Skip to content

Author: glenscriv

Published on Leave a comment on Tweets on Catch-Up

twitter_follow_button

Want me to feel my adoption? Tell me of my Father.

Want me to know 'my identity in Christ'? Tell me of *Christ*

The world is not a factory with u pulling the levers. Consider the birds. It's your Father's house, ur His child. #Matthew6 #EnjoyYourDay

You don't avoid legalism by avoiding the law. Push through the death of the law into the resurrection grace of the gospel.

Ironically legalism thrives when you don't bring the full weight of the law to bear. Don't merely wound with the law. Let it kill.

Most Trinitarian Gospel opening? Mark. Jesus intro'd as Christ, Son of God & within 11 verses: the LORD, the Father's Son & Spirit's Anointed

<< If Mark 1 doesn't strike u as Trinitarian ur thinking of Trinity as a theological speciality not the most basic confession of Christ's ID

I love the Issues Etc motto: "It's not about you, it's about Jesus For You." If u miss the last 2 words it becomes about u again!

Some of the proudest people are those who boldly renounce all 4 Jesus. The humblest r those overwhelmed He's given all 4 them

The Angel of the LORD (Christ!) encamps around you to deliver you (Ps 34:7). Nothing gets to u w/o going thru Him first #EnjoyYourDay

My Pentecostal friends may disagree but...

From Eph 1: U have continual blessings (in Christ) or no blessings (outside Him). U don't have 2nd blessings. Unless u have a 2nd Christ?

Does "Britain's oldest man" ever die? Surely he only switches.

Do u a deal: I'll speak purely of God's one-ness from now on if we can all agree we're talking about the oneness of Jesus with His Father.

If you are hidden with Christ in God, He would have to undo His own being to reject you. Col 3:3; 2 Tim 2:13 #EnjoyYourDay

What kind of God is broken apart so the wicked can feast on Him? What kind of God is poured out so you can drink? Your God #EnjoyYourDay

#mistranslatedbooks Victor Hugo's uplifting sequel: Less Miserable

#mistranslatedbooks The Story of a Conurbation by Charles Dickens

#mistranslatedbooks Harper Lee's tale of a Romanian pop duo cut down in their prime: To Kill A Cheeky Girl

#mistranslatedbooks Celsius 232.7, 69060 Miles Under The Sea, Around the World in 11.43 Weeks.

#mistranslatedbooks Mike Horton's seminal: ianity

#mistranslatedbooks Giovanni Arpino's: "Lady Pong" & Kenneth Grahame's "Fart in the Woods"

As Witness He sees yr suffering, as Advocate He sticks up 4u, as Intercessor He prays always, as Friend He sympathises. Job16 #EnjoyYourDay

#Ps146 The LORD reigns. How does He reign? He liberates, restores, lifts, loves & watches over. No other King like Jesus. #EnjoyYourDay

Mary chose the better portion: to BE served by Jesus through His word. Luke 10:42 #EnjoyYourDay

Ps 30:6. Maybe this morning means more weeping 4u. But one morning every tear will be wiped away. And today is another day closer.

It's not the Lord's 'nasty side' that judges, it's His unadulterated goodness.

"Preach the gospel, die and be forgotten." Some Dead Guy

They didn't seek 1st the Kingdom, they fled the King. Yet the King pursued the disciples thru death 2 find them & say "Peace" #EnjoyYourDay

Gently Jesus lets Peter 'begin to sink'. "Immediately" He responds to his cry. #Matthew14 #EnjoyYourDay

We are not saved by our lives but rather saved in our deaths. Robert Farrar Capon

Grace meets us in our sins, not after them. Capon

Jesus came 2 raise the dead not repair the repairable, correct the correctable, improve the improvable. Nothing is all He needs 4 anything. RFC

Biblical expectation of church life is constantly having to bear with each other in our grievances.

The woman by the well calls it a 'shaft' (phrear). Jesus speaks of a 'spring' (pege). Life from nothingness. A Fountain from the Pit.

Preachers: Don't be smart, be smitten. (Capon-ish)

Adam => Christ... Law => Gospel. It's God's way to say No then Yes. Bear that in mind when you pray.

5

Published on 5 Comments on Six brief thoughts on Francis Spufford’s “Unapologetic”

unapologetic_cover_2372637a

This might only make sense for those who have read or are reading the book... but I don't have much time so I'm not going to spell things out too much.

