Scott's Thoughts
Click title to jump to a section and ^ TOP ^ to return. Or just scroll like a normal person. And apologies for links that make getting back here annoying. We’re annoyed, too, but it’s an app limitation. And yes, Scott once had hair that could be combed.
Thank You to Brady Cone (and FCC Staff)
^ TOP ^
^ TOP ^
Though we were on vacation and I didn’t get to meet Brady, I’ve listened to his presentation at re:gen (which you should do, too!), I think his story and ministry (Calibrate Ministries) are important, he emailed me a nice note (and yes, I (finally) wrote back (just this morning, so as to be able to say I did in this Scott’s Thoughts!) Brady’s story, though filled with years of pain and struggle, is also now one of gospel hope that can be an encouragement for all of us.
So many wrongly assume that a church that stands on God’s Word against the sin of LGBT+ behavior is also against those people. But nothing could be further from the truth. Being clear about sexual sin—whether LGBT+, heterosexual, adultery, pornography, etc.—is tied to clarity about the gospel so that God’s Word will change hearts and minds for His glory and for the good of those same people! This isn’t a squishy ‘third-wayism,’ as many like to believe is possible, but the Christlike fullness of grace and truth (John 1:14) that is the only gospel we have to offer to anyone—whether Scott Wakefield, Brady Cone, you, or your friend or family member struggling with LGBT+ sin!
So bigtime thanks to Brady for “Telling the story” (H7) of God’s work in his life with Longview Ranch staff on Sunday, at re:gen on Monday, and at Pillar Young Adults on Tue. (And thanks to the staffers who teamed up to coordinate all this.) If you want or need to talk about your sexual sin or how to deal lovingly with a friend or family member, please don’t hesitate to reach out to a Staffer or FCCer, or just show up on Monday night at re:gen and we’ll go from there!
So many wrongly assume that a church that stands on God’s Word against the sin of LGBT+ behavior is also against those people. But nothing could be further from the truth. Being clear about sexual sin—whether LGBT+, heterosexual, adultery, pornography, etc.—is tied to clarity about the gospel so that God’s Word will change hearts and minds for His glory and for the good of those same people! This isn’t a squishy ‘third-wayism,’ as many like to believe is possible, but the Christlike fullness of grace and truth (John 1:14) that is the only gospel we have to offer to anyone—whether Scott Wakefield, Brady Cone, you, or your friend or family member struggling with LGBT+ sin!
So bigtime thanks to Brady for “Telling the story” (H7) of God’s work in his life with Longview Ranch staff on Sunday, at re:gen on Monday, and at Pillar Young Adults on Tue. (And thanks to the staffers who teamed up to coordinate all this.) If you want or need to talk about your sexual sin or how to deal lovingly with a friend or family member, please don’t hesitate to reach out to a Staffer or FCCer, or just show up on Monday night at re:gen and we’ll go from there!
Updates & FYIs re Sermon Plans and Footnotes in the Sermon Manuscript
^ TOP ^
^ TOP ^
A few things here, mostly to make you aware. One, here are the basic current and upcoming plans for preaching:
Second, re the manuscript… We have a Staff Maxim around here: you haven’t thought it through until you’ve written it down. This is true in life, but especially in endeavors like preaching, where frankly, it’s easy for many preacher to go awry with half-baked thoughts that maybe shouldn’t be included and, on top of that, to provide cover for unhelpful drivel by calling it “Spirit-led.” (Can I get a witness?!) This is why we require those preaching to write out a manuscript. It helps ensure our preaching is faithful to the Scriptural argument. But this also means that, if you’ve got a question about what was or wasn’t said, or you’re a Life Group Leader, you’ve got help. You can always find the sermon manuscript on the “Sermon Guide” on the app (or at fccgreene.org/sermonguide).
Third, re footnotes… A good sermon must make the argument the text itself is making and not whatever else we think may be related or interesting. Good preaching knows what to leave out as much as what to include because including too much often means communicating too little. This means that there are tons of cool nuggets that, while interesting or even somehow related, may not be helpful to include and that will ultimately detract from, I believe, the spiritual power of God speaking through His Word instead of man speaking through his piques and peculiarities. This doesn’t mean sermons can’t have multiple “points,” but it does mean that they are only helpful if connected to the main argument the text is making. So, for those who may wonder, “But what about this? How come you didn’t cover that? You should’ve referred to this verse!” there are footnotes. While I don’t always get to including as many as I’d like, there’s usually much more there, in the footnotes. It has increasingly become where I put interesting or related info that may not be rhetorically helpful. (And is another reason why manuscripting matters.)
