be the goal or target of every believer and while one of the goals of every ministry and its leadership should be to bring its people into higher and higher stages of godly maturity (cf. Col. 1:28), still, no matter how mature or how godly one becomes, none of us even comes close to perfection.

Do you remember David’s plea in Psalm 143:3? David, a man after God’s own heart and a leader of God’s people, when praying for God’s help said: “And do not enter into judgment with Thy servant, For in Thy sight no man living is righteous.”

Paul also brought out this truth in Philippians 3:10-16. The goal, indeed, the mark we are all to pursue as did Paul is spiritual maturity, being conformed to the character of the Lord Jesus, but no matter how much we have attained that goal, there will always be plenty of room and need for more growth and change. No person has ever attained full maturity except the Lord Jesus Himself!

So, what does this truth and fact mean—the fact that no man is perfect or fully measures up all the time?

(1) It means there will always be room for improvement and growth in the qualities mentioned in these passages. Being “above reproach” is not a demand for perfection before selection. If that were so, no man would ever be qualified.

(2) However, it teaches us that being above reproach in relation to these qualities means that a man’s life-style is such that, generally speaking, no one can legitimately accuse him of conduct which is unbefitting a mature believer.

(3) It means that these qualities should exist in a man’s life to such a degree that they stand out as prominent and consistent characteristics. They are clearly distinguishable, but there will be room for growth and times when he may fall short.

(4) It means that, because none of us is perfect, we should not expect our leaders to walk on water. They all have feet of clay.

(5) However, being above reproach does mean we should look for those men who are mature and examples of Christlikeness, and we should expect them to continue to grow.

The Principle of Emergent Leadership

An important question is this. How do we go about selecting the right men for the ministries of elders or deacons? This is an important question because it involves motivating the flock to understand and act on key biblical concepts which lead to the flock’s ability to do two things: (a) select the right men, and (b) respect and respond to the leadership and ministries of those men who are chosen to serve as spiritual leaders of a congregation.

Though Scripture gives clear guidelines concerning the spiritual qualifications of elders and deacons and concerning the functions of the elders, we find no clearly stated instruction for the process of selecting elders or deacons.

(1) Acts 6:1-7 is often used as an example and does provide us with some important insight, but those selected at that time were never given an official title like deacon. It was undoubtedly a temporary ministry but it still provides us with a biblical example of selecting people for important ministries through the guidance of the leadership, but also through involving the congregation in the selection process according to certain spiritual qualifications.

(2) Acts 14:23 is another passage dealing with the appointment of elders. Scholars are divided, however, down the middle on the precise meaning of “appoint” (ceirotonew, “to vote by stretching out the hand”). Some emphasize its literal meaning while others its derived meaning. Being divided on the meaning, they are also divided on the procedure used by Paul and Barnabas. But probably, they used a procedure similar to that of Acts 6 which involved the recognition of spiritually mature and growing men through input and involvement of the congregation in the process because it was the people who knew them and had seen them in action (cf. Acts 16:1-3 where Paul seems to have chosen Timothy based on the report of the people).

In this regard, there is an important principle that we need to keep in mind. Acts 20:28 clearly teaches that it is really God who makes or appoints and qualifies men for ministry by maturing them, by gifting them, and by giving them a burden for such a ministry. In Acts 20:28, the word “made” in “made you overseers” is the Greek tithemi, “to place, set.” But it often carries the idea of “appoint” and is so translated six times in the NASB (cf. John 15:16; 1 Cor. 12:28; 1 Tim. 2:7; 2 Tim. 2:11; Heb. 1:2; 1 Pet. 2:8).

Since God is the one who appoints men to the ministry of elders (and this would apply to deacons also), what exactly is the responsibility of the church? What is it that the church does in the selection process?

It is the responsibility of the church to recognize the emergence of those men whom the Holy Spirit has prepared and appointed by the qualities of their lives from the standpoint of (a) their character, (b) their giftedness, and (c) their burden and concern for the body of Christ.

Thus, while the local flock is asked to participate in the selection process, its job is not so much to elect or select such men as it is to confirm the Spirit’s work and thus His appointment and gift of certain men to serve either as elders or deacons. How? By recognizing God’s work in their lives through growth in Christ-like qualities. These qualifications then simply demonstrate God’s work and His appointment (cf. Acts 16:1-3).

What then is an emergent leadership?

It is a leadership that gradually emerges or develops like fruit growing on a tree. Selecting an emergent leadership is tremendously crucial. Listen to what Oswald Sanders says:

The Holy spirit does not take control of any man or body of men against their will. When He sees elected to positions of leadership men who lack spiritual fitness to cooperate with Him, He quietly withdraws and leaves them to implement their own policy according to their own standards, but without His aid. The inevitable issue is an unspiritual administration.³

So according to the New Testament, leadership is to be an emergent leadership, a leadership that emerges as a product of God’s work within the flock of God’s people. As an emergent leadership, men are not simply elected or appointed by men, but recognized by the qualities of these passages in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. This is why evaluation according to the criteria of these passages is so important. This is why finding men who meet the qualifications is so much more important than selecting a certain number to meet a quota even though that number of qualified men are not ready or prepared by the Spirit of God.

The Principle of Balance

As I have sought to demonstrate in the summary of the qualifications of elders and deacons that follows, you will note that these qualities may also be seen from the standpoint of all of a man’s fundamental relationships in life—to God, to His Word, to self, family, others (including the outside world), and things. Why do I call this to your attention? Because it is a way to stress that these requirements, as marks of maturity, encompass every area of a man’s life. A truly mature man is a well-rounded and balanced man who has allowed Jesus Christ to invade, take charge, and change every sphere of his life (cf. Col. 1:9f ; Josh. 3:13-14).

The point is simply this: Biblical Christianity knows nothing about compartmentalized living. There are to be no areas of the life where the Lord is not allowed to invade and take charge. In other words, there are to be no spiritual “junk closets” or areas we reserve for ourselves. We are to be His lock, stock, and barrel.

The Principle of Two Sides of the Coin

As churches consider these passages and consider men in their light, I believe it is tremendously important to recognize their primary focus so that can become our focus as well. What then is the focus?

(1) Christian character

(2) Spiritual maturity

(3) Well-rounded godliness.

The interesting point is that there is no direct, clearly-defined reference to spiritual gifts in these verses. Indirectly we undoubtedly find a reference to the gift of teaching in “able to teach” in 1 Timothy 3:2, and since one of the gifts given to the body of Christ is the gift of “leadership,” we probably have an indirect reference to the gift of leadership in the analogy between managing his family and the church in 1 Timothy 3:5. The word “manage” in verses 4-5 is proistemi, “to lead, go before.” It is used of the spiritual gift of “leading” in Romans 12:8, and of the responsibilities of elders in 1 Timothy 5:17 and in 1 Thessalonians 5:12.

There is a principle here. Clearly such gifts are necessary to some degree if an elder is going to be able to fulfill the functions and responsibilities of an elder. Without these he would be working in areas of his weaknesses rather than in areas of his strengths as gifted by the Lord. Giftedness is important to every believer’s ministry, and especially to the ministry of church leaders. In other words, what God has called you to do, He has gifted you to do, and what He has gifted you to do, He has called you to do (1 Pet. 4:10).

But the important point is this: The Apostle does not tell us to look for men who have the gift of teaching or leading or exhortation. Further, he does not tell us to look for men with dynamic personalities, or who are regarded by people as great pulpiteers or men of oratory, or for men who are successful businessmen. God’s emphasis in this passage is not on giftedness, or on dynamic personalities because such things in themselves never qualify a man for leadership in the church. The emphasis is on godly character. The body of Christ needs men who are first and foremost men of God.

How far removed this is from our day and age and from, unfortunately, the thinking of the average believer or church goer. When most people think of a church leader, they think of such things as pulpit ability, a dynamic and glowing personality, or of someone who looks good in a blue suit and is a leader in the community. We tend to focus on the outside and we give little emphasis to spiritual character.

There needs to be balance. Ability, skill, and a man’s outward impression are not unimportant nor are they completely neglected in these verses, BUT THEY ARE NOT GIVEN OR HIGHLIGHTED AS THE PRIMARY CONSIDERATION. Instead, God is telling us in no uncertain terms that the key to a man’s success in leading the church is not his skills, methods, personality, nor even his gifts. Instead, the key is in his emotional, mental, and spiritual maturity.

The ministry of overseers in the local church is like a coin with two sides and both must be included. But you know what we do? We tend to ignore or depreciate one side or the other. Both sides are important and neither should be neglected, but the side of the coin God has turned up for us to see, the side needed the most by the emphasis of these qualification passages, is the side I am calling spiritual maturity for no matter how gifted a man is, if he is spiritually immature, he will be a poor leader and the church will be in trouble.

Hebrews 13:7 teaches us the same lesson. The readers are told to remember those who had taught them the word of God, but it was not their giftedness or skill in preaching that they were told to consider or imitate. Instead, it was their conduct and their faith.

The coin principle does not stop here. Giftedness is important, and for truly qualified elders a number of gifts undoubtedly come together to enable men to shepherd the flock of God—gifts such as teaching, exhortation, showing mercy, leading, and administration. In other words, there are (a) communication skills and abilities, and (b) shepherding, leading skills and abilities. We tend to over emphasize one to the exclusion of the other, or we find a board of elders functioning primarily on administrative matters rather than on other aspects of ministry.

On any board of elders, some will be more skilled and gifted in one area and others in another. One of the needs of the board and the flock is to allow men to work in their areas of giftedness so that the men on the board are able to complement or integrate their gifts together for the benefit of the church.

Conclusion

One of the designed results of these marks of maturity is that such men become examples of the Christian life and of the power of God that is available in the person and work of Jesus Christ. The responsibility of the church is to select those men who are models, examples for the flock to follow as we see in Hebrews 13:7 and 1 Peter 5:3.

I once saw a bumper sticker that said, “Don’t follow me, I’m lost too,” That’s the state of the world and, unfortunately, of many well meaning Christians and leaders. They are like the commercial pilot who told his passengers, “I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news is we are lost, but the good news is that we are making good time.”

Motion in itself never means direction just as activity in itself never means effectiveness. We can be like the cowboy who rushed into the corral, bridled and saddled his horse and rode off in all directions. We need quality lives with quality motion aimed in the right direction with specific, biblical objectives.

Effective ministry to others is often equated with dynamic personalities, with talent, giftedness, with training, with enthusiasm, and with charisma. But these things alone are inadequate. Much, much more is needed.

Howard Hendricks, in his unique style, tells the story of a student who came to him with a problem.

“Hey prof., I have a problem.” Hendricks, “Yea, What’s your problem?” Student, “Why did the Lord choose Judas?” Hendricks, “Ah, that’s no problem. I have a bigger problem than that.” Student, “Yea, what’s that?” Hendricks, “Why did the Lord choose you?” And I think he also added, “ Why did the Lord choose me?”

His point was, look at the disciples. How would you like to launch a world wide campaign with the likes of Peter and his companions? Yet, with these common, average, uneducated men, the Lord launched a campaign that has reached the world and turned it upside down. Why? Because of their methodology? No! Because of their dynamic personalities or programs? No! Because these common men intimately knew the Lord and began to experience His life and character in theirs by the Spirit of God. He took common men and made them into great men who became spiritual leaders because they were experiencing Him. Our need? The selection of godly men!

If we must choose between giftedness and godliness, let us choose godliness. If we can choose both, that’s great and that’s the ideal, but let’s keep the emphasis where God puts it!

Qualifications for Elders

In General

As a summary statement for all that follows in the qualifications, Paul says an elder is to be a man who is above reproach (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:7). His lifestyle is such that no one can legitimately accuse him of conduct which is unbefitting a mature believer. However, this does not mean he is perfect or without room for improvement. Why? Because none of us are perfect (Phil. 3:10-14; Ps. 143:2). Generally speaking, an elder is to be a model of Christian maturity and the qualities of these passages are marks of maturity which normally characterize the qualified man. Note that these qualities may also be seen from the standpoint of a man’s fundamental relationships—to God, His Word, self, family, others including the outside world, and things.

As to God and His Word

(1) Not a new convert (1Tim. 3:6). Not a neophyte, novice, one newly converted. Does he truly know the Lord and has he shown definite progress in spiritual maturity?

