Highlands Reformed Church

Rev. Brian M. Abshire

There are probably as many expectations of a pastor’s job, as there are members of his congregation. Some people want a sympathetic ear they can bend whenever the vicissitudes of life become too much. Others want a strong authority figure that can speak authoritatively from the pulpit, but not necessarily one who gets involved in their own life. There are those who want to be intellectually stimulated by well-reasoned sermons, and articulate personal expression. But in all these and a thousand other expectations, there is one quality that is often NOT desired in a pastor; yet is perhaps his fundamental qualification for the ministry; the ability to change people’s lives.

Change is what the Christian life is all about. By an act of God’s grace, He changed us from being aliens and strangers to members of His own household. By another act of grace, He works on our characters, day by day, conforming us to the image of Christ (Rms 8:29). The Apostle Paul exhorts Christians to not be conformed to the world, but to be changed by the renewing of our minds (Rms 12:1-2). The whole point of our teaching, preaching, exhorting, fellowship, worship, etc., is to facilitate this change as the gospel of Christ permeates and effects our entire being.

A good pastor knows all the above, even if he may not always articulate exactly the same way as I have. He wants his people to grow in grace, wisdom, understanding, love and worship. He pours himself every week into studying the Scriptures, learning from our elders in the faith through reading good books and then trying to share that wisdom with his people. He prays for them, visits them in their distress, and counsels them as occasion permits. He works with his elders to develop programs that will encourage and facilitate holiness in his church.

But all too often, as he lays his head down on his pillow, too many of my brother pastors have this nagging thought at the back of their mind; “Are they really changing? Is my work really having any effect?” At least the good ones have these thoughts. The “not-so-good” ones do not even worry about it because they are having so much fun managing their programs and being the center of attention that they just are not bothered. Actually demonstrating that people are growing in grace and holiness is not an easy task. Hence pastors can either put all the responsibility on God (“it’s up to me to speak the truth, it’s up to God to change the people” or search for another measure of success. Often that measure is church growth. You can MEASURE whether your congregation is getting larger. And if more people are coming to your church, then you MUST be doing SOMETHING right! I am reminded of the old proverb; “if you set yourself on fire for the Lord, people will come from miles around; to watch you burn.” Simply getting people to come to your church, and stay awhile means nothing. In fact, in sociological surveys I conducted in “mega-churches” in the eighties, it seemed an extraordinary number of people attended simply because they liked the anonymity. The LIKED the idea of showing up for church, doing their bit, and then leaving without having to get involved in the church or the people around them. Other studies have shown that up t 70% of Christians think showing up at 11 AM on Sunday morning is all that God really requires of them. Hence, the “seeker-friendly” approach, so often criticized for its superficial theology, insipid worship and cultural accommodation may well owe its numerical success to simply effectively marketing a product that fits a religious niche; people who do not want to be changed by the gospel.

There is no need to go over the sad state of American Christianity yet again (see my book; “The Church as God’s Armory” for a detailed analysis of the sociological impotence of modern evangelicalism), yet the truth remains, in today’s church, Christians are by and large NOT changing. Every decade sees them becoming more and more like the world around them in their values, priorities, life-style and life-choices. The average broad evangelical Christian church has lost its savor as salt in the world. No matter how big your sanctuary, or well attended your services, what good does it do if the people who fill them are just like their pagan neighbors outside your church? How could a majority of evangelical Christians vote for Bill Clinton TWICE, even though the newspapers were FULL of his scandals? How come Christian marriages are failing so frequently? Why are so many covenant children growing up to abandon the faith? How is it that Hollywood can continue to constantly ridicule Christians and get away with it (when they wouldn’t dare do the same to Muslims or Buddhists or any other religious group)? Where is the world conquering faith that subdued the Roman Empire, converted the pagan tribes of Europe, built EVERY aspect of Western Civilization and brought the world liberty and constitutional government? Could it be that we can no longer change the world, because we have forgotten God’s requirement that we need to be changed ourselves?