- Jun 22-Sep 28, 2025 – Wks 11-25 of Hebrews: The Supremacy of Christ, Part 2: Our Great High Priest and His Ministry (Hebrews 4:14-10:31) – See fccgreene.org/hebrews for more.
- Oct 5-Nov 15 – 7 Wks of Ruth: From Emptiness to Fullness—God’s Sovereign Hand from Moab to Messiah
- Nov 23-30 – 2 (More) Wks (Wks 24-25) of New City Catechism, Part 2: Christ, Redemption, Grace – See fccgreene.org/ncc for more.
- Dec 7-21 – Wks of Advent 2025: “Behold Your King” (Matthew 1:1-7; 1:18-25; 2:1-12)
- Dec 28 – 1 (More) Wk (Wk 26) of New City Catechism, Part 2: Christ, Redemption, Grace – See fccgreene.org/ncc for more.
- Jan 4, 2026 – One-Off: “The 7 Habits as Ordinary Means of Grace” (Acts 2:42-47; Ephesians 4:11-16; 2 Timothy 3:14-4:5)
- Jan 11-Mar 1 – Finish Wks 26-35 of Hebrews: The Supremacy of Christ, Part 3: Follow and Serve the Pioneer of Our Faith through Endurance and Faith (Hebrews 10:32-13:24) – See fccgreene.org/hebrews for more.
- From here, at this point I’m planning on a short OT book, and then maybe 1 Corinthians?
Second, re the manuscript… We have a Staff Maxim around here: you haven’t thought it through until you’ve written it down. This is true in life, but especially in endeavors like preaching, where frankly, it’s easy for many preacher to go awry with half-baked thoughts that maybe shouldn’t be included and, on top of that, to provide cover for unhelpful drivel by calling it “Spirit-led.” (Can I get a witness?!) This is why we require those preaching to write out a manuscript. It helps ensure our preaching is faithful to the Scriptural argument. But this also means that, if you’ve got a question about what was or wasn’t said, or you’re a Life Group Leader, you’ve got help. You can always find the sermon manuscript on the “Sermon Guide” on the app (or at fccgreene.org/sermonguide).
Third, re footnotes… A good sermon must make the argument the text itself is making and not whatever else we think may be related or interesting. Good preaching knows what to leave out as much as what to include because including too much often means communicating too little. This means that there are tons of cool nuggets that, while interesting or even somehow related, may not be helpful to include and that will ultimately detract from, I believe, the spiritual power of God speaking through His Word instead of man speaking through his piques and peculiarities. This doesn’t mean sermons can’t have multiple “points,” but it does mean that they are only helpful if connected to the main argument the text is making. So, for those who may wonder, “But what about this? How come you didn’t cover that? You should’ve referred to this verse!” there are footnotes. While I don’t always get to including as many as I’d like, there’s usually much more there, in the footnotes. It has increasingly become where I put interesting or related info that may not be rhetorically helpful. (And is another reason why manuscripting matters.)
Update re Great Questions Answered and the Word “Homosexual” in the Bible
^ TOP ^
^ TOP ^
I happened across a post on the socials—which only happens when my wife sends me a link that only opens in said social’s platform, grr!—and it prompted me to edit an old slightly-too-convoluted GQA article for brevity and clarity. The post was about how, in effect, ‘white patriarchal supremacist men began misinterpreting the Bible when they introduced the word homosexual into it in 1946!’ If we remove the identity politics trope, the issue remains and needs a good answer—and there is one. It just takes a little digging and clear thinking. So, here’s the latest version: “Wasn’t The Word ‘Homosexual’ Only Recently Added By Modern Translators Of The Bible And Therefore They Introduced An Improper Bias?” For those who want some of the details, make sure to read the footnotes.
(Btw, and though a mostly unrelated point that isn’t that important, i.e., I’m not remotely as worried as the word below imply…) Speaking of current political tropes, having such articles on our website and socials is why Google, Facebook, YouTube, etc. have consistently degraded our online reach and rankings. (This isn’t conspiracy—we’ve got years of corroborating data.) So if you wouldn’t mind giving us a 5-star rating and a quick one-sentence review on Google Maps, it would help people see our stuff when they search for churches in our area. Basically, without a groundswell like this, we’ll never get beyond the algorithms. (But, again, having poor SEO rankings and no algorithmic control of our social platform is no problem for the Lord to overcome. So just invite your friends and family to church—that’ll more than overcome poor(er than should be) online rankings.)
