Skip to content

Category: sermons

Published on Leave a comment on Some mission talks

Here's a talk I did in the middle of a pub quiz (audio here).  I posted up the script in advance here.  In the end I modified it a bit.  Essentially the original talk boiled down to 'Go and live for Christ!'  The changes I made were basically to say 'See how He lived and died for you... Now don't you want to live for Him.'  An improvement I think!

Here's a talk I did on John 4 (audio here).  If I'd known about it, I'd have definitely included this quote from Malcolm Muggeridge (thanks Marc)   

I may, I suppose, regard myself, or pass for being, a relatively successful man. People occasionally stare at me in the streets-that's fame. I can fairly easily earn enough to qualify for admission to the higher slopes of the Inland Revenue-that's success. Furnished with money and a little fame even the elderly, if they care to, may partake of trendy diversions-that's pleasure. It might happen once in a while that something I said or wrote was sufficiently heeded for me to persuade myself that it represented a serious impact on our time-that's fulfilment. Yet I say to you, and I beg you to believe me, multiply these tiny triumphs by a million, add them all together, and they are nothing-less than nothing, a positive impediment-measured against one draught of that living water Christ offers to the spiritually thirsty, irrespective of who or what they are. What, I ask myself, does life hold, what is there in the works of time, in the past, now and to come, which could possibly be put in the balance against the refreshment of drinking that water?

Sermon delivered at Queen's Cross Church, Aberdeen, 26th May 1968, reprinted in Jesus Rediscovered (Garden City NY, Doubleday, 1969) pp76-82 and also in Seeing Through the Eye: Malcolm Muggeridge on Faith edited by Cecil Kuhne (Ignatius, 2005) 'Living Water' p97

.

Published on Leave a comment on Meditating on Romans 3

I preached on Romans 3:21-26 recently.  It's a dense, theologically loaded paragraph on the vindication of God's justice in justifying the unjust through the cross.  Leon Morris has called it perhaps the most important paragraph ever written.

So how to preach it? Well it's Paul, so then clearly a strong didactic form is called for.  Verse by verse, commentary in one hand, a greek lexicon in the other.  Unpack the massive theological freight piece by piece and if you're lucky some doxology tacked on the end (if you're unlucky, an exhortation to evangelism).

Well, perhaps you'll think that's more the model I ended up with.  But close to my heart throughout the preparation was this desire simply to meditate on the three scenes Paul gives us. The law court (v19-24a); the slave market (v24b) and the temple (v25). 

To be honest, if I'd had my time over I think I would have ditched everything else and just gone with a simple meditation.  I'd have gotten the congregation to close their eyes and come with me on a journey...

You are in court. Standing in the dock. You and all humanity. The arms dealer is to your left and the amnesty international human rights lawyer is to your right. In front of you is a paedophile, behind you is Mother Teresa. But there you are in the dock.  The court room intimidates you, everything in it is against you.  You know that your very life hangs in the balance. You dread the verdict that is about to be announced.

The judge reads out these words. As he reads, you know that every charge is unquestionably true:

You are not righteous.

You have no understanding.

You do not seek for God.

You have turned away.

You are worthless.

You do no good.

Your throat is an open grave.

You use your tongue only to deceive.

The venom of vipers is under your lips.

Your mouth is full of curses and bitterness.

Your feet are swift to shed blood

Ruin and misery mark your way.

You have not known the way of peace.

There is no fear of God before your eyes.

The whole court-room is silent but the words ‘not righteous', ‘no understanding' and ‘worthless' still ring in your ears. Your mouth is stopped. You cannot answer a single charge. It's all true and the weight of condemnation is crushing.

The judge raises his gavel. There can be only one verdict. The hammer crashes down. The judge declares it:

I find you not guilty.

The court-room changes in an instant. Smiles everywhere. The judge steps down off the bench to congratulate you.  You are lost for words.

"How?  Why?  What...? 

Large doors are opened and great light comes in. The guards usher you through the doors and out into the light.

The scene has changed.

