Christian Podcasts Worth Listening To

Standard

OK, so the title is a little hyperbolic, and perhaps I give my own tastes too much credit. Regardless, I think these podcasts are worth your time.

I want to add that while some individual churches do publish podcasts, and I do listen to a few of those, I want to keep this list unaffiliated to any one congregation. So, there are no individual church podcasts in the list. I hope that’s understandable.

No particular order follows, just good, solid content. May these all richly bless you.

Fire on Your Head (Steve Bremner)

Fire on Your Head

Fire on Your Head (Steve Bremner) is one of the best charismatic podcasts out there. A missionary in Peru and a Canadian national, Steve brings a different perspective. I find myself saying “amen” to this podcast more than any other, and for those of you who have wondered what a podcast of Cerulean Sanctum might be like, Fire on Your Head is about as close as it gets. I’m working backward from 2015 in my listening to this, but so far, it’s solid stuff. The podcast on worship alone is worth 100 listens (“Entering into God’s Presence without Even Singing Songs.”)

No Lasting City (Peter Smythe)

No Lasting City

No Lasting City (Peter Smythe) is another top-notch charismatic podcast, with a focus on Bible exposition. That alone makes it unusual. Peter is a lawyer by profession, and his reasonings on both familiar and difficult passages make sense and may even challenge you to think differently about the Scriptures. My only complaint? He needs to publish more frequently!

The Phil Vischer Podcast (Phil Vischer)

The Phil Vischer Podcast

The Phil Vischer Podcast (Phil Vischer) examines popular culture and Church oddities through the slightly off-kilter lens of the VeggieTales creator. Joining him are Miami University of Ohio grad Skye Jethani, who provides the theological insights, and Christian Taylor, who provides the heart and the grounding. Guests appear also. Interesting, sometimes controversial, but always fun.

The Mockingpulpit (Mockingbird)

The Mockingpulpit

The Mockingpulpit (Mockingbird) is a team effort by the folks at Mockingbird, ardent promoters of Law/Gospel preaching from an Episcopal point of view. The messages are from a variety of speakers/teachers/preachers, but all of them are thought provoking and grace filled. Some of the best preaching I’ve ever heard has come from this site. Not every message will slay you, but many will. Soaked through with the grace we so need to embrace.

Christ Hold Fast Cast (Christ Hold Fast)

Christ Hold Fast Cast

Christ Hold Fast Cast (Christ Hold Fast) is also a team effort, but by the folks at Christ Hold Fast, also ardent promoters of Law/Gospel, this time from a Lutheran point of view. Less preaching than Mockingbird, but still offers grace-filled discussions and interviews. Caters to a younger, hipper crowd, but even this old guy likes it.

Virtue in the Wasteland (Jeff Mallinson & Daniel van Voorhis)

Virtue in the Wasteland

Virtue in the Wasteland (Jeff Mallinson & Daniel van Voorhis) tackles culture, history, philosophy, ethics, and religion from a Lutheran perspective. The hosts are professors at Concordia University, and the smarts in this podcast will enlarge your mind. These two down-to-earth guys will help bolster your Christian worldview, guaranteed, while the connections they draw will make you smile.

Let My People Think (Ravi Zacharias)

Let My People Think

Let My People Think (Ravi Zacharias) enlightens with Christian apologetics from a man who is a treasure to the Body of Christ. What I love most about Ravi: His intellect never obscures his heart. He’s got you saying “amen” one moment, and you’re crying the next. Many of the podcasts are repeats of older talks, but fresh material arrives now and then. No matter, it’s all superb.

Unbelievable? (Justin Brierley)

Unbelievable?

Unbelievable? (Justin Brierley) is the quintessentially British take on apologetics, with a BBC-like feel. Host Justin usually features two guests from opposing sides who discuss a theological or ethical issue. Given that some of the loudest atheist voices are British, it’s often atheist versus Christian. One of the headiest podcasts out there, you’ll definitely learn a few things about competing worldviews by listening. Fire up your pipe, pour a couple fingers of 18-year-old Talisker, and have a go.

The God Journey (Wayne Jacobsen)

The God Journey

The God Journey (Wayne Jacobsen) is a podcast for folks burned by institutional “churchianity.” While I have reservations about Wayne’s association with the book The Shack (he was a collaborator with the author), I’ve found his insights into letting go of religious dross and renewing one’s intimacy with God to be freeing, plus he comes from a solid Foursquare background. Still, he remains controversial. If you feel the way we do Church in America makes cold, hard stones instead of warmhearted disciples, Wayne might be worth a listen.

So, lend these podcasts an ear if you want to be edified. And feel free to comment or to suggest other Christian podcasts you find helpful.

God bless you.

_My Utmost for His Highest_ —A Critical Look at the Classic Devotional

Standard

Oswald ChambersMy Utmost for His Highest is one of the best-selling Christian books, if not the outright champ of devotionals. The book was first published in 1935, 18 years after its author’s death, and has never been out of print.

That author, Oswald Chambers, was coverted in part through the ministry of Charles Spurgeon and later went on to be a chaplain in the military. Chambers passed away in his early 40s from a ruptured appendix, and his wife was the one who compiled some of his writings into the devotional book we know today. The book was first published in 1935, 18 years after Chambers’s death, and has never been out of print.

I wanted to write about My Utmost for His Highest because I decided this summer to look through an old copy that has been sitting in our library for years. Aware of the reputation of the devotional, I thought it might be a good adjunct for me over the course of the next year. I have used A.W. Tozer’s Renewed Day by Day as devotional reading in the past and thought it helpful.

I am no expert on the history of Christian devotional works, so I don’t know if My Utmost for His Highest pioneered the layout of contemporary devotionals, but it adheres to the now typical form of a short Scripture passage followed by thoughts by the author, all arranged into 366 entries that fit on a page each.

To begin, I want to say that whatever Christian Oswald Chambers was, he was certainly a more noteworthy one than I am. For that reason, readers are invited to disagree with what follows, if for no other reason than as a testament to Chambers and the sheer number of this tome that have been sold, and in 39 languages.

But in reading My Utmost for His Highest (hereafter MUfHH), I wonder if the legacy of this devotional hasn’t set the stage for some of the problems we see in contemporary Christianity in the West.

1. While Bible text opens the daily entry, there’s often just a few words of it—followed by a lengthy exposition.

The one thing a casual glance at MUfHH reveals are a lot of ellipses. Scriptures are often cut down to their barest essentials. The June 30 entry is nothing more than “Agree with your adversary quickly… (Matthew 5:25).” Believe it or not, some Bible text for a day is even shorter than that.

My concern: Unpacking such a short passage out of context can lead to reading one’s agendas and presuppositions into the text (AKA eisegesis). Chambers does not equivocate on anything in MUfHH, so he has a forceful voice. This acts against people questioning his interpretation of the limited text and what should be done with it. This also sets up a tendency in readers to accept “little text with big explanation” as a norm for Bible exposition. But should it be?

One could argue that many devotionals follow this format, but I wonder if it doesn’t contribute to a wider problem of saying more about a text than the text supports. Of course, this can lead us into error, especially when the context has no similar exposition.

2. Keswick.

An unfamiliar term for many, Keswick is/was the location in England of a notable Christian Holiness conference and movement dedicated to the “higher life.” This movement is marked by the following beliefs:

  • The baptism of the Holy Spirit (or “second work of grace”)
  • Mystical union with God
  • Holiness through Christian perfection

Some will recognize Wesleyan theology in these distinctives, but Keswick has been ecumenical in its reach. Nor was it an isolated theology, as many notable late 19th century Christians (including Andrew Murray, D.L. Moody, Hannah Whitall Smith, Hudson Taylor, and R.A. Torrey) were proponents.

Readers know I have written in support of the baptism of the Spirit and the positives (to a point) of Christian mysticism. However, it’s that third element of Keswickian theology…

My concern: MUfHH definitely shows the influence of Keswick on Oswald Chambers in that it is rife with Christian perfectionism. In fact, most of the entries contain some reference to the Christian working to perfect himself or herself to better experience God.

Some examples of how this manifests:

July 13: “My vision of God is dependent upon my character. My character determines whether or not truth can even be revealed to me.”

July 31: “Not only must our relationship to God be right, but our outward expression of that relationship must also be right. Ultimately, God will allow nothing to escape; every detail of our lives is under His scrutiny.”

August 2: “God does not give us an overcoming life—He gives us life as we overcome.”

August 9: “Are we living at such a level of human dependence upon Jesus Christ that His life is being exhibited moment by moment in us?”

August 24: “Don’t faint and give up, but find out the reason you have not received; increase the intensity of your search and examine the evidence. Is your relationship right with your spouse, your children, and your fellow students?…I am a child of God only by being born again, and as His child I am good only as I ‘walk in the light.'”

August 27: “The moment you forsake the matter of sanctification or neglect anything else on which God has given you His light, your spiritual life begins to disintegrate within you. Continually bring the truth out into your real life, working it out into every area, or else even the light that you possess will itself prove to be a curse.”

Does anyone else recognize how exhausting that perpetual self-examination is?

This kind of “I must strive to be perfect in order to receive anything from God” thinking extends from the idea that such perfection is possible this side of heaven. Sadly, it also counters the more biblical reality that Christ alone is the perfection of the born-again believer, and that Christ’s perfection is finished.

Even the title of the devotional itself offers a hidden conditional, that to get God’s highest requires one be perfect enough to deliver one’s utmost. MUfHH contains a LOT of this kind of idea, which leads to the next issue.

3. Talk of Grace, but followed by Law.

MUfHH talks much about God’s grace and how the believer can grow in it. In this, it reads like an instruction book on how to be a better Christian.

My concern: To talk of grace and immediately suggest something the believer must do to better his or her spiritual state isn’t the Gospel. Our sanctification is driven by God, not by relentless examination and working harder to be better Christians. Jesus alone is both the author and finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2). It is He alone we trust to finish the work He began in us (Philippians 1:6). If anything, our striving only gets in the way of genuine sanctification through God working His work in us.

MUfHH is loaded with striving. Almost every entry tells us what we’re not doing right and what we should do to fix it.

I offer the following little check of my own accord. You can take it for what it is worth. I believe it is in keeping with the Bible’s understanding of both Law and Gospel.

When I feel discouragement or despair in reading spiritual works, it is likely I am encountering the Law. The Bible makes it known repeatedly (and I will leave you to examine the many verses in support) that the Law illuminates every way in which I am deficient before God. How can one not feel despair in such a case?

But grace provides the opposite feelings: hope and joy. Christ overcame the curse of the Law. This is the heart of the Gospel.

Rather than being encouraged by much of MUfHH, my personal reaction has been discouragement in the form of “well, there’s just another spiritual discipline I’m not doing or not doing correctly.” Considering that nearly every entry in MUfHH consists of some way in which you and I are not being the best Christian we should be, it feels very Law-based, no matter how much grace is supposedly espoused. To begin an entry with talk of the grace of Christ but then to talk about how poorly I’m doing in apprehending it and what I should do to fix things, is not the best way to encourage Christian growth or the kind of freedom the Gospel delivers.

This is my greatest apprehension regarding this Christian classic. It’s not that it doesn’t encourage readers to go deeper in their faith in Christ, but it has a tendency to make a millstone out of this path to a deeper life in God.

To be entirely transparent, I’m unclear how most people can read My Utmost for His Highest and not despair at their inability to pull off the many solutions Chambers requires to counter the average Christian’s myriad failings. One day tells of what you are doing wrong, only to be followed by the next day telling something else you are doing wrong, and on and on. How this proves helpful to Christian growth is lost on me. What I come away with instead is a large burden that is my terribly practiced Christian life, which I appear to be performing atrociously despite God’s grace.

If anything, I see the striving that results at the heart of American Christianity. Do better. Work harder. Fix, fix, fix.

But where is the freedom of the Gospel in this? Where is the rest, in that a Christian can lay down all the striving, all the self-made righteousness and perpetual examination, and know that Jesus said on our behalfs, “It is finished”?

*****

I’m always willing to consider that perhaps I’m not reading My Utmost for His Highest correctly. Still, I cannot escape that it feels like just another set of Christian rules and suggestions that I will inevitably fail to do perfectly. Beginning each day that way—well, I’m not sure how encouraging that is.

If you have differing thoughts, please comment below.

A Faith of One: Why the Church Must Teach to the Individual

Standard

Fred Rogers of Mister Rogers' NeighborhoodFred Rogers of Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood fame told a story about his seminary days.

Rogers and a group of his friends took a road trip to hear a famous minister preach. To their brutal disappointment, the minister was on vacation that Sunday and a visiting speaker would preach.

The replacement droned on, and Rogers grew furious. It was one of the most boring, pointless messages he had ever heard, and he cursed his bad timing.

Then he looked at the woman seated next to him. She was crying her eyes out, hanging on the speaker’s every word.

The incident proved a profound lesson for the young Rogers, who understood that no matter how badly that speaker missed connecting with him, someone other than him needed to hear those words. It was a truth he never forgot, incorporating that experience into the philosophy of his classic TV show.

If you’ve been a reader of Cerulean Sanctum long enough, you’re familiar with my rant about spiritual gifts. To sum up: I think leaders in a local church must make it their priority to assist in helping congregants identify and use their spiritual gifts. Our failure to do this on an individual basis is one reason why our churches fail in their missions. God put those people in that church with those gifts for a reason. Not employing their gifts properly hurts everyone.

It’s the truth of the Body of Christ: different people, different gifts, and different purposes within the Body.

It’s not just differences in giftings and uses, either. As Mister Rogers noted, people will react individually to different messages and different types of learning.

My degree is in Christian Education from Wheaton College in Illinois. Later, the major was renamed Spiritual Formation. Now it’s called Christian Formation and Ministry. They ought to cut to the chase and call it Making Disciples.

Just as God gives each person a special role in the Body of Christ, so He also equips us differently and by different means. No one-size-fits-all approach to making disciples exists because we all form spiritually in unique ways. I know people who came to faith through reading St. Augustine’s Confessions. I can’t imagine a more dry path, but then, it’s not entirely about me. My own conversion was quickened in part from an intimate and personal message delivered to a small group followed by time alone. That may work for some but not for others.

My college learning on this topic focused more on how Jesus taught, but even He didn’t use one means. He drew his disciples through miracles, discussion, confrontation, paradox, and friendship. He taught them by stories, Scripture, His example, and through their own personal experiences. He knew each person and reached out to each with what best grew each. And he addressed the failings of each individually such as Peter’s reinstatement and Thomas’ need to see and feel.

I don’t believe most churches take the individual into account. Spiritual growth is seen as a blanket endeavor, with blanket approaches, and blanket goals.

The problem here is that in going for blanket growth, we miss one of the most important aspects of that growth: connecting with each other one-to-one.

It takes time alone with another to find out how he or she ticks. Knowing how best to grow someone means observing that person and adjusting how we work with that individual. Parents do this naturally with their children, yet we forget personal distinctions when we approach making disciples of people outside our own households.

God asks that we individualize the way we make disciples, because in doing so, we build a connection to another life. We are forced to slow down, to observe, and to show genuine care for that one person made not only in the image of God but also made in His uniqueness and depth. It is one reason why Jesus had to go away and send the Spirit, because one person cannot reach everyone at the level needed for maturing growth.

A church with a one-size-fits-all approach to making disciples is likely also a church that doesn’t have time to get to know people. The result? A church with a stunted community. Likewise, if the interpersonal relationships within a church are shallow, the making of disciples will be also.

The individual, with all his or her quirks and distinctions, matters to God. An education and discipleship program that does not take the unique gifts, talents, and needs of each person into account cannot be effective. Such a customized approach is time-consuming and costly, but it’s God’s intention. Our balking at the cost is our failure to see with God’s eyes.

In short, the only way to counteract the anemic nature of Christianity in the West is to prioritize the needs of the one to nurture a many that can truly reach all of the world for Jesus.