Skip to content

Tag: sermons

Published on Leave a comment on Christ Alone, Grace Alone, Revelation Alone

I'm halfway through Mike Reeves' excellent lectures on a theology of revelation.  Go and listen now if you haven't done already.

Maybe I should put them somewhere prominently and permanently on the blog because they explain much better than I can the thinking behind 'Christ the Truth'. 

To be an evangelical theologian is to have your method entirely shaped by God's coming to us in Jesus.  Just as we are saved through God's grace alone by Christ alone, so we know God by God's grace alone and through Christ alone.  This being the case, we need to be saved from our 'wisdom' every bit as much as we need to be saved from our 'works.'

Anyway, all these sorts of thoughts were circling through my head when I came across this quote posted on Tony Reinke's blog.  It's all about how we should 'restore the bridge' from classical literature to Christ!

“What then shall we say if we would restore the medieval bridge from Homer, Plato and Virgil to Christ, the Bible and the church? Shall we say that Christianity is not the only truth? Certainly not! But let us also not say that Christianity is the only truth. Let us say instead that Christianity is the only complete truth. The distinction here is vital. By saying that Christianity is the only complete truth, we leave open the possibility that other philosophies, religions and cultures have hit on certain aspects of the truth. The Christian need not reject the poetry of Homer, the teachings of Plato, or the myths of the pagans as one hundred percent false, as an amalgamation of darkness and lies (as Luther strongly suggests), but may affirm those moments when Plato and Homer leap past their human limitations and catch a glimpse of the true glory of the triune God.

I reject the all-or-nothing, darkness-or-light dualism that Luther at times embraced. But I also reject the modern relativist position that truth is like a hill and there are many ways around it. Yes, truth is like a hill, but the truth that stands atop that hill is Christ and him crucified. To arrive at the truth of Christ, the people of the world have pursued many, many different routes. Some have only scaled the bottom rim of the hill; others have made it halfway. But many have reached the top and experienced the unspeakable joy that comes only when the truth they have sought all their lives is revealed to them. …

If we are to accept these verses [Romans 2:14-15] in a manner that is in any way literal, we must confess that unregenerate pagans have an inborn capacity for grasping light and truth that was not totally depraved by the Fall. Indeed, though the pagan poets and philosophers of Greece and Rome did not have all the answers (they couldn’t, as they lacked the special revelation found only in Jesus), they knew how to ask the right questions—questions that build within the readers of their works a desire to know the higher truths about themselves and their Creator.”

—Louis Markos, From Achilles to Christ: Why Christians Should Read the Pagan Classics (IVP Academic 2007), pp. 13-14

How do you think your mild-mannered correspondent reacted?

Well - go and see.  Here's a selection of my many comments!

I enjoy the blog. I hate this quote.

Christ and Him crucified does not sit atop a hill as though waiting for natural man to ascend! The Truth steps down to meet us in ignorance, just as the Life steps down to meet us in death. And besides, which natural mind has ever drawn near to the crucified God? Such truth has only ever appeared as folly to the world, yet this *is* the power and wisdom of God.

This quote is epistemological Pelagianism. Salvation and knowledge go together. We must oppose synergism in the one as strongly as we oppose it in the other. No wonder Luther shows the way. We’d do well to heed his cautions...

It is incontestably and trivially true that pagans can write meaningful novels, develop life-saving medicine, pursue world-enlightening science, make correct philosophical and moral observations. And it’s equally true that pagans can work for peace, give blood and generally be very, very nice people. No-one’s saying unbelievers can’t say true stuff, just as no-one’s saying unbelievers can’t do good stuff. The trouble comes when someone tries to co-ordinate nature and grace in either knowledge or salvation. Whenever the natural is seen as a stepping stone into grace alarm bells must go off. Whenever co-ordination, stepping-stones, bridges, spectrums, pilgrimmages, ascents up hills are discussed flags have to go up...

Truth is relative – relative to Christ, the Truth (good name for a blog I reckon). His subjectivity is the one objectivity. There are therefore whole worlds of understanding that make some kind of sense within their own terms of reference and which make some kind of sense of the world but are falsely related to the true Logos. Therefore in toto and at root they are utterly false. And there can be no bridge between these worlds and the world in which Christ crucified is central. There can only be redemption from these worlds. Such a redemption will require wholesale rethinking (metanoia – change of mind)...  2 Cor 10:5!...