You find yourself in a first-century market-place. You are hungry. You have no shoes. Instead you stand in iron shackles - owned by a cruel master.  You have never known any different.  You stand in front of the mob and the bidding starts for you.  The price goes up and up and you dread the reasons why anyone would pay so much. 

"Sold!" you hear.  And you peer into the crowd to find out who.  Suddenly a man emerges.  He smiles, bends down and unlocks your shackles.  He stands up, looks you in the eye and says "You're mine now."  You reach for words but they don't really come...  "Why?  How?  What did you pay?"

"Let me show you" He says and takes you by the hand out of the market.

Immediately the scene changes again. You are at the temple, standing - like all the other sinners - in the queue for the altar.  You are carrying a young lamb in your arms just like the law tells you.  At the front of the queue someone lays their hand on the head of their lamb, confessing their sin.  Then, holding its wriggling form down on the altar, they slit its throat - the blood gushes out.  You see the blood and you know that's what you deserve as a sinner.  You shuffle forwards towards the altar.

Suddenly, from deep within the temple a voice booms out ‘Stop the sacrifices.' You drop your lamb in fright, as does everyone else.  They all scurry away. Then you see the most shocking sight of your life.  The LORD God Almghty emerges from within the innnermost sanctuary.  You are stunned.  But not half as stunned as you are about to be.  In His strength the LORD strides towards the altar. He lays down on it, and carrying the sins of all the people the LORD is slain and His blood is spilt.

And now you know - the verdict you didn't deserve, the freedom you didn't earn - it was purchased by the blood of the LORD Jesus Himself.  You look to the altar to see your God now become your Lamb and His blood now become your atonement.  Shaking your head in wonder you leave the temple, the weight of your sin gone - the weight of His glory upon you. 

Go back to the dock.  Remember your guilt.  Now feel the wonder of the verdict.

Go back to the slave-market.  Remember your bondage.  Now feel the joy of your freedom.

Go back to the temple.  Remember the queue for the altar and whose blood was really required.  Now feel the awe as you behold the Lamb of God bleeding for your sins.

.

I should have just preached that don't you think?

Anyway - I went for a bit of a compromise.  Didactic with a touch of meditation thrown in.

Read it here

Listen here.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Now that's good sermon crit

From a Tim Keller sermon on 'the first shall be last':

There was once a young seminary graduate eager to preach his first sermon.  He ascended the pulpit steps, sure his great learning would amaze the simple lay folk.  Halfway through the sermon he realized he was making a hash of it.  First the congregation lost what he was saying, then he lost what he was saying.  At the end he climbed down from the pulpit crestfallen.  An old Christian woman met him at the end and said "If you'd have gone up the way you came down, you'd have come down the way you went up."

.

3

Published on 3 Comments on Now that’s good sermon crit

From a Tim Keller sermon on 'the first shall be last':

There was once a young seminary graduate eager to preach his first sermon.  He ascended the pulpit steps, sure his great learning would amaze the simple lay folk.  Halfway through the sermon he realized he was making a hash of it.  First the congregation lost what he was saying, then he lost what he was saying.  At the end he climbed down from the pulpit crestfallen.  An old Christian woman met him at the end and said "If you'd have gone up the way you came down, you'd have come down the way you went up."

.

Published on Leave a comment on New Wineskins

Some thoughts generated from a sermon on Mark 2:18-3:6

.

In Mark 1:40-2:17 we saw three stories about the people of Jesus' kingdom.  And this was the shock: The people of Jesus' kingdom are the lepers, the paralytics, the tax collectors and their spiritual equivalents.  Jesus calls sinners.  Sinners.  Not the righteous.  Jesus' people are not the people religion expects. 

In Mark 2:18-3:6 we continue with this revolution.  In these three stories the focus is on practices - in particular fasting and Sabbath observance.  And again, Jesus' practices are not the practices religion expects.

Jesus does not fit our religious moulds.  And so over the top of the three stories stands Mark 2:21-22 where Jesus gives us this mental image:

"No-one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse. And no-one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."