(2) Devout (Tit. 1:8). Does he demonstrate a definite commitment to know, love, and walk with God?

(3) Holding fast to the faithful word . . . able to exhort . . . and refute . . . (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:9). Is he a student of the Bible? Is he stable in the faith, sound in doctrine and practice? Does he know the Word well enough to teach it to others? Is he able to use the Word of God to exhort people with sound doctrine and to refute those who are antagonistic to the faith or the truth of Scripture?

As to Himself

(1) If a man aspires to the office of overseer (1 Tim. 3:1). Based on biblical criteria and motives, does he have a strong desire to serve the Lord and the body of Christ as an overseer of the flock, or does he feel constrained by necessity (cf. 1 Pet. 5:2, “shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily according to the will of God”)?

(2) Temperate (1 Tim. 3:2). In the everyday situations of life does he tend to react according to biblical principles so that he remains under God’s control? Is he Spirit-controlled and disciplined rather than self-indulgent?

(3) Prudent (1 Tim. 3:2). Is he prudent or biblically minded to the extent that he walks wisely according to the wisdom of Scripture?

(4) Not quick tempered (Tit. 1:7). Does he have a short fuse? Is he emotionally stable and in control of his feelings?

As to His Family

(1) Husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:6). Literally, a one-woman man. He is a man totally devoted and faithful to his own wife so that he is not distracted by other women? (See the Addendum on this controversial clause.)

(2) One who manages his own household well (1 Tim. 3:4-5; Tit. 1:6). Does his wife love, respect, and follow his leadership, and are his children believers, under control, respectful of authority, and responding positively to God?

As to Others

(1) Hospitable (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:8). Literally, “a lover of strangers.” As he is able, does he share his home with others in order to minister to their needs?

(2)Able to teach (1 Tim. 3:2). Is he able to communicate the Word of God to others? Is he able to handle those who disagree with him in a patient and gentle manner? Have others recognized in him the ability to teach and communicate the Word at least in small group settings?

(3) Not self-willed (Tit. 1:7). A self-willed man is a self-centered man who demands his own way because he cares only for himself. As a servant, an elder must seek to please God and care for others. Is he able to set aside his own preferences in order to promote unity and care for the needs of others?

(4) Loving what is good (Tit. 1:8). Literally, “a lover of goodness.” He is a man who is devoted to that which is good or beneficial either in things, deeds, or people (Ps. 15). Does he take advantage of opportunities to do good to all men (both Christians and non-Christians) in order to build them up rather than tear them down?

(5) Not pugnacious or a striker, i.e., anger out of control (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). Does he show a tendency to be either physically or verbally abusive? Has he shown a disposition to use a position of leadership to bully or push people around?

(6) Uncontentious (1 Tim. 3:3). He is not a quarrelsome person who struggles against others for self-seeking reasons such as jealousy or selfish ambition. He may strongly disagree, but he will state his case without being contentious.

(7) Gentle (1 Tim. 3:3). This word in the original Greek text refers to strength under control, like a powerful, but gentle horse. Does he handle others in a gentle, patient, and gracious way? Is he yielding, showing a mellow gentleness, or is he heavy-handed, insisting on the letter of the law?

(8) Just (Tit. 1:8). In his relationships with others, is he able to make just decisions, those that are wise, fair, impartial, objective, and honest according to the principles of Scripture?

(9) Respectable, orderly, balanced (1 Tim. 3:2). Is he respected by others because his life adorns the Word of God? The basic idea of this word is orderly. It describes a man whose behavior is good and blended harmoniously in a balanced manner.

(10) Having a good reputation with those on the outside (1 Tim. 3:7). Does he have a good reputation among unbelievers because he has a life-style of unquestioned integrity.

As to Things

(1) Free from the love of money (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). Does he have his priorities straight? Is he seeking his significance, security, and primary satisfaction from material wealth? Is he involved in dishonest business practices? Is the amount of salary he receives the most important thing about his occupation? Is he seeking the office of elder for personal gain?

(2) Not addicted to wine (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). Is he free from any form of substance abuse (alcohol, drugs, etc.) or any kind of addiction which might take control of his life, cause belligerent and irresponsible behavior, and cause weaker Christians to stumble (Rom. 14:13-21)?

Qualifications for Deacons

In General

Tested . . . beyond reproach (1 Tim. 3:10). Before a man is asked to serve as a deacon, he is to be observed over a period of time to see if he is qualified for that ministry. If he is found to be beyond reproach (if there are no violations in the qualities needed to serve), he may then be chosen to serve as a deacon. This is a warning against hastily choosing men for ministry for whatever reason (the pressure of needs, to fill a quota, etc.). Time is needed so his qualifications can become clearly apparent.

This principle also applies to the selection of elders (see 1 Tim. 5:22). Because of context, some think 1 Timothy 5:22 deals with church discipline, but the only record we have of the laying on of hands in the New Testament and in early church history (before the third century) is associated with the selection and ordination of men for ministry (cf. Acts 6:6; 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6). Because of this, it is better to take this passage as a warning against hasty selection and ordination of elders.

As to God and His Word

Holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience (1 Tim. 3:8). “The mystery of the faith” refers to the body of Christian doctrine to which we hold (believe and live by) through faith. “With a clear conscience” means he seeks to honestly live by the truths of Scripture. He keeps short accounts with God.

As to Self

(1) Men of dignity (1 Tim. 3:8). He is one who takes his life and work seriously as a part of his devotion to the Lord. He has a vision for his life’s purpose.

(2) Not double tongued (1 Tim. 3:8). He is not a hypocrite who says one thing to one person and something contradictory to another. He speaks the truth, is honest. He does not destroy his credibility by words that are contradictory.

As to Things

(1) Not addicted to much wine (1 Tim. 3:8). (See above under elder qualifications.)

(2) Not fond of sordid gain (1 Tim. 3:8). As with an elder, he must not use the office for personal gain, or be controlled by the desire for material wealth. Wrong motives kill a man’s ability to serve the Lord and love others. He cannot serve God and mammon or self-seeking goals.

As to Family

(1) A husband of one wife (Literally, a one-woman man) (1 Tim. 3:12). See Addendum. (See above under elder qualifications.)

(2) Good managers of their children and their own households (1 Tim. 3:12). (See above under elder qualifications.)

There is one word which truly summarizes these qualifications. It’s the word SERVANT. A deacon, as with an elder, is to be a servant of God and a servant of men (Mark 10:43-45).

Addendum:
Support that “the husband of one wife”
means “faithful to one wife”

Does this clause mean that an elder or deacon must be married, or married only once? Some have interpreted this to mean, “married only once.” But there are several reasons this is not the best way to understand this passage.

Ed Glascock has an excellent explanation of this clause. Writing of the view that the passage means “faithful to one wife,” he says:

This view holds that the translation “husband of one wife” is not the best understanding of the Greek phrase mias gunaikos andra, but that it should be translated “a man of one woman” or a “one-woman man.” This understanding emphasizes the character of the man rather than his marital status. Thus even a single man or a man who has been married only once must demonstrate that he is not a “playboy” or flirtatious, but that he is stable and mature in character toward his wife or other females. A man who demonstrates a character of loyalty and trustworthiness in such personal relationships is qualified in this area. He, being a one-woman type of man, can be placed in this high position and trusted to deal in maturity and with discretion in a situation involving female members. This view shifts the emphasis away from an event that took place in a man’s life before his conversion and properly concentrates on the character and quality of his life at the time of his consideration for this high office.⁴

This is not saying a man must be married to be an elder. Most men were and are, so this becomes a very important quality that must be considered. Being married, however, is not a qualification which would seem to go contrary to Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 7:6-9, 25-28 where he encourages the benefits of singleness for the sake of ministry. The whole passage is dealing with subjective qualities of Christian character, i.e., qualities in which no man is 100% perfect and in which there will always be room for growth and maturity. If the clause means married only once, then it would be the only absolute quality in this list of qualifications.

The qualities that follow have to do with temperance and self-control. The point is that a man needs self-control here as in all areas. There must be no sexual promiscuity or laxity with other women.

A further support for this position is the similar qualification placed on widows to be enrolled in the list of widows who could receive support in 1 Timothy 5:9. Concerning this Saucy makes an important point:

The Scriptures nowhere forbid or even suggest as morally questionable remarriage after the death of a spouse. Paul explicitly advises the younger widows to remarry (1 Tim. 5:14). If the qualification in 1 Timothy 3:2 prohibits elders from second marriages, then the requirement for a widow to be “a one-man woman” in order to be enrolled for aid (1 Tim. 5:9) also precludes a second marriage and thus excludes from aid in their later years the younger women who followed Paul’s counsel for remarriage.⁵

1 Oswald Sanders, Spiritual Leadership, p. 20.

2 Ibid. p. 180.

3 Ibid, p. 98.

4 Ed Glascock, “The Husband of One Wife Requirement in 1 Timothy 3:2,” Bibliotheca Sacra, July-September 1983, p. 249.

5 Robert Saucy, “The Husband of One Wife,” Bibliotheca Sacra, July, 1974, p. 230.

A ministry of…

Author: Dr. Roger Pascoe, President,
Email: [email protected]

I. Renforcement De L’interprétation Biblique
“Comment Lire Et Comprendre La Bible ” (Pt. 4)

Introduction

C’est la partie 4 de notre étude continue sur le “Renforcement de l’Interprétation Biblique : Comment Lire et Comprendre la Bible.” Dans les trois premières parties de cette étude, (les problèmes 34, 35 et 36 de ce Journal) nous avons jeté un coup d’œil sur les sujets suivants :

Partie 1

1. Trois taches basiques dans l’interprétation Biblique

2. Deux questions importantes d’herméneutique

Partie 2

1. Interprétation littérale

2. Interprétation de certains genres et dispositifs littéraires

3. Un sens unique ; des applications multiples

4. l’impact de la culture sur notre compréhension – cultures anciennes et contemporaines

Partie 3

1. Deux extrêmes d’interprétation culturelle et transculturelle

2. Deux exemples d’interprétation culturelle et transculturelle

a) Le lavage des pieds

b) le voilement de la tête pour les femmes

3. Quatre directives pour comprendre et interpréter les questions culturelles

Maintenant, dans cette partie 4, nous allons esquisser Dix Règles Simples De l’Interprétation Biblique. Pour ce sujet, j’ai trouvé les page 63-99 du livre de R.C. Sproul intitulé Knowing Scripture (Connaître l’Ecriture) d’un grand apport.

REGLE #1 : Interpréter l’Ecriture En Conformité Avec Le Sens Originellement Voulu par l’Auteur

Si vous étudier le texte de façon appropriée et adéquate, vous devriez être capable d’écrire ce dont l’auteur avait l’intention de dire à ses premiers lecteurs. Vous devez déterminer cela avant de penser à ce que ça signifie pour vos auditeurs aujourd’hui. Je recommande que vous écriviez le passage avec vos propres mots (le paraphraser). Cela vous permettra de savoir si vous connaissez le sens de du passage. Si vous n’en connaissez pas le sens, vous ne serez pas capable de l’écrire avec vos propres mots. Essayez de l’écrire en amplifiant le sens des mots et des expressions, expliquant l’imagerie avec vos propres mots.

REGLE #2 : Interpréter l’Ecriture A La Lumière d’Autres Ecritures

Du moment où nous croyons que l’Ecriture est divinement inspirée, nous croyons aussi qu’aucune partie de l’Ecriture ne peut être en conflit avec une autre partie de l’Ecriture, parce que Dieu ne peut pas se contredire Lui-même.

Ce principe (interpréter l’Ecriture à la lumière d’autres écritures) est très important pour deux raisons. Premièrement, à cause des attaques des incroyants contre l’Ecriture. L’une des attaques primaires contre l’Ecriture est l’assertion selon laquelle elle se contredit elle-même. Du moment où la Bible a été écrite par 40 auteurs sur une période de 16 siècles, si elle n’était pas un livre dont l’auteur est Dieu, les contradictions et les incohérences y seraient très possibles. En interprétant l’Ecriture à la lumière de l’Ecriture, vous pouvez montrer qu’elle est en cohérence avec elle-même.