I’m happy to call any number of pagan statements ‘true’ – just as I’m happy to call any number of pagan actions ‘good’. (For me this parallel between knowledge and salvation is key.)

It allows me to say:

1) such ‘truth’ or ‘goodness’ is of great benefit to the world.

2) such ‘truth’ or ‘goodness’ can be truly seen by the regenerate as evidences of common grace.

but,

3) such ‘truth’ or ‘goodness’, viewed from the pagan themselves, does not lead towards but away from Christ and Him crucified.

A pagan’s goodness leads them away from the grace of Christ, a pagan’s wisdom leads them away from the revelation of Christ...

I could tell you all sorts of propositions that surrounded my saving faith in Christ, but I’d be reflecting back on a miracle. I wouldn’t be telling you the natural steps that secured salvation any more than the servants at Cana would be telling you how *they* drew wine out of those stone jars.

Just as there are no discrete human deeds that add up to divine righteousness, so there are no discrete human understandings that add up to divine knowledge. All must be of grace, all must be of revelation.

 

So there.  I also discuss Acts 17 and Romans 2 a bit.  And there's even some good points made by other bloggers!  Common grace really is astounding  ;-)

.

 

.

 

 

Published on Leave a comment on Time for a Spring Clean

feather duster... in the southern hemisphere anyway.

But as the weather turns decidedly Fall-en here, I'm still thinking about Spring cleaning.  The reason being - I've just preached on Exodus 12 tonight.  In preparation I was thinking about the Feast of Unleavened Bread (I speak about it some more in my 1 Corinthians 5 sermon).

Basically the Feast of Unleavened Bread begins with Passover and then continues with the purging of yeast from Israelite households. (see e.g. Exodus 12:15) What's wrong with yeast you might ask?  Yeast kept a person in slavery.  If, when the other Israelites were eating and fleeing in haste, you're waiting for your bread to rise, it's clear where your heart is.  (Ex 12:33-34)  You're not really committed to the LORD's deliverance.  You'd rather live it up in Egypt.

So then every year after Passover, the Israelites were to purge their households of any sign of this compromise.  It was a cleansing symbolic of a spiritual spring clean (see how Paul applies it in 1 Cor 5:7-8).  Cupboard examination pointed to self-examination.  Am I really on board with the LORD's redemption, or is my heart still in Egypt?

What's interesting to me is that we have a Christian festival of self-examination.  It's called Lent.  But when does it come?  Not after Passover (Easter) - but before.   Unfortunately in our calendar we have a spiritual spring clean before Jesus dies for us.  In the Hebrew calendar - Passover was the very first thing (Ex 12:2).  

In the bible, we are redeemed as helpless, enslaved sinners.  In fact nothing can happen before the LORD's salvation.  Later we consider compromise in our lives. 

So much of our church experience teaches the Lent then Easter pattern.  We clean ourselves up and then God helps those who help themselves.

Reminds me of the worst sermon I ever heard.

But maybe that's for another post...

.

Published on Leave a comment on Some newish sermons and a question about computer animation

I don't think I've updated 'My Sermons' since March.

Here's some sermons I've preached since then:

1 Corinthians 7 (for grown ups)

1 Corinthians 8 

1 Corinthians 9

1 Corinthians 10

1 Corinthians 11

1 Corinthians 12

1 Corinthians 13

1 Corinthians 14

2 Samuel 14

2 Samuel 15

2 Samuel 21 (All age with slides)

2 Samuel 22 (All age song and slides)

Mark 12:18-44

Mark 13

Mark 14:1-26

Mark 14:53-15:15

Mark 15:40-16:8

Deut 8 (The Church in the Wilderness 1)

.

I've also got a question.

.

I'd love to be able to turn Powerpoint presentations into Youtube videos. Windows Movie Maker doesn't let me keep the animations from Powerpoint (only the images). Do any of you know a cheap way of making basic videos? I'd like to be able to use Powerpoint, but if converters from Powerpoint prove expensive perhaps someone could recommend an affordable video-making / animation program?

I just think little videos might be a great teaching tool. If any of you have any ideas, let me know.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Luther v Cranmer on Lord's Supper

Given discussion about Lutheran influence on the UK, here's a Thawsday repost...