People are looking at Jesus and struggling to fit Him into their way of thinking.  But Jesus is saying:  It's not that I don't fit into your religious expectations.  Jesus says I won't fit into your religious expectations.  It's impossible to contain Jesus within moulds that aren't already designed with Him at the centre.

Jesus and His practices are like new cloth and if you try to patch them onto any old cloth it will tear apart the garment.  Jesus and His practices are like new wine and if you try to contain them within any old wineskin it'll burst the thing apart.  Whatever spiritual forms that exist in Jesus' kingdom they must consciously and explicitly be oriented to Jesus Himself.  Christ refuses to be just one more ingredient in a human religion.  You can't just take a bit of this spirituality and a bit of that philosophy and add a twist of Jesus.  You can't take your own common sense, your own culture's moral code and then expect Jesus to fit in.  Jesus demands a complete revolution.  If we haven't already, we have to begin afresh with Jesus.

In Jesus' kingdom, if you fast, you fast because of Him (you experience the absence of your Bridegroom - the true meaning of the Yom Kippur fast).  If you feast, you feast because of Him (you anticipate the presence of your Bridegroom).  If you observe Sabbath you do so 'to the Lord'.  If you don't, that's also 'to the Lord' (Rom 14:5-9).  Whatever forms of spiritual practice that exist in Jesus' kingdom are to explicitly relate to the Person of Christ.

Now apply this to any spiritual practice.  The question is not whether nor is it which practices you perform, not in the first instance.  The most pressing question is why.  More specifically the question is how is Jesus Himself the centre of this practice?  Think, for instance of bible reading.  Is reading the bible a spiritual practice of yours?  Why?  Because that's what Christians do?  Because advancing the bookmark makes you more holy?  Well you've just stripped Jesus out of this spiritual practice and turned it into human religion. 

Jesus spoke to the religious of his day who clung onto the scriptures as an old wineskin, yet they had no place for Jesus:

You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.  (John 5:39-40)

This is simply an extension of the wineskin principle to the Scriptures.  Without Jesus consciously at the centre of this practice it becomes an old wineskin - unable to cope with the reality of Jesus Himself.

Now of course the Scriptures, viewed truly, already have Jesus at the centre.  In the same way fasting and Sabbath, viewed truly, always ought to have had Jesus at the centre (hence Jesus' consistent appeals to the Old Testament in Mark).  But it's entirely possible that proper looking religious practices - even biblically mandated ones - can miss the whole Point.  The danger is always that we hold onto spiritual forms and neglect our spiritual Centre.

What spiritual practices do we need to re-examine in this light?

.

Read the sermon here

Listen here

.

Published on Leave a comment on Jesus: the abolition of religion

Adapted from a sermon on Mark 1:40-2:17

.

Jesus' teaching.  Jesus' followers.  Do you ever have trouble putting those two things together?

In a sense that's the problem the Christian faces as they seek to follow Him.  And it's the problem the non-Christian has as they look on.  How do Jesus' teaching and His followers go together??

Think about it.  With Jesus we hear righteous teaching like the world has never heard.  And yet, who flocks to Him?  The scum, the low-lives, the outsiders, the sinners.

Jesus teaches the hardest line on good living ever imagined.  He even says at one point "Be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect." (Matt 5:48).  Jesus raises the spiritual temperature to nuclear - and who flocks to Him?  Not the priests?  Not the religious types.  Not the goody goodies.  Those guys, in their long flowing robes are standing on the edges of the crowd, arms folded, plotting to destroy Jesus (Mark 3:6). 

The LORD Almighty walks around 1st century Palestine.  The Son of the Living God is calling His people and who is His entourage?  Unrighteous, disreputable outcasts.  It's a tremendous shock but it's at the heart of what Jesus came to do. 

As He says in Mark 2:17 "I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."  Jesus is the abolition of religion.  All human religion says "God calls the goodies not the baddies."  Jesus says "I call the baddies not the goodies."  Jesus is the abolition of religion.

The religious types stand on the fringes plotting to do away with Jesus.  But Jesus is at the centre doing away with religion.  These verses (Mark 1:40 right up until 3:6) are a fight to the death between Jesus and religion.  Religion is working to kill Jesus but Jesus is working to kill religion.

