The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Men's and Women's studies

Well Tom I appreciate you concern for my well being but I don't think you need to worry about it. You have enough on your mind living in Canada with no good Reformed Churches near by.

This thread has wandered around a bit! I was hoping that someone would come up with THE solution because this very scenario plagues our church as well. I'm the woman leading the Romans Bible study that the women have been asking for, while my husband has a group of 4-5 at the men's Bible study. The rest of the men who even stay for classes are at the two Focus on the Family videos. When my husband has asked men why they aren't interested in Bible study they reply (in essence)that reading the Bible is too hard and/or too boring. They want practical tools for life and not a bunch of doctrine. They also do not want to do any study during the week. They work long hours and often have a long commute as well. When they are home they are doing family things, and if by some chance they have time to themselves, they aren't going to spend it reading the Bible or some doctrine book. When I pointed out to a couple men that their wives are in the same situation, yet the wives try to spend time in prayer and Bible study each day, the men passed it off as "women are like that."

I was being facetious about looking for "the" answer. I know the problem has many facets and layers. It is just SO FRUSTRATING!

Carolyn,
I agree, it is a plague. I don't think missing study with the other men is so bad in and of itself. I know in my area that outside of the upper middle class, most men work double shifts and literally can't go to a weekly study, unless it were held at 4 in the morning. (talk about no interest...LOL) I suspect that the majority simply use an excuse to avoid study as many have stated already.
AS far as the women asking for a study of Romans, thats where the truth of the men's hearts is revealed. The women are making such a godly request, and the men are passing the responsibility to others. The men aren't leading thier families. They are not teaching and helping their families grow. There is no charge to raise Godly wives or children. The church raises up workers for the task so the men can remain fat, dumb, and happy. The men are replaced and others are given all responability and pressure to raise his family for him.
I think the best thing our churches can do is to give men a swift kick in the tail to rebuke them for leaving their posts. Men need to repent and lead their families again.
Funny quote; "if it cost money for women and children to attend church programs, fathers and husbands would quickly "remember" their responsibility. They would have a home depot experience, where one realizes how able he truly is as a "do it yourself guy."

JEB

Let me ask you this, does your pastor preach expository sermons?

Is the gospel being preached and shared?

Why isn't the leader of the study picking the study material? Why is it being left up to the "majority vote" rule on what material is going to be used?

Are the leaders or elders knowledgeable in doctrine? If so, are they encouraging the other men to be in the Word? If not, why not?

Is the pastor participating in the mens study? If not, why not?

Does your church encourage it's members to use their spiritual gifts?



That is a serious problem. If people aren't encouraged to learn their bible, then it seems to me that their is something wrong with the church.


I have found that "long commutes" are an excellent way to study. I love reading during a bus or train ride or listening to the bible on CD during a car ride.

Working long hours stinks, but I always found time for bible study when I worked labor intensive jobs with long hours.


My answer is this. God is the only one that is going to cause a change in your church. But if your church only has a handful of men showing up for a bible study and they all don't want to actually study the bible, then it seems to me that your church isn't very spiritually alive. The problem of getting men to attend a bible study is just a smaller problem that is a reflection of the church as a whole.

If men are attending worship service where they hear that they are transgressors of God's holy law and that the penalty for their rebellion is eternal death and that they are in need of a savior who has atoned for their sins. If they hear that they were born into sin and that they can't escape the judgment to come and that they need to repent and place their faith in Jesus Christ and Him alone. If they are told that there is nothing more important then their eternal security, not their job, or their hobby, or their money or their house and that they should make a complete change in their attitude about Christ and their lifestyle. That the most profitable thing that they can do as a Christian is to pray and read the bible and through these disciplines, it will allow them to grow stronger in their faith, their ministry to the Lord and to pursue holiness and to lead penitent lives mortifying the flesh and doing all things to please and bring god glory. If this type of message is frequently coming from the pulpit and the church leaders, then I don't see why most of the men of the church would not be interested in attending the mens bible study.

If the pastor is attending the study, then I don't see why the majority of the men of the congregation wouldn't want to attend. If the pastor and the church leaders were serious about encouraging the men of the church to attend the bible study then I don't see why men arn't coming.

But if these things aren't happening, then I fully understand why men aren't coming. Because they aren't truly seeking the light of God.

Post Tenebras Lux!

Here are some titles of books that you might be interested in reading about the church.

1. "The practices of a healthy church" by Donald J. MacNair
2. "Dining with the devil" by Os Guinness
3. "City on a Hill" by Philip Ryken
4. "Nine Marks of a Healthy Church" by Mark Dever
5. "Whatever happened to the Gospel of Grace?" by James Montgomery Boice.

