This Sunday is sometimes called “Christ the King Sunday.” It commemorates especially the kingdom of God and the kingship of Christ. Originally it was meant to emphasize the unique nature of Christ’s kingdom. That kingdom is not of this world, and thus it transcends racial, ethnic, and national boundaries. All Christians have a shared citizenship, the citizenship which is in heaven. But this can be and has been misunderstood over the years. What does it mean for Christ to be our king? Does it mean that we cannot have any other earthly kings? What does it mean for our citizenship to be in heaven? We will turn our attention to this question with our text this morning, and we will see that the apostle Paul connects our heavenly citizenship with the future resurrection of the body and glorification of all things.
Our Citizenship is in Heaven
The Apostle Paul says that the Christian has an alternative citizenship to that of this world. This alternative citizenship is in the kingdom of heaven. “For our citizenship is in heaven” (3:20). Earlier in Philippians he had also said, “Only let your conduct be worthy of the gospel of Christ” (1:27). The English expression “let your conduct be” is a translation of a Greek variation of the term πολιτευμα which means citizenship. He is thus telling us to live like a citizen of the gospel, like a citizen of heaven. Continue reading →
A few years ago, I blogged a short consideration of Halloween. This is a topic that I’ve found myself continually returning to over the years, and so I finally laid out a longer historical survey of the holiday. You can find that posted over at TCI here. The essay is somewhat lengthy, but I think it has some popular and even pastoral value.
Today we come to one of those passages which all respectable pastors try their best to avoid. The biblical teachings on matters relating to the end times are tricky enough on their own, but these days bible teachers have to overcome the sensationalism of Pat Robertson, Tim LaHaye, and, believe it or not, Nicholas Cage. It would be so much easier (and better for my ego) to just not talk about this kind of thing.
But alas, if one commits to preaching through the Bible and not simply skipping the verses he doesn’t like, then he is going to have to talk about these sorts of things from time to time. Now, contrary to many folks’ assumptions today, the Bible does not say all that much about “the antichrist.” The word itself only appears 4 times, always in John’s writings, and while the concept is a little broader, it only occurs a handful of times. It is certainly not a major theme. Still, it does appear, and our sermon text happens to bring us to one such instance. John says that he is writing in “the last hour,” and just as his audience has heard that the Antichrist will come, he is telling them that many antichrists have already come. Continue reading →
Earlier we mentioned that John’s epistle is characterized by its steady critique of false teachers. These false teachers denied that Jesus was God incarnate and they denied that Christians needed to live holy lives and to put away sin. If these false teachers were indeed gnostics, then they also would have taught that only those especially enlightened Christians, possessing secret knowledge, could be saved. In the second chapter, John seems to critique this notion as well, saying that the only true knowledge of God is that which brings obedient love and the only people who should have assurance of their salvation are those who love God by obeying His commandments.
How do you have assurance?
John begins this section with the topic of assurance. He calls this “knowing God.” To know God is to both know about God and to experience Him in your personal spiritual life. And John tells us how we can know that we know God (vs. 3). We can have assurance if we keep His commandments:“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments” (vs. 3). Continue reading →
1 John is written by John the beloved disciple, one of the original 12 Apostles and the same author as that of the Gospel of John and Revelation. His writings are some of the most theological in the New Testament, by which we mean they have direct statements concerning the deity of Christ, his incarnation, and the implications of that for Christian living. Some even believe that 1 John was written with the primary goal of rebutting an early church heretic, one of the first Gnostics. Whether or not this is the case, it is clear that the Church was confronted with heresy and false teachers from very early on and that John is attempting to rebut them in his letter. We will see him write about “antichrists” in chapter 2. These antichrists “went out from” the apostles, but were never truly apostles. John does not want Christians to listen to the false message of these antichrists nor to be led astray into sin or idolatry. Throughout 1John, the Apostle directly criticizes the views of these antichrists and explains the true Christian gospel and its implications for righteous living.
Incarnation and Fellowship
To begin, John reminds his audience about the incarnation. This is an essential part of his gospel. “That which was from the beginning… the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us” (vs. 1-2). On this point there can be no innovation. Any denial of the person of Christ will necessarily involve a denial of his work. Continue reading →
This sermon was preached for Pro-Life Mississippi, outside of the Jackson Women’s Health Organization in Jackson, MS.
Text: James 1:19-27
I know that you are all believers who aspire to be doers of the word. You wouldn’t be out here if you didn’t. This isn’t a glamorous calling. There’s little earthly reward. You are practicing your religion by being here.
But some of the people who run this clinic also profess to be Christians. They believe that they are acting out fundamental values and deeply-held convictions with what they do. And they are right. That is what they are doing. They are passionately and spiritually devoted to their cause, and they are certainly doers of the words they speak. It’s just their words are very different. Their religion is very different.
This clinic exists to practice abortions. It may conduct other services in addition, but everyone is clear about its raison d’être: it is the last abortion clinic in the state. The other services are accidental to the main thing. Other places carry out mammograms, distribute birth control, counsel expecting mothers, and offer various tests and screenings. The one thing that makes this clinic unique is abortion. And everyone who supports the clinic is self-conscious about this. They are passionately committed to providing abortions.
We should ask why people, many of whom profess to also be Christians, support abortion and support it so strongly. There is always the easy spiritual answer. People support abortion because of sin. Their wills have been bent because of sin, and thus they make choices and engage in activity that is wrong. But this answer is true of every kind of sin. With abortion there is a very specific rationale which explains why people support it, and I think it is important that we know this rationale and understand it. This is important for diagnosing the problem, but it is just as important for offering a solution. We cannot walk halfway down the same road, holding many of the same values, only to stop arbitrarily. We need an entirely different perspective. We need a different religion. Continue reading →
Our text this morning tells the story of Absalom’s revolt against David. Most people know Absalom because of fabulous hair, weighing between 2 and 6 pounds, depending on which commentaries you read. Tradition says that this glorious hair eventually became his downfall, as it got caught in the limbs of a terebinth tree. But he had a significant life story before all of that. Chapters 13-18 of 2 Samuel are concerned with Absalom, and he did briefly manage to win over the hearts of Israel. He led a major revolution and forced David to flee Jerusalem, providing the context for at least two of the psalms. So we should know a little more about him, as well as how he was able to start his insurrection.
Absalom was David’s third son and the likely heir to the throne, at least for a while. He had killed his older half-brother, Amnon, and as no mention is ever made of David’s second son (David had quite a lot of sons, as it turns out, see 1 Chronicles 3:1-9 for the 19 who are mentioned by name.), it seems likely that the succession would have naturally fallen to Absalom. His good looks and popularity also signify that he was an important figure in the political life of Israel, and 2 Samuel 8:18 says that David’s sons were leading political ministers. His father-in-law was also the king of Geshur, and so he would have been an obvious political star.
The psalms are the Manna of the Church. As Manna tasted to every man like that that he liked best, so do the Psalms minister Instruction and satisfaction, to every man, in ever emergency and occasion. David was not only a clear Prophet of Christ himself, but a Prophet of every particular Christian; He foretells what I, what any shall do, and suffer, and say. And as the whole book of Psalms is… A Balm that searches all wounds; so are there some certain Psalms, that are Imperial Psalms, that command over all affections, and spread themselves over all occasions, Catholic, universal Psalms, that apply themselves to all necessities. This is one of those. (John Donne, sermon on Ps. 63.7)
The wilderness of Judah
The context for writing this sermon is most likely 2 Samuel 15, when David had to flee Jerusalem from the forces of his own son Absalom. We know that the psalm is written by David when he was in the wilderness. When we look through his life, we see that he was in the wilderness on two occasions. The first was when he lived as a political exile from Saul in 1 Samuel 23-26. But he was not yet king then, and this psalm seems to indicate that David is already king when he is writing it. Thus the the occasion is David’s war against his own son, Absalom, who has temporarily taken possession of Jerusalem. This is a time where David is in danger of losing both his throne and his life. Yet he doesn’t seem to be concerned with these matters as much as he is concerned with something higher. Indeed he is most concerned about being separated from God’s sanctuary, and he writes this psalm to express his desire to be reunited with God’s holy place. Continue reading →
You all know the famous 1st question and answer to the Westminster Shorter Catechism: “What is the chief end of man? Man’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.” It’s such a great answer, mostly because of that unexpected verb “enjoy.” But I’d like to put the focus on the question for a moment. What is a chief end? The word “end” there means goal or purpose, and so the “chief end” is the ultimate or final purpose. A chief end is the most important goal, and so man’s chief end ought to be the thing that he pursues above all else. Everything else in his life should work to support that goal and bring him closer to it. Anything which distracts him from it or pulls him further away from it is working against that goal. The religious term for something like that would be sin. Everything that we do should cause us to glorify God and enjoy Him more and more. And that is what our text is about this morning. Continue reading →
The parable of the Good Samaritan is one the most famous passages of Scripture in the whole bible. It gives us the immortal illustration of what it means to be a “good neighbor” and has provided the name for countless charities and mercy ministries. But there is more to this story than only the call to take care of those in need. Jesus is here pointing out the futility of all attempts at self-justification through works while also highlighting what it truly means to keep the law of God.
This portion of scripture is organized around two exchanges between Jesus and the lawyer. There is the initial question and Jesus’ answer, followed by a second question and a second answer. The “lawyer,” meaning an expert in torah, asks Jesus this question, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” This sets up the whole conversation. It shows us the main issue. The question is actually a sincere question. He is not necessarily trying to trick Jesus, but he is a legalist.He believes, as did most of the Jews of his day, that eternal life is something obtained by law-keeping. Surely the Jews would say that it was “inherited” because of God’s gracious covenant, but still, within those parameters, the keeping of the law was what decided one’s eternal outcome. The precise wording makes this clear, “What shall I do?” Continue reading →