.

To read the whole sermon go here

To listen go here

.

Published on Leave a comment on Who’s the daddy?

Ok, no-one wants to touch Preaching Groups.  I respect that.

Let's return to the parables.

By now we know.  Jesus is the man who found treasure, the merchant looking for fine pearls and He's the good samaritan.  So now we turn to the most famous parable.

And what shall we call it?  The prodigal son?  Of course not, there are two sons.  Well then how about that for a title - the two sons?  Perhaps.  But are they really the focus?  Why not call it what Michael Ramsden tells us many oriental cultures call it: The parable of the running father.

Clearly it's the father who is the hero of the story.  Going out to meet the younger and then the older son, the father's deepest passion is to reconcile his estranged children to himself.

And both children definitely need to be reconciled.  The younger son may have asked for the inheritance but the older son also takes it when it's offered (Luke 15:12).  They've both taken the fruits of the death of their father and have spurned their filial relationship with him.

Physical distance and a slave relationship characterizes both sons, it's just more obvious with the prodigal.  The younger son puts a lot of distance between he and his father but the basis on which he returns is thoroughly calculating.  He plots to return as a hired hand and uses a form of repentance very reminiscent of Pharaoh's counterfeit repentance in Exodus 10:16.  Everything in the story up until the father's embrace shows that the prodigal prefers to be a slave at a distance than a son in the father's arms.

And that is just as true of the older son.  We find him out in the field, refusing to go in (physical distance).  And again, how does he perceive his relationship to his father?  "All these years I've been slaving for you." (v29)  Physical distance and a slave relationship mark both sons.  The only difference is how the two sons receive the approach of the father.  The one melts in the arms of his father, the other remains angry outside the house.

And now to turn to the title of this post: Who's the daddy?

Well, you've heard it preached numerous times I'm guessing.  What did the preacher say?  The father is God right?  I mean it's obvious isn't it?  We call God 'Father' and here's a story of a reconciling father - it must be God.

Well don't forget how Luke 15 begins.

Now the tax collectors and "sinners" were all gathering round to hear Jesus. 2 But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, "This man welcomes sinners, and eats with them." 3 Then Jesus told them this parable...  (Luke 15:1-3)

The occasion for the three stories - lost sheep, lost coin, reconciling father - is the grumbling of the Pharisees.  Jesus welcomes sinners and eats with them, and the religious complain about it.  So then Jesus tells a story about a man who welcomes a sinner, eats with him, and someone complains about it.  Well now - who is the younger son?  The sinners and tax collectors of course.  Who is the older son?  The Pharisees and teachers of the law of course.  And who is the father who eats with one and is complained to by the other?  Jesus of course.

Jesus is the father.  Plain and simple.  Jesus is the father.  Jesus is the good shepherd (v4-7), he's the good woman (v8-10), he's the good father (v11-32).  It just seems blindingly obvious don't you think?  And have we been confused on this simply because of the role 'father'?  Well Jesus casts himself as father even in the Gospels - 'Son, your sins are forgiven... Daughter, your faith has healed you.'  He has children (Is 8:18; 53:10; Heb 2:13; see also Luke 7:35).  If He can be a woman and even a mother hen, it's not at all inappropriate for Him to be pictured as father.

But perhaos there's this objection: Doesn't this rob us of the story's potential to reveal to us the Fatherhood of God.  Well no it shapes our understanding of it properly.  Surely we want to understand God the Father in God the Son.  And this parable helps us do that very well.  As we see Jesus running to the lost and eating with sinners we can hear Him saying "I do none of this by myself, I am doing only what I see My Father doing."  But the fact remains we see the Fatherhood of God in Jesus, who is the central character - portrayed as father.  The story is about Jesus - the Jesus who goes out to reconcile both the religious and the irreligious to bring them in.