But if “good” pastors WANT to see their people changed, then why aren’t they being changed? Are we doing something wrong? Allow me please to speculate why Christians are not changing the way that God would have them change, and offer some practical suggestions as to what we could do differently.

Now several caveats before we begin. Because this is an essay, not a book, I am assuming (always a dangerous thing to do) that the reader is already familiar with the mechanisms of Godly change (see my related essay, “The Dynamics of Biblical Change.”). Sanctification is a process, governed by the Holy Spirit wherein by His grace and the application of godly discipline (1 Tim 5:8), we put off the old, and put on the new (Eph 4:17ff). What we are specifically concerned with here are the factors that inhibit people applying those principles in the specific problems they are facing.

Secondly, a lot of the below comes from studies in psychology, cognition, learning theory, etc. However, I am NOT compromising with modern psychologists. I need to say upfront that I believe that all humanistic psychotherapy is a counterfeit religion, antithetical to the gospel and dangerous to the extreme. But there is a difference between experimental psychology, an empirical discipline concerned with studying how people learn, and counseling psychology, which is just, applied humanism. All of the principles I list below are VERIFIED by God’s Word, and ILLUSTRATED by empirical research.

Intellectual Problems
First, obviously, people often do not change because there are problems in thought, or cognition. People cannot change unless they know and understand that they OUGHT to change, not to mention what they are to change from, and what they are to change to. Ideas do have implications, what we think affects what we do (Pvbs ). People can do pretty stupid things, over and over again because they just don’t know any better or they are not thinking clearly about an issue. There is an old story (probably apocryphal but we hope it’s true anyway) about a bride making dinner for her new husband. She was preparing a pork roast and began by sawing off the end of the leg joint. Hubby asked her, “Why?” and she responded, “Well, because that’s the way my Mom always did it at home.” Intrigued, the young woman then called her Mom and asked, “Why do we saw off the leg bones? Does it help the cooking, or release some juices or something?” Her Mom replied, “To be honest, I don’t know. This is just something that MY mother always did.” Mom then calls Grandma and says, “Why DO we always cut off the leg bones?” Grandma sheepishly replies, “Well, we never had a roasting pan big enough!”

Often, people do things unthinkingly, without ever considering the reasons behind the actions. We live in a complex world and much of what we do we learned from “modeling” or seeing the example of others. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with this, in fact, if we had to study EVERY issue before taking an action, we would doubtless never do anything. As long as the action is not immoral, in and of itself, there is no harm, and no foul.

But in the Christian life, God DOES command us to do certain things, things that are often in conflict with cultural norms. Furthermore, He promises to discipline His children who do not learn to do His will (Hebrew 12:10ff). We live in a cause and effect world, governed by a sovereign God who works His will out in time. Christians therefore who are not growing in conformity to the image of His Son Jesus (Rms 8:29) often experience pain, turmoil, real moral guilt, etc., because these things are tools in the Divine hand to teach and train us.

Thus sometimes, Christians do not change because they do not know what they are doing wrong. They do not understand God’s precepts, principles and commandments and are not living accordingly. Sadly, though God has given the church pastors and elders who are to TEACH the people the content of the Christian life, many times these people those responsible do not always teach what needs to be taught. Sometimes because the teachers themselves are only passing on what THEY were taught in seminary; academic and intellectual information that never goes beyond the spiritual. If a pastor for example, has been discipled and instructed in the importance of secret and family worship, if for him sermons are to be interesting intellectual exercises in esoteric aspects of theology or whims of mystical experience, then he himself simply may not KNOW what God requires. He cannot then pass it on to others.

However, the solution is NOT always as easy as simply telling a person the truth, and leaving it at that, as many good pastors seem to think. Granted, sometimes all that is needed to see a person undergo significant life changes and grow in grace and godliness is simply saying, “Stop doing that, and start doing this!” But I can number on the fingers on one hand the times this has worked in the last twenty years of ministry. Real life just does not seem to work that way.

There is an interesting phenomenon called “assimilation” associated with human learning. It seems that when people hear new information, there is a tendency to incorporate that information within an existing intellectual framework (or “paradigm”), rather than changing the framework to reflect the new information. This makes sense, in an odd sort of way. As people grow up and develop, they try to make sense out of the myriad thoughts, ideas, values, facts, etc., they encounter. Facts by themselves are useless unless they can be meaningfully related to OTHER facts. The connections we make between how one fact relates to another, is called a paradigm. The paradigm attempts to organize all the data we discover in life into meaningful relationships (if I drop the hammer, the hammer falls. If the hammer falls on my toe, it hurts. Therefore, don’t drop hammers on your toes!) Now there are paradigms, and there are paradigms. For example, there is an old joke about a Christian missionary trying to witness to a South Sea Islander where they used to throw virgins into the volcano to keep it from erupting. The missionary is trying to show how stupid this idea is by pointing out the scientific facts about volcanoes. But the wily old chief is not to be demurred because, as he says, “We’ve been throwing virgins into that volcanoes for years and we have NEVER had an eruption!” His paradigm was wrong, and therefore he was not able to correctly deduce the relationship between his actions (throwing young girls into volcanoes) and the result (not having an eruption. The entire process of scientific progress is often testing various paradigms against reality.

While paradigms are only as good as the data in them (which we may not always interpret correctly), a paradigm itself often discards some data because it does not fit. As Van Til said, “There are no brute facts, only interpret ones.” And the paradigms we form, determine not only how we interpret facts, but whether we even recognize them as facts, at all.

So, say for example, you jump on Brother George’s case through vivid and powerful preaching, followed up with intense personal conversation and cap it off with some good ole one to one counseling on an issue he needs to get right in his life. You finally get him to cry, “Uncle” on the issue and he gives assent that the new data you have been trying to get him to accept is true, valid and Biblical. Does that mean he automatically changes his life as a result? Not at all. Because of the above process of “assimilation” he is likely to take that new data and then try and fit it into his intellectual paradigm of the way the world works, even though it may be in conflict. Like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, people are quite capable of believing six impossible things before breakfast, if it allows them to not have to do the hard work of rethinking everything they have ever learned.

I have seen this dynamic time and time again. Say Brother George is in debt, heavily in debt due to irresponsible credit cards, foolish spending, bad budgeting, etc. It is very possible that he got into this mess in the first place because he simply did not understand God’s commandments forbidding debt. Our culture has no sanctions against debt, and by appealing to men’s covetousness, actively encourages people to spend far more than they earn. Most Christians have no problem running up huge credit card debt, and then paying the minimum amount each month. So George may not necessarily be wicked; just ignorant. Nobody ever told him that debt was bad, and now he is in trouble.

OK, now you come along as a brother in Christ, and you take him through the Scriptures. You show him all the relevant passages that compares debt to slavery, that it is a curse, and that we are owe nothing but love to one another. After wrestling with the fact that it HURTS when we are convicted of sin and he is therefore resistant to admitting that he has sinned, he finally admits that his debt is wrong, bad, and that he ought to get himself out as soon as possible.

Does he then necessarily get out of debt? Not on your life! Intellectually he is very likely, even though he now KNOWS that debt “in general” is bad, to find reasons why in HIS case, it is not only allowable, but unavoidable. Now we are not talking here about a sinful refusal to repent (we will deal with that later) but rather an intellectual problem, where in HIS mind, your teaching is not just not applicable to HIS situation. Furthermore, there is a big difference between intellectually realizing something, and then being able to take the practical steps necessarily to solve the problem.

Take the example of being overweight. It ain’t rocket science, being fat is a result of taking in more calories over the amount being burned during daily life. The only way to lose weight is by either reducing the amount of calories consumed, or by increasing the amount of calories burned through exercise. That being true, why are so many Americans FAT when they would rather be thin?

Now granted, there are some poor fools who just do not understand the above dynamic. They think the grapefruit diet, or some metabolism pills, or some cream bought from an ad in the back of the National Enquirer will magically take away fat (and if they read the Enquirer, their intellectual problem falls into a different category). So you come along and show them the research. But they reject it; why?

Man is not necessarily a “rational” being; he is a rationalizing being. Because of the corruption of our nature caused by Adam’s sin, man does not necessarily use his reason to arrive at a correct understanding of the world around him, but often sinfully uses his reason to justify his own prejudices. The world IS a very complex place, and often, there ARE legitimate differences of opinion on many matters; it might be this way, OR it might be that way. Sometimes, reason in and of itself cannot come to a conclusion, for in order to make the RIGHT decision, we would have to know ALL the facts and be able to organize them together properly.

Only God who is omniscient can do that, and that is why our knowledge must be founded upon His Word, the Bible. But even here, our sinfulness and limited understanding often causes “sincere” Christians to disagree on just what God meant when He said something. But now add this dilemma to the mix; if our paradigms govern our interpretation of “facts,” and the value of paradigms differs from individual to individual; SOME people are going to be more able to create better paradigms than others. Let us be honest and frank, some people are not as smart as other people. Therefore, such people are not going to relate the “facts” very well together. Often, their paradigms have very little rational basis. In other words, MOST people are not capable of systematically organizing their facts into a coherent paradigm. They do not live in a world governed by reason, logic and sound deduction. Thus is Pastor Bob comes along, and through brilliant exegesis, logical arguments and well-reasoned debate attempts to get them to change their minds about something (and change their lives accordingly) he will often find his message falling on deaf ears. Some will not understand him. Others will simply take what he says and add it to their existing paradigm, without having to actually change anything in their lives as a result.

Thus simply telling a person he must change is not enough. Furthermore it is not enough to tell him “why” he must change. We might even be able to intellectually convince him that he ought to change, but still, for all the reasons mentioned above, he might not change. There are other factors that go into the equation.

Problems in Practicality
Pastors who are “ratiocentric” (i.e., “reason” oriented) assume that if only they marshal all their facts, make good sound logical deductions and present their case fairly and equitably, then people will just naturally accept their conclusions and make the relevant changes. In fact, again and again as I have listened to my Reformed brothers preach, I have been amazed by the lack of practical application. When I query them about this surprising lack, they are astounded. Well, the application is just “obvious.” They have assumed that people will make the leap from the insights they provided. My experience in the counseling office is that the above just isn’t true. Even if a person does understand, intellectually, what the problem is, not everyone can then figure out what then needs to be done to correct it.

I understand this problem all too well. When it comes to mechanical type things, I am a complete idiot. Oh, I can understand the theory well enough, and can even draw a diagram, but that is a far cry from actually turning a wrench. When I was younger, all of my three older brothers were car fanatics. They loved cars, loved working on them and spent all their time up to their elbows in grease. They eventually all found vocations that would allow them to indulge in their love of cars.

I on the other hand hate cars with a passion. To me, they are tools, no more, no less. My one vocational goal in life was to make so much money I could hire someone else to get greasy and dirty crawling under the darned thing and replacing a broken drive shaft during a Maine winter. Now my brothers know my hatred of mechanical work and often teased me about it with all the mercy and charity big brothers have for younger ones. I well remember a discussion with one of them about the effects of higher-octane gas on performance. In chemistry class we had gone over in quite some detail the relationship between octane and compression ratios on internal combustion engines. I remembered the lecture well, and in the discussion with my brother actually had the temerity to disagree because he was repeating a popular myth that my chemistry professor had gone out of his way to refute. I understood the physics and the chemistry of the internal combustion engine. I understood theoretically exactly how the engine worked, could diagram how the fuel was compressed in the cylinder until at a certain point the spark ignited it, etc. I KNEW it, and took more than a little sinful pleasure demonstrating my brother’s theoretical ineptitude. (My brother, being the kind of guy that he is, simply threw me down on the ground and sat on me to shut me up.)

But the point is, while his theoretical knowledge was lacking, his practical ability far exceeded mine. I have never been able to get a nut off without either stripping the bolt, or busting my knuckles. If I take something apart, I can guarantee you that when I put it back together there will be pieces left over.

A lot of people have the same kind of difficulty when it comes to relating insights about their situation to the steps necessary in actually fixing the problem. This is one of the difficulties that very bright people have in relating to the rest of us “nobs.” The brightest people often make the WORST teachers, because they cannot understand why other people do not see what is so perfectly clear to them. Since I am bearing my soul in this essay, one more example of abject failure from my own past. I went to college after serving six years in the military. Math had never been one of my favorite classes in High School (it was the only one I had to work at and for someone who could get reasonable grades simply by reading the textbook in the first week of class and then goof off for the rest of the semester, math was just too much like work. As a result, I stunk at it, managed a C and decided to take less rigorous courses as often as possible). I breezed through college in two years, but my last required class was in statistical analysis. This was the first, and only math class I had to take for my undergraduate degree. But I hadn’t had algebra in 10 years and had long ago forgotten what little I had learned. But I had been a Christian for seven years, and had learned a little diligence and self-discipline and figured that with some hard work (and a lot of prayer), I could get by. And I was right, until I had to take several statistical labs taught by fellow students. The students obviously were exemplary at math (that’s why they were TA’s). They stood in front of the class and said things like, “now this obviously reduces to this and that’s how you solve this equation.” Well, it wasn’t obvious to me! In going from one aspect of solving a statistical equation to another, they ASSUMED everyone else could plainly see what was obvious to them. Inside their brains, there was a dynamic going on that other people, not having that innate skill, just couldn’t do. So I had to ask them to break it down, step by step. At first, they looked at me like an idiot (and I admit it, I was dumb). But since I was paying them to teach me statistics, I insisted they give value for money. So talking to me like someone who has to have their mittens pinned to their jackets, they took us slowly, and painfully, step by step through the process. And they were smart guys; once they realized that they were making assumptions they could go back and fill in the steps. And not unsurprisingly, about half the class started catching on and consequently, improved their grades (for they had the same problem I had, but were too afraid to look like an idiot. You see, I am not afraid of looking stupid anymore, after all, I’ve had lots of practice!).

But often, pastors and counselors do not see people change because they assume that the person WILL be able to see those steps by themselves. After all, your average pastor is a bright guy. He has spent a lot of time in serious academic endeavors. He wouldn’t have done well, unless he had some sort of “knack” for intellectual things. And he assumes that what is so clear to him, MUST therefore be clear to you, once he delineates his three points, tells his two anecdotes and the mandatory joke. He expects that YOU the average person in the pew, will just SEE what he is talking about and will take the proper actions. But the reality is, that just does not happen very often. People need to not only told WHAT to change, and WHY to change, but also HOW to change.

Note that people only understand about 30% of what they hear, the first time they hear it. They retain about 10% of that. So when a pastor or counselor instructs a person, even if done powerfully, clearly, articulately and evocatively, we must not assume that the person understood all that we said, or that he will retain it so he can apply it later. He needs to hear it three or four times, at least (and preferably from two or more sources). He then needs to have the process broken down into small, intermediate steps so he can see what he has to do on a daily basis. In the hilarious critique of the psychopathology of modern psychotherapy “What About Bob?” they introduce the concept of “baby-steps.” And as even a broken clock is right twice a day, so also does this movie get it right here. How to you make major changes in your life? Often, by taking small steps, day by day.

Emotional Problems
But, for what it is worth, in my experience over the past twenty-five years of ministry, even if the pastor understands the dynamics of cognition and learning, and governs his ministry accordingly, he STILL may not see people change, as they ought to. For many, many Christians, the problem is NOT one of intellect, but one of emotion. Sadly in modern America, “feelings” are what governs the average person’s life and since the church is so accommodated to the world, often we mimic them in this cultural value. People have been taught, admonished, encouraged and had modeled before them that their feelings are what is really important.

And since even Christians too often live according to their feelings, when God says one thing, but their feelings are telling them another, they will often follow their feelings. In fact, I have heard it argued repeatedly that God MUST not have meant what He said in His Word, because otherwise I wouldn’t feel the way I do!”

Now several comments are in order here Without getting side-tracked by Tim LaHaye’s books and ideas in this regard, let us here restrict the term “temperament” to its most broadest meaning. A person’s temperament is their basic emotional disposition towards the world. An argument can be made that each person has certain neurotransmitters, hormones, brain secretions (such as serotonin and dopamine), etc., in different configurations that affects how we “feel.” Feelings are biochemical responses. Because each person is unique, each person responds slightly differently to the same stimuli. Thus broadly speaking, some people are more extroverted; others more introverted. Some are more boisterous; others more shy. Some people are detailed oriented; others are “big-picture” folk.

Now if there is a genetic component to temperament, there is obviously nothing innately sinful about one’s tendency to emote one way or the other in a given situation. Clearly, the moral dynamic is whether we obey God despite how we feel at any given time. But it can be argued that a person’s emotional predisposition may influence your efforts at helping them change.

For example, a person who is more boisterous, outgoing and extroverted, may have trouble actually HEARING what you say. They may nod approvingly, smile knowingly and give every evidence of understanding and accepting your counsel, when inside their minds are racing a thousand miles an hour flitting from one topic to another. It does no good to say they OUGHT to listen, for that is the reason why they are in trouble in the first place.

Other people may be more “stubborn” or resistant to ANY change. Stubbornness CAN be a moral trait (i.e., a refusal to repent) or it can be a temperamental trait (just a personal disposition). As a result, if a person is innately conservative and resistant to change ANYWAY, then you come along and insist that they MUST change, they may disregard your counsel altogether.

Emotions are also a factor in whether or not another person will understand, and accept reproof, rebuke, correction and training in righteousness. Why do some people reject what a pastor says, out of hand it seems? It could be that whether he realizes it or not, he may be stepping on some emotional toes. And since many people are more motivated by emotions, than reason, no matter how clearly and logically he presents his case, some will simply not respond because he has not touched them emotionally (or inadvertently touched the wrong emotions).

OK, obviously, such people ought NOT to be living their lives on their feelings. Fine, but how are you going to change them from the kind of people who are emotionally oriented? Gonna give this emotional person 15 reasons why they ought not to live according to their emotions? But if they live their lives based on emotions rather than reason, they will reject your reasons! You see, that is the problem, many, many Christians today DO live according to their feelings, and that is what got them into trouble in the first place. You come along and reason with them and they blow you off (seldom to your face, often behind your back) because emotionally, they cannot handle being rebuked or corrected. It is HARD to change. It requires humility; something foreign to human nature since our father Adam fell into sin. It requires WORK to stop doing one thing and learn to do another, something made onerous by that same sin.

I would suggest that a pastor must be as wise as a serpent, and yet as gentle as a dove in dealing with people. Think about how the Apostle Paul rebukes various people in his Epistles. He almost universally begins (after acknowledging the sovereignty of God) with words of encouragement, affection and love. While not for a moment suggesting that he is being duplicitous (he really did love them) or manipulative, I think he was also implicitly recognizing that it is easier to get people to do what is right, when they feel affectionate towards you. Think with me; two people come to you about a problem you have. The first is a warm, intimate friend, who has demonstrated repeatedly that he likes you, wishes you well and is willing to make sacrifices as necessary to help you in life. The other person does not like you, does not get along with you all that well, and though there may be no real problems between you, you two just don’t “click.” Now BOTH have exactly the same problem with something you said and did. The “facts” of the situation are exactly the same. But which rebuke do you find easier to take?