(Btw, and though a mostly unrelated point that isn’t that important, i.e., I’m not remotely as worried as the word below imply…) Speaking of current political tropes, having such articles on our website and socials is why Google, Facebook, YouTube, etc. have consistently degraded our online reach and rankings. (This isn’t conspiracy—we’ve got years of corroborating data.) So if you wouldn’t mind giving us a 5-star rating and a quick one-sentence review on Google Maps, it would help people see our stuff when they search for churches in our area. Basically, without a groundswell like this, we’ll never get beyond the algorithms. (But, again, having poor SEO rankings and no algorithmic control of our social platform is no problem for the Lord to overcome. So just invite your friends and family to church—that’ll more than overcome poor(er than should be) online rankings.)
Miscellaneous Musings
^ TOP ^
^ TOP ^
Beware the Bible Scholar Dissatisfied with the Simplest Explanation
For your average pastor, I keep pretty decent tabs on the basic whos and whats of academic Bible scholarship. And while there’s a lot more that could be said about navigating that complicated “space” (as the socioculturally well-informed say nowadays), here’s one easy principle that’ll save you a ton of time and discernment energy: beware the Bible scholar who’s consistently unsatisfied with the most straightforward explanation.
More often than not, the best interpretation is the plain one. Occam’s Razor—a principle dating back to 14th-century logician William of Ockham—basically says that, all things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the right one. It’s a call to avoid unnecessary complexity. But in Bible scholarship, it’s often flipped on its head. Some scholars seem addicted to the convoluted, constantly filling gaps with conjectural maybes, obscure reconstructions, and creative hypotheticals that ignore the plain sense of the text or the clear testimony of the church.
Of course, Scripture deserves careful study. But when scholars regularly dismiss the clearest, most faithful interpretation in favor of layered guesswork, that’s not insight—it’s often just overcomplication. The Reformers called it the perspicuity of Scripture for a reason. Clarity is a feature, not a bug.
Using AI With Integrity
I’ve been toying with ChatGPT and a few other AI bots for about six months now—for everything from personal curiosity to vocational tasks. And while it really can do some impressive things, I’ve landed on a simple guiding principle for using it with integrity: treat it like a conversation partner, not an unquestioned authority.
AI can sharpen your thinking—but it shouldn’t do your thinking for you. It can offer insight, generate ideas, or even challenge and clarify one’s own thinking. But it’s still just a tool—one shaped by data, algorithms, and fallible human inputs. Like any tool, it needs to be filtered through wisdom, prayer, and a biblically grounded worldview. Let it help you, sure—but don’t let easy answers from an algorithm replace the deeper, mind-strengthening work of thinking faithfully through the Word.
A Few (Preliminary) Thoughts About (the Slow Process of) Becoming a Fruitful Dad/Husband
I’m still working this out, but here are some preliminary thoughts about the all-too-slow process of becoming—word chosen on purpose—a fruitful dad or husband.
Over the years, after watching and talking to countless men and women at various stages of joy or pain in their marriages and homes, I’ve become convinced that 90% of men are slowly and clumsily trying to learn how to be godly husbands and dads while carrying a few serious disadvantages that are rarely well calculated.
Men, unlike women, don’t bear children, don’t nurture naturally, and don’t receive the same kinds of cultural affirmation for loving well. We live in bodies made to build and protect things and systems, not to carry and nourish life. (<— This one alone is a huge categorical difference not well accounted for in our world.) Add to that a culture that values us only for what we produce—money, sports, status, or fame—and you’ve got a recipe for emotional and relational disconnection. Most of us don’t have emotional intelligence modeled for us by men. We’ve rarely seen healthy family leadership up close. And we’ve received little motivation or reward for slow, steady faithfulness at home. (Yes, of course some of this isn’t a men-only thing—duh. But I’m focusing on men here. It is exceedingly dumb that I feel the need to put this parenthetical comment here, whether because of me or you.)
Even worse? Most men don’t have one real friend they can talk to about this. Moms talk about mom-ing all the time. Dads talking about dad-ing? Almost never.
So while I count my own dad as a wonderfully godly model, most of us are trying to learn from a deficit. It might sound dramatic, but I think it’s more true than we’re willing to admit. Women intuitively grasp a lot of this. Most men? Frankly, we mostly feel lost. And most women assume it’s supposed to be obvious. But for us, it’s not. No one teaches it. It doesn’t come naturally. And we’re often 20 years too late to even start talking about it in meaningful Christian community.
Wives and moms—ask your husband if any of this rings true. You might be surprised by the answer. (And I preemptively offer both an apology and a “You’re welcome” for the convo opportunities I’ve helped cause!)
For your average pastor, I keep pretty decent tabs on the basic whos and whats of academic Bible scholarship. And while there’s a lot more that could be said about navigating that complicated “space” (as the socioculturally well-informed say nowadays), here’s one easy principle that’ll save you a ton of time and discernment energy: beware the Bible scholar who’s consistently unsatisfied with the most straightforward explanation.
More often than not, the best interpretation is the plain one. Occam’s Razor—a principle dating back to 14th-century logician William of Ockham—basically says that, all things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the right one. It’s a call to avoid unnecessary complexity. But in Bible scholarship, it’s often flipped on its head. Some scholars seem addicted to the convoluted, constantly filling gaps with conjectural maybes, obscure reconstructions, and creative hypotheticals that ignore the plain sense of the text or the clear testimony of the church.
Of course, Scripture deserves careful study. But when scholars regularly dismiss the clearest, most faithful interpretation in favor of layered guesswork, that’s not insight—it’s often just overcomplication. The Reformers called it the perspicuity of Scripture for a reason. Clarity is a feature, not a bug.
Using AI With Integrity
I’ve been toying with ChatGPT and a few other AI bots for about six months now—for everything from personal curiosity to vocational tasks. And while it really can do some impressive things, I’ve landed on a simple guiding principle for using it with integrity: treat it like a conversation partner, not an unquestioned authority.
AI can sharpen your thinking—but it shouldn’t do your thinking for you. It can offer insight, generate ideas, or even challenge and clarify one’s own thinking. But it’s still just a tool—one shaped by data, algorithms, and fallible human inputs. Like any tool, it needs to be filtered through wisdom, prayer, and a biblically grounded worldview. Let it help you, sure—but don’t let easy answers from an algorithm replace the deeper, mind-strengthening work of thinking faithfully through the Word.
A Few (Preliminary) Thoughts About (the Slow Process of) Becoming a Fruitful Dad/Husband
I’m still working this out, but here are some preliminary thoughts about the all-too-slow process of becoming—word chosen on purpose—a fruitful dad or husband.
Over the years, after watching and talking to countless men and women at various stages of joy or pain in their marriages and homes, I’ve become convinced that 90% of men are slowly and clumsily trying to learn how to be godly husbands and dads while carrying a few serious disadvantages that are rarely well calculated.
Men, unlike women, don’t bear children, don’t nurture naturally, and don’t receive the same kinds of cultural affirmation for loving well. We live in bodies made to build and protect things and systems, not to carry and nourish life. (<— This one alone is a huge categorical difference not well accounted for in our world.) Add to that a culture that values us only for what we produce—money, sports, status, or fame—and you’ve got a recipe for emotional and relational disconnection. Most of us don’t have emotional intelligence modeled for us by men. We’ve rarely seen healthy family leadership up close. And we’ve received little motivation or reward for slow, steady faithfulness at home. (Yes, of course some of this isn’t a men-only thing—duh. But I’m focusing on men here. It is exceedingly dumb that I feel the need to put this parenthetical comment here, whether because of me or you.)
Even worse? Most men don’t have one real friend they can talk to about this. Moms talk about mom-ing all the time. Dads talking about dad-ing? Almost never.
So while I count my own dad as a wonderfully godly model, most of us are trying to learn from a deficit. It might sound dramatic, but I think it’s more true than we’re willing to admit. Women intuitively grasp a lot of this. Most men? Frankly, we mostly feel lost. And most women assume it’s supposed to be obvious. But for us, it’s not. No one teaches it. It doesn’t come naturally. And we’re often 20 years too late to even start talking about it in meaningful Christian community.
Wives and moms—ask your husband if any of this rings true. You might be surprised by the answer. (And I preemptively offer both an apology and a “You’re welcome” for the convo opportunities I’ve helped cause!)
Posted in Scotts Thoughts