John Richardson (whose excellent blog is here) adds his voice to this discussion on Stand Firm in Faith.  He writes about the place of repentance in the communion service.  It chimes with a lot of what I wrote here: 

I have long felt Anglicanism (specifically Thomas Cranmer) to be good at driving us to our knees in repentance, but not so good at letting us get up again.

In regard to this, I would point out the contrast between what the Book of Common Prayer says about our preparation to receive Holy Communion and what Luther said. The Exhortation in the BCP says in effect that if we are to receive Communion worthily we must first put ourselves right with God.

Contrast this with Luther. First, he says, “There must be faith to make the reception worthy and acceptable before God, otherwise it is nothing but sham and a mere external show.”

And what is this faith? It is “a firm trust that Christ, the Son of God, stands in our place and has taken all our sins upon his shoulders and that he is the eternal satisfaction for our sin and reconciles us with God the Father.”

But what does this mean for our ‘worthiness’? “This food demands a hungering and longing man, for it delights to enter a hungry soul, which is constantly battling with its sins and eager to be rid of them.”

Therefore those with the right faith are those, “who suffer tribulation, physical or spiritual ... spiritually through despair of conscience, outwardly or inwardly, when the devil causes your heart to be weak, timid, and discouraged, so that you do not know how you stand with God, and when he casts your sins into your face.” (emphasis added)

I don’t think the BCP reflects this. Rather, the BCP urges communicants first: “search and examine your own consciences ... that ye may come holy and clean to such a heavenly Feast, in the marriage-garment required by God in holy Scripture, and be received as worthy partakers of that holy Table” and so, “examine your lives and conversations by the rule of God’s commandments; and whereinsoever ye shall perceive yourselves to have offended, either by will, word, or deed, there to bewail your own sinfulness, and to confess yourselves to Almighty God, with full purpose of amendment of life” (emphasis added).

The Anglican way is ‘be cleansed, then come’. The Lutheran way is ‘come and be cleansed’.

Here's a 'come and be cleansed' type sermon I preached called Eating with Jesus (listen here).

 

.

Published on Leave a comment on Luther v Cranmer on Lord’s Supper

Given discussion about Lutheran influence on the UK, here's a Thawsday repost...

John Richardson (whose excellent blog is here) adds his voice to this discussion on Stand Firm in Faith.  He writes about the place of repentance in the communion service.  It chimes with a lot of what I wrote here: 

I have long felt Anglicanism (specifically Thomas Cranmer) to be good at driving us to our knees in repentance, but not so good at letting us get up again.

In regard to this, I would point out the contrast between what the Book of Common Prayer says about our preparation to receive Holy Communion and what Luther said. The Exhortation in the BCP says in effect that if we are to receive Communion worthily we must first put ourselves right with God.

Contrast this with Luther. First, he says, “There must be faith to make the reception worthy and acceptable before God, otherwise it is nothing but sham and a mere external show.”

And what is this faith? It is “a firm trust that Christ, the Son of God, stands in our place and has taken all our sins upon his shoulders and that he is the eternal satisfaction for our sin and reconciles us with God the Father.”

But what does this mean for our ‘worthiness’? “This food demands a hungering and longing man, for it delights to enter a hungry soul, which is constantly battling with its sins and eager to be rid of them.”

Therefore those with the right faith are those, “who suffer tribulation, physical or spiritual ... spiritually through despair of conscience, outwardly or inwardly, when the devil causes your heart to be weak, timid, and discouraged, so that you do not know how you stand with God, and when he casts your sins into your face.” (emphasis added)

I don’t think the BCP reflects this. Rather, the BCP urges communicants first: “search and examine your own consciences ... that ye may come holy and clean to such a heavenly Feast, in the marriage-garment required by God in holy Scripture, and be received as worthy partakers of that holy Table” and so, “examine your lives and conversations by the rule of God’s commandments; and whereinsoever ye shall perceive yourselves to have offended, either by will, word, or deed, there to bewail your own sinfulness, and to confess yourselves to Almighty God, with full purpose of amendment of life” (emphasis added).

The Anglican way is ‘be cleansed, then come’. The Lutheran way is ‘come and be cleansed’.

Here's a 'come and be cleansed' type sermon I preached called Eating with Jesus (listen here).

 

.

17

Published on 17 Comments on The New Birth

My great friend (and regular commenter here) Will Mackerras recently preached a cracker at Farm Fellowship (where Paul Blackham ministers).

Do we really believe that a person in Christ will naturally and organically produce righteous fruit - just as someone in Adam will naturally and organically produce wicked fruit?  Do we have a proper understanding of our new nature?  And of what will flow from it?

Will gets Rom 2:14 absolutely right to say yes.  Even Gentile believers will do by nature the things required by the law, because they are born again - they have a new heart of flesh (Jer 31:33-34).

Then he discusses how to be born again.  We do not contribute to the new birth.  We are born again by faith (John 1:12).  Will has a wonderful analogy for how Jesus does not dispense the new birth. 

He asks us to imagine a super hero called Super Doctor.  Super Doctor has the power to cure people of their sickness at will and even from distance.  But Super Doctor's one weakness is that he hates spending time with sick people.  So he hatches a plan.  He decides that he'll wait until people come into his waiting room and then as soon as they walk through his office door he'll magically heal them so that they won't get any germs on him. 

But then he thinks they won't be very grateful for this because they'll think they effected the cure by walking through the door.  So instead he just magically zaps sick people in the community at random and trusts that eventually they'll figure out what's happened to them and turn up in his surgery to say thanks.

Of course both these scenarios are very different to Jesus' healing methods.  Sick people come to Jesus just as they are.  It's precisely the sick people who do come to Jesus - leperous warts and all. (Mark 2:17)  'If you are willing you can make me clean' said the unclean man to the Holy Lord of Israel. (Matt 8:2).  Jesus heals the way He saves.  He encounters people in their unregenerate sinful mess and through the encounter He changes them.

One implication of this for preachers is that we should be far more invitational.  We call on people to turn to Christ just as they are.  They don't need to clean themselves up but simply call on Christ even in their sins and love of darkness.

I spent some great time with Will a few weeks ago discussing how we love to hear invitational preaching.  It is of the essence of the gospel to call on sinners to come to Christ right there and then as the sinners that they are.  May our preaching reflect this precious gospel truth.

 

 

 

 

 

The Spirit and the Bride say, "Come." And let the one who hears say, "Come." And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price. (Rev 22:17)

1. Just as I am, without one plea,
but that thy blood was shed for me,
and that thou bidst me come to thee,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

2. Just as I am, and waiting not
to rid my soul of one dark blot,
to thee whose blood can cleanse each spot,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

3. Just as I am, though tossed about
with many a conflict, many a doubt,
fightings and fears within, without,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

4. Just as I am, poor, wretched, blind;
sight, riches, healing of the mind,
yea, all I need in thee to find,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

5. Just as I am, thou wilt receive,
wilt welcome, pardon, cleanse, relieve;
because thy promise I believe,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

6. Just as I am, thy love unknown
hath broken every barrier down;
now, to be thine, yea thine alone,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Listen to the sermon here (unfortunately it misses the last few minutes).

.

Published on Leave a comment on Dan Allender – The Psychology of a Pooped Pastor

The Wounded Heart is my favourite Dan Allender resource. (see previous post).  But here's one that's $95 cheaper (i.e. free).  A talk entitled The Psychology of a Pooped Pastor

His main point is that the problem is not Pooped Pastors but Pissed Pastors.  (By the way Mum, by pissed he means angry - it's an American thing). 

It's not underlying tiredness but underlying anger that's the problem.  Very interesting!

.

17

Published on 17 Comments on 1 Corinthians 13 sermon

bubblebath

Sermon Audio Click Here

How do you think of 1 Corinthians 13?  Is it a warm, relaxing bubble bath?  Does it make you forget your cares and give you the warm fuzzies?

antiseptic

I'm here to tell you, this chapter is not a bubble bath.  It’s a scalding hot bath full of antiseptic!

And we are covered in cuts and bruises and deep wounds.  And 1 Corinthians 13 hurts.  It hurts!

That’s the kind of wake-up call Paul wanted the Cornithians to have.  No Corinthian read this chapter and thought, ‘How sweet!.  They thought ‘Yikes!  I am in deep, deep trouble here.’

There are three paragraphs in this chapter.  Paragraph 1 will put the fear of God into us, paragraph 2 will make us despair of ourselves, but only then will paragraph 3 give us some hope.

There’s hope in the end, but Paul wants us to soak long and hard in some painful truths.

Listen here.  Or keep reading...

...continue reading "1 Corinthians 13 sermon"

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer