The Cosmic Struggle of Christmas--Born of a Woman

Revelation 12, Luke 1:26-38, Galatians 4:4

Today's sermon enters into the mystery of the Incarnation. To "incarnate" means to give God flesh, it means for God to become human. In the birth of Jesus, our confession is that God became man and dwelt among us (John 1:14).

How this happens is one of the mysteries of the Christian faith. We call it the Virgin Birth, and so it was, but describing how such could occur from a biological perspective is beyond us. With God all things are possible (Luke 1:37).

In the sermon I reference the Calcedonian Creed. Bishops and church leaders and pastors met in the city of Caldedon (in what is present day Turkey) from October 8 to November 1, 451 AD, and continued to hammer out their understanding of what the Bible taught about the person of Christ, specifically around the issues of the incarnation. What was the relationship of the human nature and the divine nature that resided in the one body we call Jesus? It is a tough question. After centuries of Bible study, discussion, debate and discernment, the creed of Calcendon emerged, and it has satisfied most of the church. I say most, because to this day the Coptic Church (Coptic means Egyptian), does not endorse the creed but continues to define the union of the human and divine in Jesus in slightly different ways. Wikipedia has a good entry related to this creed and council.

The sermon also deals with the identity of the woman in Revelation 12. At first read it seem easy enough to say that she is Mary, the mother of Jesus. And that is true and is the position of most Catholic scholars. Revelation 12 goes on to mention that the woman flees to the desert for protection and is keep safe for 1260 days. Matthew tells us that the Holy Family went to Egypt to escape the hatred of Herod and that they remained there until they learned of Herod's death, and then returned to Nazareth where Jesus was raised. The Coptic Church tradition says the Holy Family stayed in Egypt for three and one half years (which is 1260 days). Today, numerous churches in Egypt mark the traditional sites associated  with this event. Read about it here. Though much of this is speculation and tradition, it is fascinating to consider what Mary and Joesph and Jesus experienced during this time period.

The bottom line is that the Incarnation enraged the Devil. Until then, every human being sinned and because they did, Satan laid claim to their lives. Now, in Jesus, a perfect human being emerges, one who would not sin, and thus Satan had no claim on his life. The Devil's powerful grip on humanity was broken. Things would never be the same again. Consequently, Satan makes every attempt possible to destroy Jesus.

In future weeks we will explore more fully the spiritual war that was and is raging around Jesus and our souls.

Thanks for digging deeper.

The Cosmic Struggle of Christmas--The Sign of the Times

Revelation 12:1-17

With this week we begin the Advent Season. Advent is the beginning of the Church Year and marks the four weeks preceding Christmas.

The Bible contains several accounts of the birth of Jesus. We remember the story of Mary and Joseph's journey to Bethlehem when they found no room for lodging and thus spent the night of Jesus' birth in a cattle stall. That account is in Luke 2 and forms the backdrop for the warm and cuddly Christmas Eve moments many of us hold dear. It is a great story.

Another account occurs in Matthew 1 and 2 where sometime after the birth of Jesus, while he and his family were still residing in Bethlehem, a caravan of strange men appear, coming out of the eastern lands of Persia. They are some kind of kings or astronomers or astrologists, priests in a pre-form of Zoroastrianism, and they worship Jesus as the new King of the Jews. Herod, the current King of the Jews, becomes paranoid and seeks to kill this newborn child, as he deems Jesus a threat to his throne. Mary and Joseph, after being warned in a dream about Herod's plan, take Jesus to Egypt for safe keeping, returning to Nazareth only after they learn of Herod's death (which occurred, by the way, in 4 BC).

Matthew's account lacks the warm fuzziness of Luke's and rather contains fear, evil, violence and tragedy. While we often feature the coming of the Magi in our Christmas narratives, we rarely talk about the murder of the innocent children by the tyrant King Herod. It does not make for good bedtime stories.

The Bible contains a third account of the birth of Jesus, though this one is not well known and rarely used during Advent. It occurs in Revelation 12 and will be the focus of our Advent celebrations this year. This account is more of a look at the birth of Jesus from the perspective of the spiritual realm. What was happening in cosmic struggle between good and evil on the night of Jesus' birth, and how did his coming change the spiritual landscape of our lives, especially from the perspective of the struggle between righteousness and evil. Follow this blog and my Advent sermons as we explore these questions.

Here are some sources you might enjoy. First of all, here is a rather good article (sermon) that outlines some interpretive principles necessary to understand the Revelation, and gives good background on the meaning of this part of John's vision. As always, there are a few fine points in the article to which I would take exception, but overall it is solid. It is written from a Protestant Reformed perspective and sees the woman as representing the entire nation of Israel and her children representing the Church. There is much truth in this, and it is the primary way this symbolism is understood by Protestants.

And here is a blog also works at understanding Revelation 12. This one is written by a Catholic writer and understands the woman as the Virgin Mary. There is also truth in this interpretation. Check it out, if you want to dig in deeper.

Thanks for digging deeper with me.

To Follow In His Steps

1 Peter 2:11-25

Sorry I did not post anything related to last week's sermon: The Goal of the Christian Life: Perfection.

Anyway, this week I was taken in a bit by the word "example" in 1 Peter 2:21. The Greek word lying behind our English one is hupogrammos. It literally means "to write beneath" but more practically was the word used to describe what we would call tracing. I was taken back to my early school years when I learned to print letters by tracing them on paper.

To follow Jesus means to trace his life. It means to draw my life over his; to pattern my living along the lines of his life. I found that to be an interesting way of looking at this call.

In the sermon I explore three things Jesus said would mark us as genuine disciples.

One of them is John 8:31-32 where he asks us to practice the things he taught us. This being World Communion Sunday, I naturally thought of the words of institution in the Gospels where Jesus says, "Do this in remembrance of me." Thus we take up the bread and wine of Holy Communion and celebrate his work on our behalf.

But doing what Jesus asked us to do involves more that a bit of bread. I also thought of John 14:12 where he says that those believe would do greater works than he had done. Wow.

This led me to think about what those works are. Naturally, our mind first of all goes to the actual things Jesus did, especially his miracles. But the word "work" here is ergon not semeion (which is John's word for miracle). Remember context, context, context. In the verses surrounding this and especially preceding it, Jesus is responding to Philip's question about how we can know the Father. Herein is the clue to what Jesus meant. He said he is going back to the Father and because he is, we will be able to do the work that he has been doing, which primarily was revealing the true nature of God the Father through his life, work and, yes, miracles.

Because of the work of Jesus, we can know God, intimately and personally, and the better we know him the more clearly we reveal him, and that is the central, most important work ever.

Of course, this got me thinking about miracles which got me thinking about some lofty theological ideas like the current discussion going on in theological circles around what is often called Open Theism (check it on wiki)...which goes way beyond the scope of this sermon.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Come, Follow Me

John 1:1-18

Our congregation, as you may know, has begun a short study on what it means, from our understanding, to follow Jesus. It is a five-week study that is based in our groups. In this sermon, I explore some ideas around what it means to follow Jesus.

I have been captivated recently with the thought of how humbling, amazing and astounding it is that God would invite us into a relationship with himself, and that is what I think it means to follow Jesus. After all, God already has everything he needs, and lives--has lived eternally--in a satisfying relationship of love and mutuality within the realm of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So why does he need me. Well, he doesn't. He doesn't need me, but rather desires me, and that is amazing.

In this sermon I explore just a bit the nature of the trinity and I play around with the word "perichoresis", which was used by the church fathers in an attempt to capture the nature of the relationship between the persons in the Godhead. I say attempt because all human reasoning about this falls short at some level or another. If you are interested, wikipedia has a good article here and another article here that works at the etymology of the word and its use in theology. What I say in the sermon is a very, very shallow introduction.

The four ways I mention that "follow" is often understood, or practiced, in today's world of Christianity are elaborated further in the book With by Sky Jethani (Thomas Nelson, 2011). You likely will be hearing me talk about these concepts more in the future.

You can view the video we used in worship. You may recognize the video from the opening of Contact staring Jodi Foster, and the voice over was inspired, in part, by a paragraph in With (page 100).

Thanks for digging deeper.

Unconditional (Tough) Love

Hosea 1 and 3.

As I was preaching the sermon on Unconditional Love a few weeks ago, I realized that I did not have enough time to elaborate on all the aspects of God's redeeming love for us (not ever, actually). Particularly, I did not have time to talk about God's tough love--how does God love me when I turn my back on him and go astray?

In my previous sermon (which you can link to via the side bar), I mentioned that the story of the Prodigal Son is a great window into how God loves us and waits for us to turn towards him. Likewise, the prophet Hosea is the story of how God loves us when we turn from him, and how God desires to win us back, and how he has paid the price for our redemption. He is ready to buy us back from whatever form of spiritual slavery into which we have sold ourselves. God is amazing.