Read this extract from chapter one to get an idea of the book.

The whole 'emotional sense' thing is a brilliant idea. And it's wonderfully written.  Here are 6 thoughts:

1) The book connects every time it's about sin and Jesus. It floats away on Spufford's soaring prose the rest of the time.

2) Spufford continually speaks of sin as the "human potential to f*#k things up". That's very well put. If I was Spufford, I'd object to any priggishness about the term. 'Transgression' and 'iniquity' don't describe transgressions and iniquities the way we  experience them today. "F#@k ups" do.  Jesus meets us here or not at all.

3) "Yeshua" - his Jesus chapter - is the stand-out. (Surprise, surprise).

4) Jesus shines. Spufford's "God", on the other hand seems simply to be a "Shining" and so, ironically, he doesn't.

5) Spufford is strong on the uncontainable, unreachable, beautiful-yet-bonkers teaching of Jesus. On the issues of forgiveness, generosity, worry and non-violence, Spufford captures the irrepressible overflow of the kingdom.  These sections are very refreshing to read, but...

6) ...Spufford doesn't follow this same trajectory when he treats Jesus' teaching on sexuality and hell. He hides it away saying, on the one hand, that Jesus speaks very little about sex and, on the other, that the church doesn't really believe in hell anymore, so...  Well, so Spufford should have treated Christ's teaching here, the way he treats it on every other subject: bonkers-but-beautiful,  demanding more from us than could possibly lie within us - and, at the same time, speaking of a Kingdom and King in which these things are and can be.

Spufford points attractively towards a fruitful line of gospel engagement. Let's pray others follow.

4

Published on 4 Comments on Beautiful Stranger

Have you ever read Revelation 19 and wondered what it sounds like to hear "the voice of a great multitude, like the roar of many waters and like the sound of mighty peals of thunder, crying out, "Hallelujah!""?

Last night I found out at Mount Pleasant Baptist Church, Swansea.  At their prayer meeting their singing raised the roof. I've never heard anything like it. It gave a new meaning to the phrase "prayer warriors." So encouraging.

Steve Levy hosted, Paul Blackham was answering questions from the church and I was tagging along for the ride. One issue that really seemed to connect with the folks was that of Jesus, the Good Samaritan. So I thought I'd repost this one from 2008...

Jesus is Good Samaritan

Anyone else sick of the whole 'Christ in the OT' debate?  Man... some people just go on and on.

I'm announcing a new hobby horse - Christ in the NT.  In fact I think this is where you really see a preacher's Christ-centredness.  We've had the rule drummed into us by now - Thou shalt 'bridge to Christ' at the end of an Old Testament sermon.  But does this 'bridge' come from convictions regarding Jesus the Word or is it simply a preaching convention that we slavishly follow?

Well you can probably guess at the answer by listening to a preacher's New Testament sermons.  Now I fail at this all the time but I think the challenge for all of us is this: Is Jesus the Hero of the sermon on the mount or Mark 13 or the gifts passages or James?  And the issue for this mini-series - what about the parables?

Last time I looked at Matthew 13:44-46.  Who the man?  Jesus the Man.  He seeks and finds us and in His joy He purchases us.  All praise to Him.  As Piper likes to say 'the Giver gets the glory' and in this parable (contra Piper's own interpretation of it) Jesus' glory is on show as He gives up all for His treasured possession - the church.

In this post we'll look briefly at the Good Samaritan: Luke 10:25-37

First notice this: the teacher of the law asks 'Who is my neighbour?'  That's what prompts the story.  At the end of the story Jesus asks 'Who was neighbour to the guy left for dead?' (v36).

This is such an important point to grasp.  The lawyer asks "Who is my neighbour?"  Jesus responds: "Who was a neighbour to the fallen man?" Get it?

Who does Jesus ask us, first of all, to identify with?  Not  the priest, the Levite or the Samaritan. First of all we are asked to see ourselves as the fallen man.

Why do I say 'fallen'?  Well the man's fallenness is triply-underlined in v30.  He "goes down" from Jerusalem (this earthly counterpart of the heavenly Zion).  From there he heads towards the outskirts of the land (Jericho) which is due east of this mountain sanctuary (echoes of Eden).  This would involve a physical descent of about a thousand metres in the space of just 23 miles.  If that wasn't bad enough, the man "falls" among robbers.  He's stripped, plagued (literally that's the Greek word), abandoned and half-dead.  That's the man's precidament and Jesus wants us to see it as our predicament.  So what hope do we have?