Deuxièmement, interpréter l’Ecriture à la lumière de l’Ecriture est un principe important à cause de l’attitude avec laquelle les Chrétiens lisent l’Ecriture. Les chrétiens ne lisent pas et n’interprètent pas la Bible avec l’intention de trouver des incohérences dans le texte (comme le ferait un non-chrétien). Nous cherchons plutôt des incohérences dans notre interprétation du texte qui pourraient être révélées par ce principe « d’interpréter l’Ecriture par l’Ecriture ». En plus nous lisons et interprétons l’Ecriture avec une attitude de soumission à l’autorité inhérente, l’exactitude, l’intégrité et à la cohésion du texte, de telle sorte à ce que s’il y a contradiction ou incohérence dans notre interprétation, le problème nous incombe, mais pas au texte.

Pour cela, un principe basique d’une interprétation biblique saine est que pour comprendre correctement un passage de l’Ecriture, vous devez apporter d’autres textes qui sont soit comparatifs, soit contrastants. Si votre interprétation du texte que vous étudiez est en conflit avec l’enseignement d’autres passages comparatifs et contrastants, cela veut dire que votre interprétation est incorrecte. Ou, si un verset ou un passage a plusieurs options d’interprétation, et que celui que vous avez choisi n’est pas cohérent avec d’autres passages comparatifs et contrastants, vous devez alors rejeter cette option d’interprétation et choisir une option qui est cohérente avec les autres passages.

Suivre cette règle d’interprétation biblique aide de plusieurs manières :

(1) Elle élargit votre étude et exposition du texte en y apportant plus de lumière par d’autres textes.

(2) Elle agit comme une sauvegarde pour assurer que vous n’êtes pas en train d’interpréter le texte d’une manière incohérente par rapport à d’autres textes.

(3) Elle vous rassure que vous comprenez le déroulement progressif de la révélation de Dieu dans l’Ecriture. A mesure que le temps avançait, Dieu nous a révélé par l’Ecriture, et ce, de plus en plus, sa personne, sa volonté, ses desseins, etc.

(4) Elle vous aide à voir les différentes bases sur lesquelles Dieu a traité et entretenu des relations avec des gens d’autrefois. Ainsi, l’Ecriture n’est pas seulement un dévoilement progressif de la révélation de divine, mais aussi un dévoilement progressif de sa relation avec l’humanité.

REGLE #3 : Utiliser Les Versets Claires Majeures, et Nombreuses Pour Expliquer Les Moins Claires, Mineures et Peu nombreux.

Du moment où la révélation est progressive, il est compréhensible que la révélation première soit moins Claire que la révélation dernière, parce qu’elle est partielle et parfois obscure. Les Ecritures qui sont partielles ou mineures dans leur traitement du sujet n’ont pas d’autorité interprétative sur celle qui sont plus complètes et plus claires. Les révélations claires majeures clarifient celles qui sont moins claires et mineures.

Cela met l’accent encore sur le besoin de la règle #2 : Interpréter l’Ecriture à la lumière de l’Ecriture.

REGLE #4 : Soyez Prudents Lorsque Vous Faites Des Déductions, des Inférences « Logiques ».

Cette règle est intimement liée à la règle précédente. Ce qui peut ressembler à une déduction logique, peut ne pas être nécessairement vrai. Ce qui est logique pour nous peut n’est pas être logique pour Dieu ou pour ses pensées. Clairement, si un enseignement explicite contredit votre inférence ou ce que vous pensez être implicite, alors l’enseignement explicite l’emporte. Il est alors important, de chercher une instruction explicite qui soutient ce que vous pourriez croire implicite dans le texte.

C’est très facile d’adopter des interprétations et applications de l’Ecriture basées sur les déductions logiques, ou des instructions ou inférences implicites supposées, que vous tirez du texte, qui pourraient ne pas être du tout ce que l’auteur a voulu communiquer.

Tandis que nous devons être prudents à faire des déductions et des inférences, nous avons besoin d’identifier les principes généraux qui émanent des détails spécifiques dans le texte que nous étudions. Soyez très prudents de sorte à ce que les conclusions que vous tirez de votre texte soient sous-jacentes, universelles, des principes intemporels qui sont révélés dans le texte.

REGLE #5 : Ne Pas Faire En Sorte Que l’Ecriture Satisfasse à Une Norme Littéraire Déraisonnable

Par “norme littéraire déraisonnable” j’entends une norme que vous n’exigerez pas d’autre littérature. R.C. Sproul appelle cela « lire la Bible comme n’importe quel livre »(Knowing Scripture [Connaître l’Ecriture], 63). Un commentateur le dit ainsi : “En interprétant la Bible, nous ne demandons pas des faveurs que nous ne croyons pas être des règles adéquates pour lire toute littérature sérieuse ” (Mal Couch, ed. A Biblical Theology of the Church [Une Théologie Biblique de l’Eglise], 15).

Bien sûr, la Bible n’est pas juste comme n’importe quel autre livre parce que : (1) elle est unique (aucun autre livre ne lui est semblable) ; (2) elle est divine (aucun autre auteur ne lui est semblable) ; (3) elle est inspirée (aucune autre source, communication, révélation ou puissance ne lui est semblable).

Mais nous devons la lire comme tout autre livre dans le sens qu’elle est construite avec des mots comme tout autre livre – des mots qui avaient une signification ordinaire comprise alors ; des mots qui ont besoin d’être interprétés et compris en conformité avec les règles de grammaire de l’époque et qui sont élaborés pour être compris sur cette base. Aussi, nous ne lui attribuons pas des libertés littéraires que nous ne permettrions pour tout autre littérature.

Mais notez cet avertissement : Bien que nous puissions comprendre le sens des mots et de la grammaire correctement, cela ne veut pas dire que toute personne qui lit la Bible parviendra à des conclusions correctes concernant ce qu’elle dit et la manière dont elle doit être appliquée dans nos vies. Pour cela, nous avons besoin de l’illumination du Saint Esprit, qui est une possession exclusive des croyants seulement. Les incroyants peuvent comprendre les mots sur la page ; ils peuvent également s’engager dans la même analyse littéraire qu’ils pourraient appliquer à n’importe quel autre œuvre littéraire. Mais les incroyants ne parviennent pas à des conclusions correctes la concernant, parce qu’ils n’ont pas l’illumination du Saint Esprit (1 Cor. 2 :14 ; Eph. 4 :18) – leur capacité de compréhension de la Bible est limitée au niveau littéraire seulement. Bien qu’ils puissent en avoir la compréhension intellectuelle ils n’en ont pas la compréhension spirituelle. Ainsi, les incroyants ne se soumettent pas à l’autorité de l’Ecriture ; ils ne lui accordent pas une valeur adéquate ; ils n’acceptent pas les implications de l’Ecriture pour la foi et la pratique ; et ils n’accepteront pas l’application de l’Ecriture à leur vie. Si nous voulons accorder à la Bible une valeur adéquate, parvenir à des conclusions justes concernant ce qu’elle dit, et l’appliquer pertinemment à notre nos vies, nous avons besoin de l’illumination du Saint Esprit.

Ce que j’essaie de faire ressortir ici lorsque que je dis “ “ne pas faire en sorte que l’Ecriture satisfasse à une norme littéraire déraisonnable” c’est que bien qu’elle soit grammaticale dans sa construction (mots, expressions, propositions, etc.), son contexte (historique, culturelle, politique, etc.), et ses genres littéraires (poétique, narratif, etc.) elle doit être examinée de la même manière que vous examineriez et liriez tout autre littérature, mais avec l’aide du Saint Esprit. Cette méthode objective de l’interprétation biblique protège contre l’interprétation subjective, mystique, qui n’est pas enracinée dans l’érudition et qui peut la faire signifier tout ce que le lecteur veut ou pense.

REGLE #6 : Lire et Interpréter la Bible à Partir d’Une Perspective d’Application Personnelle.

Ne demander pas « Qu’est-ce que cela signifie pour moi ? » mais « Comment cela s’applique-t-il à moi ? » En nous posant cette question, non seulement nous mettons en évidence son application courante et pertinente, mais nous découvrons comment elle a été appliquée premièrement aux personnes pour lesquelles elle a été originellement écrite. En voyant comment l’auteur à organiser ses arguments et en voyant qu’elle a été appliquée à une situation réelle de vie de ses lecteurs originels, (c’est-à-dire pourquoi il a écrit, quel problème il traitait, etc.), nous découvrirons comment elle pourrait s’appliquer à nous-même dans la limite de son sens originel voulu.

Notez cette limite : Même si nous pouvons faire plusieurs applications à partir d’une vérité, ces applications sont toujours limitées par l’enseignement de l’auteur tel qu’il l’a voulu originellement. Vous n’êtes pas autorisés à appliquer l’Ecriture de n’importe quelle manière que vous voulez. Comme quelqu’un l’a dit : « Il y a plus d’hérésies enseignées dans le domaine de l’application que dans l’explication ».

Ainsi, nous devons lire et interpréter la Bible dans une perspective “d’application personnelle” en identifiant le sens voulu par l’auteur (et ce que ses lecteurs originels auraient pu comprendre) ; en identifiant la situation de la vie des lecteurs originels (et comment ce qui a été écrit s’est appliqué à eux); et en l’appliquant de manière appropriée à notre propre situation de vie et de culture (c’est-à-dire, d’une manière cohérente, et correspondante à la situation originelle).

REGLE #7 : Identifier le Dispositif et le Genre Littéraires et Les Interpréter Convenablement.

J’ai déjà définit ce que j’entends par interprétation littérale, particulièrement quand il s’agit de dispositif littéraire (tels que les figure de style) et les genres littéraires (tel que la poésie, le genre apocalyptique, l’allégorie, etc.). Chaque genre littéraire doit être interprétée convenablement. Par exemple, la poésie Hébraïque doit être interprétée en conformité avec ses règles et coutumes – ex : le parallélisme, etc. (ex : Ps. 2 :4 ; Prov. 1 :20 ; Gen. 4 :23 ; Isa. 55 :6-7). Nous devons distinguer entre proverbe et loi. Comme nos proverbes Anglais, les proverbes Hébreux ne sont pas faits pour être des truismes universels pour les gens de tous les temps, mais des principes généraux qui sont généralement vrais pour ceux qui vivent une vie pieuse.

REGLE #8 : Etudier La Construction Grammaticale et le Sens Des Mots Prudemment.

Vous ne pouvez pas interpréter l’Ecriture correctement si vous ne prêtez pas une attention méticuleuse à la grammaire – (1) les parties du discours (ex : nom, verbe) ; (2) la forme de chaque mot (ex : singulier ou pluriel ; temps présent ou future, etc.) ; (3) le sens et l’emploi des mots dans leur contexte et leur relation les uns avec les autres (c.-à-d. la syntaxe) pour former des expressions, des phrases et des paragraphes. Ne prêtez pas aux mots le sens que vous soulez ou pensez qu’ils signifient en vous basant sur l’emploi contemporain. Vous devez comprendre le mot de la manière dont il était utilisé dans les contextes littéraire, culturel, et historique. Souvenez-vous que parfois le sens des mots change avec le temps.

Faites attention aux mots-clés importants et répétés. Les mots et expressions répétés vous disent souvent quelque chose sur lequel l’auteur veut mettre l’accent, et/ou sur le thème du texte (ex : Phil. 1 :27 ; 2 :2,3,5 ; 3 :15,16 ; 4 :2,7). Les mots importants pourraient être : (1) des termes Théologiques (ex : la justification) ; ou (2) le verbe principal dans une phrase ; ou (3) des conjonctions et des prépositions. Les mots ne peuvent pas être interprétés hors de leur emploi. Par conséquent, rassurez-vous de toujours déterminer ce que signifie un mot en analysant sa forme et son emploi dans son contexte.

Lorsque vous avez un mot avec des sens multiples possibles, vous devez voir son contexte et à ses emplois varié dans la Bible pour déterminer son sens.

REGLE #9 : Lire et Interpréter la Bible de Manière Christologique.

Par cela, j’entends lire la Bible à partir d’une perspective Néotestamentaire. Chaque message devrait diriger vers Christ ou la vie Chrétienne en Christ. Chaque sermon devrait être mu par l’accent rédempteur des Ecritures (cf. « Fallen Condition Focus » [Accent de la Condition de Chute] de Bryan Chapell (FCF) dans Christ Centered Preaching [Prédication Centré sur Christ], 1994). Cet accent n’est pas seulement le salut des perdus, mais aussi la croissance des croyants pour qu’ils deviennent tout ce que Dieu veut qu’ils soient. Chapell déclare que « la compréhension adéquate d’un passage et l’accent d’un sermon exigent une Prédication claire, Centré sur Christ » (Bryan Chapell, 42).