Well, you need to listen to the sermon to get the detail. What I want to give you hear is some more background stuff. Hosea can be a hard read.

If you are interested in various views concerning how much Hosea knew of Gomer's promiscuity before they married, read this article by a Rabbi.

One of the fascinating things about the Hosea story is the naming of his children. His first son was named Jezreel, as a prophetic word against an atrocity committed years before. God to 2 Kings 9 and 10 (and the latter part of 2 Kings 8) to read about that event. Also, link here to a really good family tree, showing you the relationship of the kings over the northern Kingdom of Israel and their descendants, and that of the southern kingdom of Judah and their descendants. This gives us insight into why Jehu would have killed Ahaziah, king of Judah, in his wild slaughter at Jezreel. (His mother was a daughter of Ahab and sister to Joram [Jehoram on the chart].) The other two children, Lo-Ruhamah and Lo-Ammi, are names that refer to the way in which God would deal with is rebellious people. Listen to the sermon.

Hosea is an amazing story of love and obedience to God, and it is a picture of how God loves us, even when he must discipline us for our sin.

The primary message to the book of that of Redeeming Love, albeit love that takes a really hard edge. It is sometimes difficult for us to see how God's love is seen in the really hard times, but it is there and for a purpose.

Finally, for a rather in-depth review of the kings and prophets with some really helpful charts, link here.

(as is often the case, I do not necessarily agree with or support everything in these links, or other things that might be written by the authors linked to. I think you all understand that.)

Thanks for digging deeper,
Galen

Unconditional Love

Jeremiah 31:1-6; John 3:16-18; Romans 5:6-8 (and a bunch of other verses).

For some reason, the idea that God loves us unconditionally is difficult for some people to affirm. If you google this idea, you will meet with posts that disagree with the concept, usually because they think to love unconditionally means to excuse sin and allow it to go unpunished. (If you are interested in reading a misconstrued article that completely misses the point, which is not helpful for everyone, check this out.)

Herein lies one of my reasons for this sermon: to explore what it means for God to love us unconditionally and then to understand what it means for us to love in the same way.

A. W. Tozer (a Bible teacher of the past century) says in his book, The Knowledge of the Holy, that the most important thing about us is what enters our minds when we think about God. Wow. To think of him rightly, then, is to shape us in a positive way and to think of him wrongly, leads us astray.

So is it correct to think if God as loving us unconditionally? Yes, if we understand what that means. Listen in to the sermon and check out this post. (link to the related topics at the bottom of the page for more good reading).

To say that God's love is unconditional is not to say he tolerates sin and will wink at sin's consequences. Rather, to believe God loves us unconditionally means that He loves us first and that his love for us continues, even after we fail him and that, even when he is rightfully angry with us, he still loves us, and even when we reject him and continue on a path of destruction, he still loves us and desires our return to him, and that even as we are dying and obviously headed for Hell (if we have persisted in our rejection of God) he loves us and grieves over us, and that even while people writhe in the pain of eternal punishment forever and ever, God still loves them.

Why does God love like this? Well, because he is God and because he created us. He is our Father and as such desires to live in a relationship with us. He is the ultimate loving father who never gives up.

You might want to meditate on this song and on the image of the loving father, waiting for his erring son to return home in Luke 15:11-20.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Baptized Into Jesus

John 15:1-17
1 Corinthians 12:13 and Galatians 3:26-28

Baptism has a jaded history. During certain eras of the Christian Church, passionate defenders of various aspects of baptism engaged in hot debates about water baptism's form and meaning. Church split over the issues and whole movements began. The  Church of the Brethren was birthed in the waters of baptism as our forbears broke with the tradition of their church and violated the law of the land, by entering the water of baptism as adults and administering baptism to each other. Through this act brought them persecution, they preserved.

So baptism is important. But how important? In other sermons over the years I have worked at the relationship of water baptism to salvation. (Water baptism does not save us, but constitutes an act of obedience to the teachings of Jesus and thus is important in our journey. Every act of obedience opens us up to more fully experiences with our risen Lord.) I have also preached about the method of baptism. (Biblically speaking, all we can say is that it involves water and is applied to people who have made a decision to follow Jesus. There are good reasons why we use the mode of trine immersion, but it is not the only mode nor is it biblically mandated.)

In this sermon I desire to look more closely at the spiritual dimension of baptism--what it means to be baptized into Jesus.

The key verse is 1 Cor 12:13 and though I do not say much about it in the sermon, the big debate over the years with this verse is with the meaning of Baptized by one Spirit. Is Spirit baptism something separate from water baptism and something different from conversion. Classic Pentecostal teaching saw the Baptism of the Spirit as an experience one received subsequent to salvation which opened a person up to the fullness of the Holy Spirit and the distribution of his gifts in one's life. In this theology, speaking in tongues was the sign that you had experienced this blessing.

In more recent years, the Pentecostal movement has come closer to the more central evangelical idea that Spirit Baptism, especially as it is expressed in 1 Cor 12:13 is more likely one way of understanding what happens to us when we get saved. At conversion the Holy Spirit places us in Christ. Now for sure, as we live out our faith in Christ, there will be subsequent experiences with the Holy Spirit and we will grow into an ever deepening experience with him and his gifts and may be given the gift of tongues. However, the sign of being spirit filled is not to be seen in the participation in any particular gift, but in the fruit of character development (Galatians 5:22ff).

So much for that. The sermon opens up for us questions about what it means to be in Christ. I suggest that we should view our baptism as a mark that we carry throughout life that identifies us as belonging to Jesus. The problem is that our baptism sort of wears off--that is, after we dry off from being baptized we no longer look any different.The only way we can appear different is in the manner of our living.

We might ask ourselves--how can people tell that I have been baptized? Good thoughts to ponder.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Keeping Sabbath

Mark 2:23 - 3:6

Wow, apologies to all my blog followers for this very late posting. I had computer issues during the week, getting all my stuff transferred over to a new system, and thus was not as connected as usual.

In this sermon I address two questions I am often asked about the Sabbath--which is the right day and what is appropriate for me to do on the Sabbath.

In the sermon I make a big deal over the fact that as Christians, we do not really celebrate the Sabbath, since  that is an Old Testament concept which is rooted in the Law and set for the seventh day of the week. Rather, we celebrate the Lord's Day. We keep the principle of a sabbath, but we do it on a specific day, in honor of the Resurrection of Jesus.

Sometimes Sabbatarians (those who insist that the Christian Sabbath must be observed on Saturday) try to make a point that it was not until Constantine, the Roman Emperor, converted to Christianity that the church began to worship on Sunday. That is not the case, as this article shows.

Actually, except for the fact that we want to honor the Resurrection of Jesus--the event that changed the world--it does not really matter what day we set aside for sabbath. Paul was clear that we should not get hung up on special days. See Galatians 4:8-10. There are millions of people who cannot take Sunday as their day of worship and rest, at least not every week--medical personnel and caregivers, pastors, air traffic controllers, first responders, etc. But take a day we must, for God order our bodies to function in this way, and we need sabbath to worship, refresh and rejuvenate.

In the sermon I speak a bit to the principles that I understand to govern the Christian sabbath. If you have not heard it, give it a listen (linked from the side of this page).

Thanks for digging deeper.

Not About Us

Though I was not preaching last week due to attending our Annual Conference, I was still writing. Here is an article I wrote for the pastor's column in the Ephrata Review, our local weekly newspaper. It was published in this week's edition (July 11, 2012).


The apparent shrinking of our world defines one of the great developments in this age in which we live. Just a bit over 20 years ago my family and I moved to Africa to serve the church there. Our means of communication consisted of letters that took anywhere from a month to a half year to reach home or a telephone located several hours away that worked intermittently. Now I can pick up my cell phone and call my friends there as easily as I call across the street. Colleagues that served a generation before me tell of long journeys lasting many months to reach their destination, while my family and I flew to Nigeria in a matter of hours. And now Facebook, Skype and other technologies enable us to have face to face conversations with loved ones living half a world away. Clearly things have changed.

And yet, with all this technology that links our world, we are lonelier than ever. We cast about seeking meaning and purpose. Many of us aimlessly wander through life, searching for an elusive happiness in the things we can accumulate or the activities in which engage. We are told that life is all about us, that finding the right partner, landing the right job, making a big enough salary or acquiring notoriety, will bring us the inner worth we crave. But it never works. As we sit by ourselves in the twilight of evening, we find ourselves asking, “Is this all there is?”