The priest?  Nope.  The Levite?  No chance.  The religious and the law are no help. What about a 'certain Samaritan' (mirroring the 'certain man' of v30)?  He's not at all like the religious.  In fact the one who 'comes to where the man is' happens to be someone who would have equally been shunned by the priest and the Levite!

Yet this Samaritan 'had compassion' (v33).  In the New Testament this verb, which could be translated 'was moved in his bowels with pity', is used only of Jesus. (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34; Mk. 1:41; 6:34; 8:2; 9:22; Lk. 7:13; 10:33; 15:20) In every narrative passage Jesus is the subject of the verb and the three parables in which it's used are the merciful King of Matthew 18 (v27), here and the father in the Two Sons (Lk 15:20).  More about that in the next post: Who's the Daddy?

Well this Good Samaritan comes across the man left for dead and, for emphasis, we are twice told about him 'coming' to the man (v33 and 34).  The Outsider identifies with the spurned and wretched.

Now remember whose shoes we are in as Jesus tells this story.  We are meant to imagine ourselves as this brutalized man.  Now read v34:

He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own beast, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. `Look after him,' he said, `and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

Now I don't have to tell you what these things mean.  You've got blueletterbible - you can do your own biblical theology of oil (hint: The Spirit) and wine (His blood).  You all know that a denarius is a day's wage (Matthew 20:2) and therefore the Samaritan will be returning on the third day.

And remember you're meant to be putting yourself in the position of this fallen man, left for dead, unaided by religion, healed by a beautiful stranger and awaiting his return.  Are you there?  Have you felt those depths and appreciated those heights?  Well then, now:

You go and do likewise. (v37)

Don't first conjure up the character of the Good Samaritan.  First, be the fallen man.  First experience his compassion and healing.  Then go and do likewise.

Or... leave Jesus out of it.  Spin it as a morality tale and end with: "Who was that masked man? No matter - just go and do likewise."

See how important 'Jesus in the NT' is?

.

And check out this preacher as he nails Jesus: the Good Samaritan

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=d5Mr4UUYetw]

I was like a wounded man

Jesus came all the way down.

On a Friday evening, He died on a Roman cross

Early one Sunday morning He got up

How many of you believe – He got up?

Thank You, for being a Good Samaritan

Thank You, You didn’t have to do it

Thank You, for taking my feet out of the miry clay,

Thank You, for setting them on the rock

Thank you, for saving me,

Thank You, for binding up my wounds

Thank You, for healing my wounds

Thank You, for fighting my battles

Did He pick you up?

.

15

Published on 15 Comments on Do Not Worry – A Sermon on Matthew 6:25-34

what-me-worryWe spend our lives worrying about what we’ll eat and Jesus takes bread saying “I’m the bread of life, broken to feed worriers like you.”

We spend our lives worrying about what we’ll drink and Jesus takes a cup saying “This is my blood poured out for anxious souls like you.”

We spend our lives worrying about what we’ll wear and on the cross Jesus is stripped, so that we can be clothed in His righteousness.

.

Sermon text

Audio (I had to re-record the last 3 minutes after the service).

.

1

Published on 1 Comment on Which God Don’t You Believe In – an evangelistic talk

ascension JesusYou might have heard me (or others!!) bang this drum before. But if not, here's a 25 minute evangelistic talk entitled "Which God don't you believe in?"

DOWNLOAD AUDIO

Colossians 1:15-23

 Three thought prompter questions...

What do you picture when you think of God?
What do you picture when you think of Jesus?
What does God picture when He thinks of you?

When you think of God…?

Problem - v15: He's invisible. Which means unknowable!

There's been a divorce- v21.

But there's an Image: Jesus.

This is the reverse of natural thinking

We think God is obvious, we're unsure of Jesus.

Bibles says, Jesus is on show, God is unknown.

God is Jesus shaped.

.

When you picture Jesus...?

V15-20  What kind of God is this!?

Climaxing in the cross.

Jesus is God sized.

.

When God pictures you…?

Not dimmer switch. On or off.

V21: OFF - going against the grain of reality

V22: ON - holy, without blemish, free from accusation.

.

Have you been reconciled?

Have you forgotten Jesus?

Every day I imagine an unChristlike God on the throne.