Does this matter?  Well yes.  What if the story is spun in the usual manner - i.e. the father = God and those who come to their senses will get back into his good books?  Well if that's the story then we've just described Islam not the gospel. Kenneth Bailey puts the case for the Muslim interpretation like this (h/t Matt Finn)

“Their case can be stated thus: In this parable the Father obviously represents God while the younger son represents humankind. The son leaves home, gets into trouble and finally decides to return to his Father. He “yistaghfir Allah” (he seeks the forgiveness of God). On arrival the Father welcomes the son and thus demonstrates that he, the father, is “rahman wa rahim” (merciful and compassionate). There is no cross and no incarnation, no “son of God” and “no saviour”, no “word that becomes flesh” and no “way of salvation”, no death and no resurrection, no mediator and no mediation. The son needs no help to return home. The result is obvious. Jesus is a good Muslim who in this parable affirms Muslim theology. The heart of the Christian faith is thus denied by the very prophet Christianity claims to follow. Islam with neither a cross nor a saviour preserves the true message of the prophet Jesus”.

The Cross and the Prodigal, Kenneth Bailey, p15

But no, Jesus is at the very centre of this drama.  And His reconciliation is unlike anything Allah could or would offer.  He goes out, He bears the shame, He pleads, He appears weak and He celebrates sinners.  This is not prompted by the sinner's repentance, which was calculating at best, but by His own reconciling love.  Take this together with the other two stories which form a single 'parable' according to verse 3 and what do you have?  You have (as Barth put it) the father going into the far country to hoist the lost onto his shoulders and bring them home.  Luke 15 is no Christ-less, cross-less forgiveness tale.  Christ and His cross is the heart of it all.

.

Matt's posts on the parable are great.

Michael Ramsden's sermon is extraordinary preaching (though, if I'm picky, a bit vague on the point at issue here)

Keller's sermon is wonderful (though, again, not as straightforward on this point as I'd like).

Here's my attempt at a Luke 15 sermon

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA0-syI-rE0?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent]

Audio Download

.

10

Published on 10 Comments on Who's the daddy?

Ok, no-one wants to touch Preaching Groups.  I respect that.

Let's return to the parables. 

By now we know.  Jesus is the man who found treasure, the merchant looking for fine pearls and He's the good samaritan.  So now we turn to the most famous parable.

And what shall we call it?  The prodigal son?  Of course not, there are two sons.  Well then how about that for a title - the two sons?  Perhaps.  But are they really the focus?  Why not call it what Michael Ramsden tells us many oriental cultures call it: The parable of the running father.

Clearly it's the father who is the hero of the story.  Going out to meet the younger and then the older son, the father's deepest passion is to reconcile his estranged children to himself.

And both children definitely need to be reconciled.  The younger son may have asked for the inheritance but the older son also takes it when it's offered (Luke 15:12).  They've both taken the fruits of the death of their father and have spurned their filial relationship with him.

Physical distance and a slave relationship characterizes both sons, it's just more obvious with the prodigal.  The younger son puts a lot of distance between he and his father but the basis on which he returns is thoroughly calculating.  He plots to return as a hired hand and uses a form of repentance very reminiscent of Pharaoh's counterfeit repentance in Exodus 10:16.  Everything in the story up until the father's embrace shows that the prodigal prefers to be a slave at a distance than a son in the father's arms.

And that is just as true of the older son.  We find him out in the field, refusing to go in (physical distance).  And again, how does he perceive his relationship to his father?  "All these years I've been slaving for you." (v29)  Physical distance and a slave relationship mark both sons.  The only difference is how the two sons receive the approach of the father.  The one melts in the arms of his father, the other remains angry outside the house.

And now to turn to the title of this post: Who's the daddy?

Well, you've heard it preached numerous times I'm guessing.  What did the preacher say?  The father is God right?  I mean it's obvious isn't it?  We call God 'Father' and here's a story of a reconciling father - it must be God.

Well don't forget how Luke 15 begins.