Théologiquement, chaque sermon doit avoir comme but le même but que le passage, qui est « un aspect de la condition humaine qui exige l’instruction, l’admonition et/ou la consolation des Ecritures » (Chapell, 43). En ayant cela comme objectif, chaque sermon sera unifié avec son but.

REGLE #10 : Lire et Interpréter la Bible Théologiquement.

Cherchez des indications dans le texte de(s) vérité(s) essentielle(s) que l’auteur exprime. Posez-vous la question : Quelle doctrine (théologie) l’auteur originel du texte exprime-t-il ? (2) Quelle vérité primordiale émerge du texte ? N’imposez pas vos préjugés doctrinaux au texte. Ne lisez pas dans le texte ce qui n’y est pas. Posez-vous la question : (1) Que dit le texte sur Dieu ? (2) Que dit le texte sur la relation de l’homme avec Dieu ? (3) Que dit le texte sur comment vivre pour Dieu ? Si vous ne pouvez pas trouver la réponse à ces questions dans le texte, c’est que probablement vous ne connaissez pas ce qu’est l’accent théologique du texte.

La difficulté de cette tâche dépend souvent du genre littéraire. La vérité enseignée peut s’avérer difficile à découvrir dans le genre non didactique– ex : le Cantique de Salomon, ou le livre de Jonas. Est-ce que livre de Jonas traite de la manière dont Dieu agit avec un prophète rebelle ? Ou traite-t-il de la souveraineté de Dieu dans toutes circonstances, qu’elles soient des actes de la nature (tempêtes, plantes, et vers), des marins païens, des prophètes rebelles ou des méchants Gentilles, etc. ?

Dans ce sens, vous devez être très prudents dans l’interprétation des narrations dans le but d’être sûr que vous comprenez la théologie qui y est enseignée. Vous devez extraire le sujet théologique des détails de la narration.

II. Renforcement Du Leadership Biblique
« Servir Notre Maître Dans Un Monde Qui Le Hait : Une Etude Exégétique De Jean 15 :18-27 »

En tant que leaders chrétiens nous faisons souvent face au rejet, à la fois dans nos églises et dans le monde. Vivre en tant que chrétien est difficile et intimidant, n’est-ce pas? Le monde est opposé à l’évangile et à Christ Lui-même. Parfois, leur animosité fait que nous avons peur de tenir ferme pour Christ. Mais là est l’encouragement – Jésus a dit : « Vous aurez des tribulations dans le monde ; mais prenez courage, j’ai vaincu le monde » (Jn. 16 :33).

Ainsi donc, que faisons-nous en tant que serviteurs du peuple de Dieu, pour encourager nos assemblées à témoigner pour Christ quand la culture environnante est hostile ? C’est notre sujet dans cet article : “témoigner pour Christ dans un monde qui le hait ” (Jn. 15 :18-27). J’espère que l’étude de la Bible vous aidera et vous encouragera tandis qu’il devient difficile de confesser Christ publiquement dans ce monde.

Dans notre passage, Jésus venait d’exhorter les disciples à demeurer en Lui (15 :1-11) et de s’aimer les uns les autres (15 :12-17). Maintenant, Jésus continue de les prévenir de la haine du monde contre Lui-même et contre eux qui le suivent (15 :18-25) et les encourager à témoigner de lui au milieu d’une telle haine (15 :26-27).

Le principe que nous apprenons de ce passage est que : « malgré l’opposition venant du monde, nous pouvons fidèlement témoigner de Christ ». Nous distinguons trois principes théologiques dans ce texte…

I. Le Monde Hait Ceux Qui Suivent Christ (18-20).

Remarquez que 1. Le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ parce qu’il a haï Christ lui-même le premier (15:18). « Si le monde vous hait, sachez qu’il m’a haï avant vous » (15 :18). Quand Jésus dit: « si » le monde vous hait, il n’est pas en train de déduire qu’il se peut que le monde vous hait ou ne vous hait pas. C’est une « si » de raison, non pas un « si » de doute. Il n’y a aucun doute que le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ.

Les disciples eux-mêmes avaient déjà expérimenté cela. Ils savaient ce qui était arrivé à l’aveugle-né et ses parents dans le ch. 9. Ils savaient que les parents de l’aveugle-né « dirent cela parce qu’ils craignaient les Juifs ; car les Juifs étaient déjà convenus que, si quelqu’un reconnaissait Jésus pour le Christ, il serait exclu de la synagogue » (9:22). C’était de la pure intimidation des Juifs contre ces personnes parce qu’ils avaient expérimenté la puissance de guérison de Jésus. On avait contraint les Juifs de taire leur témoignage de ce que Jésus avait fait pour leur fils. Dans les jours qui devaient venir, les disciples allaient même connaître un dégrée de haine plus grande de la part du monde. Il y a une haine innée qui jaillit de ceux qui sont amèrement opposés à Christ. La vérité est que le monde hait les chrétiens parce qu’il hait Christ. Le monde est rempli d’hommes et femmes méchant(e)s dont la haine contre Christ, inspirée par satan est manifestée dans leur haine contre ceux qui suivent Christ.

Jésus console ses disciples en disant : « Si le monde vous hait, sachez qu’il m’a haï avant vous » (15 :18).”La consolation en cela c’est que les chrétiens qui expérimentent la haine souffrent avec leur Sauveur. Jésus a souffert la haine du monde en premier, et les chrétiens souffrent pour Christ maintenant. L’apôtre Paul appelle cela un privilège, un don : « car il vous a été fait grâce, par rapport à Christ, non seulement de croire en lui, mais encore de souffrir pour lui » (Phil. 1 :29). Jésus ne nous appelle pas à vivre quelque chose que lui-même n’a pas vécu en premier. A cause de la souffrance et de l’opposition, plusieurs des disciples de Jésus ont arrêté de le suivre (Jn. 6 :66). Ils ne pouvaient pas supporter l’intolérance, le rejet, l’humiliation, les sévices corporel. C’est là le défi auquel plusieurs chrétiens sont confrontés aujourd’hui.

Ainsi, 1. Le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ parce qu’il hait Christ lui-même; 2. Le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ parce qu’ils ont été choisis par Christ (15:19-20). « Si vous étiez du monde, le monde aimerait ce qui est à lui, mais parce que vous n’êtes pas du monde, et que je vous ai choisi du milieu du monde, à cause de cela, le monde vous hait » (15 :19). Etre “du monde” signifie s’identifier au monde, tenir les croyances et les valeurs morales du monde, adopter les habitudes et le caractère du monde. Si vous faisiez cela, dit Jésus, “le monde” vous “aimerait” comme les siens. Si vous étiez motivés et caractérisés par les valeurs du monde, le monde vous aurait accepté comme les siens propres. Mais la vérité est que le monde ne vous accepte pas. En réalité, le monde vous hait « parce que vous n’êtes pas du monde ». La raison pour laquelle vous n’êtes pas du monde c’est que Jésus « vous a choisi du milieu du monde ».

Avez-vous compris cela ? Jésus est en train de dire qu’il y a une seule raison pour laquelle vous n’êtes ni acceptés, ni soumis au monde et c’est parce que ; « Je vous ai choisi du milieu du monde ». Cela, c’est sa souveraine grâce et miséricorde envers eux qui le suivent. La raison pour laquelle les disciples étaient séparés du « monde » n’était qu’il y’avait quelque chose de bon ou de méritoire en eux aux yeux de Dieu, mais parce qu’ils étaient choisis par Jésus. Et tout comme Jésus les avaient souverainement appelés, de même, il appelle souverainement tous les croyants aujourd’hui à lui-même, à le suivre et à être ses porte-paroles. C’est cela qui nous rend différent du monde. Nous avons été appelés hors du monde par Dieu et séparés pour Lui ; pour Son usage et Son dessein exclusif.

En répétant ce qu’il leur avait déjà dit dans 13 :16, Jésus dit : « Souvenez-vous de la parole que je vous ai dite : le serviteur n’est pas plus grand que son maître. S’ils m’ont persécuté, ils vous persécuteront aussi ; s’ils ont gardé ma parole, ils garderont aussi la vôtre ». (15:20b). En d’autres termes, la manière dont le monde réagit vis-à-vis de Jésus sera la même à l’égard de nous qui le suivons. Inversement, s’ils avaient obéi à sa parole, ils auraient également obéi à la parole de ceux qui le suivent. Bref, le monde réagira à votre égard de la même manière qu’il a réagi à l’égard de Jésus.

Le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ - 1. Parce qu’il a haï Christ lui-même ; 2. Parce que les chrétiens ont été choisi du milieu du monde par Christ, et, 3. Le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ parce que le monde ne connaît pas Dieu. (15:21). « Mais ils vous feront toutes ces choses à cause de mon nom, parce qu’ils ne connaissent pas celui qui m’a envoyé. » (15 :21). Le monde persécutera et haïra ceux qui prennent le nom de Jésus « parce qu’ils ne connaissent pas Celui qui M’a envoyé ». C’est en Jésus-Christ seulement que l’on peut connaître Dieu. Si vous haïssez Jésus, c’est parce que vous ne connaissez pas Dieu – « Celui qui L’a envoyé. » Celui qui connaît vraiment Dieu, sait que Jésus est son seul et unique Fils éternel, qu’il a envoyé dans le monde. S’ils avaient su que Jésus était l’Envoyé de Dieu, ils ne l’auraient pas traité comme ils l’ont fait. Car la Bible dit que « le Père a envoyé le Fils comme Sauveur du monde. » (1 Jn. 4 :14).

Par conséquent, le premier principe théologique dans ce passage est que le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ. Mais remarquez le second principe…

II. Il N’y A Pas D’excuse Pour La Haine Du Monde A L’egard De Christ (15 :22-25).

1. Il n’y a pas d’excuse pour la haine de Christ, à cause des paroles qu’Il a dites (15 :22-23). « Si je n’étais pas venu et que je ne leur avais pas parlé, ils n’auraient pas de péché ; mais maintenant, ils n’ont aucune excuse de leur péché » (15 :22). La vérité, c’est qu’ils auraient dû connaître qui était Jésus. Il est venu les amener à connaître Dieu et c’est ce qu’il a fait en paroles et en actes. Si Jésus ne leur avait pas révélé qui il était dans ses enseignements, alors ils n’auraient pas commis le péché de le rejeter comme leur Messie, parce qu’ils auraient été dans l’ignorance – « il n’auraient pas de péché. » Mais, puisque Jésus leur a révélé son identité, “maintenant, ils n’ont aucune excuse de leur péché”. Rejeter Jésus est inexcusable ; ils sont coupables. Pourquoi ? Parce que Jésus leur a clairement déclaré la vérité au sujet de son identité et de celle de Dieu. Cependant, ils l’ont quand même rejeter. Et il n’y a pas d’excuse à cela. Aucune personne qui soit née dans ce monde n’aurait d’excuse de rejeter Christ devant le Trône Blanc du jugement de Dieu – rien à dire, pas d’excuse, pas de justification de soi. Pour quoi? Parce qu’ils ont entendu la vérité et l’ont rejeté.

« Celui qui Me hait, hait aussi Mon Père » (15 :23). Vous ne pouvez connaître Dieu qu’en connaissant et en croyant et en obéissant à Dieu. Si vous haïssez Jésus, vous haïssez le Père aussi. Les Juifs du temps de Jésus disaient que Dieu était leur Père mais, ils ont rejeté Jésus en tant que Fils de Dieu, le Messie. Cela est impossible parce que Jésus est un avec le Père. Vous pouvez revendiquer connaître Dieu, mais si vous rejetez Jésus, vous rejetez Dieu le Père aussi. Ainsi, des gens et des groupes religieux qui disent adorer Dieu mais renient la divinité de Christ, son expiation substitutive pour le péché, sa résurrection d’entre les morts, etc. ne connaissent pas Dieu et ne peuvent pas le connaître.

Ainsi, 1. Il n’y a pas d’excuse pour la haine de Christ, à cause des paroles qu’Il a dites. And, 2. Il n’y a pas d’excuse pour la haine de Christ, à cause des œuvres qu’Il a faits (15:24-25). « Si je n’avais pas fait parmi eux des œuvres que personne d’autre n’a faites, ils n’auraient pas de péché » (15 :24a). Non seulement les paroles de Jésus (15 :22) sont des preuves irréfutables de qui il est, mais ses œuvres le sont aussi. Il est le seul à avoir dit ce qu’il a dit et fait ce qu’il a fait. S’il n’avait pas fait des signes miraculeux qu’il a faits, alors, il dit : “ils n’auraient pas de péché”. Mais Jésus a fait « des œuvres que personne d’autre n’a fait. » et pour cette raison, chacun est responsable de sa réaction à son égard. « Mais maintenant, ils les ont vues, et ils m’ont haï et Moi et Mon Père » (15 :24b). Les gens du temps de Jésus ont montré leur réaction en le rejetant de son vivant et à sa mort. Un tel rejet était inexcusable en ce qui concerne l’identité de Jésus. En le rejetant ils ont rejeté Celui qui l’a envoyé.

Maintenant, ce n’est pas différent aujourd’hui. Nous avons la preuve des paroles et des œuvres de Jésus là, devant nous dans les Ecritures. Ainsi, tout un chacun est responsable de la manière dont il réagit par rapport aux preuves. Ce que nous voyons dans ce passage est que les preuves ne sont pas souvent suffisant pour convaincre certaines personnes de leur péché et de leur besoin d’un Sauveur. Telle est la dureté du cœur humain.

« Mais cela est arrivé afin que s’accomplît la parole qui est écrite dans leur loi : il m’ont haï sans cause » (15 :25). C’est malheureusement la triste vérité – « il m’ont haï sans cause ». Habituellement, les gens nous haïssent sans raison. Mais dans le cas de Jésus, ils l’on haï sans aucune raison. Cela va simplement montrer la dureté et la méchanceté incroyables du cœur humain ! Jésus est venu, faisant du bien aux gens gratuitement. Il a fait du bien à des gens qui ne le connaissaient même pas, guérissant ceux qui étaient malades, nourrissant ceux qui étaient affamés, et ressuscitant certains d’entre les morts. Il est venant déclarant des paroles de grâce et de miséricorde. Il est venu nous faire connaître Dieu.

En le haïssant sans cause, les détracteurs de Jésus accomplissaient deux choses par ignorance : (a) ils étaient responsables de sa mort ; et en même temps (b) ils ont accompli les desseins rédempteurs éternels de Dieu. Dieu a utilisé les actes méchants de l’homme, pour accomplir sa volonté parfaite, de telle sorte que les êtres humains sont responsables de la mort de Jésus, tandis qu’en même temps, par sa mort, Dieu offre la vie éternelle à la race humaine. Cela, c’est l’amour et la grâce merveilleux de Dieu !

Qu’avons-nous appris jusqu’ici ? Premièrement, le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ (15 :18-20). Deuxièmement, il n’y a pas d’excuse à la haine contre Christ (15 :22-25). Ainsi donc, en tant que des leaders de Christ dans Son église, comment Le servons-nous et témoignons-nous de Lui dans un tel monde rempli de haine ? Bien, voici l’encouragement.

III. Malgre La Haine Du Monde, Nous Pouvons Temoigner De Christ (15 :26-27).

1. Nous pouvons témoigner de Christ par la puissance du Saint Esprit (15 :26). Dans 15 :18-25, Jésus a averti les disciples de la venue de la persécution et expliqué la raison pour laquelle ils seraient persécutes. Maintenant, dans15 :26-27, Jésus exhorte et réconforte les disciples en leur disant d’où viendrait notre source de force pour témoigner de Lui au milieu de l’opposition et de la persécution. Tout comme il leur avait dit au début du chapitre 14, Jésus nous rappelle encore que notre réconfort et notre puissance face à l’opposition, c’est le Saint Esprit. « Quand sera venu le consolateur, que je vous enverrai de la part du Père, l’Esprit de vérité, qui vient du Père, il rendra témoignage de moi » (15 :26). Jésus a promis que lorsqu’il retournerait au ciel, il enverrait « le Consolateur (l’Aide)…de la part du Père. » C’est ce qui, bien sûre, est arrivé à la Pentecôte.

La nature du Saint Esprit est “l’Esprit de vérité” (15 :26b). Tout comme la parole de Dieu est vérité et que Jésus est la vérité, le Saint Esprit est aussi la vérité parce que la Trinité est une. Ainsi, la nature du Saint Esprit est la vérité même et l’œuvre du Saint Esprit c’est de « rendre témoignage de Moi ». C’est là, l’un des rôles primaires du Saint Esprit dans le monde aujourd’hui. « Quand il sera venu, il convaincra le monde en ce qui concerne le péché, la justice et le jugement ». Dans le monde, le Saint Esprit témoigne de la plénitude du péché de la race humaine, de la plénitude de la grâce de Dieu, et de la plénitude de la merveille de la rédemption de Christ. Le Saint Esprit est “l’Esprit de vérité” qui atteste la vérité de Dieu.

Ainsi, 1. Nous pouvons témoigner de Christ par la puissance du Saint Esprit, et 2. Nous pouvons témoigner de Christ à cause de notre relation avec Lui (15 :27). « Et vous aussi, vous rendrez témoignage parce que vous êtes avec moi depuis le commencement » (15 :27). Très tôt, les disciples allaient expérimenter le manque total de témoignage pour Christ lorsqu’ils l’ont tous abandonné et fui. Mais après la venue du Saint Esprit, ils allaient être hardis et remplis de puissance pour être sans crainte. Des hommes qui avaient abandonné Christ par peur allaient bientôt être des hommes courageux, qui rendaient de Christ sans crainte, même jusqu’à la mort à cause de leur relation avec Lui depuis le commencement.

Comme les disciples, parce que nous avons une relation intime avec Christ, nous sommes rendus puissants par le Saint Esprit pour témoigner de la grâce de Dieu sans peur. Nous pouvons rendre témoignage face à la condition morale pitoyable de la race humaine. Nous pouvons rendre témoignage à la grâce salvatrice de Dieu en Christ. Et tout cela au milieu de l’opposition du monde. En tant que dirigeants d’églises, notre responsabilité aujourd’hui, c’est de donner l’exemple de comment témoigner de Christ même dans l’opposition. En tant que des personnes qui suivent Christ, le Saint Esprit demeure en nous et nous sommes placés dans le monde pour rendre témoignage de qui est Jésus, pourquoi il est venu, ce qu’il a fait, où il est maintenant, et son prochain retour. Nous rendons témoignage de lui chaque fois que nous prions pour notre nourriture. Nous rendons témoignage de lui chaque fois que nous disons une parole de la part de Christ aux autres. Nous rendons témoignage de lui quand nous prenons position contre ceux qui rabaissent Christ. Nous rendons témoignage de lui par notre style de vie, nos paroles, nos actions, nos priorités, nos associations, nos habitudes. Tout ce que nous disons ou faisons doit être avec pour but de glorifier Dieu par notre Seigneur Jésus Christ.

Observation Finales

Ce que nous avons appris dans ce passage est que : 1. Le monde hait ceux qui suivent Christ parce qu’il a haï Christ lui-même (15 :18-20) ; 2. Il n’y a pas de haine contre Christ à cause of (a) des paroles qu’il a dites, et (b) des œuvres qu’il a faites (15 :22-25) ; cependant, 3. Malgré la haine du monde, nous pouvons fidèlement témoigner de Christ, (a) à cause de la puissance dont le Saint Esprit nous équipe (15 :26), et (b) à cause de notre relation avec Lui (15 :27). C’est ça notre consolation et notre encouragement.

Que cette parole soit un encouragement et un défi à chacun de nous aujourd’hui, spécialement ceux d’entre nous qui dirigeons et paissons le peuple de Dieu. Jésus a averti que rendre témoignage de lui ne sera pas facile. Et il nous a encouragé et équipé pour le faire malgré la haine du monde. Puissions-nous tenir ferme pour Lui dans un monde qui le hait.

III. Plan Du Message

Titre : Lettres Aux Sept Eglises : Sardes – Le Christianisme Nominal (Rev. 3 :1-6)

Thème : Une église peut entretenir une façade de Chrétienté, même quand elle est sur le point de mourir

Point I : Il y a une différence entre la renommée et la réalité : « Je connais tes œuvres. Je sais que tu passes pour être vivant, mais tu es mort ». (3 :1)

1. Par la renommée (« nom ») cette église était « vivante ».

Point II : Il y a une connivence entre se réveiller et travailler (3 :2)

1. Cette église devait « se réveiller » – et « de veiller »

2. Cette église devait « travailler » – « pour affermir ce qui reste »

Point III : Il y a la nécessité de se souvenir et de se repentir (3 :3-6)

1. Il est nécessaire de se souvenir du passé – « se rappeler de ce que vous avez reçu et entendu » (3 :3a)

2. C’est nécessaire de reconnaître le présent – « garde et repends-toi » (3 :3b)

3. Il est nécessaire de se refocaliser sur l’avenir

a) Beaucoup de dormeurs seront surpris par le jugement de Christ – « Si tu ne veilles pas, je viendrais comme un voleur, et tu ne sauras pas à quelle heure je viendrai sur toi » (3c)

b) Quelques saints seront satisfaits de l’approbation de Christ – « cependant, tu as à Sardes quelques hommes qui n’ont pas souillé leur vêtements » (3 :4a)

A ces saints fidèles, Christ promet…

- « Ils marcheront avec moi en vêtements blancs, parce qu’ils en sont dignes. Celui qui vaincra sera revêtu de vêtements blancs » (3 :4b-5a)

- Je n’effacerai pas son nom du Livre de Vie (3 :5b-c)

Conclusion : « Que celui qui a des oreilles entende ce qui dit l’Esprit aux Eglises » (3 :6).

 PREACHING DOCTRINE: 

A Call To Preach The Trinity
Introduction
When was the last time you preached or heard a sermon on God – his nature, character, purposes, plans, ways, and will?  I suspect for some it may have been a long time.  Sadly, we hear and preach all too few sermons about God.  And yet, those are the sermons that we, and our people, need the most.  J. I. Packer states: “The average Anglican clergyman never preaches on the Trinity save, perhaps, on Trinity Sunday.”   Why is this?  Why is there such a lack, or even absence, of preaching on doctrine and, in particular, the doctrine of God and of the Trinity?  Let me propose several reasons.  
First, many preachers do not “fight the good fight of faith” any more (1 Tim. 6:12).  They do not contend for our Christian confession in advancing truth, correcting error, and opposing heresy.
Second, I venture to suggest that some preachers do not preach the doctrine of the Trinity much anymore because they do not understand it, it is difficult to explain, and it takes hard work – in research, sermonizing, and application.
Third, perhaps some preachers don’t preach about God anymore because they are driven by a consumer-oriented mentality, preaching what the people want to hear, not what they need to hear.  These are surely the days to which Paul referred when he said that “the time would come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables” (2 Tim. 4:3-4).  No wonder Paul exhorted Timothy to “hold fast the pattern of sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13).  No wonder he warned against those things that are “contrary to sound doctrine, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God” (1 Tim. 1:10-11).  No wonder he pressed home the need for “sincere faith,” from which some had strayed having turned aside to idle talk, “desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm” (1 Tim. 1:5-7).  No wonder he insisted that the leaders of the church be men who are “bold in the faith which is in Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 3:13), men who “hold fast the faithful word” so that they “may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict” ( Tit. 1:9).  No wonder he urged Timothy to “instruct the brethren in these things” so that he would be “a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished in the words of faith and of the good doctrine” which he had carefully followed (1 Tim. 4:6).  No wonder he warned about those who would “not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to doctrine which accords with godliness” (1 Tim. 6:3).
It is not my intention in this paper to “proof text” my way to the doctrine of the Trinity, nor to show you “how” to preach the Trinity, but rather to issue a clarion call to preach the Trinity by (1) developing a biblical basis for preaching the Trinity; (2) providing some reasons why we must preach the Trinity; (3) suggesting a preferred approach to preaching this doctrine; (4) motivating you with some goals for, and benefits from, preaching the Trinity; and then (5) drawing some conclusions.
It is the thesis of this paper that just as the biblical authors did not present a systematic theology of God and the Trinity, but assumed and acknowledged it as their understanding of God was enlightened and filled out by God’s progressive revelation of himself, so we should preach the Trinity in like manner, preaching the nature, character, and ways of God as he has progressively revealed himself to us.
First, then... 
I.  The Biblical Precedent for Preaching the Doctrine of the Trinity
Even a casual consideration of Jesus’ teaching quickly and clearly indicates his  emphasis and focus on God.  Consider His high priestly prayer: “This is life eternal,” Jesus said, “that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn. 17:3).  Or, consider His Great Commandment: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind” (Matt. 22:37).  Or, consider His response to Satan: “You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only you shall serve” (Matt. 4:10).  Or, consider how he, the Son of God, led by the Spirit of God into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil, defended his Father and his own deity (Lk. 4:1-13).  
More particularly, in his dialogue with Nicodemus, Jesus openly and clearly articulated the work of  the Trinity in redemption as he outlines the work of the Spirit in  regeneration (Jn. 3:8), the work of the Son in the crucifixion (3:14-15), and the work of God himself in the plan of redemption (3:16-17).   Of course, Jesus himself made no secret of his deity, which always incited the wrath of the Jews against him (e.g. Jn. 5:16-18; 10:33-38).  
Jesus’ lengthy discourse with the disciples in John 14-16 and his pursuant high-priestly prayer in chapter 17 give us his most detailed and explicit teaching on the Trinity.  Here, he carefully and intricately unfolds the doctrine of the Trinity by moving from his unity and oneness with the Father (Jn. 14:7-11; cf. also 12:45) to the unity and oneness of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit (14:16-17).  Bringing comfort to their saddened hearts as they reacted to the news of his departure, Jesus promises them another Comforter, “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name” and who would “abide with them forever” (14:16, 26).  This “Holy Spirit,” Peter Toon comments, “...is described in personal terms as he who dwells within the disciples, teaches them, and bears witness to and glorifies Jesus.”   This is the Spirit of truth, who would proceed from the Father and who would “testify of Me,” Jesus says (15:26).  To have eternal life is to know not only the Father but also the Son (17:3), who had finished the work of redemption which the Father had given him to do, had manifested the Father’s name and given the Father’s word to his disciples (17:4-6), who now needed to be kept by that self-same word, the word of truth (17:17), and who would now enjoy a mutual indwelling with the Father and the Son similar in character to the mutual indwelling that exists between the Father and the Son (17:21, 23).
Further, Jesus’ commissioning of his disciples was a trinitarian commission.  As the Father had sent him, so he was sending them, and then he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit” (Jn. 20:21-22).  His final instruction as to the nature of the disciples’ commission continues this trinitarian theme, as Jesus declares that they were to baptize disciples from all nations “in the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:18-20).
The gospel writers preached about, were focused on, and were absorbed with, God.  From the time of Jesus’ birth, to his baptism, death, resurrection, and ascension, they present a trinitarian God.  They declare the God, who through the overshadowing power of the Holy Spirit, became flesh and dwelled among us, “Immanuel, God with us” (Matt. 1:23; cf. Isa. 7:14).  They tell us about the Word, who pre-existed his incarnation, who was with God and who was God (Jn. 1:1).  They faithfully record that Jesus, upon whom the Holy Spirit descended at his baptism, was affirmed by God the Father as his beloved Son in whom He was well pleased (Lk. 3:22).  Indeed, the transfiguration of Jesus was such a powerful testimony of Jesus’ deity to the disciples of the inner trio that it indelibly marked their ministry (Lk. 9:28-36).
The God whom the Gospel writers believed, followed, and preached was none other than the triune God as both Peter (“You are the Christ the Son of the living God”) and Thomas (“My Lord, and my God”) boldly confessed.  
 The apostle John openly declared, was focused on, and absorbed with, God, not only in his gospel, but also the epistles and Revelation.  Perhaps more explicitly than any of the other gospel writers, he declares the truth of the Trinity concerning the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, Christ, and the Father (e.g. Jn. 14:17-23).  For John, understanding who God is and believing in Him is of prime importance.  For John, to know God is to know him as Trinity.  “Then he [the Spirit through one of the seven angels] showed me the river of the water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (Rev. 22:1-5).
Stephen preached, was focused on, and absorbed with, God.  This is  powerfully evident at his martyrdom when, “being full of the Holy Spirit,” his final experience on earth, as they stoned him to death, was to gaze into heaven and see the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:55-59).  That’s where his life was lived – in the presence of the triune God.
The apostle Peter preached, was focused on, and absorbed with, God.  He preached a trinitarian God who raised up Jesus from the dead and exalted him in ascension to his own right hand, having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:32-33).  He preached the gospel of our trinitarian God who anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power and who raised Him up on the third day, and showed Him openly; the God to whose command Peter and the apostles responded by preaching to the people and testifying that it is He, Jesus of Nazareth,  who was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead, to whom all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins (Acts 10:38-43).  
This is the God who elected us according to his foreknowledge in sanctification of the Spirit for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 1:2); the God who raised Jesus from the dead and gave him glory so that your faith and hope might be in God (1 Pet. 1:21).  This is the triune God whom Peter witnessed on the holy mountain of transfiguration when he heard the voice of God declaring from heaven that Jesus Christ was his beloved Son in whom he was well pleased (2 Pet. 1:16-18).  
The apostle Paul preached, was focused on, and absorbed with, God.  He emphatically teaches the primacy of preaching about God, who he is and what he has done.  In Romans, Paul preached the gospel of our trinitarian God concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was “born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Rom. 1:1-4).  Paul preached about a trinitarian God who demonstrated his love toward us by sending his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom. 8:3) to die for us while we were still sinners in order that, through His death, we might be reconciled to Him, and whose Spirit has poured His love into our hearts (Rom. 5:5-11).  He preached about the God whose Spirit now indwells us, and by whose power he will give life to our mortal bodies, just as He raised Christ from the dead (Rom. 8:9-11).  Paul’s God is the God whose Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we are children of God and who helps us in our weaknesses by interceding for us in agonizing, unutterable prayers; the God who foreknew us and predestined us to be conformed to the image of his Son, and who has called us, justified us, and will glorify us; the God who did not spare his one and only Son but delivered him up for us all; the God who freely gives us all things and from whom we can never be separated (Rom. 8:13-32).
In Corinthians, Paul preached the testimony of our trinitarian God concerning Jesus Christ and him crucified, not to convince or impress his hearers with human wisdom or oratory but to demonstrate the Spirit’s power so that their faith would not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God (1 Cor. 2:1-5).  Paul’s gospel was the wisdom of God in a mystery which can only be known through the Spirit of God who alone reveals to us the deep things of God (1 Cor. 2:8-14).  Paul’s God is the trinitarian God whose Spirit baptizes us into the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12), in which there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit, differences of ministries, but the same Lord, and diversities of activities, but the same God who works all in all (1 Cor 12:4-6).  Paul’s God is the trinitarian God who always leads us in ministry triumph in Christ (2 Cor. 2:14) and whose Spirit has engraved on the tablets of our hearts that we are epistles of Christ (2 Cor. 3:2).  The trinitarian God who commanded the light to shine out of darkness has shone into our hearts by his Holy Spirit to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 4:6).  This is the God in whose trinitarian name and character Paul blesses the saints (2 Cor. 13:14).
In Galatians, Paul’s God is the trinitarian God who sent forth his Son, born of a woman, and who has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts (Gal. 4:4, 6).  In Ephesians, Paul’s trinitarian God is the Father who elected us before time began (Eph. 1:4-5), the Son in whom we have redemption (1:7), and the Spirit who has sealed us and guarantees our inheritance (1:13-14).  Paul’s God is the trinitarian God to whom we have been reconciled through the cross of Christ in one body, through whom we have access by one Spirit to the Father, and in whom the whole building of the church body is fitted together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord, a dwelling place of God in the Spirit (Eph. 2:16-22).  Paul’s trinitarian God is the Father to whom we direct our prayers, so that his Spirit may empower us in the inner man and that Christ may dwell in our hearts through faith (Eph. 3:14-16).  Paul clearly and unequivocally declared the doctrine of the Trinity as “one Spirit...one Lord...and one God and Father of all” (Eph. 4:4-6).  
In Timothy, Paul exalts the God whose Son, Jesus Christ, is “the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the God who alone is wise” (1 Tim. 1:17), “the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see, to whom be honour and everlasting power” (1 Tim. 6:15-16).  Paul’s insists that “there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5).  Paul’s God is the trinitarian God of salvation – the Father, whose kindness and love toward us has appeared and by whose mercy he saves us through the washing and regeneration of the Holy Spirit, whom he has poured out on us abundantly through his Son, Jesus Christ our Saviour (Tit. 3:4-8; cf. Tit. 2:11-14). 
 The writer of Hebrews declared, was focused on, and absorbed with, God.  He wrote of the God who spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets and who has in these last days spoken to us by His Son (Heb. 1:1-4).  This author affirms the trinitarian work of salvation by the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, to cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God (Heb. 9:13-14).  
For the N.T. authors, then, the notion of a triune God was intuitively obvious such that they saw no need, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to inscripturate a systematic formula.  “What the Bible provides is not a developed doctrine of the Holy Trinity and not even proof texts for developing such a  doctrine.  Rather the whole New Testament stands as a witness to a basic Trinitarian consciousness in the hearts of the writers and of the early Christian church.”  
Evidently, from the moment the apostles understood the truth and reality that the One whom the wise men and shepherds worshipped was the one true God who alone is truly worthy of worship (and who, as God, received their worship); from the moment they comprehended the implications of his calling of them to follow him; from the moment they grasped the truth of his perfect, sinless life, his performance of miracles, his radical teaching about the principles for living in his kingdom, his outright claim to deity, his prophesy and fulfillment of his death and resurrection, his ascension to heaven and his promise to return again, together with the coming and powerful indwelling of the Holy Spirit as the fulfillment of Jesus’ promise (Jn. 16), so that they themselves performed miraculous deeds - from that time forward their Judaic notion of one God underwent a dramatic shift, but a shift that was, for them, understandable, acceptable, logical, and which needed no systematic explanation.  As Paul Rees states, “Nothing short of this three-personal God does justice to the experience of the early Christians.”   Their explanation of who God is did not lead them to deny their belief in the one true God of Israel, nor to abandon their notion of the one sovereign Creator, nor to add Jesus as a second God, but to “accept and confess a mystery” and to confirm their conviction of God as Father and Son and Holy Spirit – one God in three eternal, co-existing, co-equal persons.  “These persons had a trinitarian Christianity even before they had a trinitarian theology.”   Peter Jewett writes, “Being inchoate Trinitarians from the start, Christians became conscious Trinitarians in the end.  Confessing with the prophets of Israel that the Lord their God was one, and with the apostles of Christ that Jesus is Lord, they eventually came to unite these truths, so fundamental to their faith, in the doctrine that God is the triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”  
So then, the biblical precedent and basis for preaching the Trinity is enormous.  In addition, we have, of course, the model of the Reformers and Puritans, who also declared, were focused on, and absorbed with, God.  I do not have the time to develop this here, but just to note that they regularly preached on the nature, character, and attributes of God.  They were transfixed by God.  Luther, Calvin, John Owen, Jonathan Edwards, and others all give united testimony to their absorption with God both in their personal and public lives.  One only needs to read a sample of Jonathan Edwards’ sermons to safely conclude that they focus on the nature and character of God both in their content and in their application.  He was possessed by the glory of God, and obsessed with declaring God in his sovereignty, beauty, glory and majesty at every opportunity.  
Alas, such is not the case today.  Why do we hear so little preaching about God the Father – his attributes, his purposes, his ways?  Why do we hear so little preaching about God the Son – his person, his redemptive work, his teachings?  Why do we hear so little preaching about God the Holy Spirit – his deity and present operations in our lives and in the world?  I think it is because contemporary preaching in many evangelical churches has been caught by, and caught up in, the spirit of the age – in a culture that wants “how to” sermons that focus on us, our needs, our lives, our well-being, our success.  It is anthropocentric preaching, not theocentric or Christocentric.  It panders to our supposed “felt” needs not “real” needs.  It is market driven, not God centred.  It has corporate objectives, not kingdom directives.  It is therapeutically oriented, not spiritually motivated.  
Doctrinal preaching has long fallen out of favour.  It is considered a subject for theologians, not congregations.  It is discussed in seminaries, not churches.  It is articulated by denominational leaders, not church members.
II.  Why Preach the Doctrine of God and the Trinity?
One of the concerns about preaching doctrine, specifically the doctrine of the Trinity, is that the general attitude today is that doctrinal preaching is boring, irrelevant, of no practical value for the Christian life, and, in the ultimate analysis, incomprehensible anyway.  But the truth is that if our people do not know God – who He is, what He is like, and how He acts – they cannot adequately, properly, or fully live their lives in God’s world, under God’s control, and for God’s glory.  
How can we possibly strive for, much less achieve, our primary goal in living – namely, to glorify God in thought, word, and deed, if we do not know Him?  As J. I. Packer rightly puts it: “Disregard the study of God, and you sentence yourself to stumble and blunder through life blindfold, as it were, with no sense of direction and no understanding of what surrounds you.  This way you can waste your life and lose your soul.”   
We are compelled to preach the doctrine of the Trinity because this doctrine throughout history has been and continues to be maligned, distorted, mocked, and perverted.  How can our people properly distinguish between truth and error if we have not taught them the truth about God?  How can they discern the error, if not outright heresy, of liberal theologies, such as Open Theism, which propose a God who is different from the God of the Bible, if we have not taught them the truth?  How can they adequately and appropriately respond to Jehovah’s Witnesses who come to their doors with the age old Arian heresy, if we have not taught them the truth about God?  The reality for many Christians is that they can’t properly respond to, nor adequately discern, theological error.  
We are compelled to preach the doctrine of the Trinity because there are many false prophets, deceivers and antichrists in the world (1 Jn. 4:1; 2 Jn. 7).  Some of them are trying to tell us that we can and should properly refer to God as female by using the female pronoun “she.”   Such terminology is foreign to the Bible and must be counteracted.  In the spirit of the age others in the egalitarian movement propose that God be referred to as Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier rather than as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in order to be non-gender specific.  The fact that God is genderless and that He is described in Scripture as having some attributes associated with females does not authorize us to refer to him as “she.”  I understand that God is not defined adequately by any of our pronouns: God is spirit, wholly other than we are in his essence.  He is not defined by male gender or genitalia; nor are males more like God than females; nor does referring to God as Father imply any sort of male privilege or preference.   But Scripture throughout refers to God as “He,” being consistent with the gender of Father and Son.
Unless we properly instruct our people in this doctrine, how will they be able to “test the spirits whether they are of God” (1 Jn. 4:1)?
We are compelled to preach the doctrine of the Trinity because to be wrong about God is to be wrong about one’s eternal destiny.  This is a doctrine that clearly has eternal consequences if we get it wrong.  It will lead to destruction if we believe in a god who is not the God of the Bible.  The truth of the gospel can only be retained and maintained so long as we uphold, defend, and boldly proclaim the truth about God – the truth about God in election, salvation (justification and sanctification), and glorification.  We must preach the one, true gospel of Christ, not a gospel of a different kind (Gal. 1:6-10).
We are compelled to preach the doctrine of the Trinity because the doctrine of the Trinity is fundamental to the Christian faith and separates it from all other belief systems.  “The doctrine of God is the doctrine which is basic to all others and...the doctrine of the trinity is basic to the doctrine of God.” We are compelled to preach the doctrine of the Trinity because, as Paul Rees, puts it, “nothing short of it fully satisfies my heart.”  We need to hear about and inculcate the truth of:
(1) the grace of Christ – that grace that has met my need (2 Cor. 8:9); 
(2) the love of God – that love that deigned to send his Son to be my substitute; and 
(3) the fellowship of the Holy Spirit – that fellowship of believers, “who are indwelled and baptized by the Spirit into one body and who are now the testimony of Christ on earth.” 
We are compelled to preach the doctrine of the Trinity because the responsibility is ours, as preachers and church leaders, to preach on this challenging but fruitful subject not only for the edification of God’s people but for the worship and glory of God.
We are compelled to preach the doctrine of the Trinity because, as John Piper rightly asserts, true expository preaching is trinitarian since, as he says, “the goal of preaching is the glory of God, the ground of preaching is the cross of Christ, and the gift of preaching is the power of the Holy Spirit.” 
III.  Suggestions for Preaching the Trinity
Of all the doctrines to preach on, the doctrine of the Trinity is perhaps the most challenging, because it is a difficult concept to understand and explain, and because it is hard to relate to life. 
The first challenge is: “How do you approach such a topic homiletically?”  If you take a systematic approach, your sermon quickly sounds like a list of proof texts, which becomes tedious for the congregation and seems more like a seminary lecture than a sermon.  Such a clinical, academic approach can also detract from the impact of awe and worship that should result from preaching this topic.  Just as Sidney Greidanus astutely points out concerning miracles, that “a turgid apologetic for miracles, or, worse, any rational explanation of miracles may scuttle the sense of ‘wow’ (that it is designed to evoke) and, therefore, be homiletically inappropriate,”  so, it seems to me, a systematic explanation or dissertation would not be an appropriate homiletical approach to the doctrine of the Trinity.  I am not in any way minimizing the need for, or the benefit of, systematic theology, nor am I suggesting that we should not teach our people dogmatics.  Rather, I am suggesting that since the doctrine is not presented that way in Scripture, we would be wise to follow the pattern of Scripture, which pattern is more likely to evoke a response of wonder that it surely should.
Therefore, I would suggest that rather than a systematic approach to preaching the Trinity in a congregational setting, you take a biblical theology approach – i.e. teach the truth of the Trinity as it unfolds throughout the Bible, tracing the biblical history of God’s progressive revelation of who He is.  Deal with who God is, how He acts, what He likes and dislikes, and what He has done (i.e. God’s nature and character and works as Scripture progressively reveals them), all of which can only be explained ultimately in trinitarian terms, which, of course, makes clear why the concept of Trinity is everywhere assumed and acknowledged in the N.T.  You may preach on the divine attributes of the Trinity – omniscience, omnipresence (Ps. 139), omnipotence, immutability (Mal. 3:6), eternality (Psalm 136:1?), perfection (Matt. 5:48), self-existence, sovereignty (Matt. 5:21), worthiness (Rev. 4:11) and so on.  You may preach on the trinitarian God as our Creator, and our the Judge.   You may preach on the moral attributes of the Trinity – holiness (Isa. 6:3), righteousness (Rom. 3:22), and justice (2 Thess. 1:6).  You may preach on the love of God (1 Cor. 13:8), his mercy (Deut. 4:31), compassion (Matt. 9:36), goodness (Matt. 19:17), kindness (2 Sam. 9:3), truthfulness, faithfulness (Deut. 7:10), trustworthiness (Amos 5:24).  You may preach on the ways of God – his revealed will, his chastisement, his comfort and compassion.  Or, you may preach on “the pleasures of God” (to use John Piper’s phrase) - what brings him joy, what incites his anger.
These aspects of the nature, character, and ways of God are now often, and sadly, unfamiliar to some of our congregants, but were at one time regularly preached.  Take, for example, the fourth question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism which asks: “What is God?”  The answer: “God is spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.”  These simple catechisms are no longer taught or memorized, so that if you ask someone to tell you what, for example, “justification” means, most Christians could not give you a succinct answer.
Such a sermon series on the doctrine of God would be quite lengthy, but appropriately so given the subject matter.  And it would be out of this series that you would then be able to draw logical conclusions about God, one of which would be that the God of the Bible is a triune Being.
I would suggest that the biblical theology approach to preaching the Trinity is the most commendable, most edifying, and most relevant.  It allows you to follow specific passages and preach them expositorally, so that the people can see from the text what you are talking about.  As your sermon series progresses over the weeks and months, they will see the progressive revelation of Scripture concerning the nature, character, and ways of God, from the Judaic view of the oneness of God in the O.T. (e.g. Deut. 6:4; 4:35; Isa. 43:10; 44:6-8; 45:5-6; 21-22) to the oneness-and-threeness of God as revealed in the N.T.  Gradually, they will begin to see the connection between the “Lord” of the Shema and “the living and true God” of the Christian confession (1 Thess. 1:9; cf. alsoEph. 4:6; 1 Cor. 8:4; Mk. 12:29).  
By preaching the Trinity this way you will open up to your people the progression of revelation in Scripture from a God who is holy and just, punishing sin and rewarding righteousness, to a God who fulfilled his promise to redeem his people in and through his Son, whom He sent to be the Saviour of the world; from a God who is transcendent and awesome, to a God who cares and provides for his people; from a God who is love and light, in whom mercy and truth unite, to a God who has revealed himself in his word, in which we see his purposes and plans laid out; from a God who has sent his Spirit to indwell us so that we are capable of living for his glory, to a God who will complete salvation history at our glorification. In sum, a God who alone is worthy of all our praise.  
Let me issue two caveats about preaching the Trinity using a biblical theology approach.  First, we need to be careful when preparing sermons, not to make a sharp distinction, which we so often do, between the O.T. and N.T.  They are one Word of God; they are a unit with historical, theological, and revelatory progression and continuity.  Granted, when we turn the page from Malachi to Matthew we might well ask: “What happened?”  Nevertheless, our hermeneutical and homiletical task is to preach both Testaments as one revelation from God, in which we see:
(1) the typological connections between the O.T. and the N.T. (such as institutions like the tabernacle, events like the feasts and offerings, and people like Moses and Joseph) as salvation history unfolds; 
(2) the promises and prophecies of the Old Testament concerning the coming Messiah fulfilled in the New in Christ; 
(3) the offices of the O.T. which point forward to their fulfillment in Christ as prophet, priest, and king; 
(4) the progression of salvation history from the O.T. toward its eschatological goal in the New;  and 
(5) in the specific case of our topic, the trinitarian inferences in the O.T. which become more evident in the New.  Thus, we move, as Sidney Greidanus puts it, not so much “from the lines drawn from the O.T. to the N.T. but in the prior move in the opposite direction – the move from the fullness of the N.T. revelation to a new understanding of the O.T. passages.” 
Therefore, our task is to preach this unfolding of God’s self-revelation by faithfully communicating the O.T. understanding of God and tracing it through to the New Testament trinitarian understanding as it developed.  
Further, this biblical theology approach to preaching the Trinity requires great sensitivity to the various literary genres in which it is presented in Scripture.  We must let Hebrew narrative or gospel genre, for example, shape how we preach the truth of the passage, being sure to find their theocentric purpose – namely, “to show God at work in His creation and among His people.  The narratives glorify Him, help us to understand and appreciate Him, and give us a picture of His providence and protection.”   We must interpret and explain the Psalms and Prophets in accordance with their respective genres and in the light of unfolding redemptive history.  In O.T. prophetic literature, the central focus is on the coming King in His kingdom (e.g. Isa. 42:4).  Thus, we need to look for corresponding references and inferences.  Nevertheless, we must be careful to interpret these texts in the way the original audience would have – namely, associating the person with the immediate referent before associating him with the fulfillment in the N.T.  
Of course, once such passages have been exposited accurately we can draw the appropriate theological conclusions.  Then, we will see how these O.T. truths become clearer through the incarnation and teachings of Jesus (whose most extensive teachings on the Trinity occur in his discourse with the disciples in John 14-16) through to the book of Acts where their understanding of God develops and a more complete expression of that understanding is recorded.  We can trace this natural development and see the apostles intuitively coming to grips with the concept of God without stating it in systematic form, so that, ultimately, the progressive unfolding of truth led them to the only rational conclusion that adequately synthesized their experience and data and concluded with their universal presupposition as to the trinitarian nature of God.  
Second, we need to be careful not to reverse the order in which the doctrine of God is developed by trying to teach the systematic doctrine of who God is before we have preached the biblical history of who God is and what He is like, as revealed in his acts in the world and the biblical authors’ understanding of God.  Therefore, let us preach the doctrine as it unfolds in Scripture, declaring God’s mighty acts in history, culminating in the apex of redemptive activity at the cross and resurrection, showing how God is present and active and what His relationship is to the human race and his creation in general before we try to synthesize all of that into a systematic unit called the doctrine of the Trinity.
If you take this homiletical approach that I am suggesting, as your people listen to you preach the biblical theology of God in the context of biblical history, they will come to understand that even though the systematic theology and creedal articulation of the doctrine of the Trinity was developed over the first three or four centuries in response to heretical teachings about God  that were beginning to surface in the second and third centuries,  and that even though universal, formal adoption of a single creedal statement by orthodox churches did not occur until the fourth century,  nonetheless, the doctrine and concept of God as Trinity is pervasive throughout the N.T.  As Darrell Johnson explains it, “What really triggered the theological process was what ordinary people experienced when they encountered Jesus Christ...The doctrine of the Trinity is not the result of philosophical speculation carried out in ivory towers, cut off from real life.  It is the result of ordinary believers trying to make sense of the facts of God’s self-revelation and trying to live in the light of those facts.”    Or, as Alister McGrath points out, “The doctrine of the Trinity is the end result of a long process of thinking about the way in which God is present and active  the world…The scriptural witness to and Christian experience of God came first, and reflection on it came later.”   
So much, then, for the first major challenge in preaching the Trinity – namely, “How do you approach the topic?”  The second major challenge in preaching the Trinity is: “How do you apply this doctrine to people’s lives?”  How do you make such a doctrine relevant to contemporary Christian life?  How do you overcome the “so-what” hump of your audience?  Doctrine must always be related to life when we preach or teach.  As Peter Toon points out, “If we give the impression that the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is only and solely the doctrine of the immanent or ontological Trinity then we run the risk of its confession being irrelevant to Christian worship, life, and service.”   
We can and must relate the doctrine of the Trinity to some very practical aspects of the Christian life, by showing how our understanding of the Trinity uniquely applies to our Christian worldview and mission.  For example, when preaching the Trinity, you would probably want to apply the doctrine to such topics as:
1.  The creation of the world and the Trinity.  The godhead unitedly created the universe.  The Father planned it; the Son implemented it; and the Holy Spirit empowered it.  Most importantly, the human race was created in God’s image.  Since we are created in God’s image, we are to reflect the many dimensions of God’s nature and character.
2.  Our human existence and the Trinity.  God providentially cares for and controls the universe that He has created.  For “in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28).  As John Calvin says: “It is perfectly obvious... that our very being is nothing else than subsistence in God alone.” 
3.  Our salvation and the Trinity.  God the Father through the Spirit delivered his Son into the hands of wicked men.  He went to the cross and rose again, and in so doing, reconciled the world to himself.  In this the love of God is manifest to the world in that, through him, our sins are expiated and we have eternal life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Jn. 4:9).
4.  Our Christian lives and the Trinity.  Our lives are intimately related to, bound up in, and united to (1) the Father’s care, provision, protection, love, goodness, and holiness; (2) the Son’s truth, grace, liberty, and forgiveness; and (3) the Spirit’s guidance, illumination, teaching, power, and comfort.  “The doctrine of the Trinity gives expression to the fact that...God has opened himself to us...in such a way that we may know him in the inner relations of his Divine Being, and have communion with him in his divine life as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”   
The Father sends the Spirit in the name of the Son to indwell believers, sanctifying us, illuminating us, and empowering us for godly living.  God is in us, so that, as new creatures in Christ we are “partakers of the divine nature” (1 Pet. 1:4). Therefore, because God is holy, so we are to lead holy lives.  Because God has given us his illuminating Spirit, we are able to fully and properly understand the truth that God has given us.  “The Father is light, the incarnate Son is light, and believers are called to live and walk in the light...For one to see the light, to have the light shine in his heart, and to walk in the light, he needs the illumination of the Holy Spirit of light.  In other words, light shines upon and within him from the Father, through the Son, and by the Spirit” 
5.  Our Christian community and the Trinity.  Our fellowship, relationship, and unity are intimately bound up in the relationship of the Trinity (1 Jn. 1:3; Eph. 4:3-6).  God is not an isolated God but one who lives in relationship with his creation and his people in particular.  He is a God of intimacy, “Immanuel, God with us.”  The intra-trinitarian intimacy and relationship is to be reflected in the Christian community.  Our fellowship with each other is made possible through our fellowship with the Father and the Son (1 Jn. 1:3).  Because God is love and first loved us, we love Him (1 Jn. 4:19) and because love is of God, we love one another (1 Jn. 4:7) and demonstrate that love in fellowship and mutual care.  As Jewett points out, “when we are admonished to ‘maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’ (manifest in the one body which is the church [Eph. 4:3]), we are being admonished in our Christian communal life to imitate the communal life of God himself.” 
6.  Our Christian worship and the Trinity.  Our worship is truly Trinitarian when we render worship and prayer to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit.  Such worship is not possible with any other concept of God.  Peter Toon states, “True worship must be offered to the Father through (i.e. according to the truth which is in) Jesus and by / in the Spirit, who is given by the Father...To worship in Spirit and in truth is to worship the Trinity by the Trinity.”   In the language of the seraphim, we worship God and cry: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory” (Isa. 6:3).  As Darrell Johnson writes, “The Father draws near to us to draw us near to himself so we can praise the Son the way he does.  The Son draws near to us to draw us near to himself so we can worship the Father the way he does...The Spirit comes upon us to fill us with his passion to see the Father and Son glorified.” 
7.  Our Christian mission and the Trinity.  Because God is love and we are of God, we love the world he has made.  We are ambassadors for Christ (2 Cor. 5:20), so that “as He is so are we in the this world” (1 Jn. 4:17).  Jesus said: “As the Father has sent me, I also send you” (Jn. 20:21).  We are “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14) even as Jesus himself was the Light of the world, reflecting the God who is light.
Let me also suggest that preaching the doctrine of the Trinity gives you an opportunity to make relevant certain creeds, hymns, and spiritual songs by utilizing them in your services to underscore the doctrine on which you are preaching.  I recommend that you adopt regular recitations of the various orthodox creeds, especially in this case as they relate to the Trinity (e.g. the Apostles’ creed, the Nicene Creed, or the Athanasian Creed) to provide support to and a framework for your doctrinal preaching.  Incorporate into your services the singing of the great hymns of the faith that declare powerfully the triune nature of our great God.  If we encourage our congregations to participate in worship by reciting these creeds and singing these hymns, they will at the same time, become familiar with our basic Christian doctrines and especially the doctrine of God, so that they should be able to give an answer of the hope that lies within them – particularly, what they believe about God.
IV.  The End for Which We Preach the Trinity
Our pursuit of God must be practical more so than theoretical – i.e. “to know and enjoy God himself”   (cf. Psalm 119:12, 18, 97, 103, 125).  In other words, our goal is to know God personally and practically and the means to that end is the knowledge and experience of God.  The more we know about God, the more our lives will reflect his nature and character in our own godliness and manner of life.  Our knowledge about God is then reflected in our values, our priorities, our speech, thought, and behaviour, our worship, our prayer, and our occupation with God.
Our pursuit and preaching of the truth about God must have as its aim not merely the knowledge about God, but to know Him – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  The duty and delight of the preacher must be to preach about the God who created us, redeemed us, guides us and keeps us, and the God who is coming for us.  Our duty and delight must have as its proper object not theological knowledge or academic pursuit as an end in itself, for that can lead to arrogance, spiritual pride, and intellectual superiority, and is self-centred, not God centred (cf. Jer. 9:23f) - but our proper object is to have the knowledge that leads us into a deeper relationship with God.  Our motive and objective must be to know him more fully, love him more deeply, and follow him more devotedly.  This is the grand goal of preaching and of preaching the Trinity in particular.
I believe that the pastor who regularly preaches about God will do his congregation a great spiritual service, the benefits of which will become readily apparent.  There will be an increased zeal for God among your people, evidenced in (1) evangelism; (2) the advancement and defence of the truth and opposition to false teaching; (3) in corporate worship, (4) in Christian fellowship, and (5) in congregational unity.
There will be an increased occupation with God.  The orientation of their lives will change.  They will begin to think biblical thoughts about the ways and character of God in the day-to-day events of their lives.  They will live in the atmosphere of God, thinking, acting, and speaking as children of God.  Their thought lives will improve as they meditate on the glories of God.  Their lives will be enriched as they live in awe of God.  As you preach about God, you should find increasing evidence of their inner peace with God, their willingness to “be still and know that I am God,” their dependence on God not self, their spiritual maturity, their relationships, and attitudes.
VI.  Conclusions
This, then, is why I am issuing this clarion call to preach the Triune God whom we know, worship, serve, and obey – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, “God in three persons, blessed Trinity.”
Until and unless we understand, believe, and acknowledge that (1) God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; (2) that the Father, our Creator, is God; (3) that Jesus, our Redeemer, is God; (4) that the Holy Spirit, our Comforter, is God; and until we understand, believe, and acknowledge the truth of our triune God, we can never  effectively proclaim the Gospel of God or truly worship the God whom we trust for eternity.
There is, as Steven Lawson’s title to his book says, a “famine in the land”  – a famine of expository, doctrinal preaching.  I whole-heartedly affirm Timothy George’s exhortation that “The recovery of doctrinal preaching is essential to the renewal of the church.”   He goes on to say:
“The presupposition in doctrinal preaching is that the God who has once and for all come in Jesus Christ and once and for all spoken in Holy Scripture still comes and still speaks to His people through the faithful proclamation of His Word in the power of the Holy Spirit.  ‘Doctrine’ is not an abstract formulation of belief divorced from this saving reality and divine revelation.  To the contrary, it is the irreducible content of this very reality, conveyed through God’s authoritative, infallible Word and elucidated through what the church of Jesus Christ believes, teaches, and confesses on the basis of that Holy Word.” 
Similarly, John Piper writes, “Our people are starving for God”   “They are starving for the grandeur of God, and the vast majority do not know it.”   Our task, then, is to so declare God to our hearers in all the aspects in which he has revealed himself to us, so that the hunger of their hearts and minds is satisfied and they are wholly occupied with Him.  This demands preaching that is trinitarian in its exegesis and proclamation.  As Piper says, 
“If anyone in all the world should be able to say, ‘I have looked upon thee in the sanctuary, beholding thy power and glory,’ it is the  herald of God.  Who but preachers will look out over the wasteland of secular culture and say, “Behold your God!”?  Who will tell the people that God is great and greatly to be praised?  Who will paint for them the landscape of God’s grandeur?  Who will remind them of the tales of wonder that God has triumphed over every foe?  Who will cry out above every crisis, ‘Your God reigns!’?  Who will labor to find words that can carry the ‘gospel of the glory of the blessed God’?
“If God is not supreme in our preaching, where in this world will the people hear about the supremacy of God?  If we do not spread a banquet of God’s beauty on Sunday morning, will not our people seek in vain to satisfy their inconsolable longings with the cotton candy pleasures of pastimes and religious hype?  If the fountain of living water does not flow from the mountain of God’s sovereign grace on Sunday morning, will not the people hew for themselves cisterns on Monday, broken cisterns that can hold no water (Jer. 2:13)?” 
The overriding need is not for more “how-to” sermons but for more of God.  Let us, then, resolve that through our preaching, our people will know God more intimately, see him more clearly, live for him more devotedly, worship him more passionately, and love him more deeply so that, with the Psalmist, they cry: “One thing I have desired of the LORD, that will I seek: that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the LORD, and to inquire in His temple” (Ps. 27:4).  
No preaching accomplishes this task better, it seems to me, than preaching the Trinity.
 
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge, vol. 1. London: James Clarke & Co., Limited, 1957.
Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids:  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991)
Fee, Gordon D. and Douglas Stuart, How To Read The Bible for All Its Worth. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.
George, Timothy. “Doctrinal Preaching” in Handbook of Contemporary Preaching, ed. Michael Duduit. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992.
Goldsworthy, Graeme.  Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.
Greidanus, Sidney. The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature.  Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988.
Jewett, Paul K.  God, Creation, & Revelation: A Neo-Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991.
Johnson, Darrell W. Experiencing the Trinity. Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 2002.
Lawson, Steven J. Famine in the Land. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2003.
Martin, Dana. “God in Three Person” in Best Sermons, vol. 6, ed. James W. Cox (San Francisco: Harper, 1993)
McGrath, Alister E. Understanding the Trinity. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988.
Packer, J. I. Knowing God. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1973, 1975 edition, 16th impression 1987.
Piper, John. The Supremacy of God in Preaching. Grand Rapids; Baker Book House, 1990.
Rees, Paul.  Stand Up in Praise to God. Grand Rapids:  Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1960.
Toon, Peter. Our Triune God: A Biblical Portrayal of the Trinity (Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 1996)