Let's return to the God of Jesus.

1

Published on 1 Comment on Condemned already [repost]

gavelJohn 3:18 is emphatic - humanity is condemned already for its unbelief in Jesus.  The verdict is already handed down, the sentence is already passed, the human race is already lost.  The gavel has fallen, court is adjourned.  There's no higher Judge, no appeals process, no loopholes, no going back, no ifs, no buts.  Condemned.  Perfectly, completely, irreversibly condemned.

Are you human?  Are you flesh and blood?  Then you are condemned.  Condemned already.

You want a retrial?  Stiff bickies, as they say in Australia.

But let me tell you why it's good news that we're condemned already.

It means I'm not crushed under the weight of determining my eternity!  I don't stand at a crossroads with heaven and hell depending on my wise and moral choices.  Neither am I walking a tightrope - one wrong step and I plunge to my doom.  No, no.  Thank God the pressure's off.  I'm condemned already.

It means that none of my past sins have condemned me to hell and none of my future sins ever can.  That betrayal, that abortion, that infidelity, those years of rebellion will not take me to hell.  My sins and my works just don't have that power.  They don't even come into this equation.  They are only the fruit of a condemned tree, the symptoms of a condemned condition.  Reality is, I'm condemned already.

It means that both the problem and the solution lies in the realm of my being not of my doing.  I'm not expected to summon up the strength for a 5-point plan of salvation.  All that nonsense is irrelevant.  I'm condemned already.

It means I don't need to worry about judgement day as though that will have the decisive word on my destiny.  Judgement day is not about presenting my good works or my right confession of faith (as though we'll be in the queue nervously rehearsing our confession "Please let me in because of the blood of Jesus shed for me").  Nothing hangs in the balance. And no-one hangs in the balance. Judgement day will only confirm what we are and therefore what we have chosen.

It means that hell is God's pronouncement upon those who remain in unbelief: 'have it your way.'

And it means that Jesus is my only hope.  There's nothing in me that's not sunk in perdition.  Therefore my eyes are taken off myself.  I must look to a Saviour completely outside myself because I'm condemned already.

In evangelism it means that we do not address religious consumers with their capacities for choice.  Instead we address condemned criminals with news of a pardon.  We do not treat unbelievers as mighty decision-makers with eternity in their hands.  They are lost.   And we do not preach judgement simply as something hanging over them but as something in which they are already sunk.

Do you think we give enough emphasis to the already-ness of humanity's condemnation?

.

14

Published on 14 Comments on Four Points On Preaching by Tim Keller

keller

Here's a man who proclaims the gospel every sermon.

.

We still have much to learn from Keller. And as a distillation of the preaching task it would be hard to improve on these four points (from this nifty little 9 page paper)...

...

1. PREACH TO CHRISTIANS AND NON-CHRISTIANS AT THE SAME TIME

Because the gospel is the root of both justification and sanctification.

The typical approach to the gospel is to see it as the ABC’s of Christian doctrine, or merely the minimum truth required to be saved, but to rely on more “advanced” biblical principles for progress in the Christian life. If that were the case, then we truly could not focus on both evangelism and spiritual formation at the same time. However, Martin Luther understood that the gospel is not only the way we receive salvation but is also the way to advance at every stage in the Christian life. This is why the first of Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses was “All of life is repentance.”

Jonathan Edwards, in his Religious Affections, argues that belief and behavior are inextricably linked and that any failures in Christians are due to unbelief. The antidote to unbelief is a fresh telling of the gospel. Preaching, therefore, is not either for evangelism or edification, because all of us have the same underlying problem.

2. PREACH GRACE, NOT MORALISM

My sermons used to follow this approach:

+ Here is what the text says
+ Here is how we must live in light of that text
+ Now go and live that way, and God will help you.

I came to realize over time that I was doing exactly what Edwards said would not work. I was relying on fear
and pride to prompt obedience to God. Although I was doing it indirectly and unconsciously, I was employing
preaching to trick the heart instead of reorienting the heart.

I have come to realize that my sermons need to follow a different outline:
+ Here is what the text says
+ Here is how we must live in light of it
+ But we simply cannot do it
+ Ah—but there is One who did!
+ Now, through faith in him, you can begin to live this way.

3. PREACH CHRIST FROM EVERY TEXT

There are, in the end, only two ways to read the Bible: It is either about me or about Jesus. It is either advice to the listener or news from the Lord. It is either about what I must do or about what God has done.