Now the tax collectors and "sinners" were all gathering round to hear Jesus. 2 But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, "This man welcomes sinners, and eats with them." 3 Then Jesus told them this parable...  (Luke 15:1-3)

The occasion for the three stories - lost sheep, lost coin, reconciling father - is the grumbling of the Pharisees.  Jesus welcomes sinners and eats with them, and the religious complain about it.  So then Jesus tells a story about a man who welcomes a sinner, eats with him, and someone complains about it.  Well now - who is the younger son?  The sinners and tax collectors of course.  Who is the older son?  The Pharisees and teachers of the law of course.  And who is the father who eats with one and is complained to by the other?  Jesus of course.

Jesus is the father.  Plain and simple.  Jesus is the father.  Jesus is the good shepherd (v4-7), he's the good woman (v8-10), he's the good father (v11-32).  It just seems blindingly obvious don't you think?  And have we been confused on this simply because of the role 'father'?  Well Jesus casts himself as father even in the Gospels - 'Son, your sins are forgiven... Daughter, your faith has healed you.'  He has children (Is 8:18; 53:10; Heb 2:13; see also Luke 7:35).  If He can be a woman and even a mother hen, it's not at all inappropriate for Him to be pictured as father.

But perhaos there's this objection: Doesn't this rob us of the story's potential to reveal to us the Fatherhood of God.  Well no it shapes our understanding of it properly.  Surely we want to understand God the Father in God the Son.  And this parable helps us do that very well.  As we see Jesus running to the lost and eating with sinners we can hear Him saying "I do none of this by myself, I am doing only what I see My Father doing."  But the fact remains we see the Fatherhood of God in Jesus, who is the central character - portrayed as father.  The story is about Jesus - the Jesus who goes out to reconcile both the religious and the irreligious to bring them in. 

Does this matter?  Well yes.  What if the story is spun in the usual manner - i.e. the father = God and those who come to their senses will get back into his good books?  Well if that's the story then we've just described Islam not the gospel. Kenneth Bailey puts the case for the Muslim interpretation like this (h/t Matt Finn)

“Their case can be stated thus: In this parable the Father obviously represents God while the younger son represents humankind. The son leaves home, gets into trouble and finally decides to return to his Father. He “yistaghfir Allah” (he seeks the forgiveness of God). On arrival the Father welcomes the son and thus demonstrates that he, the father, is “rahman wa rahim” (merciful and compassionate). There is no cross and no incarnation, no “son of God” and “no saviour”, no “word that becomes flesh” and no “way of salvation”, no death and no resurrection, no mediator and no mediation. The son needs no help to return home. The result is obvious. Jesus is a good Muslim who in this parable affirms Muslim theology. The heart of the Christian faith is thus denied by the very prophet Christianity claims to follow. Islam with neither a cross nor a saviour preserves the true message of the prophet Jesus”.

The Cross and the Prodigal, Kenneth Bailey, p15

But no, Jesus is at the very centre of this drama.  And His reconciliation is unlike anything Allah could or would offer.  He goes out, He bears the shame, He pleads, He appears weak and He celebrates sinners.  This is not prompted by the sinner's repentance, which was calculating at best, but by His own reconciling love.  Take this together with the other two stories which form a single 'parable' according to verse 3 and what do you have?  You have (as Barth put it) the father going into the far country to hoist the lost onto his shoulders and bring them home.  Luke 15 is no Christ-less, cross-less forgiveness tale.  Christ and His cross is the heart of it all.

.

Matt's posts on the parable are great.

Michael Ramsden's sermon is extraordinary preaching (though, if I'm picky, a bit vague on the point at issue here)

Keller's sermon is wonderful (though, again, not as straightforward on this point as I'd like).

.

Published on Leave a comment on Free to follow

Not sure it ever happened (happy to be contradicted), but what a good illustration as heard in this morning's sermon by Neil Green (my vicar).

Abraham Lincoln was once at a slave auction.  A young girl was being sold, naked but for her shackles.  Lincoln was so distressed by the thought of her being bought by any of the rabble present that he bid for her himself.  As the price went up and up, Lincoln continued to outbid the rest and eventually he paid top dollar for her.  The girl was brought to Abe, petrified of what a man who paid so much would want with her.  Lincoln took off his great black cloak and clothed her saying 'You're free.' 

The girl couldn't believe it.  She said 'You mean I can go?' 