Soli Deo Gloria

Dave.

Dave,

From reading your reply it appears that you think that spirituality comes automatically when a church and/or pastor/elder(s) are faithful in doing A, B, C, etc.?? Although it is important that whoever is responsible for the preaching that they preach "the Gospel", which IMHO should occupy a very small part of preaching vs. "the whole counsel of God" for "the upbuilding of the saints", it wouldn't make a wit of difference if Charles Spurgeon or R.C. Sproul were doing the preaching if the hearts of the hearers weren't regenerate.

I say, that the Church with its preaching and teaching opportunities can only further the already resident desire to grow in grace and to call those without that desire to repentance and faith in Christ. If someone told me that they don't have any interest in going to Bible Study, no desire to read the Scriptures, had no appetite for doctrinal discussion and/or learning, then I would have to conclude that there is a serious spiritual problem NOT with the person's church, but with THEM. There have been and are countless individuals who right now belong to/attend "dead" churches where there is little to no sound preaching and/or teaching. Yet, there are some who have an insatiable hunger to learn about God and study the Scriptures. Many seek high and low for that "good food" outside their respective churches. The Highway is one of those type of "spiritual cafeterias" which serves up solid meat and some milk for those who hunger due to a lack of substance where they "worship".

Bottom line.... the church can do everything right, within its power and ability, but that is no guarantee that those who attend that church will be spiritually alive and hungry to study, pray and live out their lives before God in holiness. The Church is not some kind of vending machine where you can simply drop in the correct change and push the button to get the wanted result. The Lord Christ was the most perfect evangelist and teacher this world has seen or ever will see. Yet, His "success rate" in getting people to be His disciples; i.e., with a lively faith in Him, continue in His word and hunger after righteousness, was probably less than any known preacher/teacher in history while He was yet on earth. As I stated in my other replies, there are "2" areas that need to be considered in such matters: 1) the Church and 2) the Individual.

1 Corinthians 3:7 "So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase."

In His grace,

Jeff,


First, I never said anything would come automatically. Second, I agree with your statement here fully, but I don't agree with your conclusion. Preachers that are as passionate and true to the word of God like Spurgeon and Sproul are going to have vibrant churches God willing and I do believe that He would be for great preachers who preach His truth in season and out of season.

Yes, I agree that those whom God has not elected will always be hardened, but these people are not going to stay in a Christ focused, Gospel preaching, devout, conservative, orthodox, conservative church, where the Gospel is preached in it's full beauty with conviction. These unregenerate people are not going to stay in a church where the whole councle of God is preached and taught.

This is my point of my post. If you have a pastor and church leaders who are serious about Christ and serious about maintaining a biblical church then you will find that the unregenerate will leave to another church where their ears can be tickled, where they aren't convicted of their sin and where they can resume to feel comfortable about themselves.

Using my own personal experience, If I were to bring my current PCA pastor and elders to my past PCUSA church and allowed them to run the church for a month and told the congregation that they were here to stay. They would be branded as intolerant, ultra conservative leagalists and you would have a mass exodus of congregation members to another liberal church.

God uses good godly preachers like Spurgeon and Sproul for His good pleasure to further His kingdom and where you find these godly preachers, you find godly congregations that are spiritually alive. Of course I'm not saying that there won't be unregenerate covenant members, it won't be a dead church either.


Yes, I agree, there will be those whom are truly of God in dead churches. I was one of those people. I guess what I'm trying to say is that, it was very hard for me to remain in a dark place. I wanted to worship God in a very meaningful way and everything about the PCUSA church became so disturbing to me, that I was having a very hard time staying there. It was a situation where I found myself having people at every encounter getting upset with me with my calvinistic, biblical steadfastness. My wife also was not growing at all and that needed to change. She needs to be in a church where she is challanged and encouraged to learn because she won't do it on her own. Now that we're in the PCA she attends a womans bible study using a Kay Arthur study, where she is learning sound bible instruction. She is learning much more from the pulpit and I can see the much needed change in her. So for my own personal experience, it wasn't an option for us to stay in the big, mega, neo-orthodox, liberal church to be a bright light to those around us. It was effecting my family in a seriously harmful way.

So yes, I do still firmly believe that it's God's sovereignty and providence that causes revival, growth and spiritual healthy churches, but we are His instruments and where His truth is proclaimed and believed, then His followers will come. Where His truth is hid then His followers will be spiritually handicapped and they will IMHO sooner of later leave to search for another church.

I tried very hard and prayed very hard for reform in my old church. I spent a lot of time in fellowship and bible studies with a lot of people. I worked hard at my ministry opportunities and I shared the gospel often with everyone I was in fellowship with, but at the end of it, I finally had to discern that God had withdrawn His hand from that congregation and it was time for my family and myself to find another church.

After reading books like "nine marks of a healthy church", "City on a Hill" and "Whatever happened to the Gospel of Grace." I have concluded from these godly preachers that it does matter how you preach and run the church.


I agree for the most part with this. But, who's to say how big a church has to be for it to be edifying. What I'm saying is that if a preacher is preaching the way that God has intended for him to preach, then you will find a situation where the people who remain in the church are going to be for the most part spiritually alive, now with saying that, the church might only be a few families, but if that is what God has planned for that preacher, to be a preacher of a church with 5 or 6 families, then so be it. It's better to preach the truth to empty pews then to compromise God's Word.

Dave.

Dave

You mentioned that your wife attends a Bible study where Kay Arthur maturial is used.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Kay Arthur an Arminian in theology?

Tom

Dave,

Sorry but I seem to find some contradiction in what you are trying to say. Perhaps I am misunderstanding what it is exactly you are believing..... if so, I would be grateful if you would set me straight. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

What you are saying ----> appears <---- to be this: Where "great" men such as Spurgeon and Sproul can be found, there will be (always?) godly men and women who will have an interest in "meaty" Bible Studies such as those which were referred to in the original question of this thread and which the men of that church had no interest. So, on this point, if I have understood you right, we are going to have to disagree. Although it is most important that preachers/teachers of the Word fulfill their respective positions responsibly and biblically, there is never a guarantee that in doing so there will be fruit.

Secondly, again referring back to the original post and question concerning the near total lack of interest on the part of men in the church in question, you appear to automatically conclude that the Pastor and/or teachers in that church are not . . . no CANNOT be preaching and teaching the Word of God faithfully and fully. (see comment #1 above) My response was and still remains that this may not be the case at all. But rather, inspite of faithful preaching and teaching there still can be lack of interest on the part of men (yes and women and children too) due to the fact that they are yet unregenerate. May I point out to you at this point, that when Paul went to Corinth he surely preached the Word of God faithfully and in all its fulness. Yet, the opposition was so abundant and so strong Paul was ready to pack it in and leave. But the Lord came to Him in the night and told him that he must remain for there were "much people" in that city (aka: elect) that needed to hear the Word. So again, by way of example, faithful and sound preaching/teaching does NOT guarantee positive and immediate results.

Thirdly, if as you write, that with sound preaching and teaching, unregenerate persons will leave rather than endure that type of ministry. IF that were true, then what we should see is that in those churches where a faithful ministry exists, there will be no unregenerate individuals but rather only those who have come to know Christ and desire to grow in grace. Thus the men of the church would be banging down the doors to get to Bible Studies where doctrine is being taught. However, I have to insist that this does not represent reality. I have been in a few churches where the preaching and teaching was "to die for"! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" /> Yet, in those churches only a minority of men came out to the myriad studies offered; whether in the church itself or those held privately in homes. So, I have to wonder where you would find fault? . . . would you say that my assessment of the preaching and teaching was in error because if it was sound all the men would have attended the classes? Or, would you conclude that something was awry with the spiritual condition of those men who didn't attend; not excluding that there are sometimes extenuating circumstances which would prevent full attendance?

My good man.... may I tell you that even at Westminster Seminary where one could have experienced some of the most biblically sound teaching and preaching, there were young men who were far from God. And may I also tell you that at one Baptist seminary where I studied, despite the woefully "weak" teaching and preaching there were men who were indisputably of faith and conviction.

God works in mysterious ways and calls men to faith and discipleship from everywhere, albeit in some cases in spite of where they are found. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

Why do you suppose that these men whom you mentioned, do not attend sessions where doctrinal matters are being taught?

Folks, it's not just a matter of free food. Men need to fall flat on their faces in failure before they get up and DO something. Women have, for their part, have been far too willing to prevent such failure and have stood in the gap. Not good! Also, contemporary preaching (on male roles) has fallen along the lines of 'Promise Keeper's' themes, instead of covenantal responsibility... PRACTICING headship and leadership.

JM

I'm not sure exactly but I have looked through her studies where I work and they look solid. Plus, the women leading the study is reformed and I know she is a good godly woman. So it really doesn't concern me if Kay Arthur is an arminian. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Dave.

Yes I agree. I was simply asking what the situation was in her church? Because I believe that if it's a liberal church where the gospel isn't preached from the pulpit and the sermons aren't convicting or centered on Christ then that "might" explain why there aren't very many people interested in meeting.


Yes, I'm not disputing this, your absolutely correct. Again I made sure to be clear in my last reply that I never mentioned an "immediate" result. I'm talking long term here. Yes I agree, even if a preacher does everything right, it's still up to God. Example = Jonathan Edwards.


That's not what I said. I simply said that there would be a lot of people who would leave to go to other liberal churches. But that there will always be unregenerate in the visible church.


Agreed again.

But.... if it were the situation where the preaching was first rate, doctrinally sound, Christ centered and so on. If there were sermons about biblical roles of man and women. If there were attempts from the church leaders to encourage men to come to the studies, then we would have to conclude that yes, it's time to leave it up to God and pray for a revival.

But on the other hand, if none of the above is happening in the church, then we might be able to conclude that church is failing at it's task of the sanctification of it's body.

But we don't know what the situation in this particular church is, so it's hard to really say for sure what the problem is.
<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/broke.gif" alt="" />

Dave.

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/yep.gif" alt="" /> And not only "might", but in my estimation, it would be the #1 reason. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" /> A church hardly ever will rise above the level of that of the Pastor/Elders. And this, IMHO, is why the vast majority of people who profess Christ have little to no personal knowledge of Him. They have been indoctrinated into "Churchianity" and not much more, unfortunately. Good point!!

How true.... so perhaps we might be graced with some further information about this particular situation which would better help us assess things and offer some reasonable counsel. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

How do you sugguest this be corrected. Should seminarys increase the requirements to get in?

Edited: Corrected faulty UBBT Code.

I am not sure what you mean by seminarys increasing their requirements for entrance. There aren't too many schools today that teach classical languages. Westminster Theological Seminary, while requiring a high level of mastery in greek and hebrew, therefore offer an introductory Greek to satisfy entrance requirements. I am not sure what others require. But, while I think that seminarys can instill a love for learning and introduce people to good resources, learning and developing a love for the truth is something that must come from within. If a pastor or elders, basically don't have a love for learning, and a deep down desire to know the truth then they cannot direct others the way they ought. A serious consideration for those desiring the pastorate or church leadership.

However, not one of us can blame our lack of interest on others. If our pastors aren't learned men that does not mean that we aren't responsible to read and learn and seek to know the truth ourselves. We have so much literature available to us in English that we have no excuse except our own laziness and lack of interest.

No, I would say that if these church people say that the Bible is boring, hah, they haven't read it or they are not believers and therefore it is a mystery to them. If they do not pray, they are not believers for no one can have a saving faith without a relationship with God that includes prayer. So, all of the clever ideas of luring guys into a bible study or prayer group is a waste.

I have heard that the great revivals in the past were preceeded by great amounts of prayer. I know that in New England there were prayer cells. I think if you want revival, then there must be prayer toward this end. Coffee and donuts won't do it.

I'm assuming you are asking about my comment re: "the indoctrination of most professing Christians into Churchianity" as opposed to biblical Christianity? The corrective for this is obviously for those preaching and teaching in the church to be regenerate, men of obedient faith who have a passion to serve Christ and His sheep and who are not theologically challenged. There is no place for "seeker-friendlyism", "emergent churchianity", "theatrics", "entertainment worship", etc., ad nauseam in the church of God. There needs to be men who are committed to BIBLICAL Christianity who are totally reliant upon the sovereignty of God and hold fast to the promise of Christ that HE will build His church and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. . . . etc....!!

I am of the view that seminaries should interview all prospective students to try and determine their spiritual state, much the same as one would be examined for church membership. There is no foolproof method of knowing who is genuinely converted or not, but it can be reasonably ascertained if done with prudence. But a seminary cannot guarantee what a man will do once he leaves that institution. One can give lip-service to a Creed, Confession, statement of faith but what those documents uphold may have little bearing upon a man's actual thinking or passions. Seminary is not a place that manufacturers "Borgs" . They provide an accelerated educational environment in order to prepare men for ministry and/or women for teaching positions. The local church must discern the calibre of the men they allow to occupy offices in their assembly.

Most of us here realize, and we lament the fact, that there is no perfect church on earth. And there are no perfect office bearers on earth. The church is going to consist of sheep and goats until the Lord returns and separates them Himself. We can only fulfill our given responsibilities in this area which will at times be faulty. Those who wish to "do their own thing" can do so, generally without hindrance, since they can simply start their own church or in the case of an existing church, hire unto themselves teachers who will teach that which they want to hear and not necessarily the truth. (2Tim 3:3, 4)

In His grace,