A wise sage once said, “If you want to find your life, you first have to lose it,”(Matt. 10:39) and another ancient voice says, “You are not your own; you have been bought with a high price” (1 Cor. 6:19). The root of our desperation stems from an error in our thinking. It is a fundamental mistake. One that all of us make, initially, and, even after realizing it, from time to time. It is the human condition. The mistake is the belief that life is all about us. It is not, and to think it is marks the gravest error anyone can make. To assume life is about us sets us on a self-centered quest for which there is no satisfaction. Rather, we are not our own; we were made for something else. Until we lose ourselves in the “else” we will strive endlessly to find rest from our labor.

What is the “else?” The “Else” we really seek is our Creator. He made us with intention. Though we rebel against him, he buys us back by his grace and seeks to call us to a place where we fulfill the purpose for which He created us. And when we do—when we lose our lives in His purpose—we find the abundant life, a life so full we need nothing else.

So what is life about if it is not about me? Well, simply put, life is about God. It is about bringing God honor and praise and glory in all I am and all I do. Life is about honoring God in my home; not about having my needs met. Life is about honoring God through my job as I provide a service to my community; not about acquiring wealth to spend on myself. Life is about honoring God in my relationships, as I learn to be gracious and righteous and kind and devoted.

Life is not about you or me. After all, we did not choose to be here. Life, the abundant life, is found in knowing our Creator and enjoying a life-long relationship with Him through the gift of life received through faith in his Son, the Lord Jesus.

The Church: Who we need to be

Matthew 13:1-9, 18-23

This sermon is a follow up the last week's sermon, "The Church: what it was, is and is becoming.

About a year ago I had the privilege of hearing Dallas Willard speak in person. Dallas is one of the key Christian leaders today. He is a professor of Philosophy at the University of Southern California who has also specialized in the the area of Christian spiritual formation. Read whatever you of what he wrote, and if you ever get a chance to hear him speak, do it. Here is his website.

Anyway, that day Dallas was talking about the human soul and he defined it as "that part of us that integrates all other parts." (He explores this some in his book, Renovation of the Heart). I was fascinated by this and discussed it with him a bit, and have been thinking it through ever since. I also mention in my sermon that Paul Grout has been saying that "our current manner of living is destroying our soul." So if our soul's are being destroyed by contemporary life, then we are losing our ability to integrate life--we are becoming more animal-like and less human. It is no wonder that human nature is degenerating, which is the fulfillment of one of the three prophecies I discuss in the sermon.

Pollster George Barna discusses what he believes are "four common barriers to transformation, including lack of commitment, unwillingness to fully repent, confusing activity for growth, and failure to engage in genuine, accountable community." Read it here.

If you google around the statistics related to Christian faith in the USA, you find a lot of interesting stuff. One fact is that those who self-identity as Christian are decreasing by 1% a year, and this while the population is increasing each year, meaning that there are less of us, by percentage of our society, each year. This is one reason our influence is waning. Despite the prevalence of mega-churches (more now than ever, and larger ones each year), there is no county in the USA where the percentage of Christians has grown.

Without a major spiritual revival, this will not change. The purpose of these two sermons was to help us understand what is happening, but to also left up what God is doing in the midst of it. During the era when Christendom reigned, the church got all entangled with the culture and the world and the government. It brought power, but power often corrupts. God is not taking us to a place where we have the opportunity to reexamine what we are, what we seek, and what we are called to. It is a good thing.

All this leads me to seek out from God, what this means for me and for the congregation I serve. Status quo no longer makes it. Being busy doing good things, no longer accomplishes much, if it ever did. Society is redefining normal; we need to "understand" (listen to the sermon), what God deems normal, and commit to it.

Do not fear. Rather, seek Jesus and the spiritual transformation only He can provide, and you will be fine in this post-modern, pre-Christian era. You will be fine, but you will be weird (in the world's eyes) and you will not remain the same. You will be God's person.

Thanks for digging deeper.

The Church: what it was, is and is becoming

Matthew 16:13-20; 13:31-32

Sorry of the delay in posting these notes.

This is a sermon I have been wanting to preach for sometime. The effect of post-modernity on our society has been studied from many perspectives and the impact on the church has been written about by many people with more specialized training in sociological stuff than I have. However, I am living it. Having been raised in the church and now having provided almost 40 years of leadership, has given me some perspective that I would not have otherwise. Also, having worked with the church in a non-western culture for a season has been extremely beneficial on a number of levels.

Anyway, these are extremely stressful times for churches and church leaders. But my gut tells me it is good. As society falls apart around us, we are forced to return to our roots, which is Jesus and his teaching, and to be more focused, more radical, more clear and more intentional about who we are and what we are called to be. It is no longer enough for a church to simply be busy running programs--we must be focused on personal transformation so that we become strong in our faith to with stand the forces being imposed on us by an increasingly hostile world. Actually, churches that are busy with program that is not transformational in nature, will find themselves in worse shape, in my opinion, than those which don't do anything.

Maybe the most important point I make in the sermon is this: We do not go to church; we are the church!

In the sermon I quote Sky Jethani, who is an editor for Leadership Journal, a premier publication for church leaders. I am currently reading his book The Divine Commodity and With. I commend them both to you. The first discusses the impact of our current consumer culture on our lives, faith and church. The second explains why we changed our mission statement from Living for Jesus so others may know him to Living with Jesus so others may know him. I wish I had With back when we changed the slogan--it is a great read which also looks at what is wrong with the way we think about God and our faith today.

Next week's sermon will continue with this topic, with a closer look at what all this means for us as followers of Jesus.

Thanks for digging deeper.

What is that in your hand?

Exodus 4-1-5 (all of chapters 3 and 4).

I have always wanted to preach on this passage, but never have. As I considered what to share on this Sunday when we honor those graduating from various schools, I was led again to this text. I think for a number of reasons.

This is a great moment in the life of Moses. He's standing, as it were, at a crossroad in his life. Of course, right in front of him is the burning bush, and God is speaking to him from the midst of it. He could turn away, or he could stay. He chose to stay and hear God out.

God had a great task for Moses--go to the most powerful ruler on planet earth and tell him to let God's people go free. (Remember, the Israelites were providing untold hours of free labor for the Pharaoh.) It is no wonder that Moses had some excuses. The dialog between Moses and God, though somewhat anthropomorphic, shows  God's extreme patience with us, his willingness to provide for our fears, and his awesome power which takes what little we have to offer and empowers that with his power.

And that is the message I hope to convey in this sermon.

Sort of related to this sermon, but not really, is the question of the location of Mount Sinai, where Moses first encountered the burning bush and later came with the Israelites and received the 10 Commandments. The traditional site is in the southern section of the Sinai Peninsula. If you are interested, here is a site that reviews the info, and another one that argues for a different location. I also like this Rabbi's conclusion.

Thanks for digging deeper.
(By the way, I will be on vacation the next to Sundays.)

Choosing Where to be Planted

Psalm 1

I'm back after two weeks off from preaching (one week to attend our newest grandson's dedication and another to speak at the 100th anniversary celebration of a church I previously served as pastor).

Thanks for hanging in there. And its Memorial Day weekend, so many people are away for the weekend.

Anyway, I felt led to speak on Psalm 1, for several reasons which I mention in the sermon.

For background, it would be good to review some of the basic characteristics of Wisdom Literature, as it appears in the Bible. Here are two web sites that give good, general background. one two

The psalm uses images from the ancient agricultural practice of harvesting grain. You may be more or less familiar with the steps of harvesting and winnowing, depending on your background. Here is a good video that summarizes the process, as it would have been done in biblical times, and is still done today in many parts of the developing world.

In the sermon I state that we can each choose where to be planted; or we can choose to live among the godly or the ungodly. I mention that that choice is up to us to make; it is not chosen for us. The out come of this choice is predetermined and predestined, but the choice is not. Some readers may react to that statement, believing that sovereignty and predestination extend to the choice itself and are not limited to the outcomes of our choices. You may be right, however after years of contemplation on these topics, and the study of Scripture, I have rather made peace with this idea.

I think God has granted us fee will while, naturally, knowing full well the choices we will make. But knowing them and controlling them are two different things. If I offer you a million dollars, no strings attached, I know up front what choice you will make. You will take it. But I am not controlling your choice; you could reject the gift. If a human can make such a judgment on something so simple, why can't God know all things on all topics in advance, without even blinking an eye. I believe he can and he does.

However, the outcomes of choices we make are predetermined. If I choose to live in disregard of God and his ways, I am headed for a life of sadness that leads to judgment and a future alienated from God. No one can change that. Only by making a different choice in life, can I change the outcome.

People who choose well, live well and die well. This being Memorial Day weekend, let's honor those who have modeled the good life for us.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Nehemiah: Walking in the Fear of God

Nehemiah 5:1-13

This is the last sermon in this short series on Nehemiah. I finished it feeling like we could have just kept going.