Jesus is the true temple, the true prophet, the true priest, the true king, the true sacrifice, the Lamb, the Light,
the bread. The Bible is not about you—it is about him.

4. AIM AT THE HEART (NOT THE EMOTIONS, OR EVEN THE MIND)

We must not assume, for example, if our listeners are materialistic that they only need to be exhorted to give more. Though guilt may help with the day’s offering, it will not alter one’s life patterns. If people are materialistic and ungenerous, it means they have not truly understood how Jesus, though rich, became poor for them. They have not truly understood what it means to have all riches and treasures in Jesus Christ. It means their affections are causing them to cling to material riches as a source of security, hope, and beauty. Thus in preaching we must present Christ in the particular way that he replaces the hold of competing affections. This takes not just intellectual argument but the presentation of the beauty of Christ. Jonathan Edwards defined a nominal Christian as one who finds Christ useful, while a true Christian is one who finds Christ beautiful for who he is in himself.

14

Published on 14 Comments on All for One-ness and One-ness for all!

321321 begins by associating God with three-ness.  "God is three Persons united in love" says the presentation.  And occasionally people have asked, "What about God's one-ness?"

Well the short answer is - it's right there in the explanation: "three Persons united in love." That phrase is just trying to unpack the word Trinity which is itself only the squashing together of "tri" and "unity".  Just from the word 'Trinity' it should be clear how the church has considered God's one-ness historically. God's one-ness is a unity of the Three.  It's not a unity apart from the Three or underneath the Three. But often we think like that.

It's always revealing when people say things like: "Trinity is great but we also need to focus on God's unity." This is literally the same as saying "The unity of the Three is great, but we also need to talk about the unity of God."  At that point we really need to ask, "What is this second kind of unity you want to talk about? And what is this God you want to talk about apart from discussion of the Three?"  Those are worrying questions to raise!

To answer them, people sometimes try to wheel in Gregory of Nazianzen for support. In doing so they make him say the precise opposite of what he meant.  Here's his famous quote:

No sooner do I conceive of the one than I am illumined by the splendour of the three; no sooner do I distinguish them than I am carried back to the one.

Wonderful theology. Yet in a heartbeat the thought can get turned into...

Once I've spent a decent amount of time thinking about the one God of monotheism, I then force myself to spend the same amount of time considering Father, Son and Spirit.  And once I've given equal airtime to the Three, I return to my philosophically defined monad.

But that couldn't be further from Gregory's meaning. The One simply is the profound interpenetration of the Three and the Three just are 'in' each other in unloseable, mutually-constituting, ontological oneness. Gregory is not saying that we ought not to think of one-ness and three-ness separately. He's saying we cannot do it.  The one and the three are strictly mutually-defining concepts.

Yet every time someone says "Let's not prioritise trinity, let's give equal time to the unity" they attempt this feat.  Whatever three-ness they're considering apart from the one-ness - it's not the true three-ness of God. Whatever one-ness they're considering apart from the three-ness - it's not the true one-ness of God.

So here's my offer. I will happily major on the one-ness of God for the rest of my life. I will rename the website one-two-one.org - cool, still has a nice ring to it.  But I'll do it on one condition: can we please all agree that this oneness is the one-ness of Jesus with His Father?

You see, if we're talking about Christ, if we're talking about the gospel, if we're talking about salvation, then whatever one-ness we uphold must not destroy the concrete Person of Jesus. It must not mess with the gospel economy in which the Son lives and dies before the Father, is exalted and ministers before Him.  It must not dissolve our salvation in which the Son bears us before the Father. If Jesus, if the gospel, if salvation determines our God-talk then the one-ness we maintain must be a one-ness of distinct Persons mustn't it?  It must be a one-ness that includes difference and interplay and relationship mustn't it?

So if the one-ness we're talking about is the "one-ness" of Jesus with His Father then sign me up. I couldn't be more for "one-ness".  I'll talk about this one-ness until Jesus returns.  But some want to talk about another one-ness - a one-ness that would dissolve the Person of Jesus, His gospel, His salvation. A one-ness that would involve not merely looking away from 'the Three' in some abstract sense, but looking away from Jesus and His gospel in order to know God. To look to this other one-ness is to look away from the God of Jesus and we must never do that.

There can be only one kind of one-ness. And it's the one-ness of the Three.

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer