Sermon Tone Analysis

I. INTRO

A. Character

1.

In month one we talked about Christian leadership, in general, and the need for Christian leaders!

2. In month two we examined theology proper and delved into some deeper water of systematic theology, Reformed theology, and how to study about the things of God — most emphasized was the need to be public theologians [knowing about God and making him known to our communities] (a massive intro).

3. Today we’re focusing on Character

a. Definitions

The moral and mental features that define a person, whether good or evil.

The term also means moral strength, which Scripture regards as something to be highly valued.

What Does the Bible Say about Christian Character?

Character is defined as strength of moral fiber.

A.W. Tozer described character as “the excellence of moral beings.”

As the excellence of gold is its purity and the excellence of art is its beauty, so the excellence of man is his character.

Persons of character are noted for their honesty, ethics, and charity.

Descriptions such as “man of principle” and “woman of integrity” are assertions of character.

A lack of character is moral deficiency, and persons lacking character tend to behave dishonestly, unethically, and uncharitably.

A person’s character is the sum of his or her disposition, thoughts, intentions, desires, and actions.

It is good to remember that character is gauged by general tendencies, not on the basis of a few isolated actions.

We must look at the whole life.

For example, King David was a man of good character (1 Samuel 13:14) although he sinned on occasion (2 Samuel 11).

b.

Character is Important

4. Thoughts before we jump in?

Observations from the reading?

II.

Kent Hughes and Bryan Chapell (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: To Guard the Deposit, Preaching the Word)

A. Christian Ministry and Leadership is without question a matter of character

1.

I say all this to emphasize that Christian ministry and leadership is without question a matter of character.

One’s authentic spirituality and Christian character is everything in church leadership.

It is a sober fact that as goes the leadership, so goes the church.

With some commonsense qualifications, it is an axiom that what we are as leaders in microcosm, the congregation will become in macrocosm as the years go by.

Of course, there are always individual exceptions.

But it is generally true that if the leadership is Word-centered, the church will be Word-centered.

If the leadership is mission-minded, the church will be mission-minded.

If the leadership is sincere, the people will be sincere.

If the leadership is kind, the church will be kind.

This is also true negatively—exponentially! Unloving, narrow, stingy leaders beget an unloving, narrow, stingy church.

2. Elders and Deacons Qualifications in Scripture

a. Hyper-emphasis on character here

b.

Notice that the qualifications are the same for elder and deacon, minus the ability to teach for deacons...

c.

Probably one implication — “all Christians should display these traits...”

3. Here’s a common tension: “Our Competency Outpaces Our Character”

a.

Tension: “When our competency outpaces our character”

b.

Competent people get put in charge of things.

Competent people get recognized in our culture.

Competent people get things done.

i.

But listen: COMPETENCY DOES NOT EQUATE TO CHARACTER!

ii.

And over time when you take on more than your character can hold up to — you’re going to explode

iii.

This is another countercultural quality to Christianity — Character trumps everything else.

c.

4.

B. Questions/Comments about Hughes and Chapell?

III.

Timothy Keller (Counterfeit Gods)

A. CH. 2 — LOVE

1. Jacob and Rachel Analogy

a. Attempt to make love an idol, a God counterfeit

b.

We maintain the fantasy that if we find our one true soul mate, everything wrong with us will be healed.

But when our expectations and hopes reach that magnitude, as Becker says, “the love object is God.”

No lover, no human being, is qualified for that role.

No one can live up to that.

The inevitable result is bitter disillusionment.

c.

Thoughts?

2. C.S. Lewis

a. hookup culture

In the 1940s, C. S. Lewis heard from many of his peers in the British academy that sex was nothing but an appetite, like that for food.

Once we recognized this, they said, and began to simply have sex whenever we wanted it, people would cease to be “driven mad” by desire for love and sex.

Lewis doubted this, and proposed a thought experiment.

Suppose you come to a country where you could fill a theatre by simply bringing a covered plate on to the stage and then slowly lifting the cover so as to let every one see, just before the lights went out, that it contained a mutton chop or a bit of bacon, would you not think in that country something had gone wrong with the appetite for food?…

One critic said that if he found a country in which such strip-tease acts with food were popular, he would conclude that the people of that country were starving.29

However, Lewis goes on to argue, we are not starving for sex; there is more sex available than ever before.

Yet pornography, the equivalent of striptease acts, is now a trillion-dollar industry.

Sex and romantic love are therefore not “just an appetite” like food.

They are far more meaningful to us than that.

Evolutionary biologists explain that this is hardwired into our brains.

Christians explain that our capacity for romantic love stems from our being in the image of God (Genesis 1:27–29; Ephesians 5:25–31).

Perhaps it can be said that both are true.

b.

Cosmic Disillusionment

i.

We learn that through all of life there runs a ground note of cosmic disappointment.