He said 'Yes'. 

'I can marry anyone I want?' 

'Yes.'  

'I can work anywhere I like?' 

'Yes' 

'I can go anywhere I please?' 

'Yes.'  

'Then,' she said, 'I will go with you.'

.

Published on Leave a comment on No worries

From this sermon on Luke 12:1-12...

What is the most common command in the Scriptures? 

Fear not.  Do not be afraid. Hundreds of times in the whole bible - the message is repeatedly given "Don't worry." 

But we do.  All the time.  About everything.

I bet if I asked you to make a list of things you were worried about at the moment, you could reel off at least five without thinking about it. If I gave you enough time you'd fill a sheet of paper with worries.  We are fearful people.  And Jesus knows us.  So He keeps on persisting with this teaching, till maybe some of it sinks in. 

In Luke 12 we are told not to worry 6 times:

 

4 "I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid

 

7  ...Don't be afraid

 

11 "When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry

 

22 "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life

 

26 ... why do you worry?

 

32 "Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom.

 

The repetition tells you - we've got a problem with fear.  But it also tells us, Jesus has a solution to fear. 

But Jesus' solution to fear is different to our gut reactions to fear. 

We usually have one of two gut reactions to fear.  One reaction is to take the Nike logo to heart - Just Do It.  You're afraid, so what, just do it.  Notice that Jesus doesn't tell us that.

Everytime He says ‘Don't be afraid' He gives us a reason not to be afraid. And in this chapter it's always one of two reasons.  He says ‘Don't worry, God is very powerful.' Or He says ‘Don't worry, God loves you very much.'  He's very powerful, He's very loving - those are reasons not to worry and Jesus wants those truths to sink down into our hearts until the worry goes.  So Jesus does not say ‘I don't care if you're afraid, just do it.'  Jesus wants to address our fears, He wants us to examine them and to replace them with a confidence in His Father's power and love.  

The other reaction we have to our fears is simply to run from them.  If our first reaction is the stiff upper lip, this reaction is the cowardly retreat.  Our fears dominate our lives so that we never do anything scary and we just live very dull lives, never risking anything. 

Sometimes I've spoken about fears and people have said to me ‘I don't fear anything.  I'm not the kind of person that gets worried.'  My next question is - What risks do you regularly take?  When do you make yourself vulnerable to others?  How do you engage with and serve this broken world?  When have you tried to get new initiatives off the ground?  How often do you back a cause that won't necessarily be popular?  When do you take moral stands? And this is the one that really bites:  How often do you speak up for Jesus even when it won't be popular? 

Inevitably the answers to those questions are - I don't.  A person who says they have no fear is almost always a person who is very controlled by fears.  They live a life of humdrum mediocrity, with very few highs, very few lows, they don't speak out for Christ, they don't stand up for Him, they don't give their hearts and their service to others, they surround themselves with safety and comfort and in fact every aspect of their life is controlled by fear.  The cowardly retreat from fear is very common.  It's in all of us.  It's what stops us from being the radical disciples that Jesus calls us to be.

We're not the people we want to be because of our fears.  It's not that we've looked at the way of Jesus and said ‘I'd be perfectly happy doing that, I just don't really fancy it.'  We've looked at it and said ‘I can't do that - I'm petrified of living that life.'

And that's why Jesus keeps coming to us saying - ‘Follow me and don't be afraid'.  He doesn't say ‘Follow me and stuff your feelings'.  And He doesn't say ‘Don't bother following me if you're scared.'  He commands both: ‘Follow me and don't be afraid.'

And this puts us onto one of the deepest truths about fear.  Freedom from fear does not come by staying safe.  Freedom from fear comes as you put yourself in danger.  It's so counter-intuitive which is why we so rarely experience freedom from fear.  We try to find freedom from fear by avoiding all conflict and danger.  But you don't find peace there - not God's peace anyway.  You find God's peace on the front lines.  God's peace comes in war.  Freedom from fear comes as you take up your cross daily and follow Jesus to Golgotha.

.

For more, go to my sermon on Luke 12:1-12

.

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer