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.
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 →
I preached a sermon on the Ascension this past Sunday, and it is now available online.
Next week will be Pentecost, and that will bring a close to my lectionary preaching this year. It’s been really great, and I would recommend it to any starting preacher. The lectionary cuts out a lot of the pre-preparation work, and the texts always keep you focused on Jesus.
Some of the recent criticism of “the centrality of the word” in the worship service has arisen due to the fear of rationalism and an over-intellectualizing of the gospel. Combined with the ongoing liturgical renewal, folks will also challenge this concept for being gnostic, supposing that stimulating our brains is much more important than our bodies.
There may be well something to these fears when we have in mind the entity that they are currently responding to, but it is just as important to pay careful attention to the historic position of the Reformers when they advocated the centrality of the word. They had something specific in mind, and it may not be the same thing that we think of today.
In fact, there’s no reason to pit the word in opposition to the sacraments or the liturgy because all of these are working towards the same goal. Every aspect of Christian worship is for the purpose of receiving Jesus Christ. This is true of the sermon as much as the Eucharist. On this note, Paul Avis writes:
For the Reformers, the word is nothing less than Christ, revealing and communicating himself to us in divers ways– through the Scriptures, the preaching of the gospel, the Christian brother or sister, or the visible words of baptism or communion. These are all facets of the external word. Continue reading →