As I developed this message, I was led to focus, at least in the last half, on the way in which we see Satan attacking the work of God in the book of Nehemiah, and how those tactics are still used today. If you missed the sermon, you will need to listen to it to catch all of that.

By stopping the series at this point in Nehemiah (basically through chapter 6), we miss the great celebration that ensured when the wall was completed. You can read that celebration in chapter 12:27-47. It is said that the "rejoicing in Jerusalem could be heard far away" (12:43).

In the sermon I spent some time talking about the heavy taxes people had to pay to the Persian government, which levied a huge burden on the individual families, especially considering there was a general famine going on and that most of their time was taken up working on the wall. What bears mention in all this, and which I did not take time to mention in the sermon, is the posture Nehemiah took as the Governor. As a Persian King appoint ruler, he could have demanded a tax from the people, but he did not, and he could have lived very well off the allotted rations that were his right as the Governor. Rather than indulge in all this for himself, he used it to feed 150 people a day at his table, as well as other visitors. He did not claim any land and he did not add to the burden of the people. What a man. Read 5:14-19 for this information.

Finally, I came across another great resource on the Book of Nehemiah in the course of this study. It is a book called Jerusalem in the time of Nehemiah by Leen and Kathleen Ritmeyer. Leen is a well-known archaeologist who has worked on any number of digs around Jerusalem. The book is not large, but is filled with color maps and reconstructions that really help you visualize what the city was like in Nehemiah's time. I got my copy through Christianbook.com. Amazon has it too.

Thanks for digging deeper

Nehemiah: Prayer, the Fabric of Our Lives

Nehemiah 4:1-9

Just by way of reminder, from Sunday's sermon, the book of Nehemiah is divided into three major parts:

Nehemiah’s memoirs (written in 1st person) – Chps 1 - 7
Ezra’s continued reforms (written in 3rd person) – Chps 8 - 12:31
Nehemiah’s memoirs (written in 1st person) – Chaps 12:31 - 13

The two 1st person sections are peppered with the prayers of Nehemiah, both planned and spontaneous in nature. A study of them is an excellent devotional exercise, from which one can learn much.

Section I records 7 prayers   (1:4-11; 2:4; 4:4-5; 4:9; 5:19; 6:9; 6:14)

Section II records 4 prayers  (13:14; 13:22; 13:29; 13:31)

There is much we can learn from Nehemiah's prayer life, and that is the focus of the sermon, so I will not repeat it here. I do want to develop a bit more what I just introduce in the sermon, related to the prayers of Nehemiah which seem harsh or vindictive in nature. These prayers occur in response to the opposition Nehemiah had been experiencing.

There is one particularly sharp prayer in the book (4:4-5) and two that tend toward being imprecatory in nature (6:14 and 13:29). These prayers join with other passages in which biblical characters express, often in prayer, ill wishes upon their enemies. The most famous of these passages are a number of psalms that include imprecations. One that might fit well here is Psalm 137, which was written by Jewish exiles living in Babylon and remembering the fall of Jerusalem. Take a moment to read the psalm, especially verses 7-9.

In regard to Nehemiah's prayer against his enemies, we must remember, as I stated briefly in my sermon, that Nehemiah is guarding the work of God against those who would seek to stop it. He is not concerned for his own work or his own reputation, but he is very passionate that God be honored and that His work be done. He knows that those who oppose the building of the wall, are opposing God and that is a very serious thing.

Nehemiah never takes things into his own hands. He wants retribution for the evil done to his workers but he does not seek that himself. He knows the Bible in which God clearly says that vengeance is not ours to take (Leviticus 19:18, Deuteronomy 32:35, and repeated in Romans 12:19). But even though he does not act upon his feelings, he does have feelings, as we all do. But rather than suppress those feeling and much better than acting on them, Nehemiah offers them up to God in prayer.

Prayers like these and Psalms and other passages that include this kind of expression help us see that biblical characters are human and real. They were just like us. And they show us a godly way to process our feelings. If you are interested in reading more on this topic, click here for a good article.

As I was working through this my mind went to a often misinterpreted passage of scripture--Matthew 25:31-46. In this parable of the Sheep and the Goats, at the end of the age the nations are judged based upon how they had responded to the "lest of these brothers and sisters of mine" (or the "least of these my brethren" in older translations). We often assume that the "least of these" are people in need (the hungry, naked and imprisoned, as the parable states). Therefore, the parable becomes an encouragement for the church to reach out and care for the needy of the world. This is, of course, something the church ought to do, however it is not what this passage teaches.

The key to understanding this passage lies in how Matthew uses the phrase "my brethren" (or however translations render it). Whom does he have in mind when he uses this phrase? It is clear from Matthew 12:48-49 and 28:12, that for Matthew, "my brethren" are those who believe in Jesus and follow him. So what Jesus is saying in Matthew 25:31-46 is that in the end, Nations (and individuals) will be judged according how they treated the Christian community in their land and communities. This is something significant to ponder.

How does it relate to Nehemiah--simply like this. Sanballat and Tobiah and others who opposed Nehemiah, were actually opposing God and they will be held accountable for how they have treated the people of God. Nehemiah knew this and offered up his prayers to God, seeking God's honor and allowing retribution to rest in the hands of God. I for one would not want to be Sanballat or Tobiah on judgment day.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Nehemiah: Everybody on the Wall

Nehemiah, chapter 2

To all my blogger friends--sorry for the delay in getting this post up. What can I say--not lazy, just busy.

Anyway, I wanted to share a bit more about Nehemiah's Jerusalem. In chapter two of Nehemiah we have a brief account of Nehemiah's night-time examination of the condition of the walls around Jerusalem and then chapter three gives a very detailed account of the teams that were rebuilding the wall, and what sections they were working on. This is the best biblical description (and non-biblical, for that matter) of the Jerusalem of the post-exile period and it is rather intriguing. It leaves us and scholars trying to picture what Nehemiah's Jerusalem was like, particularly, how big was it--where did the walls actually run. A lot is still up in the air. But here are some maps and diagrams that help us picture what it might have been like.

First of all, we might ask what was the size of Jerusalem just before it was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC? In the diagram below, notice the area called "City of David" just below the rectangular Temple Mount. That was the city when David took it from the Jebusites (2 Samuel 5). He quickly moved the Ark of the Covenant there (2 Sam. 6:15) and began to make plans to eventually build a permanent temple (2 Sam 7, 1 Chronicles 22), but was forbidden by God to do so (2 Sam. 7). The task of temple building would be left for his son, Solomon. However, David began assembling material and eventually purchased the threshing floor of Araunah (2 Sam. 24:16 and 1 Chron. 21:15), which was the high ground north of the City of David, which became the Temple area and today is the Temple Mount.

This area (City of David and Temple Mount) seems to have remained the walled in city of Jerusalem for some time.Solomon expanded the walls to include his palace (which lay between the City of David and the high ground on which the Temple was built (1 Kings 3:1), but it does not seem that he extended the walls West, though no doubt some people were living there outside the walls of the old city.

We know that with the fall of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BC, there was an influx of people into Jerusalem from the North. This was during the reign of Hezekiah, and he extended the walls (2 Chron. 32:5) to include the Western Hill (the black lines on the map above).

By the way, the faded lines on the above map show the line of the current walls of Jerusalem, built by Suleiman the Turk in the 1500's.

And finally, the red line in the above map marks an additional expansion, perhaps under Hezekiah's son, Manasseh (2 Chron.33:14) or during the reign of Josiah (2 Kings 22:14, 2 Chron. 34:22), for this is the first time we read of the "New Quarter."

So on the map above, the City of David and Temple Mount walls, along with the black line of Hezekiah and the red line of later additions, comprised Jerusalem before it was destroyed in 586 BC.

But how much of that did Nehemiah rebuild. There are two views held by scholars, neither of which can be proven with any certainty. Here they are in map form. The first is the view that assumes a smaller (shorter) wall. (Note the current city walls which are not shaded and given for comparison.)

However, the other view point would suggest a larger city. Here is another map assuming longer walls.

Which is correct--don't know, but I would expect the smaller (shorter) of the two. Remember, the task was finished in 52 days.

I like this image, which is built on the shorter wall viewpoint. Link here Nehemiah's Jerusalem.

So much for the history lesson. As important as that is, it is the spiritual lessons we are really trying to learn, which I tried to lift up in the sermon for this week. if you did not hear it on Sunday, give it a listen via the link on the side of the blog.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Nehemiah: Broken over Brokenness

Nehemiah 1:1 - 2:5

This sermon begins a short four-sermon series drawn from the life and experience of Nehemiah. To get the most from this series, you would benefit from digging into the history of the post-exile period of biblical history. Reading Ezra will add information that precedes that which is recorded in Nehemiah, and then reading the three last prophetic books in the Bible (Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi) will add insight since these three prophets spoke their messages during this time period. I will have only limited time to deal with this history part of things in the sermons themselves, not to mention, it would bore most people.

As we may remember, the Jewish nation of Judah had fallen to the Babylonians and Jerusalem, along with Solomon's Temple, was finally destroyed in 586 BC with many of the leading Israelites taken captive back to Babylon to live. Jeremiah and others had prophecies that this captivity would last 70 years. During those years, the Jews taken to Babylon adjusted to their new life there and for the most part fared rather well. The books of Esther and Daniel record events related to the Jews living in the Babylonian, and later, Persian empires. Back in Jerusalem, the Jews who were not taken to Babylon as captives, settled into life there, many being assimilated in the larger culture. We meet up with these in Ezra-Nehemiah, mostly around the difficulty of inter-marriage.

In 539 BC, the Persians, under the leadership of Cyrus the Great, defeated the nation of Babylon. Almost immediately, Cyrus issued a decree allowing deported peoples to return to their homelands and encouraging them to rebuild the cities there, and specifically, the temples to their various Gods. Some Jews took him up on his offer and returned to Jerusalem. Ezra-Nehemiah record these Aliyahs (this is what Jews call returns to the Holy Land, even today). The first return in 538 was led by Zerubabbel and Jeshua with the aim of rebuilding the Temple, which was completed in 516 BC. The next return was led by Ezra in 458 with a goal at bringing spiritual reform and the third major return was led by Nehemiah in 444 BC with an aim at rebuilding the walls around Jerusalem. In all, over 50,000 Jews returned from their deportation.

This sermons series will be drawing from experiences during this time of wall building.

I discovered one thing of interest while rereading some of the history of this period. It relates to the purpose lying behind Cyrus' benevolent degree to allow peoples, not only Jews, to return to their lands and rebuild their cities and temples. In 1879 archaeologists working in ancient Babylon found a clay cylinder which has written on it an account of Cyrus' defeat of Babylon and the decree which he issued. Wikipedia has a good article about the Cyrus Cylinder. You can read a translation of the full text of the cylinder here. Scroll down to frames 34, 35 and 36. This is what I found to be very interesting regarding the motive of Cyrus. It seems he was being true to his pagan beliefs in many Gods. If he could do something nice for the gods of the nations around him, then maybe they would do something nice for him.

Doesn't sound much different from the bartering we do with God in his "modern" age!

Thanks for digging deeper.

Friends, have you no Fish?

John 21:1-14

Happy Easter Everyone!

This is the last sermon in the "Jesus, Friend of Sinners" series that I have used through Lent, and thus this is the last "friend" passage in the Gospels. In this case, the account occurs along the shore of the Sea of Galilee one morning after the Resurrection. It's an amazing story that is full of meaning, and is rather tightly connected to the passages that follow it which close the Gospel of John.

In the sermon I mention briefly the discovery of a first century fishing boat near Kibbutz Ginosar in 1986. Not only was this an amazing discovery that confirmed pieces of information from the Gospels, but the recovery and preservation of the boat is an equally amazing story. Here is the official site for the "Jesus Boat" as it is called (understand, though, that no one is claiming that this is actually a boat Jesus used, just that it is typical of one he would have used). This site contains tons of information, photos and videos, that will give you the whole story. (Here is  another site of a more commercial nature that has some good information, along with a lot of junk to sell you.) If you are interested in the "boat mosaic" I also mention in the sermon, found at Migdal (same place as Magdal, the home of Mary Magdalene). More info on the mosaic is here and the interpretation by Ronny Reich can be read here. I know, too much information.

I first saw this boat in 1989 while it was soaking in a vat of chemicals where it lay for nearly a decade. Now it is on display in a really nice museum at the Kibbutz. It is a must see while visiting the Holy Land and I try to stop here every tour I lead.

I also mention in the sermon the link of this account at the end of the ministry of Jesus to the one in Luke 5:1-11 in which Jesus first called these disciples to follow him. These are, of course, two different accounts happening at polar ends of the time the disciples spent with Jesus. But they are related. How quickly Peter and the others reverted to their "normal" way of life after the Resurrection is scary. They were called to something greater and seemed not to have a clue as to what it was.

In this manner, it seems that the account in John 21 also has some metaphoric value in suggesting just what the disciples were called to do--they were to fish for men. Here is where some wild, though interesting, interpretations of the number of fish caught comes into the picture. Why mention 153 fish--specifically and exactly? Some have said that 153 was the exact number of different kinds of fish that were to be found in the Sea of Galilee. Another interpretation says that this was the number of nations existing in the world at the time. Either way, the number represented that no one should should be excluded from the Gospel and that Jesus had (or was about to) commissioned his disciples to go into all the world. Nice interpretations and the point is true enough, though there is no historical support for these interpretations of the exact number.

More likely the exact number is there because having never caught a net full like this before, the disciples simply counted how many there were (as I would have done) and the number found its way into the account, which is another marker of its authenticity.

Either way, as my sermon suggests, Jesus calls all of us to cast our nets on the right side. He calls all of us to another way of living, which is marked by his life and teaching.

Blessed Easter to you all,
and thanks for digging deeper.

Friend, do what you came for.

Matthew 26:14-16; 47-56

This sermon focuses on the relationship between Judas and Jesus, and how it is that Jesus could call him friend.

In the sermon, I ask, but do not answer, the question as to why Judas did what he did, and whether or not he had any choice on the matter. The account of Judas raises these questions, and even more (questions related to suicide and repentance and eternal security). I do not intend to address all of these, but here are a few thoughts.

First of all, in regard to the eternal destiny of Judas, Jesus was rather clear in John 17:12, that he was lost. But since Judas was fulfilling a prophecy of scripture (John 13:18 and Psalm 41:9), some have wondered if he had any choice in the matter, and if not, what justice there was in God condemning him.

From the actions of Jesus toward Judas, from his calling him friend (albeit not philos--see sermon power point), to his placing Judas next to him at the Last Supper, to his reaching out his hand to dip the sop with him, Jesus seems to hold out grace and love to Judas, right up to the end. Was this the offer of repentance? If Judas would have changed his mind, could have God fulfilled the prophecy in some other way? Of course, this is all meaningless speculation, since what happened, happened, and there is no going back to change it.

In regard to the question related to Judas' choice in the matter, there are two biblical principles that come to bear. One is that there was destiny involved in this. There was a prophecy that had to be fulfilled. This was going to happen. Nothing could change it.

In respect to Judas specifically, along with teaching the sovereignty of God (Ehp. 1:3-14), the Bible also teaches the free will of humans to make real choices that impact their destiny (Revelation 22:17). These two truths occur side by side in the Bible, and create, for the human mind, an insurmountable obstacle. How can God know the actions of everyone in advance and yet allow each of us to make our own choice? I do not know how that can be, but then, I am not God.

It seems clear enough to me that in the realm of possibilities, naturally Judas, being a free moral agent, could have chosen another path for his life. But he did not, so in reality the question is mute. He made his choice and it played out toward certain consequences, as all of our choices do.

Why did Judas do it?
There has been a lot of speculation around this question. My guess is that it was not because Judas hated Jesus. A clue to motive might be found in Judas' remorse after the fact (Matt 27:1-10). Here is the way I work it out. The disciples were still thinking that Jesus came to overthrow the Romans and to again establish an earthly kingdom ruled by the Jews themselves (Acts 1:6-7). As the events of Holy Week worn on, it was obvious this was not happening. Jesus seemed uninterested in any kind of rebellion against Rome. Judas grew impatient and pondered how he might force Jesus to act. So he concocted a plan. He would betray Jesus to the Priests, who were plotting to kill him, and when He was arrested, certainly then Jesus would react and rise up with all his power and usher in his kingdom. After his arrest, when Jesus allowed himself to be condemned to death, Judas realized his plan went horribly wrong, and in despair committed suicide. (This view is held by a number of Bible scholars.)

On the question of suicide, the Bible nowhere teaches that to commit suicide automatically destines one to Hell. Let's leave it at that for now.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Our Friend Lazarus has died

John 11:1-44

The Gospel of John is about signs, and of course, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. I point out in this sermon that the Gospel of John is often divided into two primary sections. First, up through chapter 11 is the Book of Signs and then from chapter 12 on is the Book of the Passion of Jesus. This is an oversimplification in many ways, but still helpful. For example, there is another miracle of Jesus in John 21 and of course the resurrection of Jesus is the most central miracle of all. However, John 21 is obviously a kind of epilogue, balancing the prologue of John 1, and the resurrection of Jesus is of a nature very different from the miracles Jesus preformed on others.

The first chapters record seven miracles that Jesus did, which John calls signs. Signs point to something, and for John, the miracles of Jesus point to His glory. (Link to the sermon power point for more info.) I've always had trouble defining "glory." In the sermon I say that glory is "brightness, splendor, honor and essence." These are the central ideas given by any Greek lexicon. The idea is that the miracles Jesus preforms, at least in the way John is looking at them, reveal something about the splendor and honor and glory of Jesus. In his first chapter, as he is introducing Jesus, John says, "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." (John 1:14)

So each miracle is a window into the true essence of Jesus. Each one points to some truth about his real nature and purpose. Take the time, if you will, to look at each of these seven miracles and ask, "What does this sign teach me about Jesus?" As you seek the meaning of the miracle, pay attention to the context, especially the conversation and teaching that happens as a result of the sign. In the sermon, I mention briefly the relationship of the sign in John 2 and the conversation with Nicodemus in John 3. Here are John's seven signs:
Water to wine, John 2:1-11
Healing the son of a nobleman, John 4:46-50
Healing a lame person by the pool of Bethesda, John 5:1-17
Feeding the multitudes, John 6:1-13
Calming the storm (and walking on water), John 6:13-21
Open the eyes of one born blind, John 9:1-41
Raising Lazarus from the dead, John 11:1-44

After you do this exercise, you might google the seven signs of the Gospel of John and see how others have viewed these miracles. Bible students find different things (not that every one is always right!) and hearing from each other can be a good thing.

Another key to understanding these two primary sections of John can be seen in the use of the word "hour." In the first section, Jesus tries to avoid attention and escapes harm, because his hour had not yet come (see 2:4; 7:20; 8:20). However, in chapter 12, things change and Jesus says his "hour has come" (see also 13:1 and 17:1). The "hour" no doubt is the time for his crucifixion, his passion as we call it, and the latter part of John is all about Jesus preparing his followers for his departure, and then the crucifixion and resurrection, and then Jesus' appearances afterward, leading up to his ascension.

John is a wonderful telling of the life of Jesus and a great piece of finely crafted literature. Study it and you will not be disappointed.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Friends, Do Not Be Afraid

Luke 12:1-12

There are two things I would like to do in this blog. One is to share a personal account of my own struggle with the "yeast of hypocrisy" and the other is to give more background to the Valley of Ben Hinnom and the idol worship of Molek.

First my story. In the sermon I talk about how the fear of what others will say or think about us is the driving force behind hypocrisy. As a young preacher just starting out in church leadership (and I was young, being 19 when I was called to the ministry, 20 when I was licensed and 23 when ordained), I had my own struggle with fear. Ashamedly, I was overly concerned with how people would view me and it impacted how I preached and dressed and lived. I remember one dream I had sometime into my early ministry years. I dreamed that I had made a commitment to be true to the Word of God no matter what others thought. As I recall, I had been reading the journals of Jonathan Edwards, Puritan reformer in New England, in which he talked about his list of life resolutions. The first one was: Resolved to live for Jesus no matter how hard it gets (my paraphrase. Read his list here.) Anyway, in my dream I made this commitment (which was not just a dream, because I had recently responded to an invitation at a crusade and made this very commitment), and as a result, in my dream I saw all my friends walking away from me, and I was all alone.

I woke up a bit shaken. Over the next years as I both matured spiritually and in my own personality (I was a bit of a dweeb way back then), this dream proved itself to be true. I did lose friendships because of stands I took, some of which I see now were more influenced by the people I wanted approval from, than they were by a pure reading of the Word.

As the years unfolded, I grew more and more hungry for the approval of God and less concerned about the approval of others, and that has led to a higher level of authenticity and integrity in my life. But it has come with a price--the price of strained relationships and associations. But living true to oneself and true to what one believes are the purposes of God, is worth any sacrifice one makes. I still do not live this out perfectly--everyone is impacted by the "yeast of hypocrisy" to one degree or another. I continually pray, asking God to show me where I need to be strong and more authentic.

Now Molek.
In the sermon I talk a bit about the history of the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, which encompasses Jerusalem on the West and South sides of the city.

In Old Testament times, the idol to the god Molek was located in the Valley of Hinnom, most likely near its juncture with the Kidron Valley. (Interestingly enough, today at this juncture there is the Greek Orthodox Saint Onuphrius Monastery. I love the way God redeems things!) Molek was one of the gods in the pantheon of Canaanite gods. His worship involved the propitiatory sacrifice of children. Read more about Molek 

here.

Worship of Molek and the associate child sacrifice was strongly condemned in the Old Testament. Prohibitions exist in the early law codes of Leviticus (18:21 and 20:1-5) and by the prophets, particularly Jeremiah (32:35). However, its presence in such a central place continued to cause trouble for Israel. Molek played a role in the fall of Solomon (1 Kings 11:1-6) and the evil kings Ahaz (2 Chron. 28:1-4) and Manasseh (2 Chron. 33:1-6). Righteous Josiah desecrated the idol of Molek (2 Kings 23:10).

By the time of Jesus, the idol was long gone, but its memory lingered. The Valley of Ben Hinnom, Gehenna in Greek, was now the garbage dump of Jerusalem where a fire burned continuously. This is the image that lies behind the word Hell, as Jesus used it in the Gospels (and James one time in his writing). Here is a list of the references, copied from the Wiki entry for Hinnom:

• Matt.5:22 whoever calls someone "you fool" will be liable to Gehenna.
• Matt.5:29 better to lose one of your members than that your whole body go into Gehenna.
• Matt.5:30 better to lose one of your members than that your whole body go into Gehenna.
• Matt.10:28 rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.
• Matt.18:9 better to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna.
• Matt.23:15 Pharisees make a convert twice as much a child of Gehenna as themselves.
• Matt.23:33 to Pharisees: you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to Gehenna?
• Mark 9:43 better to enter life with one hand than with two hands to go to Gehenna.
• Mark 9:45 better to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
• Mark 9:47 better to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna
• Luke 12:5 Fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into Gehenna
• James 3:6 the tongue is set on fire by Gehenna.

Lastly, here is an old artistic rendition of what the idol Molek looked like:

 

The arched opening at the base is where you built the fire that heated up the bronze idol. Then, if the image on the left side is correct, you threw your child in the fire. If the one on the right is correct, after the arms were glowing red with heat, you placed your child in the idol's arms.

It does not get any more detestable than that.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Friend, Your Sins are Forgiven!

Luke 5:17-26 (Mark 2:1-12) Matthew 18:21-35


Well I'm back from a two week trip to Israel. (View pictures here: Israel Pictures.) It was an awesome trip (my 7th) with some neat new experiences, like snow in Jerusalem. But now I'm back to preaching. While I was off, my colleagues, Jim Carson and Kim Ream, started our Lenten series for 2012. We are calling the series, Jesus, Friend of Sinners, from the reference in Matthew 11:13 and Luke 7:34. What a great title for Jesus. In the biblical account, it was meant in a derogatory way, but we see it differently.


The idea is that during Lent, as we study The Relationship Principles of Jesus in our classes and groups, our sermons will look at the times Jesus referred to people as friends. The first two sermons were Jesus, Friend of Sinners from 7:18-35 and Luke 15:1-31 (preached by Jim Carson) and You are my friends if... from John 15:1-17 and Matthew 21:28-32 (preached by Kim Ream). You can listen to these sermons by following the sermon link to the right of this column.


My sermon today is the third in this series that looks at the times Jesus called someone, friend. Jesus uses the word friend rather frequently. Most often, it occurs in his teaching material, especially in parables. However, there are a handful of times when Jesus addresses someone by calling the person "friend." Here they are: Matthew 26:50 (Judas); Luke 5:20 (friends of the the paralytic who is let down through the roof--today's sermon); Luke 12:4 (disciples); John 15:13-15 (multiple references to his disciples as friends); John 21:5 (his disciples) and John 11:11 (Lazarus).


Today's sermon considers the theme of forgiveness, as Jesus grants it to the paralytic and also heals him.


For further reading, here is a good article from the Mayo Clinic and another one, with multiple questions to explore, from a Christian source.


Thanks for digging deeper. 

The Power of Confession

I John 1:1 - 2:2 and James 5:16

This sermon leads into a healing service where people are encouraged to follow the simple directions of James 5:13-16. The sermon, however, focuses not so much on the anointing service and the promise of God to heal, as it does on the power of making confession to God and to each other.

A few weeks ago as the staff at church were working through the chapter on confession in Richard Foster's book, Celebration of Disciple, I was caught by his comment that sometimes we do not find freedom from habitual sin because we fail to confess our sins to each other. He was referring to James 5:16. Not long after that, our Leadership Team was away for a weekend retreat. We had asked Dave Witmer, a local church leader, to come and listen to us and share his evaluation. In the course of our time together, and sort of in passing, Dave mentioned that we "confess to God to be forgiven and to each other to be healed." He was referring to 1 John 1:9 and James 5:16.

I must confess, that even after my nearly 40 years in ministry and having done countless anointing services, this struck me as a new thought--or at least a new insight into an old thought. There is no doubt that as part of the Protestant Church, we have been a bit afraid of the "Confessional." In the Catholic Church, as you may know, times of confession are offered wherein you come to a priest and in the privacy of the confessional booth, share your confession and receive forgiveness. Protestants have reacted to this on a number of levels. One, we do not believe confession must be made to Priest, not that a Priest has any power to grant forgiveness. Secondly, we believe that to "require" confession leads to insincere and spurious confession, which lacks any spiritual benefit.

Unfortunately, by reacting to the formalized confession of the Catholic Church, we lost the power of confession our sins to each other. We emphasize confessing sin to God, but not confessing to each other. We Brethren have held on to this concept through the anointing service. When ever we practice this rite, we are taught to encourage the one receiving it to examine his or her life and make appropriate confession. But I must admit, in my own experience, I have seen so many shallow confessions that I sometimes gloss over this part of the service. I know, shame on me!

What would a Protestant confession look like, especially one in the Anabaptist vein of the church. Let me venture a guess. The power of confession to each other would be taught. People would freely seek out each other, trusted friends, and confess their sin to each other. The friend would pass along from God his promise forgiveness and then walk in relationship with the person as he or she continues to strive to live free from the sin. There would be relationship, friendship, discipleship and accountability in love. It is a beautiful thing.

I know this kind of confession happens more often in the Body of Christ than we realize. It happens in the midst of our groups of people who come together to pray and study; it happens between friends who are pursuing intentional spiritual friendships; and it happens in the home as couples pray for and love each other and as parents train up their children in the Lord.

But it could happen more, and the impact on the Body of Christ would be beautiful. Link here to a short section from the Inter-Varsity New Testament Commentary on James, written by George M. Stulac as he comments on the impact on the church, when people come together in confession and prayer. It is a good read and encouragement
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QfWHRzM0aOzBT2NFvVB2GMXMc1xOBVVrieOabqJwZBI/edit

Thanks for digging deeper.

When Hell Invades Earth

Genesis 6:1-8 and 1 Peter 5:5-8

This is sort of a follow up sermon to last week's sermon, "When Heaven Invades Earth." In this sermon I talk about Satan, who he is, and his methodology in promoting evil throughout the world.

In the sermon, I do not discuss the difficult question of where Satan came from. I'll take a shot at that here.

When the Bible opens in Genesis, Satan is present and active, as seen in the temptation of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden in Genesis 3. So we logically conclude he was here then and thus his origin lies before that event..

The origin of Satan and thus evil are somewhat cloaked in the mysteries of ancient times into which God's revelation of truth has not given clear insight. You can ask "why not?" but only God can answer that one.

Now that said, there may be some glimpses in Scripture. Two Old Testament texts have been seen by some scholars as perhaps giving some insight into the question of where Satan came from. Let me quote here from the Nelson's Bible Dictionary:


"Two Old Testament passages-Isa 14:12-15 and Ezek 28:11-19-furnish a picture of Satan's original condition and the reasons for his loss of that position. These passages were addressed originally to the kings of Babylon and Tyre. But in their long-range implications, many scholars believe, they refer to Satan himself. They tell of an exalted angelic being, one of God's creatures, who became proud and ambitious. He determined to take over the throne of God for himself. But God removed him from his position of great dignity and honor.

"Building upon this foundation, Rev 12 sketches the further stages in Satan's work of evil. In his fall from God's favor, Satan persuaded one third of the angels to join him in his rebellion (Rev 12:3-4)."
(from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright © 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

Take the time to read the Isaiah and Ezekiel passages, and their larger contexts. It does seem to me that the language of these verses "goes beyond" application to the earthly kings to which they are directly addressed. This is a normal way in which Old Testament prophecy works. Most of the passages that we understand as being messianic prophecies in the OT, have first of all an immediate reference and fulfillment, and then also a future and more far reaching one (e.g. the virgin of Isaiah 7:14).

This rebellion of angels in heaven may, in part, lie behind the comment in Jude 6. And in four OT accounts, Satan appears as an angel. Consider Numbers 22, Job 1-1, Zechariah 3 and 1 Chronicles 21 (as it interprets the events of 2 Samuel 24). (The revised International Standard Bible Encyclopedia has an excellent article on Satan which elaborates on these four texts).

What we do know is that Satan is a being of super human powers, but not divine powers. In other words, he is stronger than us but not a strong as God. He is a spirit being who has corralled a host of other spirit being helpers who are subordinate to him. We call them demons. Just as good angels seem to have some kind of leadership structure (angels and archangels and seraphim and cherubim) so too demons have some kind of functional structure (thus Jesus refers to Beelzebub, the prince of demons.) They are given rather free reign to rule the world, as their domain, raking havoc as they will. But even so, they have their powers ultimately limited by God. This is especially true in reference to their affliction of God's people. (My sermon works at these concepts a bit.)

One might ask, "Why would God allow Satan to lead people astray and to afflict the world with so much suffering?" That is not a bad question, for which, unfortunately, we do not have a complete answer. But think about it, what joy would there be in your life if your spouse, or special friend, or kids, only loved you because there were no other options. Not much joy in that. However, when I realize that out of all the possible men my wife could have chosen (and believe me, she had options!), she chose me. Wow! And so it is; God wants us to choose him; not because there were no other options, but rather, to choose him in the midst of man of what appear to be very enticing options.

And that is really the purpose of these two sermons--to help us think about how our choices always reflect which kingdom we are living in--the kingdom of this world, or the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ.

Choose wisely.

Thanks for digging deeper

When Heaven Invades Earth

Matthew 6:10 and 33, Mark 1:14-15

I am struck by the fact that when Jesus began his ministry, as recorded in each Gospel, his message was "The Kingdom of God has come. Repent and believe the good news." He spent a great deal of time in the Gospels (especially Matthew) explaining what the kingdom of heaven was like (check out all those parables in Matthew 13). And yet, the modern church today says so little about the Kingdom.

First off, we should not get too hung up over the difference between the Kingdom of Heaven (used most often in Matthew) and the Kingdom of God (used mostly in the other Gospels). We are rather sure that Matthew was simply keeping to good Jewish form in not wanting to use the name of God and thus substituted Heaven. The concepts are the same for both phrases in all the Gospels. This can be seen in that the phrases--Kingdom of Heaven and Kingdom of God are used interchangeably. Matthew does use Kingdom of God (4 times: 12:28, 19:24, 21:31, 21:43) and when Matthew uses Kingdom of Heaven, the other Gospels use Kingdom of God. For example, in Matthew Jesus begins preaching by announcing that the Kingdom of Heaven has come (Matt 3:2) but Mark records him as saying that the Kingdom of God has come (Mark 1:15; and also Luke 8:1). So the terms seem to be interchangeable.

(I know it seems like I am making much of this, but a whole system of biblical interpretation has been built around the idea that the two are different.)

Secondly, it can be a bit hard wrapping our heads around this idea because it is rather meta-physical. Jesus was clear that we cannot see the kingdom (Luke 17:21) and John says to perceive of it, one needs to be "born again" (John 3:3). The Kingdom of God does not have geographical boundaries. There is no capitol, at least not here on earth. The Kingdom of God is a reality and exists whenever and wherever anyone crowns God in Christ as Lord and Sovereign of their lives. It is a spiritual reign, not a physical realm.

That said, one might be tempted to say that the Church is the Kingdom of God. The Church both is and is not the Kingdom. Let me try to explain. Scholars often talk about the true, invisible, Church and the physical church. The invisible Church is the collection of all genuine believers in Jesus and the physical church, or the visible one, includes a mixture of genuine believers and those who are attracted to the beauty and activity of the church, but fall short of true belief. Jesus spoke about this in the parable of the Drag Net in Matthew 13:47-52.

The Kingdom of God is the sovereign rule of God when and where ever it exists. The true, invisible, Church is the group of individuals who respond to that rule. So the Kingdom includes the true Church, but is not limited to it. God's coverings rule extends beyond the church.

The real purpose of this sermon is to help us think about choosing to live in the Kingdom by choosing to live by kingdom values. We actually live on the front lines of a battle field in which two sides are warring against each other. This is happening 24/7. Next week I will speak about the converse idea to Heaven Invading Earth--When Hell Invades Earth--and will look a bit at this war. However, being on the front lines, as it were, it is far to easy for us to vacillate from one side to the other.

Lord, help me choose Your Kingdom, Your will, everyday in every way!

Thanks for digging deeper.

Servant Leadership, Part 2: How to follow well

1 Timothy 5:17-24

As I mentioned in the sermon, when we are discussing what it means to follow well, we enter into some principles that have often been wrongly interpreted and painfully applied.

Basically, the primary principle that governs how we follow those who lead us is submission. On every level of life, the Bible calls us to submit to those who are over us, whether it be our government leaders (elected or otherwise--Romans 13), parents (Ex 20:12 and other places), masters or employers (Eph 6:5 and other places), in marriage (Eph 5:21-22), or to church leaders (Heb 13:7, among others).

This being the case, it is imperative that we understand what it means to submit. I work at that in the sermon, and also mention that submission does not necessarily equate to obedience. We honor God with our primary submission, and we must obey him before man (Acts 5:17-39).

Submission is first and foremost an attitude that governs our life in respect to how we relate to each other--in all human relations. The Greek word which is virtually always translated "submit" or "subject" is hupotasso and is formed from a prefix and main word. The prefix hupo is also a standard preposition in Greek and means under or beneath. The main word, tasso, means "to arrange something in an orderly manner", or "to appoint it to an proper position." As far as I have seen, the word hupostasso is always used in a passive voice, meaning the subject of the verb creates action that flows back on themselves. Thus the frequent translations "subject yourselves" (Rom 10:3; 1 Cor 16:16; Eph 5:21; Col 3:8, etc.)

So the first thing one might notice is that submission is a voluntary act that we do for ourselves. It is a choice we make, not one forced upon us. God asks us to submit ourselves to the powers that be. We do it, because it is the right thing to do and brings with it the fulfillment of God's promises, that flow from our obedience.

Antonyms of submission are concepts like rebellion, disrespect, and disobedience. In the sermon, I work a bit at the importance of living under the authority that God places over us and what happens when we do not. The warning of 1 Samuel 15:23 is chilling: "rebellion is like the sin of divination." How can that be? Divination (attempting to foretell the future via omens and the like) is one of many forms of Spiritualism that when practiced opens up our lives to deeper forms of Satanic involvement. Rebellion does the same thing. Rebellion occurs whenever we belligerently disobey a form of authority under which God calls us to live. This being true, disobedience to authority is a serious issue.

Ephesians 5:21 calls us to submit to one another and suggests that to do so is a part of what it means to be filled with the Holy Spirit. Submission, as I understand it, relates to my attitude, which then impacts my actions. To live in the attitude of submission, means I honor other people, see their importance and respect their value, treating them as I would want to be treated. Submission is the strength to view others as better than ourselves and to bless them and see them prosper. It is to understand that we are a called to serve each other, not to lord it over one another. Submission is the natural outgrowth of true love (1 Cor 13 kind of love).

So the question arises: What do I do when someone, especially someone who is in authority over me, asks me to do something that I believe violates biblical teaching and goes against my conscience? I must obey God rather than man, but I also am not supposed to disobey for fear of losing the protection that God gives me through those over me in authority.

I suggested in my sermon that there are ways to disobey submissively, and there are ways of disobeying rebelliously. It comes down to a matter of the heart. There are a few simple steps we should follow when we find ourselves in a position where we cannot blindly obey someone or some law.

First, we should appeal to the appropriate person/people calling on them to reconsider their decision.

Second, our appeal should be based on the harm that said decision will have on them (our boss, parents, company, church, or whatever). In other words, why is this a bad decision? What will be the consequences?

Third, we should present, if possible, a creative alternative. Sort of a "I cannot do that, but I would do this." During WWI there was no allowance for Conscientious Objectors (CO's) to War in our selective service system. After the war, and as war clouds were again gathering in Europe which eventually led to WWII, representatives from the historic peace churches when to Washington. They effectively said, "To not have some way of honoring CO's is to deny the principles upon which or Constitution is built. To keep on this way harms who we are as a people." They also presented an creative alternative. It is called, guess what, "Alternative Service." They basically said, "we cannot take human life for any reason, but we will serve our country in non-violent ways." The government heard their appeal, recognized the fundamental correctness of it, accepted their creative alternative, and thus many people have been able to save their conscience and serve their country.

Fourth, if all this is to no avail, we must be true to our understanding of what is right, even if it means we disobey those over us. If we need to disobey, we do so carefully, prayerfully and submissively. In other words, we do not rise up in rebellion, but rather firmly resist. We accept the consequences of our choice to obey God rather than man. We do not run from it. (Of course, we make use of every honorable way to escape pain and death. Paul was quick to call upon his rights as a Roman citizen. Acts 22:22-29) That means we may lose our job, our home or our lives. But we will not lose our honor.

As I write this, I see Martin Luther standing in the courtyard before the judges at his inquisition, declaring "Here I stand, I can stand nowhere else. God help me." I see Rosa Parks taking a seat in the front of the bus. I see Nelson Mandela writhing in jail for 20 odd years because he would not submit to the yoke of Apartheid. I see my wife's ancestor in the tower prison in Basel Switzerland because he chose adult baptism.

God grant to me and to you, the grace to be honorable in both our submission and, when necessary, our disobedience.

Thanks for digging deeper.

Servant Leadership

1 Peter 5:1-11

When I initallly planned this sermon, I thought I would spend about half the time outlining leadership principles and the other half discussing "followership" (you like that word? I think I made it up!) principles. However, as I developed things,there was just too much to say about leadership to cover it adequately in one sermon. I will need to return to followership principles later.

In the sermon I discuss three biblical metaphors for leadership, One of them is a Bond-Slave.

As soon as we mention "slave" today, our mind goes back to slavery as we had experienced it here in the USA and in England, during the early days of our nation. The black slave trade involved removing people against their will from their home land, transporting them in inhuman conditions, selling them to masters who often, though not always, treated them worse than livestock and rarely, if ever, providing any opportunity to be set free. This was an evil practice that created a stain on the moral fabric of our nation.

The problem is that slavery in the Bible could often be very different. The Old Testament Law that guided the Israelites laid down very specific laws relating to slavery. In the context of the ancient Middle East, these laws were progressive, generous and aimed at recognizing the full humanity of slaves. During New Testament times in Greek society, though there were abusive owners, many treated their slaves very well. In both Jewish and Greek cultures, and opportunities to gain freedom were provided.

What I find very strange is that often in these ancient cultures, people would sell themselves into slavery. This was especially true for those who were poor. To serve as a slave for a period of years, meant a place to live with food and, often, education, or at least the opportunity to learn a trade. After a season of this, one could save up some money, be trained in a job, and then reenter society much better off than before. It was in this tone that Paul advises slaves to serve their master well, but if they have opportunity to gain their freedom, they should do so, and he admonishes masters to be kind and generous (1 Cor 7:21; Eph. 6:5-9; Col. 3:22 - 4:1; 1 Tim 6:1-2; Titus 2:9). Peter also offer advice to slaves and masters in 1 Pet. 2:13-22.

In this context of slavery the possibility of entering into a bond-slave relationship existed. This idea is introduced as part of the Old Testament Law (Ex 21:2-6 and Deut 15:12-18). What if things were really good in the household where you served as a slave. Your master cared for you and treated you well. What if the idea of living out on your own and having to make all those ends meet really was not for you. In this case the Law allowed the creation of an interesting concept. Upon your manumission, you could turn to your master and say, "Thank you very much, but I want to remain your slave and continue to serve you." That point, the master took you to the entry door to his home, took an awl and drove it through your ear lobe into the door post of the house. Ouch! The idea was that you were now permanently attached to this household. Many scholars believed that the slave then wore a special earring in that ear, marking him as a bond-slave. You might say a love-slave (though today that word has other, not very positive, connotations).

It is this word for bond-slave (Greek, doulos) that the New Testament usually uses when it calls us to view ourselves as slaves of God (1 Pet 2:16) and when Paul and others call themselves slaves of Jesus (Phip 1:1). Often in English Bibles, doulos is translated "servant" which is misleading. It means bond-slave. (The English word "servant" is used to translate other Greek words like diakonos and huperetes, both meaning more of what we understand as a servant.)

All this to say that when we find freedom in Christ from a life of slavery to sin, we really are giving ourselves to God as slaves of righteousness. We are not our own, but have been bought with a price, and are now owned by God, the best Master anyone could ever have. As slaves of God, we are not free to live where we want and do what we want, but rather are obligated by love, to do what he asks of us.

This is true of all of us; but it is especially true of those of us who are called to give leadership to God's people, the Body of Christ. We are His and are honor-bond to do his will.

Thanks for digging deeper