Baptist Renewal

In the past two years, our church has been privileged to partner with AMBER (The Association of Ministers for Baptist and Evangelical Renewal), a new network of churches and pastors across (mostly Western) Canada I previously wrote about here.

It was in the middle of our spring conference last May, listening to Shaun Martens’ message on congregationalism, that I first thought, “We need to publish this as a book.” Over the past few months we’re re-worked our conference addresses into written chapters and have bundled it with our freshly-updated confession of faith. We’re also honoured that respected historian Dr. Michael Haykin contributed his essay on the origins of the Baptist movement (which he delivered at our conference last year) to this volume.

There are many great books out there which delve deep into the biblical basis for our Baptist distinctives and identity, but not any—that I’m aware of—that are short, readable, pastoral, and which I could confidently put into the hand of anybody in my church. We really hope “Baptist Renewal” fills this gap for many pastors and churches.

We’ve priced this book to make it easy to pick up and give away ($10 CAD for print, $2.99 for Kindle) and pray the Lord will use it for his glory in many Canadian churches. You can check it out here.

And, by the way, don’t miss out on AMBER’s 2026 spring conference, “A Better Story: Celebrating God’s Good Design for Men and Women,” coming up in just a few short weeks.

PrayerPlay

I love praying for my family, my church, and missionaries around the world, and, like many people, I’ve found it necessary to use tools to help me remember names and prayer requests. I simply don’t trust my memory.

Two quick asides here:

1. I don’t agree with the idea that all good praying is spontaneous, and that writing down someone’s name to pray for them at a later time makes your prayer less personal or less meaningful. The opposite is true: writing it down means it’s important enough to make sure you actually do it. If we write down appointments, tasks, or other notes we want to remember, why would we treat prayer any less seriously?
2. I also don’t think that structured, list-based praying is the only kind of prayer we should engage in. Praying in response to Scripture as we read it, praying throughout our day as needs and burdens arise, praying for people as they cross our minds—all of this is important, too. Prayer, like other relationships, should have both structured and spontaneous elements to it.

After reading Paul Miller’s A Praying Life (which I really recommend!) I found his “prayer cards” model to be very helpful. Instead of a giant, intimidating list, a stack of recipe cards allows you to pray for people in a manageable, focused way, as well as keep track of the “prayer stories” that develop as we bring people before the Lord regularly. Daily, weekly and monthly stacks let you pray for different requests with varying frequency. In the last few years I’ve switched back and forth between physical cards and the PrayerMate app which replicates this functionality on my phone.

Here’s where I’ve struggled, though: some of my best times talking to the Lord are not when I’m sitting still, but when I’m driving somewhere, hiking through the woods, or, more recently, walking the neighbour’s dog. Some of this is probably a combination of personality and ADHD; I have a way easier time talking to anybody when we’re out for a walk or a drive compared to sitting still. But there’s also something about the sky, being outside in God’s world, that spurs worship and provokes a response to the person who made all of this.

The obvious problem is that it’s hard to flip through a deck of recipe cards, or look at a screen on your phone, while you’re walking or driving.

Enter PrayerPlay. Using an AI tool (Claude Code), I made an app in my spare time that reads your prayer cards out loud, so you can pray on-the-go. I’ve been really helped by it, and I hope it helps you too!

Here’s a short rundown on some of the app’s features and functionality:

• You can set it up however you like.
  • You can keep it simple with a single list of a few cards.
  • Or, you can make a robust system with multiple lists, dozens of cards in each list, and numerous items on each card.
• You can use it in different ways.
  • Pop in headphones and have your prayer items advance on a customized interval, pausing or advancing at any point.
  • Or, you can turn off audio and swipe through cards manually, for those times where you do want to sit still.
  • Each prayer list has a “play” button at the top so you can pray through just that specific list.
  • Or, the “Pray” tab builds a customized pray session that pulls together cards from various lists.
    • Each list has settings that determine how many cards get included in each prayer session.
    • Cards and items can be shuffled, viewed in sequence, or scheduled for specific days of the week, month. (One time requests can be set for specific dates and optionally auto-archived afterwards.)
• A quick-add shortcut from the home screen (or within the app) makes it quick and easy to add new requests.
• A sharing functionality lets you easily share anything with other users.
• Your data is yours, period. PrayerPlay uses purely on-device technology, from speech to storage; nothing is collected or saved on a server whatsoever. Nobody can see what you’re using the app for unless you choose to export and share.
• Totally free to use. Zero in-app subscriptions. (The App Store description has a link where people can contribute to development costs if they choose to.)

At this point, PrayerPlay is available for iOS only; an Android version is in the works. Check out this link to download (free!).

It’s been a joy to be a part of these projects and I pray that the Lord uses them for His glory.

“Take courage, and be men, O Philistines, lest you become slaves to the Hebrews as they have been to you; be men and fight.” (1 Samuel 4:9)

The Philistines understood that being a man isn’t just a matter of biology; it’s also a matter of behaviour. There are certain ways of acting that are appropriate for men. In this passage, that specifically includes courage and the ability to fight.

As Christians, we’re very prone to spiritualize these characteristics. 1 Corinthians 16:13 says, “Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.” I wonder how many of us assume that, because that’s in the New Testament, it means we should be spiritually strong.

No doubt it does. But is that all it means? I’m not so sure.

Most men discover at some point that it’s impossible for them to be spiritually strong without some attention to their bodies. Even Charles Spurgeon, not exactly the picture of physical health, recognized that he couldn’t be happy in the Lord without getting out and walking in a stiff breeze every once in a while. “A day’s breathing of fresh air upon the hills, or a few hours ramble in the beech woods’ umbrageous calm, would sweep the cobwebs out of the brain of scores of our toiling ministers who are now but half alive,” he once wrote.

God gave us bodies which work best when they are used, and much of the time that means using them to do hard things. “Bodily training is of some value,” Paul said in 1 Timothy 4:8, a statement that establishes rather than downplays the value of physical training. Commenting on this passage, Douglas Moo writes,

We should not underestimate the physical toughness of someone like Paul, who walked thousands of miles/kilometers on his journeys and endured extreme physical deprivation over decades (2 Cor 11:23–27). Timothy would have trekked his share of miles/kilometers alongside Paul. The point is not to denigrate fitness but to contrast its (temporal) utility with the eternal worth of “godliness.”¹Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,” in NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2018), 2173.)

Let’s go even a step further. Men, as men, have a God-given responsibility to provide and protect. When bad people want to hurt vulnerable people, godly men step in between. A generation of us have been raised on John Piper’s illustration of a young guy on a first date with a girl who, he just found out, has a black belt in a martial art. But then…

…two men accost them with ominous expressions and say, “Pretty girl you’ve got there, fellow. We’d like her purse and your wallet.” And then they say, “In fact, she’s really pretty. We’d like her.”

Now, the thought goes through his head, “She’s got a black belt in martial arts,” but instead of stepping behind her, he takes her elbow with a firm grip and just eases her back and says, “You touch her, it will be over my dead body.” And he tackles them both. And while he tackles them, he says, “Run.” They knock him out cold, and the next thing they know, they’re both on their back with their teeth bashed in.

…and as she’s riding to the hospital with this man, she looks down at him and says to herself, “This is the kind of man I want to marry.”²https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/god-created-man-male-and-female/excerpts/what-makes-a-real-man

I’ve shared versions of this story throughout the years, and I love watching how the guys sit up a little straighter and the girls get that far-away look in their eyes. We all know, deep down inside, that this is what real men do. This is good.

But 1 Samuel 4:9 has got me thinking: what’s the value of getting in between your girl and the bad guys if you can’t actually do anything to protect her? Most of the women in our lives don’t have black belts. For a lot of men, this story would end very differently: “They knock him out cold, and then they grabbed the girl and did what they wanted with her.”

Did the man in that version of the story act like a man? He had the courage to try to protect her. But what good is intention without ability? If God has given him the responsibility to protect, but he can’t actually fulfill that responsibility when the situation calls for it, is he actually being a man?

Increasingly, I’m beginning to suspect that physical strength has at least something to do with God’s call for Christian men to “be strong.” Those who know me well understand how ironic this might sound. I’ve been hopelessly ectomorphic my entire life; my body really doesn’t like building muscle. I’m not a particularly strong man, if strength is defined physically. But, at 40 years of age, I’m feeling less and less okay with that. And I have a fresh bag of protein powder on my kitchen counter to prove it.

If it sounds strange to hear a pastor talking about the the importance of physical strength on his church’s website, maybe that’s because I’m getting sidetracked on some weird tangent. Or, maybe that’s because us western Christians have a long history of separating physical realities from spiritual realities in ways that the Bible doesn’t.

There’s a whole post’s worth of caveats and qualifications I could add here. If you’re thinking “but what about…?”, there’s a good chance I’d agree with you. Yes, there’s different kinds of strength and different ways of being strong. Yes, feminine strength has physical manifestations, too: lots of women throughout history and around the world today have had to work really, really hard with their bodies. No, I’m not advocating for some macho, chest-thumping version of Christianity. And no, I certainly haven’t been “red-pilled” by the “manosphere.”

But I do want to call men to be men in every way that God intended them to be. Paul meant something when he said “act like men, be strong.” And I’m wondering if just maybe the Philistines were on to something after all.

Maybe you’ll find it helpful, or know others who might. Feel free to pass it along.

So, we can think of wedding rings as a sign and a seal of the covenant relationship of marriage, and their use reflects an ancient pattern seen in the Bible. When God entered into a special relationship with people (called a covenant), he often gave a visible sign of that new relationship. These signs were incredibly diverse, like a rainbow after a storm (Gen 9:13-15), a weekly day off (Ex 31:15-17), or even a minor surgery (Gen 17:9-11). In each case, just like a wedding ring, these signs represented and reminded God’s people about his promises to them. In some cases, these signs also “sealed the deal” of the covenant between God and people.

When we trust in Jesus, we enter into a covenant relationship with God, and baptism (which comes from a Greek work that means to “dip” or “immerse”) is both a sign and seal of this relationship.

As a sign, baptism points to the great realities of our salvation. The water retells a story: just as Noah was carried safely through the flood of judgement in the ark, and just like Israel passed through the Red Sea on dry land, so we too have been saved from judgement through Jesus, who took our judgement for us. When he went to the cross, he sacrificed himself as as payment for our sins. When we go under the waters of baptism, we reenact how Jesus went under the judgement of God for us, dying in our place. When we come up out of the water, we announce that we have begun to share in Jesus’ eternal resurrection life. Baptism proclaims that what Jesus did, he did for us (Rom 6:3-5).

The waters of baptism also point to the way that Jesus’ death cleans us, washing away our sins so that we might live in the new life he gives us (Acts 22:16, 1 Pet 3:20–21). 

Beyond being a sign, baptism works to seal our covenant relationship with God. Baptism is how we respond to what Jesus has done for us. Baptism makes it public that we belong to Jesus, that we have come under his kingship, and that we belong to his body (the church). Baptism is like our citizenship ceremony in the kingdom of God, where we pledge our loyalty to heaven’s crown and are marked out as one of his disciples (Matt 28:18-19).

It’s not that baptism saves us; Jesus saves us by his grace, which we receive by faith. And yet, baptism—like a ring exchanged at a wedding—is how God has told us to receive and respond to his saving grace. “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38).

The AMBER confession of faith summarizes all of this helpfully: “Baptism is a symbol and proclamation of the sinner’s death to sin and his resurrection in newness of life in Christ Jesus. Baptism is a mark of identity, not maturity, and by this initial, one-time act of obedience, the believer is ushered into the fellowship of the local body, admitting him to participate in the Lord’s Table. In baptism, the individual professes faith in Christ, but a local church also lends her affirmation by placing the name of the triune God upon the believer in recognition of his new status and incorporation into the people of God.”¹http://baptistrenewal.ca/confession/

If you believe the gospel, knowing Jesus to be your Lord and saviour, then your next step is to be baptized. If you’re a part of our church community here at Emmanuel, you can visit this page to see what the process looks like for us. We’d love to help you take this important step!

But I really struggle with them.

It’s not because I don’t I love the theology of the Reformation and the movements that followed in its wake. I do! I’m a Baptist who traces my convictional heritage back to the Puritans. Many of my Christian heroes love the Puritans and recommend large doses of reading these theological “redwoods.”

But still, I really struggle to read and appreciate the Puritans. And I think I can narrow it down to two reasons.

First, I’ve found the Puritans to often be unreliable in their use of Scripture. Richard Sibbes’ “The Bruised Reed” is one example of this. Taking up Isaiah 42:3—”a bruised reed he will not break, and a faintly burning wick he will not quench”—he goes on for chapters and chapters, splicing and analyzing every nuance of these words in a way that is painfully out of touch with how Hebrew poetry and metaphor actually work. “Here’s the kind of person that a bruised reed represents, here’s exactly how it got bruised, here’s how to know if you’ve been bruised in this way, here’s what the smoke of the wick signifies, here’s what Jesus plans to do with the wick…” This is all stuff that would get a bad mark on a first-year Bible college paper. While some of what Sibbes says is good, he spends a lot of time going way beyond anything Isaiah 42:3 is actually intending (or able) to communicate.

This might not be such a problem if it was obvious that what we’re reading is a theological meditation inspired by Scripture. The problem is that the whole thing is put forward as exposition of Scripture, and modern day Puritan-promoters go on about the Puritan’s incredible ability to see all kinds of deep things in Scripture that nobody else can see. Maybe that’s because, at least sometimes, they’re seeing things that aren’t actually there in the first place. Maybe “a bruised reed he will not break” is a beautiful but straightforward metaphor that communicates a simple truth about the Messiah, but which is not designed (nor able) to carry the freight that Sibbes expects it to. Maybe preaching seventy-five sermons on half of a verse of Scripture is a cause for concern, not celebration.

My second struggle with the Puritans is their approach to sin. The Puritans really embraced the idea of total depravity, but often applied it in such a way that made it sound like born-again Christians can’t do anything but sin. From the moment we open our eyes in the morning, we are soaked in heinous rebellion. The best prayers we’ve ever prayed contain enough sin to send the whole world to hell, as John Bunyan is famous for saying.

If you read through the Valley of Vision, see this idea all over the place: even as Christians, we’re filthy, awful, disgustingly sinful people who need to start each day begging God for mercy as if we were just coming to Him in faith for the first time.

All of this sounds convicting, and appeals to those of a particular temperament and sensitive conscience. The problem is that this view of sin and the Christian life is not in sync with the New Testament. “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life… For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace” (Rom 6:4, 14).

Jesus saved us from sin, and the writers of the New Testament expect that Christians will walk in freedom from it. Yes, they describe sin as an ongoing struggle, but they did not think we’d be on the losing side of that struggle all the time. As we read passages like Colossians 3 or 1 Peter 1, we see how the apostles defined sin, told us to kill it, and assumed we’d be victorious with some measure of consistency. “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin” (1 John 2:1a). Killing sin is both possible and achievable.

Yes, that is not the whole story. The apostles are also realistic: “But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1b). We should not be surprised to get to the end of a day and find we have sins to repent of. But we should also not be surprised to get to the end of a day and not be able to think of any sins we need to repent of. The Puritans would probably consider this evidence of great spiritual blindness; I suggest it’s something closer to the normal Christian life. “Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God” (1 John 3:21; see also Paul’s repeated references to a “good” or “clear” conscience).

Any Christian can over-analyze themselves and come up with all kinds of reasons for why they must repent for each muscle twitch not performed for the glory of God (and the Puritans seemed to have a propensity for introspection of the highest order), but this morbid approach to holiness is wildly different from what we see in the pages of Scripture. This connects us back to the first point on interpreting the Bible properly: sweeping statements like “you therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt 5:48) or “whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Cor 10:31) are found in contexts that define what is being asked of us, which much of the time has to do with down-to-earth realities like loving our enemies or eating lunch with idol-worshippers. If we define sin in such a way that we can’t blink our eyes without bringing down damnation on ourselves, we’re not paying attention to how the Bible actually describes these realities.

So, there you have it. These are two reasons why I struggle with the Puritans. I know that I’m in danger of over-generalizing here, so should clarify that the Puritans were a varied group and some of their writings are much better than others. I know there’s examples that avoid the pitfalls expressed here. I also don’t want to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so want to add that we owe a lot to the Puritans, as do I, personally. For example, I’ve benefitted a lot from John Owen’s “Communion With God” (except for his frequent cringe-inducing use of the Song of Songs). I’ve been enjoying “A Heart Aflame for God,” a recent book by Matthew Bingham that explores spiritual formation from a Puritan perspective. The Puritans shaped many of the men who shaped me, which isn’t saying nothing. I know I still have a lot to learn and gain from them.

So yes, there is a large and healthy baby amidst some murky bathwater; pointing out that such a distinction exists is all that I really hoped to accomplish by writing this short (and decidedly non-Puritanical) article.

When the church gathers, we worship God, and one of the key ways we do that is through song. We sing together to remember God’s Word, to respond to God’s grace, and to reflect God’s glory. We sing to express an appropriate emotional response to the truths about God in Christ (Psalm 33). Ephesians 5:19 speaks of addressing “each other” through song, and in Colossians 3:16, singing is connected to the word of Christ as we teach and admonish each other. Corporate worship is thus not an individual experience, but something shared by those gathered.

Accomplishing these realities (as consistently as possible) requires the best combination of songs sung by our congregation. Lyrics really matter. With only a certain amount of songs to sing each week, it will be important for them to be as impactful as possible.

As a result, we use the following criteria to curate and maintain the collection of songs that EBC will sing. Song leaders will have freedom to choose from this group of songs for any given week in cooperation with the preacher, in order that the songs will fit well with the truths of the Biblical passage being preached.

General Criteria

• Song choice should reflect sensitivity to a wide range of ages in our congregation.
  
  
• Certain songs could appeal more to a certain age group, but the general mix of songs chosen should be able to appeal to a broad range of ages.
  
  
• While respecting the first point about appealing to varying ages, we shouldn’t choose songs based on category, but for content. Songs don’t get a pass because they are either old or new. An older hymn should be evaluated as carefully as a newer chorus.
  
  
• We want to appreciate a place for both simplicity or complexity in theological or doctrinal truth. Something like Jesus, Strong and Kind will come across more simply, while O Sacred Head Now Wounded is obviously more complex. Both have their place.
  
  
• Song lyrics should be as clear as possible. Vague lyrics or phrases that could be interpreted wildly differently by various people will generally not help us to worship as a body. Additionally, we will be cautious in choosing songs that express specific feelings or experiences that some of our congregants may have never felt or experienced. We will keep in mind different backgrounds of our congregation and how certain words or phrases could be interpreted.
  
  
• Even if a song just has one or two lines that seem weak, it’s probably better to look for a song that is better suited for use. With limited opportunity to sing each week and over a year, we wants to have the strongest group of songs for worshiping together.
  
  
• Content should trump personal musical preferences as much as possible. A song an individual really likes can continue to be a song they really like, but it may not be the best fit for corporate worship at Emmanuel.
  
  

Specific Questions

• Truth
  • What is this song saying or teaching? Does the Bible clearly state the same?
  • What is it saying about God? Is it true? Is it saying it in a biblical manner?
  • What is the saying about us? Is it true? Is it saying it in a biblical manner?
  • Does the song misinterpret Scripture or does it help us understand the Bible? Does it misapply anything from the Old Testament toward the New Testament or life today?
    
    
• People
  • Does this song say things that would be easy for people to misinterpret or misunderstand? Is there poetic/metaphorical language that is hard to grasp or interpret?
  • How will this song be received by men? Women? Children? Seniors? Can all age groups sing this through with integrity?
    
    
• Experience
  • How does this song engage our emotions? Does it do so in a fitting way?
  • Does this song describe experiences that most of us can/should be able to relate to?
  • Does it say things most people in our church can/should honestly sing?
  • Is this a song about the experience of worship, or is it a song that actually worships God/teaches/admonishes?
    
    
• Music & Craft
  • How singable is this? Does it jump octaves? Does the music serve the words and do we need to adjust anything from any existing recordings of it? Are there any long interludes we want to trim?
  • Is the song excellently and carefully written?
  • Do the lyrics have an understandable “flow,” or do they just string together nice phrases in a way that will leave people confused as to what they just sung?
    
    
• Purpose
  • Why do we want to sing this song? Is it because it’s popular and catchy, or does it actually serve our congregation?
  • How does this song accomplish the goals of Ephesians 5:18-20 and Colossians 3:16? How will singing this song, long-term, shape us as a church?
  • How does this song fit into our repertoire? Does it balance/compliment the other songs we sing?
    

While doing our best to be faithful to the Lord and His word, we recognize that genuine worship is ultimately a supernatural event: we are drawn near by the Father through Jesus to offer Him the fruit of our lips (John 4:23, Hebrews 8:1-2, 10:19-22, 13:15). May the Lord bless our efforts, magnifying His name among us as we worship Him in spirit and truth.

As I reflected further on these matters this week, my mind went to an article written by C. S. Lewis in the 1940s that reflected on the English monarchy and the problem of “equality.” It’s a superb example of how to think through cultural and political realities from a Biblical worldview. Following Lewis’ article—which I’ve posted here in its entirety—you’ll find a video segment from is an interview Jordan Peterson gave to a British audience the day Queen Elizabeth died. 14 minutes long, it is a helpful reflection and application on the very realities the Lewis article reflects on.

While I don’t agree with or endorse everything either man says below, both Lewis and Peterson provide solid food for thought and, I believe, helpful additions to our Sunday reflections.

Equality
By C. S. Lewis

I am a democrat¹Lewis here meant that he believed in democracy, not that he was a member of the Democratic Party. because I believe in the Fall of Man. I think most people are democrats for the opposite reason. A great deal of democratic enthusiasm descends from the ideas of people like Rousseau, who believed in democracy because they thought mankind so wise and good that everyone deserved a share in the government. The danger of defending democracy on those grounds is that they’re not true. Whenever their weakness is exposed, the people who prefer tyranny make capital out of the exposure. I find that they’re not true without looking further than myself. I don’t deserve a share in governing a hen-roost, much less a nation. Nor do most people—all the people who believe advertisements, and think in catchwords and spread rumors. The real reason for democracy is just the reverse. Mankind is so fallen that no man can be trusted with unchecked power over his fellows. Aristotle said that some people were only fit to be slaves. I do not contradict him. But I reject slavery because I see no men fit to be masters.

This introduces a view of equality rather different from that in which we have been trained. I do not think that equality is one of those things (like wisdom or happiness) which are good simply in themselves and for their own sakes. I think it is in the same class as medicine, which is good because we are ill, or clothes which are good because we are no longer innocent. I don’t think the old authority in kings, priests, husbands, or fathers, and the old obedience in subjects, laymen, wives, and sons, was in itself a degrading or evil thing at all. I think it was intrinsically as good and beautiful as the nakedness of Adam and Eve. It was rightly taken away because men became bad and abused it. To attempt to restore it now would be the same error as that of the Nudists. Legal and economic equality are absolutely necessary remedies for the Fall, and protection against cruelty.

But medicine is not good. There is no spiritual sustenance in flat equality. It is a dim recognition of this fact which makes much of our political propaganda sound so thin. We are trying to be enraptured by something which is merely the negative condition of the good life. That is why the imagination of people is so easily captured by appeals to the craving for inequality, whether in a romantic form of films about loyal courtiers or in the brutal form of Nazi ideology. The tempter always works on some real weakness in our own system of values: offers food to some need which we have starved.

When equality is treated not as a medicine or a safety-gadget, but as an ideal, we begin to breed that stunted and envious sort of mind which hates all superiority. That mind is the special disease of democracy, as cruelty and servility are the special diseases of privileged societies. It will kill us all if it grows unchecked. The man who cannot conceive a joyful and loyal obedience on the one hand, nor an unembarrassed and noble acceptance of that obedience on the other—the man who has never even wanted to kneel or to bow—is a prosaic barbarian. But it would be wicked folly to restore these old inequalities on the legal or external plane. Their proper place is elsewhere.

We must wear clothes since the Fall. Yes, but inside, under what Milton called “these troublesome disguises,” We want the naked body, that is, the real body, to be alive. We want it, on proper occasions, to appear: in the marriage-chamber, in the public privacy of a men’s bathing-place, and (of course) when any medical or other emergency demands. In the same way, under the necessary outer covering of legal equality, the whole hierarchical dance and harmony of our deep and joyously accepted spiritual inequalities should be alive. It is there, of course, in our life as Christians: there, as laymen, we can obey – all the more because the priest has no authority over us on the political level. It is there in our relation to parents and teachers – all the more because it is now a willed and wholly spiritual reverence. It should be there also in marriage.

This last point needs a little plain speaking. Men have so horribly abused their power over women in the past that to wives, of all people, equality is in danger of appearing as an ideal. But Mrs. Naomi Mitchison has laid her finger on the real point. Have as much equality as you please – the more the better – in our marriage laws, but at some level consent to inequality, nay, delight in inequality, is an erotic necessity. Mrs. Mitchison speaks of women so fostered on a defiant idea of equality that the mere sensation of the male embrace rouses an undercurrent of resentment. Marriages are thus shipwrecked. This is the tragi-comedy of the modem woman; taught by Freud to consider the act of love the most important thing in life, and then inhibited by feminism from that internal surrender which alone can make it a complete emotional success. Merely for the sake of her own erotic pleasure, to go no further, some degree of obedience and humility seems to be (normally) necessary on the woman’s part.

The error here has been to assimilate all forms of affection to that special form we call friendship. It indeed does imply equality. But it is quite different from the various loves within the same household. Friends are not primarily absorbed in each other. It is when we are doing things together that friendship springs up – painting, sailing ships, praying, philosophizing, fighting shoulder to shoulder. Friends look in the same direction. Lovers look at each other: that is, in opposite directions. To transfer bodily all that belongs to one relationship into the other is blundering.

We Britons should rejoice that we have contrived to reach much legal democracy (we still need more of the economic) without losing our ceremonial Monarchy. For there, right in the midst of our lives, is that which satisfies the craving for inequality, and acts as a permanent reminder that medicine is not food. Hence a man’s reaction to Monarchy is a kind of test. Monarchy can easily be “debunked”; but watch the faces, mark well the accents of the debunkers. These are the men whose tap-root in Eden has been cut: whom no rumour of the polyphony, the dance, can reach – men to whom pebbles laid in a row are more beautiful than an arch. Yet even if they desire mere equality they cannot reach it. Where men are forbidden to honor a king they honor millionaires, athletes, or film-stars instead: even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food and it will gobble poison.

That is why this whole question is of practical importance. Every intrusion of the spirit that says, “I’m as good as you” into our personal and spiritual life is to be resisted just as jealously as every intrusion of bureaucracy or privilege into our politics. Hierarchy within can alone preserve egalitarianism without. Romantic attacks on democracy will come again. We shall never be safe unless we already understand in our hearts all that the anti-democrats can say, and have provided for it better than they. Human nature will not permanently endure flat equality if it is extended from its proper political field into the more real, more concrete fields within. Let us wear equality; but let us undress every night.

From The Spectator, vol. CLXXI (27 August 1943), p. 192.

It’s a good question, and I thought it was worth trying to answer in this format.

Principles

I’ll start at the top: I believe that Christianity provides us with a total and complete view of reality. It is not just a private religion or spirituality that we practice off in a corner, sealed off from the rest of the world. Instead, as C. S. Lewis said so well, “I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.”

This is because Jesus is Lord of all. All. Kuyper was right: “There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!” This means that we can (must!) look at anything and think about it like Christians. Jesus is Lord over all that we do—not just the 15 minutes we spend reading the Bible in the morning, but also every hour worked, every diaper changed, every meal prepared, every little league game watched, and every evening spent on the couch. Biblical principles can (and must) shape how we structure a household, earn an income, watch a movie, practice a hobby, feed a pet, and govern a nation.

And, in fact, they already do so in more ways than we realize. Thanks to centuries of Christian influence, Biblical principles are the “air we breathe,” whether we know it or not. People are valued, freedom is celebrated, and progress is made because the teachings of Jesus took root and shaped the values of whole cultures. Biblical principles have had a significant and unmistakable impact on much that we hold dear in our modern world.

Priorities

That being said, it must be recognized that when we read Scripture—and the New Testament in particular—we don’t merely find a collection of principles for Christians to take and apply at will. The gospels and epistles are not just fodder for our theologizing. Instead, the New Testament gives Christians a specific set of priorities that should shape their life and direct what the New Covenant people of God focus their efforts on.

These priorities centre around the words of our risen Lord in Matthew 28:18-20: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.”

Making disciples is not a single-track activity, and our witness to the reign of Christ should be comprehensive. Good words are to be paired with a whole life of good works. But make no mistake about it—the goal of our good works is the advancement of the gospel message. A thoughtful read through the epistle to Titus shows the tight connection between our actions and our message about the once-crucified, now-risen, and soon-returning Jesus. Christians are to behave such “that the word of God may not be reviled” (Ti 2:5), “so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us” (Ti 2:8) and “so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior” (Ti 2:10).

This unabashedly evangelistic shape to the Christian life is chronically missed or under-emphasized by many Christians, sometimes particularly by those interested in the whole-life implications of the Biblical worldview. When I read Andy Crouch’s Culture Making or Tim Keller’s Every Good Endeavour a number of years ago, I came away thinking, “Okay, fair enough—but what about the Great Commission? What about the day God has fixed on which he will judge the world in righteousness?” Vague notions about the cultural mandate cannot be used to displace the specific priority to make, baptize, and teach followers of the risen Christ who is our only deliverer from the wrath to come (Acts 17:30-31, 1 Thess 1:10).

So yes, there are all kinds of things that Christians should do as we seek to live a life of good works that draw attention to our Lord (Matt 5:16). We should mow our lawns and brush our teeth and pay our taxes and shovel our neighbour’s driveway and feed the poor and serve cheerfully on our tenant’s association. Christians should work in all kinds of jobs, serving the Lord Christ (Col 3:23-24) as they pick up garbage and teach students and pave roads and write software and raise children and film movies and drive tractors. Doing these things will have a positive effect on our immediate surroundings. Like salt in a meal or a lamp in a dark room, Christians should get into all the nooks and crannies of our world, being noticed when they are around and missed when they are not (Matt 5:13).

But none of these things, in and of themselves, constitute our primary objective. Good works will provide temporary benefit, and demonstrate love to our neighbours, but without the hope of eternal life, they are ultimately meaningless—just like everything else under the sun (Ecc 1:2-3). “For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?” (Matthew 16:26).

Some have suggested that the salvation of souls is a lesser goal than the transformation of societies, and Jesus does not agree. Our Lord has given us clear priorities, and it’s our duty to maintain those priorities: “No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him” (2 Tim 2:4). The alternative is disaster. “For Demas, in love with this present world, has deserted me” (2 Tim 4:10).

Politics

Because God places Christians in various vocations (1 Cor 7:17-24), we should expect to see the people of God in all kinds of jobs, offices, and positions, making a difference for Jesus just like he told us to (Matt 5:13-16). Politics is no exception. Indeed, even before the New Testament was completed, numbers of government employees and officials were being impacted by the gospel (Luke 3:12-14, 8:3; Acts 8:27ff, 10:1, 17:4, 19:31; Phil 4:22).

When Christians in politics serve the Lord Christ, there is no doubt that they will benefit their constituents, and this is something to celebrate. We’d have to be blind to miss the hand of God working through William Wilberforce—and others like him—who spread lots of salt and light through their political vocations.

But from everything I can see in Scripture, a Christian who finds themself in politics is in basically the same spot as a Christian in any other vocation. They have before them particular opportunities within their particular sphere of influence to do good works that glorify God and adorn the gospel. Their sphere of influence may be larger than others, which is why it’s good for a country when its leaders are disciples of Jesus. We should cheer for godly politicians, and encourage young people so inclined to pursue political careers for the glory of God.

And yet, it remains a fact that not a single New Testament passage instructs the people of God to pursue cultural transformation through direct political involvement. This truth can’t be drowned out by theological catchphrases or witty rhetorical questions. Cultural transformation through politics is simply not a New Testament priority.

That should give us pause when we feel the temptation to overemphasize the importance of politics, compromise Biblical standards for political ends, or hitch our hopes to a partisan agenda. It should give us pause when we start to forget that we are sojourners and exiles (1 Pet 2:11) with no lasting city who instead are to be seeking the city that is to come (Heb 13:14). It should help us remember that we will inherit the earth not by pulling the levers of political power, but through meekness (Matt 5:5).

Practicalities

What does this mean for Christians who are involved in politics? It means that, at the very least, they should be faithful and courageous, devoted to unchanging righteousness instead of questionable party platforms, and willing to call out wickedness whichever wing it’s coming from. Like Daniel and his three friends, they should be ready to give up their influence—and even their own lives—for the sake of their true allegiance. It means that they do their jobs to the best of their abilities for the glory of God, adorning the gospel without ever confusing their work with the gospel.

What does this mean for the rest of us? I’ll offer two suggestions. First, while we should be thankful for Christianity’s influence on our society, we shouldn’t treat this as our expectation or birthright. Christianity exploded in the first three hundred years of its existence despite being culturally weird and politically powerless, and it’s thriving around the world today under similar circumstances. Although, perhaps “despite” is the wrong word to use. According to 1 Corinthians 1 & 2, the weakness and strangeness of the gospel is a feature, not a bug. God loves to save people in ways that anchor their faith in His power instead of man’s wisdom (1 Cor 2:5). Cultural Christianity had its benefits, but the costs have been high, and returning to a world in which the gospel seems strange may not be the catastrophe many make it out to be.

Second, as clichéd as this sounds, we need to keep the main thing the main thing. The gospel is our priority, and no, this doesn’t mean we neglect politics any more than we neglect other non-gospel responsibilities like brushing our teeth. But if every second sermon given in your church talked about bad breath as if it were the great plague of our times, you’d be right to ask questions. If your pastor started a weekly podcast about missional dental hygiene (maybe called “Cross Brushing”), I hope you’d ask more questions. If he started to publicly recommend which brand of mouthwash you should use, and hosted a conference at your church about why Christians should get their silver fillings replaced with composites, you’d be right to assume that the cart was pulling the horse, and gospel implications were supplanting the priority of the gospel itself.

If you left to join another church, his devotees might pity you. “There goes another grungy-mouthed dupe of the processed food industry. Don’t they understand it’s either Christ or cavities?”

Lest you think I’m just being sarcastic, the truth is that oral health is a really big deal and a legitimate avenue for global missions. It’s something Christians should care about—and that’s exactly my point.

So vote for good politicians, and do what you should to establish righteousness in your society. And along the way, don’t forget that Heaven and Hell are forever, Jesus is coming back, and that “according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Peter 3:13).

Also, don’t forget to brush your teeth.

Unpacking Syncretism

The heart of my concern was summed up in this sentence: “I am concerned that Evangelicals on both sides of the border are falling prey to a syncretism that espouses Christianity insofar as it is important for Making America (or Canada, or wherever) Great Again.”

The New Oxford American Dictionary defines syncretism as “the amalgamation or attempted amalgamation of different religions, cultures, or schools of thought.” This is what we might call a thin definition of syncretism. Missiologists—those who study missions—define syncretism a little more “thickly:” Syncretism is what happens when the practices of a new religion are adopted without any change to the existing worldview.

What does that even mean? Here’s an example. Years ago, friends of mine went on a missions trip to a Central American country. They were stunned to learn how the local Catholic priest would perform the mass, and then, without missing a beat, walk out the door of the church, change his robes a little, and offer a goat in sacrifice to the local tribal deity.

This is classic syncretism, of a kind we see all around the world. A thin definition of syncretism says, “look, two religions being blended.” A thick definition of syncretism understands what’s really happened here: for years, the people had believed in a spirit-filled world in which various little gods needed to be kept happy in various ways. Catholicism was introduced to them, and the people rapidly adopted its practices. But their basic way of looking at the world hadn’t changed. The God of the Bible is just one more deity to appease. The sacrifice of the mass is just one more religious ritual to perform along with all the others. And after it’s done, of course a goat has to be offered on the church lawn, because how else are all the other gods going to be kept happy?

Syncretism is so sneaky, because, from the perspective of the missionary, it can appear to be but a minor speed bump in an otherwise successful endeavour. “Look! These people say they believe in Jesus, they’re coming to our church meetings, and they’re starting to talk like Christians. Sure, they’ve got a few kinks to work out, but that will come in time.” Little do they realize how much remained unchanged. Instead of turning from idols to serve the living and true God (1 Thess 1:9), the people have simply added Jesus to their long list of gods. He’s just another tool in the tool-belt to help them get at what they’ve always been after (Acts 8:9-24).

In other words, the goat sacrifices aren’t anomalies: they are where the real worldview pokes through the veneer of Christian practice.

From the perspective of the syncretists themselves, nothing seems off. Syncretism may shock outsiders, but it’s invisible to the ones practicing it, which is why they are practicing it in the first place. Their syncretism feels like the most natural thing in the world.

Evangelical Syncretism

A seminary professor (and a former missionary) once told our class that, in his opinion, North American Evangelicalism was one of the most syncretistic religions in the world. He believed that many Evangelical Christians, though fully adopting the forms and practices of Christianity, still held to a worldview that was throughly secular. They might go to church every Sunday, read Christian books, and listen to Christian music, but if you dug down to the foundations of how they actually understand reality, you would find basically the same set of assumptions and priorities as their unbelieving neighbours.

And if you looked hard enough, you’ll see evidence of this syncretism at play in their lives—their own version of the Central American goat sacrifices. Evidence that, in the end, they still wanted basically the same things as everybody else: worldly success, satisfaction in life, and a comfortable existence surrounded by family and friends. They practiced Christianity in some measure because it helped them get those things. Jesus was a means to an end.

I think my professor friend was on to something, and in recent years, I’ve seen more and more evidence for Evangelical syncretism—particularly in the realm of politics. Beneath a layer of Christian practice and language, it appears as if the underlying priorities, goals and values of many Christians are increasingly political, human-centred, and, frankly, worldly. The primary framework appears to be political conservativism with a little Jesus added to the mix.

Now, I fully understand that many conservative Christians understand their politics to be related to their faith in that as they see conservative principles being most in line with Christian principles. That’s a fair position to hold and defend, and it’s one I hold myself, even though it needs to be acknowledged that it is not the only position Christians have held and defended. A fair bit also depends on how narrowly or widely one defines “conservative principles.”

Nevertheless, though some defend conservative politics as the most consistent outworking of biblical principles, others appear to embrace Christianity as the most effective means to achieving conservative ends. In other words: syncretism. Christianity is the best and most reliable way the way to achieve the same socio-political goals that our unbelieving neighbours are after.

Where do I see this? What is the evidence I offer for this alleged syncretism? In what follows, I’ll share some observations that I’ve grouped under four main headings. Could these be examples of an unbiblical worldview poking through a veneer of Christianity, bearing witness to the syncretism that lurks below?¹Please note, this is not an academic paper, and you won’t see many quotes or footnotes in what follows. These are my observations, which may or may not resonate with you, but which I hope are stimulating as you ask some of these big questions for yourself.

1. Adopting Political Instead of Biblical Categories

One of the key areas I see syncretism at work is the way in which many Christians have adopted extra-biblical (or even un-biblical) categories for describing people and the world we live in.

One prime example is “the Right” and “the Left.” How many times have I heard Christians talk about “the Left,” as if “it” is the great scourge of our day, without batting an eye?

The problem here is that “the Left” is not a biblical category—it is a political category. If we think that people on “the Left” are worse sinners than people on “the Right,” then we’re not thinking like Christians. If we think that “the Left” is the problem with our country, then we are thinking in terms of worldly wisdom. If we allow the “Left-Right” polarization to shape our conception of reality, we’ve abandoned a biblical framework.

Is there a chance we feel more at home with someone who shares our politics, but not our faith, than we do with someone who shares our faith, but not our politics? If so, what does this say about our most foundational beliefs?

The cosmic struggle isn’t between “Right” and “Left” or “liberals” and “conservatives,” but between the domain of darkness and the kingdom of Christ (Col 1:13). Can we forget that it was conservative Pharisees who crucified Jesus? Can we forget that a conservative without Jesus is in just as much darkness as a liberal without Jesus? Can we forget that, without the hope of eternal life set before us, all of the conservative politics in the world is just vanity, a chasing after wind?

Christians must also remember that “the Left” is not an amorphous blob of viewpoints. When we say “the Left” we are talking about people, made in the image of God, people who are more than the sum of their cultural and political viewpoints, people who we’ve been commanded to love and share Christ with.

People are people, not walking political issues. When we see someone from an other country, what do we see? Do we see “immigration,” or do we see a person who has probably been through a lot, who is probably suffering right now, and who could really use the love of Jesus?

Isn’t this how Jesus taught us to think when he told us, “And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles” (Matt 5:41)? The language Jesus uses here points to the Roman practice of soldiers forcing civilians to carry their loads for a distance of one mile. It was an unmistakably political event in which the oppression of Rome came crashing in to the daily lives of an occupied people. And yet Jesus tells us to see the soldier, not as a symbol or stand-in for the oppressive Roman regime, but as a person whom we are to love by going above and beyond what’s legally demanded of us.

What would it look like if Christians consistently applied this kind of thinking in our day?

2. Advancing Un-Biblical Priorities

Another area where I see syncretism at work is in the way that many Christians have adopted and promoted extra-biblical (or even un-biblical) priorities.

Christian nationalists advocate the transformation (or return, as they may argue) of our countries into Christian states. Those who are less strident still speak of the importance of maximizing the Christian influence on our culture.

That sounds like a great idea, but it’s simply not a biblical priority. If you struggle with that thought, I encourage you to read through the New Testament with a highlighter in hand, underlining every passage where Christians are encouraged to maximize their influence on the surrounding culture through direct political engagement.

It’s just not there. Now, I’m not ignorant to how the arguments tend go at this point. “Well, would you prefer us to work at minimizing Christian political influence? Would you prefer that we maximize secular or Muslim political influence?”

And my response is that those are the wrong questions entirely. They are questions which, intentionally or not, attempt an end-run around the Word of God. Influencing politics is simply not a question that the New Testament is preoccupied with. It describes us as sojourners and exiles with a gospel to preach, a saviour to follow, and people everywhere to love. We can go round-and-round the mulberry bush of political theology all day, but if we just stop and open up our Bibles and start reading them, I suggest we’ll find that Jesus and His apostles are interested in other things altogether.²https://www.plough.com/en/topics/faith/discipleship/why-i-went-cold-turkey-on-political-theology

Now, yes, Christians will have an influence on our culture as we live as salt and light, carrying out good works that bring glory to our Heavenly Father (Matt 5:13-16). Furthermore, most of us reading this live in democracies, and loving our neighbours will include some level of concern and engagement with politics. Some Christians should even pursue careers in politics. But that’s where an understanding of priorities is so crucial. What is the relative importance the New Testament gives to these matters? There’s lots of things Christians should do as good neighbours, but what should be occupying our attention?

The priority many Christians give to political matters is evidence of being out of touch with the priorities of Scripture—especially the emphasis found in the Bible on the return of Christ and the glories of the age to come.

“For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done” (Matt 16:26-27).

What good is it if we win the next election but lose our soul? Is there a chance we’ve lost the plot?

3. Compromising Biblical Standards for Political Ends

One of the clearest places where I’ve seen evidence of syncretism is in the way that many Christians have been willing to compromise biblical standards for the sake of political goals. A key example here is Evangelical support for Donald Trump.

Two comments before I go further: yes, I’m Canadian. But there’s lots of Canadian Christians I know who wish they could have voted for Trump. Support for him doesn’t end at the 49th parallel. Second, I realize many of my American brothers and sisters voted for Trump with their noses plugged, trapped inside of a real-world round of “Would You Rather?” with no happy choices. That’s not the phenomenon I’m referring to. What I’m referring to are the Evangelicals who supported Trump with enthusiasm, gusto, and little-to-no criticism.

There’s lots that could be said here, but the big problem to highlight is the double standards. Trump has regularly said and done things which would make conservatives blow gaskets had they come from the other side. Conservative Christians have been so quick to point out the lies of “the Left” but have said precious little, in comparison, about the many, many lies that Trump has told.

Would John the Baptist have held his tongue about Herod’s infidelity if Herod had happened to be on the right political “side”?

Five years ago, Albert Mohler described Trump as a huge embarrassment, and he’s still right. When I talk to my family and friends who are not Christians, it’s clear that, in their eyes, Evangelicals have lost their moral authority over the way they’ve given unqualified support for the unsupportable and made excuses for the inexcusable.

Does the truth matter, or is it just a political tool? If we are to “live not by lies,” does that also include the lies coming from the Right? Will we hold ourselves (and others) to God’s eternal standards, or the fluctuating morals of political expediency?

4. Confusing The Christian Gospel with a Political Message

Finally, syncretism is on full display when Christians repeatedly confuse the gospel with a political agenda. This has been a problem for some time, but it’s come into razor-sharp focus since the murder of Charlie Kirk.

Once again, I want to reiterate that Charlie’s death was a tragedy, and may God help (literally) anyone who celebrated it. What happened to him was atrocious, and we’re right to be appalled.

And at the same time, the truth matters. If all you knew about Charlie Kirk was based on second-hand information from Evangelicals shared on social media in the last several days, you’d get the idea that he was basically a missionary. Christians have used phrases like “when Charlie Kirk went to campuses to preach the gospel…” and have compared him to Stephen—or even the Apostle Paul.

Friends, no matter how tragic Charlie Kirk’s death was, the truth is that he was not a Christian missionary; he was a political activist. He wrote books like “The MAGA Doctrine.” He was an apologist for Donald Trump, defending him at every turn. Watch hours of his latest videos (as I did into the wee hours of a recent morning) and you won’t see lots and lots about Jesus. You’ll see lots and lots about DOGE, the scam of college education, Trump’s immigration practices, etc.

Kirk was a political activist who was also a Christian, and sometimes he talked about his Christian faith and its relation to his political work. This is not slandering Charlie Kirk. It’s simply stating the facts.

There are only two explanations, as far as I can see, for the widespread depiction of Kirk as a champion for the gospel. One, people have only watched a few carefully-selected clips, and assume that they represent the entirety of his material. Or two, they are familiar with the rest of his material, and they can’t tell the difference between Christian doctrine and the MAGA doctrine.

If I had to, I’d guess that both explanations are in play, but it’s the second one that worries me the most. Leaving aside the growing irony of a message about a crucified saviour being wrapped up with the actions of a powerful and morally compromised government, even if Trump supporters could justify the administration’s every decision as good and wise (an impossibly long shot, I’d offer), that does not justify confusing pro-Trump political activism with gospel proclamation. As Mark Dever said back in 2008, “we must make a distinction between the gospel and other things that we take to be true, and… this distinction is faithful to the New Testament.”³https://t4g.org/resources/mark-dever/improving-the-gospel-exercises-in-unbiblical-theology-session-iv/ This whole message is worth watching, and has many helpful points of contact with the current topic.

In Conclusion

The central issue here—and the whole reason I’m speaking up about any of this—is the purity of the gospel. When we stop seeing a difference or distinction between conservative politics and the gospel, we are in dangerous territory. This is a danger inherent in the way in which Charlie Kirk, and the many now following in his steps, seamlessly moved between pro-Trump and pro-Jesus talking points. When the gospel begins to be confused with MAGA politics, it is not merely in danger of being forgotten, minimized, diluted, or compromised—those things are already happening.

For years, conservative Christians have generally assumed that our biggest enemies were on the cultural left. We’ve pushed hard against the progressive agenda. Could it be that our spiritual enemy, like a deft master of jiu-jitsu, is using our momentum against us? As we gain traction against liberal opposition to the gospel, could we be tumbling right into conservative compromise of the gospel?

“I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor 2:2). Christians, regardless of political stripe, must be zealous to maintain the purity of the gospel. May God deliver us from any vestiges of syncretism, and shape us to be bold and pure witnesses for the crucified, risen, and returning Lord.

Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!

Read part three: Principles, Priorities and Politics

Some Things We Know

Here’s one thing we know for sure about September 10, 2025: what happened that day was unspeakably awful. To watch any man be killed is appalling; to have a man be killed in public, so gruesomely, so unexpectedly, is atrocious; and to know this happened to a husband and father of young children is heartbreaking.

One day, Kirk’s children will come to realize that millions of people watched their dad be killed, and will bear the burden of deciding whether or not to see that same footage themselves. It’s right for this to chew us up inside.

Charlie Kirk’s death was a tragedy and an atrocity.

Selah.

Some Things We Don’t Know

There are some very important things we don’t know about the death of Charlie Kirk, particularly why he was killed in the first place. While any information we have may be out of date within days or hours, at this point the news reports are still full of words like “allegedly,” “purportedly,” and “apparently.” There’s a lot that’s unknown.

Which means that, until we know more, Christians should refrain from referring to Kirk as a “martyr.” According to Merriam-Webster, a martyr is “a person who voluntarily suffers death as the penalty of witnessing to and refusing to renounce a religion.”¹https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/martyr At this point, we simply have no basis for applying that term to Charlie Kirk. It’s neither certain nor clear that he was targeted for his faith, let alone that he voluntarily suffered death for refusing to renounce his religion. Even if it comes out that he was killed for being outspoken on issues that are adjacent to (or implications of) his Christian beliefs, this is still a step removed from actual martyrdom.

No matter how highly you may think of Kirk, I hope we can agree that words have meanings, and those meanings matter. By calling him a “martyr,” we devalue that word and dishonour the many real martyrs around the world who are killed for their faith in Jesus each and every day.²See more at persecution.com, opendoors.org, or globalchristianrelief.org/stories/christian-persecution/. What happened to Kirk is bad enough—there’s no need to embellish it with things that aren’t true.

Some Things to Consider

In the wake of last week’s tragedy, I’ve been concerned by much of the narrative and commentary I’ve heard from fellow Christians (including some I deeply respect).

I am concerned that many have been quick to call Charlie Kirk a “martyr” precisely because they perceive little difference between Christianity and the particular brand of conservative politics that Kirk was famous for promoting.

I am concerned that Evangelicals on both sides of the border are falling prey to a syncretism that espouses Christianity insofar as it is important for Making America (or Canada, or wherever) Great Again.

Albert Mohler unintentionally diagnosed the problem last week when he described how an earlier Charlie Kirk

…saw Christianity as a huge drag on conservative progress. He was pretty clear in calling for a new young conservatism of liberty and resistance. At the time, he didn’t have a lot of use for conservative Christians, and he wasn’t subtle.

Not long thereafter, Charlie embraced two things that had been missing from his earlier approach. He openly and boldly claimed the gospel of Christ and courageously identified himself as a Christian believer. He also began to argue with consistency that a recovery of Christian truth was essential for a lasting conservatism.³https://wng.org/opinions/a-most-tragic-turning-point-1757563042

The order of operations is not insignificant: conservatism first, Christianity second. This pattern is reflected in eulogies which describe Kirk as a patriot and a man of faith, in that sequence.

I am not picking on Charlie Kirk here. I am suggesting he was emblematic of an entire worldview that sees Christianity as an essential ingredient of the American republic (and Western civilization), and therefore embraces Christianity, not necessarily because it is objectively true, and not necessarily because Jesus is supremely worthy, but because Christian faith is necessary for the achievement of their specific sociopolitical vision.

Lest anyone accuse me of judging Kirk’s heart, I am not saying that he was not my brother in Christ. I am simply surveying the evidence of what he actually talked about most of the time. Yes, we heard about Jesus occasionally, but a Jesus so wrapped in red, white and blue that I question how recognizable He was to much of the world. I’m also looking at the speed at which Evangelicals have been quick to laud Kirk as a martyr, which I take as further evidence of increased confusion between the Kingdom of Heaven and the Republican Party.

It’s Not All or Nothing

As I type these words, I fully anticipate some writing me off as being a part of “the Left.” You must be a “lib” if you have anything critical to say about Charlie Kirk, right? The truth is that I’m thoroughly conservative in my social, economic and political convictions. But I’m a Christian first, and I don’t see complete alignment between the priorities of Jesus and any political party, platform, or persona. And I’m increasingly convinced of the importance of viewing the world through Biblical categories, not the simplistic zero-sum grid of “Left” and “Right.”

Here’s an example: we can reject the progressive social agenda without having to pretend that Donald Trump is a good man—or that Charlie Kirk was a respectful debater devoted to the open exchange of ideas for truth’s sake alone. Because, in general, that just wasn’t true. Of course you can find some good examples, but often enough I have to agree with Moira Donegan’s description of many of his interactions: “aggressive, unequal, trolling affairs, in which he sought to provoke his interlocutors to distress, shouted them down and belittled them… and selectively edited the ensuing footage to create maximally viral content in which his fans could witness him humiliating the liberals and leftists they perceived to be their enemies.”⁴https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/14/charlie-kirk-killing

Whether or not someone agrees with that description will probably depend on whether or not they agree with Kirk’s positions, and that’s exactly the problem I’m seeking to address. Christians, thinking with Biblical categories, should have room for nuance. We can grieve his death, and even agree with some of his conclusions, without having to cast Charlie Kirk as the model of Christian speech and missional purity. It’s not all or nothing.

Why This Matters

These issues are not theoretical. I write these words in particular for the many thoughtful young men in our church, one of whom texted me the news last Wednesday before I heard it anywhere else. (Yes, Kirk had an impact this far north of the border.) I have a genuine concern for these brothers, and the possibility of them being over-influenced by the Charlie Kirk hagiography currently circulating the Evangelical internet.

Brothers, don’t get swept up in the emotion of the moment. I know this sounds so clichéd, but Christ, and not Charlie Kirk, must be our example. Titus 3:2, which reminds us “to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people,” applies to “libs” and “smug college students” too.

With renewed minds, let’s keep steady on in our refusal to be conformed to the pattern of this world—whether that pattern tries to press in on us from the Left or the Right.

Read the follow-up article here.

This post is about some changes we are making in the fall with our Sunday morning ministries, particularly with Sunday School and with the start time of our Sunday service. But before I describe exactly what these changes are going to look like, I want to tell you a bit about how and why we made this decision.

For the last two years or so, a group of ministry leaders at Emmanuel has been having a series of discussions about how we do things as a church. These discussions have often used a model, familiar to some, of a trellis and a vine. Trellises, as we know, are structures that help a vine grow. In a church, the “vine” is the vital ministry of the body of Christ building itself up in love. “Trellises” are structures, like programs, that help facilitate that person-to-person ministry.

Here in North America, churches tend to put too much of a focus on their trellises (their structures and programs), treating them like they are the real goal. As a result, they don’t focus near as much energy on the central work of equipping the saints for the work of ministry (Eph 4:11-16).

Within this framework, we’ve been thinking long and hard about the fact that we run two separate children’s ministry programs—Sunday School and Awana. When we started both of these ministries, I believe they were the right choice, and we’ve had many good years doing both of them the way we have. We’ve done Awana close to 40 years, and it has a rich legacy in our community. I loved seeing how hard we worked to make Awana happen during the Covid years. I’ve loved watching my oldest son go through the program from start to finish.

But our church has changed. We have way more young families than we did when we started Sunday School. We have way more homeschooling families than we used to, meaning that inviting friends from school to Awana is harder than it used to be. Both programs have ended up largely serving the exact same group of people. Both programs take significant resources in terms of people’s time and our finances. We’ve often found ourselves scrambling to find the time and people to do all aspects of both programs with excellence. It’s no surprise that we’ve been wondering if doing both of these programs is really the best use of our efforts as a church.

This is especially true when we consider the biblical priority for parents—dads in particular—to train and disciple their children (Ephesians 6:4). According to the Bible, whose job is children’s ministry? Dads. What we do here is just a supplement. Our main priority should be to equip parents for the ministry of discipling their children. But does running two separate programs, exclusively for children, really fit with that model?

Alongside of this, we’ve been recognizing that Sundays can be hard on our many young families. It’s a long morning for anybody, especially for those caring for little people. We’d love to see more people showing hospitality and less people going home alone—but we recognize that many of us are completely wiped out after a full morning.

So this fall, we’re making a shift. We are going to combine our two children’s programs into one single program that brings together the best of each. It will happen at 6:30pm on Tuesdays, and will start with an open session that includes some of the games we’ve played at Awana and a time of singing. Then we’ll break out into age-specific groups where we’ll continue using the excellent Truth78 curriculum we’ve enjoyed so much in Sunday school. We love how this material focuses on discipling children by teaching them the big truths of our faith from Scripture.

We will continue to advertise and promote these nights like we did Awana, and they’ll be open to our community just like they’ve been all along. We plan to still run a Grand Prix once a year, and may incorporate other fun elements from Awana like theme nights.

In addition to these elements from our existing ministries, we’re adding a focus on families. Families will be invited to experience these nights together. We’ll welcome moms and dads to participate in everything along with their kids as they are able. We’re planning to end the nights with a time where one or two families can sit down together—all age groups present—to talk about what they learned that night and pray for one another. As we do that, we hope to encourage families to do that kind of thing more and more themselves.

To begin with, we plan to end these nights a little sooner than Awana did—hopefully by 7:40 or 7:45. In time we’ve got some other great ideas to incorporate, but will take things one step at a time.

With this change, there will be no Sunday school on Sunday mornings. Alongside of this change, effective Sunday, September 7, our Sunday morning services will begin at 10:00 am.

We still invite you to come at 9:30 or anytime thereafter! If we can, we’ll still serve coffee and muffins and enjoy an unhurried time to connect and converse with one another. When our service finishes at 11:30 or 11:45, we’ll have that much more margin to enjoy being together, connect with people for lunch, or run home to grab something before a potluck.

We’re also thinking of ways within our existing Sunday morning service to make sure that our kids feel valued and included in our time together.

What about Adult Sunday school? Many of you know in the last couple of years we’ve done workshops one Sunday evening a month focused on marriage and parenting. That workshop time-slot will become our main focused time, outside of Sunday mornings, for adult education. Once again, it means doing a little less than we’ve been doing, but with more focus, excellence, and (hopefully) effectiveness. We’re already preparing for some vital teaching this year that you won’t want to miss.

This is a decision that we’ve discussed in principle for probably two years. In recent weeks our Christian Education Committee, Worship Committee, and Elders had some serious discussions and came to this decision unanimously. We know it’s a big change, but one we hope will better serve our church for where our church is at today, helping us more effectively disciple our children, equip the saints for the work of ministry, and give us some more margin to actively love one another.

With a large group of people, no change works out equally well for every single person. We know that some of you will be disappointed by this change, and we wish that we could perfectly suit the varying schedules and circumstances for everybody in our church. For those who struggle with this decision, we welcome your feedback, while communicating that we really did our best to make a decision that brought the best possible outcome to the greatest amount of people.

Now, there’s some details still to figure out. We still don’t know exactly what we’ll call these nights (though we have some early ideas). If you’ve taught Sunday school or served with Awana, you might wonder what your role will be or how we’ll do this or that. We will have more information for you in the next few weeks as details are nailed down.

In the meantime, thanks to everyone who helped make this decision. As we enjoy the rest of the summer, let’s look forward to—and pray for!—a strong season of ministry together in 2025/26.

I first heard John preach on 800 CHAB while growing up in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. A country (now oldies) station by day, for two hours each evening they play back-to-back Christian programming. Haven of Rest, Back to the Bible, or the inimitable drawl of J. Vernon McGee often filled our car speakers while we waited for our mom to come out of the grocery store. To my young ears, it sounded like the kind of stuff people in a seniors’ home would enjoy. Nothing I was interested in.

At some point, though, a specific voice stood out. I’d sit up straighter and pay attention when he would come on. He was different than the others. Instead of treacly platitudes, he often criticized the Western church, and as someone who had grown up in that church, his criticisms resonated with me. Instead of telling stories, he asked you to look at the next verse, and told you what it meant. Passages of scripture came to life as their meaning and application were opened up with clarity and passion.

Somewhere along the line I put a name to the voice: John MacArthur. When I was 17 or 18, I started listening even more deliberately and intently to his preaching, tuning in to CHAB at 7:30 on purpose. Thanks to the internet, I began to devour his sermons on demand. Though I had attended evangelical churches most of my life, I had never (to my memory) been exposed to expository preaching, and it was like being introduced to the Bible all over again. Rather than being the domain of sleepy Sunday school classes, milquetoasty Sunday morning pep talks, or guilt-ridden but fruitless quiet times, I encountered Scripture as a book through which the living Christ addressed his church with authority and relevance.

Then a friend recommended I read MacArthur’s landmark book “The Gospel According to Jesus,” which recalibrated my whole conception of the gospel. Next, the same friend pointed me to “The Coming Evangelical Crisis,” a volume to which MacArthur had contributed an essay, and which helped me understand the environment I had grown up in as never before. Next up was his two-volume commentary on Romans, which I read slowly and carefully over several months. Convictions were being shaped, and theological foundations were being formed.

Is it any surprise that it was during this season I began to experience a tug towards pastoral ministry myself? I read through MacArthur’s “Rediscovering Expository Preaching” the summer I was 19, and a preaching opportunity that September gave me the chance to apply what I’d been learning. I rode on the high of that sermon for months, and became fully convinced that proclaiming the word of God was what I wanted to do with my life.

At that early stage, anybody who watched me walk into church with my big MacArthur Study Bible might have mistaken me for a textbook MacArthur-ite. What cured me from hero worship was actually two trips to Sun Valley for the Shepherd’s Conference in ’06 & ’07. The teaching at those conferences had a profound impact on my developing philosophy of ministry, but staying in the homes of two families from Grace Community Church helped me recognize that this place was not Heaven. These were real people with real imperfections, as was true of John himself. As I interacted with conference attendees who did revere him in an unhealthy way, I thought a lot about how to learn from someone without worshipping them.

As the years have gone on, there’s no doubt that I’ve parted ways with MacArthur on many points, whether on theological matters (like dispensationalism), his handling of cultural or political issues, or what seemed to me like an increasingly combative approach to just about everything. Ministry apprentices at our church have heard me criticize him more than once over the years. And honestly, that’s probably why I’m writing this piece. I want to set the record straight: when I criticize John MacArthur, I do so in the way that a son might criticize his father. Some things may drive him nuts, but he dearly loves the man who has shaped him in more ways than he is aware—and to whom he owes his life.

If it wasn’t for John MacArthur, I doubt I would be a pastor (if not a Christian), and I certainly wouldn’t be the pastor (or Christian) that I am. I have a hard time thinking of a single conviction I hold that he did not have some role in shaping. At the foundation of all of my philosophy of ministry (and approach to life itself) is the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture, and nobody did more than John MacArthur to help me understand and embrace that central tenet. In the Lord, I owe him a great debt, and my gratitude for him is profound.

The day after John died, I opened up the Grace to You podcast and played “What Heaven Is” for my kids at the breakfast table. It was classic MacArthur, and a great introduction for their first time hearing him preach. I hope it won’t be their last.

So thank you, Lord, for John MacArthur. Thank you for the gift that he was to so many of us. Keep me, and the many others who follow in his footsteps, faithful to you until the end of our own earthly races. To you be the glory forever. Amen.

If we are pleased with the results of today’s election, let us yet in humility remember that every earthly authority must one day give way to your eternal rule—so let us in grace love all our neighbors well.

Or, if we are disappointed, let us resist all fear, anger, accusation, and bitterness, but instead renew our trust in you—and let us in grace love all our neighbors well.

Whatever the outcome of this election, let our citizenship and our hope be rooted first in your heavenly kingdom, that we might live in exile here as winsome ambassadors of our soon-returning King—always in grace loving all our neighbors well.

From Every Moment Holy, Vol. 3 (Nashville, TN: Rabbit Room Press, 2023), p. 364.

But just as Jacob feared, Laban tried to stop him. Laban apparently thought he has ownership over Jacob. “Then Laban answered and said to Jacob, ‘The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, the flocks are my flocks, and all that you see is mine'” (Genesis 31:43). Laban is talking nonsense here. He sounds like a mob boss—or maybe just one of the many dysfunctional grandparents throughout history who missed the memo in Genesis 2:24 about their adult children leaving home to start new families of their own.

A few weeks ago, a friend of mine told me about his grandparents who have really struggled with their grandchildren living more than a few minutes from home, and have put intense pressure on their family to stay put within the same few square miles.

Perhaps we can understand that coming from unbelievers, whose only hope is in this life, and for whom family really is everything because they have nothing else. But when grandparents know the Lord, they can avoid the example of Laban. They can give up control, and with tears bless their children and grandchildren to go wherever the Lord directs them to do whatever He wants them to do.

I’m so grateful my in-laws gave us that gift when we moved to Nipawin. Our family was small, our youngest was still a baby, and though there was sadness, they did not for one minute try to make us feel bad for moving away in pursuit of kingdom fruitfulness.

When Paul invited Timothy to accompany him (Acts 16:1-3), Timothy left behind Eunice, his faithful mother, and Lois, a godly grandmother, both of whom had invested years of love and training into him (2 Tim 1:5, 3:15). Just think of what we all would have missed out on if they had selfishly guilted Timothy into staying close to home.

Arrows in a quiver aren’t meant to stay there—they’re for shooting at the enemy (Psalm 127:4-5). I can’t imagine Lois and Eunice had dry eyes as they said their goodbyes to Timothy, but would they also not have felt joy at seeing what all their years with him had built up to? They had trained him in the Scriptures so that they could unleash him on the kingdom of darkness, and every reader of the New Testament is, in one sense, in their debt.

So as we search the Scriptures for examples of wise grandparenting, let’s look to Lois, not Laban. If you have grandchildren, invest in them so that they—and through them, God-willing, many others—may spend eternity with the Lord, not just holidays and Sunday dinners with you. There will be a cost involved, but the rewards will be infinitely worth it.

Today, together, we’re here to face the awfulness of death. We’re not going to hide from that or run from that. As we commit the body of little Constance to the ground we remember God’s curse on the sin of our father Adam: that because of his sin, he and his children would “return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return’” (Genesis 3:19).

Adam was a gardener, used to putting things in the ground, and one day he himself would go into the ground. It sounds so symmetrical—from the ground, to the ground; dust to dust—but it’s not the way it’s supposed to be. We were supposed to go from dust to glory. We were made from the dirt to be more than dirt; to be living images of the living God who would walk with him in eternal fellowship. We came out of the ground, but we were never supposed to go back to it.

There is something about death, no matter the age of the one who dies, that shocks us with its unnaturalness and its wrongness. This is not how it should be. And the shock and horror of death is accentuated when the one who dies is not old and aged, but young and small and innocent. There is one kind of sadness in seeing a blazing fire slowly burn down into ashes until the last glowing coal is extinguished. It is another matter altogether to witness the kindling snuffed out before the fire even has a chance to burn.

Nothing here seems right. Death seems wrong, and this death seems especially wrong.

But if I may, I would draw our attention to another death in history that, if it is possible, is even more wrong, even more shocking in its sense of un-fittingness.

I speak of the death of a son who was more perfect than any human child. A son who filled His father with delight. A son who was truly perfect, unstained by Adam’s sin; a son who had been given many chances to do wrong and never caved in once over 33 years. A son who took upon Himself the sins of the world and suffered in the place of His people from all time and all places.

I believe we have good reason to be confident that on the cross, Jesus died for this little one we’ve gathered here for today. We know that we are all sinners, not only by choice, but also by nature. We’re all born with a guilty status that we’ve inherited from our first father Adam (Rom 5:12-19). And yet, Scripture repeatedly tells us that the sins for which people are judged are not the sins they inherited but the ones they committed. We know from John 9:41 and Romans 1:20 that God’s judgement falls on those who reject Him “without excuse.”

And from that, I, and many others, conclude that God treats differently those who do have an excuse—those who die without the ability to see and respond to his glory. The sin they inherited from Adam cannot be ignored, but must have been graciously paid for by Christ on the cross, and thus they are welcomed with mercy into the kingdom of God.

“Jesus said, ‘Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven'” (Matthew 19:14).

Jesus died for our sins—committed and inherited. And what that means is that Christ’s death has transformed this death. Because of His death, this death is not merely a return of dust to dust. This burial today is not an act of finality. It is an act of gardening—yes, even on this frigid February afternoon. We are planting a seed today, a seed that will one day bloom into beauty unimaginable.

But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body… So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. (1 Corinthians 15:35-38, 42–44).

I believe that we are sowing here today. Planting a seed that has fallen to the ground and died much sooner than anybody expected. A natural seed, sown perishable, dishonourable, weak. But because Jesus died and led the way on His resurrection morning, this is a seed that will be raised: supernatural, imperishable, glorious, powerful.

Now, I don’t share any of this today to try to make anybody feel better, or to take away the pain of this loss. That’s impossible. This grief is real and it is only appropriate to feel it and sit with it.

But I share this to try and situate the grief and the pain in the right story, and in the right place in that story.

Though we sow in tears today, full of questions without answers, yet shall we reap with shouts of joy on the day when, from this very spot, Constance Alma Neudorf arises to meet her saviour on the day of His return. “And so shall we ever be with the Lord” (1 Thess 4:17).

We groan in grief today, but this is a groaning that leads to life—the life of the Resurrection (Rom 8:22-23).

And one day, under the bright sky of the New Creation, perhaps some of us will gather at this very spot, and think back to today, and look back on these tears as old tales.

I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

   “Death is swallowed up in victory.”
     “O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?”

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:50–58).

AMBER’s three emphases—Word saturated, gospel centred, and distinctly Baptist—resonated deeply with me. I nodded along to every sentence of their “Abstract of Principles for Baptist Churches.” When a member in our church read some material from their website, she told me, “It sounds like you wrote it.” It seemed like we shared not only some important convictions and values, but a vision for the renewal of the church in our part of the country, and that excited me.

That March I was able to have lunch with Michael Lorusso, a member of AMBER’s council. Despite mishearing his last name as “LeRousseau” and asking if he was French (a deep insult to any Italian), he was gracious and we had an engaging conversation. I learned that AMBER began its life as a renewal movement within a particular Baptist conference in the midst of its own downgrade. Their attempts at fostering renewal hadn’t been met with the warmest welcome, some of the churches represented by AMBER had already moved on from that conference, and AMBER’s purview had widened as a result. They were open to connecting with Baptist pastors in various denominational situations across Western Canada.

I asked how I could learn more and connect further, and Michael suggested I come to their conference in Abbotsford that May. That seemed like a long shot at the time, but our elders were supportive of the idea, and we found a way to make it happen.

I left from Nipawin with one of our elder apprentices, and our route to Abbotsford took us through Alberta such that we were able to make the second half of the road trip with Michael and three others from his church. Sharing a vehicle and accommodations for three days provided a solid opportunity to get to know these brothers and talk about things that matter. The conference itself was a real encouragement; hearing the various pastors preach through Galatians, and then talking to them one-on-one between sessions, deepened the sense that I’d found some kindred spirits. We left at the end of the weekend with plans to connect further.

That fall, after further conversation and a thorough process, I was invited to become a council member of AMBER. I was then able to join the rest of the council in Calgary at the end of October to finalize our confession of faith. For two days, rigorous theological discussion and heartfelt prayer flowed together with side-splitting laughter and good espresso, and we parted with a document—forged in the fires of our brotherhood—that we could joyfully stand behind.

I love our confession because it is robust, historically informed, Bible-soaked, and worshipful. It does not shy away from bring gloriously specific on matters like God’s good design for men and women, and yet there is a gentle humility in the application of this doctrine. As the introduction states, “We recognize that this statement is not perfect and only represents the best attempt of a few fallible and finite men at giving an abbreviated summary of what is infallible and infinite. For that reason, agreement can only mean that an individual has no settled theological opposition to the doctrines contained herein…. we believe it is necessary to call all those in association with AMBER to a substantial agreement with this statement while graciously granting room for growth for those with hesitations or without formed convictions, trusting the guidance of the whole in places where we feel less confident or even unsettled.”

So, for example, while AMBER stands firmly within the Reformed tradition, AMBER is “Reformed” in the same way that I am. We prize what the Bible says about the absolute sovereignty of God in all things, including the salvation of sinners, but we don’t use these truths as a club to clobber people, or to exclude those who are still hesitant or unformed in their understanding.

AMBER is, as its name implies, an association of ministers—which in this context primarily means pastors and elders—who can support and resource one another in the work of Baptist renewal. We also hope that as we build relationships as pastors, our churches will be able to link arms and partner together for encouragement, accountability, and gospel partnership.

For the past two years, AMBER has hosted conferences focused on our first two emphases: the primacy of the Word and the centrality of the gospel. This May, our third annual conference, “Baptist Renewal,” will consider it means for us to be distinctly Baptist. After an opening session with renowned historian Michael Haykin (who will be joining us virtually), the conference sessions will unpack significant Baptist distinctives, such as the headship of Christ, congregationalism, and believer’s baptism. I’ll be speaking on the topic of regenerate church membership.

This conference is not just for pastors—it’s open to all who care about the church in our part of the world. (In fact, one of the highlights of last year’s conference was seeing just how invested the people of Maranatha Baptist Church were with the event, and AMBER in general.) This year, we are hoping to bring a good sized group from Emmanuel, and we’ve actually set aside some money in our church budget to help cover travel and accommodation costs for those attending. (The conference itself is free.)

If you’re interested in learning more about AMBER or the conference, please find out more at the AMBER website or the conference’s event page. You can register here, and if you do, please let me know. It would be good to get a sense, sooner than later, of how many from Nipawin will be making the trip.

I’m grateful for the friendship and fellowship I’ve already experienced with AMBER, and I’m looking forward to our church getting to know these other churches better. I pray that these budding relationships will be used by the Lord for the sake of the gospel in Western Canada for years to come. May it be!

One of the first things we learn about God in the Bible is that He is creative.¹The fact that “creativity” is not listed as one of God’s attributes in many systematic theologies says a thing or two about common theological methodology, but that’s a point for another post. He makes things. He created this universe out of nothing. And not only is He powerful enough to make everything we see, He is also creative enough to think it all up.

God thought up galaxies and neutrons and red blood cells and the small intestine. He thought up chickens and lobsters and platypuses and chameleons. He designed the periodic table of elements and the northern lights and the water cycle and the migration patterns of birds. He made tall oak trees and red strawberries and wheat that changes from green to gold and flowers of a million different colours and patterns.

God didn’t need to do any of this. He could have made a universe functional and boring. But the fact that He created what He did shows us that He is creative.

As humans created in the image of God (Gen 1:26-27), we see His creativity reflected in us as we create. We paint, puzzle, plan, parent, produce, and perform because we can’t help but make things like our maker. Authors and moviemakers build whole worlds, children snap together building blocks, and thoughtful adults arrange furniture and artwork to make a home. Made in God’s image, we see the Creator reflected in each one of us.

God’s creativity is surely reason for us to praise Him. After describing some of God’s multi-faceted creation, Psalm 104:24 exclaims, “O Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom have you made them all; the earth is full of your creatures.”

But beyond this, God’s creativity is also a reason for us to trust Him. Ephesians 3:20 refers to God as “him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think.” God’s ability surpasses not only our capacity to ask, but even the boundaries of our thinking—which includes our imagination.

When struggles and trials stump us, we so easily imagine that God is stumped too. As if our problems are His problems. As if He can’t figure this out just because we can’t figure this out.

But God is the one who not only thought up the giraffe but also designed special valves in its neck to maintain consistent blood pressure to its brain, so that as it bends its head down to drink its brain doesn’t explode from the blood pressure in its neck, and as it raises its head up again it doesn’t faint from orthostatic hypotension. God is the one who not only designed the woodpecker, but gave it a tongue that wraps around its brain to protect it from otherwise-fatal shock as it hammers away for insects. God not only built you, but gave you an incredibly complex immune system that right at this very second is protecting you from harm in ways you’ll never be aware of.

This God is able to do more than we can ask or think. And if you know Him, haven’t you experienced this time and time again? How many times has God surprised you with an answer to prayer you never would have anticipated? How many more times will He do the same?

This means we can trust Him with our requests. We can cast our cares on Him (1 Pet 5:7), and leave them there, knowing that it is an infinitely creative God who hears our prayers and cares for His children.

Towards the end of the message I made the comment that the Sabbath doesn’t apply to us, but I didn’t get the chance to flesh that out any further, and so I (understandably) got some questions about that later. Was I really saying that the command to rest one day in seven doesn’t apply to Christians anymore?

The short answer is yes, that’s exactly what I was saying. Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5 are two passages that show us this is the case.

But there’s a bit more below the waterline on this topic. Isn’t the Sabbath a part of the Ten Commandments? Aren’t Christians supposed to obey the Ten Commandments? Didn’t the Sabbath just move from Saturday to Sunday? Are we allowed to mow our grass or do homework on Sundays?

If you want to explore these questions (plus a bonus question about Phariseeism and decisions in the church today), I did my best to explain how this all works in this video earlier today. Below it, you’ll find some links to where we tackled this topic in the You Are Here series back in 2019.

• The Law (sermon)
• Law, Covenant and Mission (blog post)

In the last instalment, we considered how the suffering of Christ paid for the sins of all who believe in Him. For those who are trusting and resting in Christ alone, judgment for sin is not a future event waiting for us after we die—it is a past event that happened finally and fully at Calvary.

But what does this mean for suffering in the lives of Christians? If suffering is a picture of the reality of sin, and Christ has paid for that sin, why would we still need to suffer? If suffering is a warning about coming judgement, and Christ has taken that judgement for us, what role could suffering still have for a Christian? If suffering is meant to drive us to repentance, and if we have repented and trusted Christ, then surely there is no further reason for Christians to suffer?

The logic being these questions is sound. And one day, because of the cross, we will experience a suffering-free eternity:

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.” And he who was seated on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” (Rev 21:1-5)

Because of the cross, the suffering of God’s people will end. The question is, when? And the answer is, not yet.

Already, Not Yet

As we’ve been recently exploring in our sermon series in Matthew 11, you and I live in the “already-but-not-yet.” The Messiah has come and inaugurated the kingdom, but its final consummation still awaits. Jesus healed the sick and raised the dead, but John the Baptist still languished in prison (Matt 11:1-6). The decisive victory against Satan was won by Christ on the cross (Col 2:15), and yet we are still waiting for our enemy’s final destruction (1 Cor 15:24-25). We are already new creations (2 Cor 5:17), yet we groan in these mortal bodies (2 Cor 5:1-4). There is a glory that will be revealed in us, but in the meantime we do suffer (Rom 8:18).

As Rich Mullins put it, when Jesus was born “the old world started dying and the new world started coming on.” We live between these two worlds, in the tension between the already and the not yet.

And we find that in this season, while not everything had changed, neither have things remained the same. The realities of the old world have not been fully removed, but they have been transformed. We see this when we consider our relationship with sin, suffering, and death, realities that were conquered at the cross and will be removed in the new creation. In the meantime, wile they are still a part of our existence, our experience of them has been permanently altered.

Consider sin. Before we were born again, we were dead in sins (Eph. 2:1) and in slavery to it (Rom 6:17). In the New Creation, sin will be no more (1 Jn 3:2, 1 Cor 15:42-54, Rev. 22:3). In the meantime, in the in-between of the already-but-not-yet, sin still plagues us. But instead of being enslaved to it, we’ve been set free from its power (Rom 6:18). It’s still around, but instead of being our master, it’s now an enemy combatant, a sword has been put into our hands, and we’ve been told to put it to death (Rom 8:13).

The same is true with death. Before redemption, death was the end, the inescapable doorway to judgment (Rom 6:23, Heb 9:27). In the New Creation, death will be no more (1 Cor 15:53-54, Rev 21:4). In the time between, we do not escape death—but our relationship with it is drastically changed. It is no longer the end (Jn 11:25-26). Instead of just an enemy, death is now an ally that ushers us directly into the presence of our Lord (Phil 1:21-23). Because of the death and resurrection of Jesus, death is no longer a loss but a gain.

And the same goes for suffering. Before we knew Christ, suffering told us of our sin and warned us of our judgement. In the New Creation, suffering will be eradicated. Until then, suffering is not removed from our lives. But our relationship with suffering, and its significance in our lives, is permanently altered. In order to draw this out, let’s consider Romans 8:18-24.

Groaning in Hope

Romans 8:18 says, “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.” Suffering, for those who are in Christ, has become something small and temporary. There is a glory coming, and it is so great that our present suffering doesn’t hold a candle to it.

The next verses situate our present suffering in the broader context of creation. “For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility” (Rom 8:19-20). That “futility” is the curse of Genesis 3. The creation didn’t do this to itself. Neither did Adam, or even Satan.

As the rest of verse 20 explains, the creation was subjected to futility “not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope.” Yes, God brought the creation crashing down around Adam as a portrayal of his sin, but that was not creation’s final role in this drama. As verse 21 goes on to say, God subjected the creation to futility in hope “that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay, and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (Rom 8:21). Just as the creation has displayed the horrors of human sin, so it will one day display the beauty of our final redemption. Unchained from the curse, all things made new, creation will be finally free and fully glorious.

Until then, it waits. And while it waits, it suffers. But the future hope transforms the present hurt, as verse 22 explains so poignantly: “We know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.” The suffering of creation—every earthquake and famine, every red tooth and claw—is like groaning, but a groaning that leads not to death. It is the groaning of a woman in childbirth. She is in pain, but a pain that will bring about new life.

And according to verse 23, this is not just true for creation, but for all of us who are in Christ: “And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies” (Rom 8:23).

We groan along with creation—meaning that our groaning is the groaning of childbirth. And this is a most stunning transformation. To the unrepentant sinner, the sufferings of this world are death throes, forebodings and warnings of final destruction. But to those who are in Christ, the suffering we experience are but the birth pangs of the new creation. John Piper describes this amazing transformation with the following illustration:

If you are in a hospital and you hear a woman across the hall groan or scream, it makes all the difference in how you feel if you know you are on the maternity ward and not the oncology unit. Why? Pain is pain, isn’t it? No. Some pain leads to life. And some pain leads to death. And what verse 22 promises is that for the children of God, all pain leads to life. All the groanings of this world are the birth pains of the kingdom of God. If you are part of the kingdom – a child of the King – all your sufferings are labor pains and not death spasms. And I mean all of them – even the death spasms!¹https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/subjected-to-futility-in-hope-part-2

Glorious Transfer

These words are profound to me, because I’ve been in both situations. I’ve stood beside my mom in the oncology ward as she cried out in pain from the cancer that was eating her body away from the inside, and I’ve held my wife’s hand in the delivery room as she sweat and cried and pushed for dear life to bring our three children into the world. I’ve seen the pain that leads to death, and the pain that leads to life. And Romans 8:22 is telling us that, in Christ, all of our pain is pain that leads to life.

When Jesus saved us, he did not immediately remove suffering from our life—but he did something no less stunning: he transferred us from the palliative ward to the maternity ward.

I find this perspective so helpful in its utter realism. Ask any mother, particularly those who did not have anesthetic, and she will tell you that childbirth was an indescribably painful experience. But she will also tell you how those sufferings were eclipsed by the overwhelming joy of holding her new child in her arms.

Similarly, choosing to see our suffering in the light of eternity is not some mind game we play to try and make things feel better. We’re not saying “it’s not that bad.” It is that bad—and the glory towards which we are hastening will be infinitely better.

So lift your eyes, suffering Christian. Your suffering is all about the gospel, which we’ve come to learn is not just a private business, but a cosmic drama that encompasses all of creation. Christ has died, Christ has risen, and Christ will come again. In the meantime, we suffer, but not a palliative-ward kind of suffering; Jesus has transferred us to the delivery room of hope. Cancer, car accidents, catastrophes of all kinds—these are no longer threats of impending judgment, but preverberations of new life. Each experience of suffering is one push closer to the sweet rest of the new creation.

So we do not lose heart. Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day. For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal. (2 Cor 4:16–18).

If suffering is ultimately a display of the reality of sin, then it’s no coincidence that Jesus had to die the way He did. Jesus did not pay for sin by dying alone in a quiet way. Sin had to be atoned for through suffering.

“From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised” (Matt 16:21).

“And he said to them, ‘I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer’” (Luke 22:15).

The gospels tell us what that suffering entailed physically: spitting, slapping, punching, beating, whipping. “His appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of the children of mankind” (Isaiah 52:14). A crown made of thorns—the very thorns that grew up in painful response to Adam’s sin (Matt 27:28, Gen 3:18). An unbearably heavy cross, nails through the hands and feet, and slow, agonizing suffocation. There’s a reason that the word we use for extreme pain is “excruciating,” which comes from the word for cross.

He also suffered the emotional pain of abandonment by his closest companions, being slandered and lied about, being rejected by His own people, and the shame of being hung up naked in front of a crowd who had gathered to mock him while He died.

And beyond this was the spiritual torment of bearing the curse that our sins deserved. The dark sky, the shaking ground, the cry of “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” all speak to the reality of the divine judgement that Christ bore in the place of His people. “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us” (Galatians 3:13).

And we can’t miss that Christ did not just suffer—He suffered publicly. On the cross, He was lifted up from the earth so that people might look at him (John 3:14). And as we look, we see a man pierced for our transgressions. Crushed for our iniquities. If suffering is a reflection of the seriousness of sin, then Christ’s gruesome suffering for our sins makes it crystal clear just how atrocious those sins actually are.

But, praise God, that’s not the only thing the cross tells us. Because Jesus did suffer for our sins, the public suffering of the cross also makes it unmistakable that our atrocious sins have been paid for. The punishment He bore brought us peace, and each of His wounds was for our healing. Our sin was laid upon Christ, and He was condemned and judged as our substitute. He drank the cup of the Father’s wrath in our place. He satisfied divine justice on our behalf. The bloody spectacle of the cross not only tells us how serious our sins are, but also that those literally deadly sins have been forgiven.

“For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Cor. 5:21) “Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God.” (1 Pe. 3:18) “There is now therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1)

No condemnation. The storm is over. The axe has fallen. The debt is paid. The law has been satisfied. Justice is fulfilled. Satan’s grounds of accusation are taken away. “He has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Hebrews 9:26).

The cross is at the centre of history, and there are countless implications of Christ’s accomplishment upon it. For the purposes of this series, we want to ask an important question: if suffering is a display of sin, and our sin has been put away by Christ, does that mean that those who trust in Christ don’t need to suffer any more? On this side of Calvary, can we forget about pain and get on with living their best lives now? That’s the question we’ll consider in the next instalment.

In part 2 of this series we saw that physical suffering is a part of God’s response to human sin, deliberately designed to demonstrate the tragedy that exists within each of our own hearts.

We might ask whether this is fair of God, or at least something of an overreaction. Did a bite from a fruit really warrant all of the pain and bloodshed in the world?

To answer that question, it’s helpful to consider what would have happened if Adam and Eve had got what they actually deserved. “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Gen 2:17). God would not have been unjust to respond to our first parent’s sin with instant, eternal punishment. That what sin deserves, because every sin—even the smallest bite from a fruit—is an offence against a Person of infinite worth and majesty.¹For more consideration of the nature of the first sin, see What Eve Should Have Said. Thus, even the smallest sin is a crime of infinite offence.

But Adam and Eve did not get what they deserved. They kept breathing. They kept living. They awoke to fresh sunrises and the sound of a baby’s cry and the taste of good food and refreshment of rest after work and the love of one another. And all around them was this universe—still beautiful, still showing God’s glory—but constantly reminding them of their sin.

There is a word for this: grace. God could have dealt with sin immediately by giving them their just deserts. But instead He extended grace, giving them life while showing them their sin, and therefore offering every opportunity to return to Him. Being alive on a cursed earth is a lot better than any one of us deserves, and when we see it like this, we begin to grasp that pain and suffering are gifts that summon us to repent before it’s too late.

This connection between suffering and repentance is one Jesus made explicit in Luke 13:1-5:

There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”

Luke 13:1-5

Jesus tells his hearers that extraordinary suffering does not imply extraordinary sin. But that is not because He sees no connection between suffering and sin. According to Jesus, we are all extraordinary sinners, all worthy of death. Every resident of Jerusalem deserved to fall under Pilate’s sword or be buried under the rubble of Siloam. The wonder is not that some suffered, but rather that so many did not.

And not just Jerusalem: “…now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17:30b-31a).

We’ve all heard the question, “How can a good God allow suffering?” The assumption, buried somewhere below the surface, is that we’re mostly good people who deserve something along the lines of a comfortable existence. But God does not agree with our self-assessment. Something as basic as the cycle of the seasons is a grace we don’t deserve, designed to witness to His goodness and lead us to repentance (Gen 8:21-22, Acts 14:15-17, Rom 2:4). The fact that anybody is breathing right now is an unfathomable gift not one has earned.

Suffering, therefore, gives us a taste of what we actually do deserve. Suffering speaks to us of our sin and our need to repent of it. Suffering tells us that God is patient, and that He is warning us and waking us and giving us time before it’s too late. Suffering tells us that we need a Saviour to rescue us from final judgement.

Suffering, therefore, points us to the greatest act of suffering in history: the crucifixion of Christ. That’s what we’ll consider in the next instalment.

More to come.

In Part 1 of this series, we considered how God created a physical, visible universe in order to communicate spiritual, invisible truth (Rom 1:20). This declarative role of creation must be kept in mind as we explore both humanity’s first sin and the Lord’s response to it.

Consider Adam and Eve, surrounded by the glory-shouting universe, created to see and know and love and worship the God whose undefiled majesty they saw everywhere they looked. And yet they did the unthinkable: they rebelled, choosing a piece of fruit—and what it would do for them—over the glory of God. Although they knew God, they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and they worshiped and served themselves more than their Creator (see Rom 1:18-25). They willingly chose to disobey the Lord, challenge Him, and disbelieve His word—all in order to elevate themselves to His place (Gen 3:4).

And as their teeth sunk into the fruit… well, what did happen? As they defiantly swallowed that first bite, did Eden immediately disappear, the sky grow dark, and thorns and thistles spring fully grown from the ground? Not that we can tell. As far as we know, nothing happened to the external world right away. 

The initial change was internal. Their eyes were open to the reality of evil. But there was no blind law of nature that made death and suffering come into the world in a sheer action-and-reaction response to their sin.

What did happen, according to Genesis 3:8-13, is that God Himself came down to Eden and called them to account. It was a very personal process: He asked them questions, and He made them answer. He then responded to their actions, personally and specifically, starting with the serpent. He then addressed Eve, describing to her the struggle and pain she would now bear.

Yet His most sweeping statements are reserved for Adam. Why? Adam was the head. Adam should have protected His wife from the serpent, and certainly not followed her into sin. Adam was the one primarily responsible for stewarding the creation. That’s why Romans 5:12 says that it is through one man that sin entered the world. And speaking to Adam on that dark day, the Lord said these words:

Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, “You shall not eat of it,” cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.

Genesis 3:17-19

We have to notice that “The Curse” did not fall from the sky and self-deploy. God cursed the earth because of Adam’s sin. The crucial words are there in verse 17—”because of you,” or “for your sake” as the KJV says. God deliberately declared that the physical world, from that moment on, would be changed on account of Adam’s rebellion.

Every morning that Adam woke up to go plow the fields, his work said: “your sin.” Every drop of sweat that came down his forehead and stung his eyes said, “your sin.” Every time he bent down to pull a weed up, and pricked his finger on a thorn, and felt the pain and saw the drop of blood—that all said “your sin.” And as Adam felt death began to work in his body, and saw one of his sons kill the other, it all shouted, “this is your sin.”

When we remember that the universe was designed to communicate spiritual truth to us, we can see God’s purpose in bringing the perfect creation crashing down around Adam. The physical world was being used to tell Adam about the nature of His own sin—and, thereby, the magnitude of the one against Whom he had sinned—in graphic, bloody, painful detail.

Another passage that points towards this same truth is found in Jeremiah:

Has a nation changed its gods, even though they are no gods? But my people have changed their glory for that which does not profit. Be appalled, O heavens, at this; be shocked, be utterly desolate, declares the LORD, for my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water.

Jeremiah 2:11-13

The Lord looks at the horrific sin of His people and, in effect, says to the stars in the sky: “Do you see what they’ve done? You can’t just keep shining on there as if nothing has happened!” Creation declares the glory of God, and in these cases it does so by demonstrating the true scale and nature of our rebellion against Him.

It’s common enough to say that pain and suffering are a result of sin. What I’m seeking to press here is that they are a result of sin because God made it so. He cursed the earth. It was intentional. Romans 8:20 confirms this: “For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it.”

The curse of death and suffering that God brought on the world was deliberately designed to communicate to us the reality and the seriousness of sin. Which means that when we experience suffering “out there”—cyclones, car accidents, cancer—we are fundamentally seeing a display of the awfulness that already existed within our own hearts.

Which means that suffering is designed to lead us to the gospel by way of repentance. That’s what we’ll explore in the next instalment.

More to come.

This post is the first in a short series in which I hope to explore some of the Biblical connections between suffering and the gospel. The word and is important. I don’t mean suffering for the gospel (as important a theme as that is). What I mean is: what does human suffering have to do with the gospel? What do cancer and natural disasters and terrorist attacks and car accidents have to do with the cross of Christ? Are there Biblical connections?

I believe there are—and, in fact, I believe these connections are as wide as the Bible itself. Not only that, but grasping these connections is key to developing a full, robust, biblical understanding of suffering.

There’s a certain urgency in developing such an understanding. Suffering is a universal experience. If you have a pulse, you either have or will experience suffering. My sad conviction is that far too few Christians today have an adequate Biblical understanding of suffering. And this leaves them in an extremely vulnerable place when the waves of suffering finally do reach the shores of their life.

For some people, suffering leads them to abandon their professed faith. This is particularly prone to take place if they have false expectations regarding suffering. If they think that God is supposed to make their life comfortable, successful and pain-free, prolonged suffering can lead them to conclude that God has either failed them, doesn’t love them, or just plain doesn’t exist.

Perhaps just as common is another kind of spiritual shrivelling—when a suffering person does not abandon Christianity, but instead redefines it along the lines of their experience. Their anemic theology can’t process how a big, mighty, sovereign Creator could allow his people to suffer so horribly. So, in order to cope, they scale back their understanding of God and His place in the universe.

They no longer worship God as the One who fills heaven and earth and accomplishes His will in everything that happens. They no longer view Christianity as a comprehensive worldview, Scripture as a complete revelation of absolute truth that is binding upon all.

Instead, their faith retreats and becomes something small and private. The world is a big, scary place, and God— instead of being the King over all—becomes more and more like a private therapist or a reassuring friend, a close co-sufferer who cheers for us and helps us feel okay in the midst of the big world out there, a world that often shocks Him as much as it does us.

Scripture tells us so much more. It tells us that God is the sovereign king over all creation who upholds all things by the Word of His power. He is not sleeping or helplessly standing by when people are diagnosed with cancer or planes fly into buildings or hurricanes develop over the ocean. He works all things according to the counsel of His will (Eph 1:11). Whatever He pleases, He does, in heaven, on earth, and in the sea (Psalm 135:6). He is King and Lord (Dan 4:34-35).

And He’s told us all we need to know about suffering, why it exists, and what we are to make of it. We don’t even need to look much further than the first three chapters of the Bible to find this vital instruction.

In fact, the very first words of Scripture lay a crucial foundation for understanding all of this: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen 1:1).

Just stop and think about the profound realities summed up in these few words. In the beginning,

• a spiritual God created a material heavens and earth.
• the invisible Creator made a visible world of sight and smell and sound and taste and touch.
• the eternal Trinity formed a temporal universe.
• the self-sufficient, self-sustaining One created something that was outside of Himself, which was not Himself, and yet which depended on Him for its moment-by-moment existence.

Why? What was His reason for doing this? That answer to that question is crucial to understanding all that will come next.

At least two passages in Scripture explicitly describe the eternal Creator’s purpose in creating the physical heavens and earth. The first is the familiar words of Psalm 19:1-4: “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. Their measuring line goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.”

The second is from the first chapter of Romans: “For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made” (Rom 1:19-20)

God created the heavens and the earth to communicate truth about Himself. From the vast galactic superstructures to the wonder of 8.7 million species of life on earth to the complexities of the smallest cell, the choir of creation sings to us with innumerable voices about the creativity and knowledge and wisdom and power and glory of God.

In other words, the universe is a megaphone proclaiming truth about God. That’s why it was created. “From him and through him and to him are all things” (Rom 11:36).

And when we see that the physical world was designed to communicate spiritual truth, we’re primed to grasp the purpose of the curse in Genesis 3—and from there, God’s intention in all of our suffering.

More to come.

Among complementarians—who all agree that the office of overseer/elder is restricted to men—there are some who argue that we should be free to use the title “pastor” for women. They argue that “pastor” is a spiritual gift, distinct from the office of elder/overseer, and nothing in Scripture restricts this gift to men. If a woman is involved in a biblically-legitimate ministry that involves shepherding care, then we can, or perhaps even should, call her a pastor.

I respectfully disagree. I submit that using the title “pastor” to refer to a woman is a significant mistake for four overlapping reasons.

1. It Works Against the New Testament Pattern

The word “pastor” just means “shepherd.” As a noun and a verb, the word is used in the New Testament in three contexts, referring to 1) literal shepherds, 2) the Lord Jesus, and 3) church leaders.

In this final and third context, “shepherd” (or “pastor”) is used as a noun only once, where Ephesians 4:11 speaks of “shepherds” being given to the church by the Lord. As a verb (“to shepherd”), it’s used once as a command addressed to Peter (John 21:16), once to speak of the self-serving “pastoring” of false teachers (Jude 12, translated “feed”), and twice in addresses to church elders/overseers.

In Acts 20:28, the first of these final two uses, the elders of the Ephesian church were summoned by Paul and charged to “pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for (lit. shepherd) the church of God.” The second use is in 1 Peter 5:2, where the elders were instructed to “shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight.”

Notice that, other than Peter the apostle, there is only one group of people in the New Testament who are told to “shepherd” (or “pastor”) others: the elders/overseers of a church. Put another way, if we were to ask the question, “according to the Scriptures, who is responsible for shepherding God’s people?”, the only answer we would come up with is “the elders/overseers.” Those attempting to apply the word “pastor” beyond elders and overseers do so without Biblical warrant. 

2. It Misunderstands Ephesians 4:11

Sam Storms is a complementarian who believes women can be called “pastor.” One of the grounds for his argument is that Ephesians 4:11 describes pastoring as a spiritual gift, not an office. On the basis of that one verse, he argues that “‘pastoring’ is a spiritual gift that may be found in numerous individuals of both genders who do not yet (or never will), for a variety of reason, qualify as Elders,” and that “pastoring is a gifting that is to be exercised by those who hold the office of Elder. But nowhere does the NT assert that Elders/Bishops/Overseers are the only ones who can function as pastors.”¹https://www.samstorms.org/enjoying-god-blog/post/a-complementarian-case-for-women-as-pastors

Storms assumes far too much about the nature of spiritual gifts in Ephesians 4:11. The passage does not in fact identify shepherding/pastoring as a spiritual gift per se. It simply says that Jesus gave shepherds/pastors to the church. In other words, it is the shepherds/pastors themselves who are the gift; the ability to perform their task is not what’s being described.

Now, it’s true that Ephesians 4:11 lists “shepherds” alongside of “prophets” and “teachers,” both terms elsewhere associated with spiritual gifts. But we must be careful of two errors here: first, reading those other passages into Ephesians 4:11 without warrant, and second, misunderstanding the nature of those other passages within their own contexts. Kenneth Berding’s excellent book What Are Spiritual Gifts? demonstrates that we should be careful of assuming “special ability” every time we read “gifts.” Particularly in Romans 12:6-8 and 1 Corinthians 12:28-29, “ministry assignments” or even “offices” may be a more accurate way of understanding what’s in view.

That being said, Ephesians 4:11 itself says nothing about spiritual gifts. It simply says that Jesus gave shepherds to his church. Arguing for women pastors on the basis of this verse begs a great many questions.

3. It Misunderstands the Nature of Shepherding

Much of the confusion over this issue may stem from a modern misunderstanding of “pastoral care.” As I said in a recent sermon,

We easily think that the job of a “shepherd” is to be like a chaplain in a hospital, somehow distinct from the work of leading and teaching. And not all of this is all wrong. But it can miss that, like we saw a few weeks back, shepherds were primarily leaders. Their position had authority. They cared for the sheep, not by cuddling with them, but by braving the elements and the dangers to lead the sheep from one place to the next where they could find food and water. That’s why Psalm 23 and John 10 highlight the way in which the sheep follow their shepherd. The shepherd cared for and fed the sheep by leading them.

https://ebcnipawin.ca/sermons/1-peter/good-shepherds/

Shepherds had authority over the sheep. That’s why Peter twice makes a close association between shepherding and overseeing. In 1 Peter 2:25, he refers to Jesus as the “Shepherd and Overseer of your souls,” doubling up similar words for an intensified effect, as he so often does. Similarly, 1 Peter 5:2 instructs the elders to “shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight.” These are not two distinct instructions. Rather, Peter’s use of language suggests that “exercising oversight” is how the elders shepherd the flock of God.²Mark Dubis, 1 Peter: A Handbook on the Greek Text, Baylor Handbook on the Greek New Testament (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2010), 160.

It’s thus incorrect to argue that there’s no necessary link between the function of pastoring and the authoritative office of elder/overseer. Rather, the New Testament repeatedly confirms, in various ways, how connected they are.

4. It Fails to Grapple With the Cultural Baggage

Even if the previous point is missed, it must still be acknowledged that the word “pastor” has a strong association with the office of elder/overseer in our culture. When the average Christian hears that a church has women pastors, they probably don’t think, “caring ministers distinct from the elders.” They’ll almost certainly assume that church has embraced egalitarian theology.

Shouldn’t the broad cultural understanding of the word “pastor” have something to say about how we use the word?

Consider the word “husband.” The word “husbandry” literally refers to the “management and conservation of resources” or “the care, cultivation, and breeding of crops and animals.”³https://www.google.com/search?q=husbandry

In true Proverbs 31 fashion, my wife does a fair amount of husbandry, conserving and managing resources for her children and her… er, spouse. Further, any woman who works on a farm is technically a “husband.”

But wouldn’t it be quite odd for someone to start calling these ladies “husbands”? Particularly in an era of gender fluidity and relational confusion, wouldn’t we assume they had some sort of an agenda?

Similarly, when God’s good design for men and women is so under attack in our day, why would anyone who embraces that design deliberately add to the confusion by using such a loaded term for female ministry personnel? I really struggle to see the wisdom in this, particularly in the absence of a biblical demand to call anyone by the title of “pastor.” If we don’t have to, why would we?

In conclusion, I believe that it’s at best unwise, and at worst unbiblical, to use the title “pastor” for a woman, even if her role is distinct from an elder/overseer. There is so much good ministry that women can and should be doing in our churches; we don’t help them at all by giving them an unbiblical and unnecessary job title.

A while back I wrote out this passage as a prayer, and have prayed these words often at the beginning of a new week of sermon prep. I shared this prayer with a group of younger preachers today and thought it might be helpful to pass on in this setting.

Father,

As I prepare to preach your word, grant me confidence in you through Christ. Not that I am sufficient in myself to claim anything as coming from me, but help me see that my sufficiency is from you, who has made me sufficient to be a minister of a new covenant, not of the law but of the Spirit. The law kills, but I praise you for the Spirit who gives life.

Grant me boldness—not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not gaze at what was being brought to an end. Today, a veil continues to lie across the hearts of so many, including, perhaps, some who will listen to me preach. I would have no greater joy than if you used my preaching of Christ to draw them to yourself. Would you cause them to turn to you, and remove the veil of spiritual darkness? Grant us all freedom by your Holy Spirit. Give us each an unveiled face, so that we, beholding your glory in your word, may be shaped more and more into your image. May this very sermon be used by you to transform us from one degree of glory to another.

Lord, I confess that I have this ministry by your mercy alone; knowing this, would you help me not to lose heart? Help me continue to renounce any disgraceful, underhanded ways. Keep me from any inclination to practice cunning or to tamper with your word. Make me content to simply commend myself, by the open statement of your truth, to everyone’s conscience in your sight.

I know that to some, the preaching of your gospel will still seem veiled in misunderstanding. I grieve to think of the unbelievers whose minds have been blinded by Satan, the God of this world, who seeks to to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Jesus Christ—your son and perfect image.

So keep me from proclaiming myself. May I only ever proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord, with myself as a servant for his sake. O Lord, at creation’s birth, you said “Let light shine out of darkness.” I ask for this miracle again this week. Through this preaching of your word, overcome Satan’s power and shine in all our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of your glory in the face of Christ.

I praise you that you’ve entrusted me with such a treasure as this, though I am but a clay jar. Thank you for putting a glorious message on the lips of a weak messenger. Thank you for making it plain that this surpassing power belongs to you and not to me.

Truly I am weak, O God. You see how I am afflicted in every way; thank you for keeping me from being crushed. I am perplexed; protect me from being driven to despair. Though I’ve been persecuted, I praise you that you’ve never forsaken me. You’ve allowed me to be struck down, but you’ve never let me be destroyed. Lord, you’ve seen fit to allow me to carry, in my body, the death of your son Jesus. Help me never forget that the goal of all this: that his resurrection life may also be manifested in this body. While I live, may I ever be content to be given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in this mortal flesh. Make me content for death to be at work in me, if that means life will be at work in those whom I serve.

Grant me the same spirit of faith according to what has been written, “I believed, and so I spoke.” May I also believe, and so believing, may I speak. Cause me to know that you who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus and bring us together into your presence.

Please keep me mindful that all of this—the preaching, the suffering—is for the sake of those whom I am privileged to shepherd, that your grace may extend to more and more people and so, ultimately, that you are brought more and more thanksgiving and glory.

Help me to not lose heart. You see, O Lord, how my outer man is wasting away. As this happens, cause my inner man to be renewed day by day. Help me to see all this affliction as light and momentary, and serving a purpose: preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison. Cause me to look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. Help me know that what I see with my eyes is ever-changing, but what I cannot see is eternal.

In Jesus’ name,

Amen

And we laughed about it. I explained that it was funny, and was supposed to be, and we should be okay enjoying the humour in the story.

But was this right? How can we laugh about something as awful as a man dying in this way? Isn’t this making light of a really horrible event? Since someone put this question to me on Monday, I’ve considered a response, which goes along three lines of thought.

First, in general, I agree that we should not use humour to make light of serious matters, particularly in the pages of Scripture. When it comes to preaching, I suspect that a significant portion of my sermons—probably most—don’t include jokes or deliberate attempts to get a laugh.

That’s not because I don’t have a healthy sense of humour or know how to enjoy a good laugh, and it’s not because I want my preaching to be a joyless affair. It’s because, as C. S. Lewis wrote, “There is a kind of happiness and wonder that makes you serious. It is too good to waste on jokes.” Our basic posture as we receive the Word should be trembling before the One who spoke it (Isa 66:2). This is a profoundly joyful experience, and it is far too good to waste on jokes.

Too often, preachers reach for humour because they’ve been taught it “works.” It’s also a communication tool that renders instant feedback: when people laugh, you know they’re tracking, and it feels good. Unfortunately, much of the time, it also distracts and detracts from the weight of glory in the texts we are preaching. In a world in which everything is trivial, and the idea of God rests lightly on so many of us, preachers should pray for their hearers to be cut to the heart (Acts 2:37), not ache from belly laughing.

Of course, there are exceptions. There are times when a careful use of humour can underline, not undermine, what a particular text is saying. And, as was the case on Sunday, there are times when Scripture itself deliberately uses humour. When the Bible invites us to laugh, we should join in.

That brings me to the second consideration—how do we know that Judges 3 is supposed to be funny? Are we really supposed to laugh at the thought of Eglon’s servants nervously waiting outside the door while their late lord lies dead in his own excrement?

I think we are, and I get this from the way the text is written. Judges 3:20 could easily have dried things up by saying something like, “And Ehud struck Eglon down with the sword. And he locked the doors to the roof chamber, and escaped. While the servants of Eglon were delayed in discovering their master, he arrived in Seirah.”

The grotesque details are—at the very least— intended to humiliate Eglon. There is dark irony in seeing a man whose belly (and, yes, bowels) were full of the bounty he has mercilessly extracted from Israel dying like this. And the awkwardness of Eglon’s servants waiting outside the doors, thinking he’s using the bathroom (and no doubt aided in their assumption by the smell wafting out), is nothing if not funny. It didn’t need to be included in the story, but it’s there on purpose. It makes us laugh. And it’s supposed to.

This is not the only time that bathroom humour makes its way into the Bible. “And at noon Elijah mocked them, saying, ‘Cry aloud, for he is a god. Either he is musing, or he is relieving himself, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened” (1 Kings 18:27). It’s hilarious to imagine Baal unable to respond to his priests because he’s tied up on the toilet. We’re supposed to laugh at this.

Now, there are some folks who don’t need any convincing about this, and tend to over-use this kind of humour. If that’s your inclination, just note how infrequent these examples are in Scripture. “Every Potty Joke in the Bible” would not be a very thick volume. We should learn from this.

And yet, when the Bible invites us to laugh, we should laugh. And as we do that, we might actually find ourselves joining our Heavenly Father.

• “He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord holds them in derision” (Psalm 2:4).
• “The wicked plots against the righteous and gnashes his teeth at him, but the Lord laughs at the wicked, for he sees that his day is coming” (Psalm 37:12–13).
• “But you, O Lord, laugh at them; you hold all the nations in derision” (Psalm 59:8).

Are you comfortable with God being portrayed in this way? He laughs at the wicked who don’t know their day is coming. He laughs at petty tyrants who try to set themselves up against His rule. He laughs at men like Eglon, bloated with apparent success, so convinced of his invincibility as he gullibly walks into the most obvious trap in the world.

And we’re allowed to join in, especially when Scripture specifically invites us to.

There is no “formula” for getting free from pornography: each person, and their situation, is unique. At the same time, just as sexual sin operates in certain patterns, so I’ve witnessed common patterns in the way the Lord breaks people free from its chains. Over the years, I’ve developed something of a road-map that I use to walk with a guy who is wanting to get free from porn.¹While I don’t have direct experience helping women with the same process, I suspect many of the same steps would apply. There’s five key landmarks along this path, which look something like this:

1. Start With the Gospel (But Remember All of It)

The gospel must be our starting point for so many reasons. We can’t do Romans 6 without Romans 5. Only forgiven sin can be conquered, and I’ve seen again and again how pornography shrivels up and dies at the foot of the cross.

And yet, as we recognize this, we want to avoid the simplistic idea that just “believing the gospel,” or repeatedly confessing our sins, will be enough to sever the strong hold of pornography. Romans 6:12 does not say “See Romans 5:8.” It tells us to do something about sin’s lingering presence, understanding that practical freedom from sin is one of the accomplishments of the death and resurrection of Christ (Rom 6:1-11).

We see a similar pattern in 1 Peter 1:14-19, where the cross is presented as the enabling basis for our obedience to His commands. “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness” (1 Peter 2:24).

So yes, the gospel kills pornography, but this gospel does not end with justification. Reconciled to God and seated at His table, we’re summoned and empowered to live like His children. Those fighting porn need to hear both the gospel’s comforting forgiveness and clarion call to holiness.

2. Ruthlessly Remove Opportunities

The next step in fighting porn is to ruthlessly get rid of any ability to access pornography.

It amazes me how many people struggle—or walk alongside of those struggling—for years, without ever taking this step. Have we become so captive to our devices that the thought of going without a phone or computer seems too extreme, or worse, never even occurs to us?

If someone asked you for help to overcome pornography, and you found out they were living next door to a porn shop, wouldn’t you encourage them to move? And if you found out they were carrying a portal to a 24-hour porn shop in their pocket everywhere they went, wouldn’t you encourage them to get rid of it?

Such a device exists: it’s called a smartphone.

I recently heard a ministry leader (whom I highly respect) tell how he helped someone break free from pornography. He began by warning them it would be a five-year journey, and led them on a path of prayer and repentance that, not surprisingly, was not very effective for quite some time. This was seen to be a normal part of the process.

It’s not. Romans 8:13 does not say, “If by the Spirit you slowly sin less and less over the next five years, you’re doing okay.” Scripture tells us that sin is something we need to kill—to be decisively violent with. Sometimes literally: “If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell” (Matthew 5:29).

I know, this is usually the point where people rush in to say that “we obviously shouldn’t take Jesus literally here.” But just think about it: Jesus’ logic is rock-solid. It would make way more sense to gouge out your eyeball with a screwdriver than to keep sinning and end up in hell. The reason we shouldn’t do this is not because Jesus’ logic is faulty, or too extreme: it’s because our eyes aren’t actually the cause of sin. Sin starts in the heart (Matt 5:28). Blind men can lust. And so we don’t need an enucleation; we need a heart transplant, something the Spirit does for us as we are born again and enter the New Covenant (Eze 36:26-27).²I developed these ideas at more length in this sermon on Matthew 5:27-30.

The point still stands, though: temptations for sin must be dealt with with utmost decisiveness. “Make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires” (Rom 13:14). “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you” (Col 3:5).

When I’m talking to a guy about a porn problem, very early on I’ll ask him about the devices he’s using to access porn, and if he’s willing to get rid of them. This question is crucial, not only for the practical importance of severing his access to porn, but because of what it tells me about him. If he’s not willing to be vicious in his fight with porn, nothing is going to change. You can’t be half-hearted with fighting sin; you kill it, or it kills you. A man who is being shaped by the gospel will cherish holiness more than technological convenience.

Much of the time, total separation from technology isn’t required. Most smartphones have parental controls which, when set up properly (especially when combined with good accountability/filtering software like Covenant Eyes or Ever Accountable) can make it next to impossible to access porn. The same generally goes for computers, and even some smart TVs can be locked down to make them sufficiently safe.³This includes turning off the built-in web browser, adjusting accepted media ratings, and removing the ability to install applications.

If someone lives with others, they can help each other with device usage. Computers can be moved to shared spaces, work laptops can be left at the office, and phones can be placed in a central location each night. If these options don’t work, and no device restrictions are available, then the offending devices will need to be removed, at least for the time being.

When a guy goes through this process, it doesn’t take him five years to get off of porn. It happens as soon as he deals with his devices. And I’ve noticed, surprisingly, that he usually doesn’t miss the technology. If he takes the next steps that we’ll look at, the joy of being porn-free far outweighs the lack of entertainment or information he was used to.

3. Walk Closely with God and His People

Blocking access to pornography is not the end of the road—it’s just the beginning. For many guys, porn has been an idol, a poor replacement for the one true God. They’ve turned to it for satisfaction and significance. And if all a guy does is remove access to pornography, he puts himself in a Matthew 12:43-45 situation, biding his time until the enemy returns to his well-swept but empty heart. So it’s absolutely crucial to fill up the void left behind by pornography with a vital, growing relationship with God and His people.

I’m not talking about anything super-spiritual here: just the basic spiritual disciplines like regular devotional times, Scripture memory, and meaningful involvement with a church community. For most guys, porn kept them from either having or enjoying regular times of personal worship with God. It kept them from either having or enjoying good relationships with the people of God—particularly with women, whom they had been conditioned to see as nothing more than sex objects. As the weeds of porn are pulled out, the flowers of fellowship with God and His people can grow.

I’ll never forget one guy, just a few weeks into being porn-free, telling me how much he was enjoying reading the Bible and praying every day. The thought of going back to porn, and missing out on all of that newfound joy in fellowship with God, wasn’t even an option for him. Another man at a similar spot was discovering what it was like, for the first time in his adult life, to look at a woman and actually see a person. He did not miss the lurid lenses that he didn’t even know he wore while using porn.

This process isn’t all sunshine and roses. Lust does not die in the absence of porn, and a man needs to learn how to use the sword of the Spirit to kill the cravings still entrenched in his flesh. I’ll also warn a guy in these early weeks that he’s about to discover he struggles with a bunch of sins, totally unrelated to sex, that he had no idea about.

There’s two reasons for this. First, porn had been smothering his conscience. Every time he heard the word “sin” he thought “porn,” and the fact that “growing in holiness” means a lot more than “beating porn” is a new idea he’ll take some getting used to. The guilt from using porn kept him so occupied that he didn’t notice he was lazy, or played too many video games, or stayed up too late too often. Second, porn had been his refuge. He turned to porn to soothe himself when he felt hurt or lonely or angry or powerless. Without porn in his life, he might find himself loosing his temper, over-eating, or finding any number of substitutes for the refuge that he must only find in God (Psalm 61-63).

Not surprisingly, as a guy grows in these other areas, his strength and resolve to fight sexual sin grows as well. I know some men who, previously helpless before the allure of lust, found fresh resolve as they started going to bed on time, eating a healthy diet, and getting proper exercise. An undisciplined guy who caves in to every craving for food and sleep and entertainment will have a harder time saying “no” to lust than a man who has his whole body under control (1 Thess 4:4).

It’s important to not leave someone to figure this all out alone. Particularly if he’s been trapped by porn for years, a guy needs to learn—perhaps from scratch—what it means to live a normal Christian life, and maybe even a normal adult life too. And so whether it’s joining a small group, finding a mentor, or some other form of deliberate discipleship, he needs God, and he needs God’s people. This becomes the engine that drives real, lasting change, giving him a growing vision of beauty that makes porn look small and ugly in comparison.

4. Stay Proactive

We’ve already seen that beating porn requires proactivity. Staying free from porn requires continual proactivity. It’s been sad to see guys walk free from porn for months, even years, only to fall hard when they least expected it. In my experience, this typically happens when a guy drops his guard. He thought the battle was over, that it was time to relax and put his sword away. And so when his roommates go away for the weekend, and he gets home late to an empty house after a discouraging performance review at work, he’s put back on his heels by the fierce assault of temptation.

So he needs to stay vigilant. He might want to forget about the battle with porn, but Satan won’t. A man who wants to keep walking in victory needs to think like a soldier, planning ahead to defend weak spots and vulnerabilities before they get exploited by the enemy. 

A part of this process can include reading a good book on the topic. “Closing the Window” by Tim Chester is the one I’ve used most often, but there’s many good options to choose from. John Piper’s excellent “Future Grace,” or the abridged “Battling Unbelief,” help us to understand and apply a biblical vision for holiness in all areas of life. Resources like this can be useful at any point in the process, but they might be particularly important a few months in to the journey to encourage a guy to stay in the game.

5. Never Forget the Gospel

When someone starts walking free from porn, it’s thrilling—especially if they’ve tried and failed before. It’s good for them to enjoy their relationship with God and others, their growing confidence, and every new victory. But it’s vital for them to keep circling back to where we started: the gospel. If they don’t, they’ll start to imagine that they’re accepted by God because they don’t look at porn. And then they’re basically in the shoes of the self-righteous pharisee in Luke 18:11: “God, I thank you that I am not like other men.”

Instead, we need to remember that we’re all basically the tax collector in the story: sinners who have been shown great mercy. If God gave us what we deserve, it would be hell. An eternity of abstinence from pornography could not pay off the debt we owe. Life, forgiveness, and the ability to please God are blood-bought, Spirit-wrought gifts of abundant mercy. The months or years or decades since someone last looked at porn are a fruit, not the root, of their acceptance by the Father.

Not the labor of my hands
Can fulfill Thy law’s demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All could never could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone.

The fight against pornography is but one way we live out Philippians 3:2: “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.” May God help us to never forget this, filling us with profound gratitude and humility as we become the purified people Jesus died to purchase (Titus 2:14).

What “Robert’s Rules” Are & Why We Use Them

Henry Martin Robert wrote the first edition of his book “Robert’s Rules of Order” in 1876. The idea was to have a clear system of agreed-upon guidelines for running meetings. Since then, they’ve been widely adopted by many organizations. Robert’s Rules are not the law, and there’s no legal requirement to use them, but they’ve been proven to generally be the best way to run a good meeting.

Robert’s Rules help us navigate between two priorities: 1) letting everyone have a voice, and 2) keeping things orderly and organized. Most of us have been in some sort of a meeting where everybody had something to say, but there were no guidelines on how to proceed, and we saw how quickly things fell apart. On the other hand, some of us have been in very tightly-organized meetings where it all ran very efficiently, but nobody had any opportunity to contribute at all. Robert’s Rules help a meeting have structure and give regular opportunity for people to participate in meaningful ways.

In a Baptist congregational church like ours, we believe that the members together are highest authority (under Christ) in our church, and yet we also recognize the role of the elders in providing shepherd-like oversight to the members. Robert’s Rules are a way to help us reflect that relationship in our meetings. The elders propose an agenda; the members can approve it or suggest changes. The elders introduce motions; the members vote on them and/or propose new motions of their own. The guidelines in Roberts Rules help direct our meetings as we seek to honour both the congregation’s authority and the elders’ oversight.

To help you wrap your heads around Robert’s Rules even just a bit more, you can check out a “cheat sheet” below which shows the different kinds of motions and procedures within Robert’s Rules. As you read the list, you’ll see some examples which will never (or at least should never) need to be used in our church setting. That’s a good reminder that, even though Robert’s Rules are a helpful tool, we ultimately look to the Holy Spirit to soften our hearts and give us the mind of Christ as we work alongside one another for His glory.

I Move That We Understand Motions

Let’s talk about the idea of a “motion,” one of the central concepts in Robert’s Rules. A motion is simply another word for a proposal. It can be a proposal to discuss something, decide something, consider something—anything at all really. “Motions” are not laws, and, if passed, are not fixed in stone. A motion can be modified before it’s voted on, or overturned by a subsequent motion.

Here’s a few ways that could happen. Let’s say, at a meeting, someone makes a motion that we paint the inside of the building red. Someone else seconds that motion, meaning it’s ready to be voted on. At that point, according to Robert’s Rules, anyone can make a secondary motion to adjust the primary motion. For example, someone else could stand up and say “I move that we amend the previous motion to say that we’ll paint the building green.” If that motion is seconded and voted on, then we’d all still need to vote on the first motion, which has now been modified to say “green” instead of “red.”

Any member can also move to postpone or extend discussion on a motion, or even send a motion to a committee for further study. Even if a motion is passed, a further motion can be made to reconsider that motion. (All of this is described on the “cheat sheet” below.) What this shows is that motions are not “the law of the Medes and Persians.” A motion is just a proposal—a proposal that can be changed, clarified, or overturned in the light of new information or fresh discussion.

Closing Thoughts

If you’re a member of our church, you have a important and influential voice in our life together, and our quarterly meetings are an important place for your voice to be heard. Please, we invite you to come and ask questions about things you don’t understand, make suggestions, and participate in the sacred decision-making process that was entrusted to us not by Henry Robert but by Christ Himself (Matthew 18:18-20).

Once in a while I’ve heard members say things like, “I didn’t necessarily agree with that decision, but I didn’t want to speak up or vote ‘no.’” That is so sad, but I get it—it’s easy to try and “read the room” and assume what everyone else is thinking, and then decide to stay quiet. But what if others are doing the same thing, just hoping that someone else will speak up and give voice to their hesitations? And what if that person is you?

So please, play your part! That includes more than just participating at meetings, even though that’s a great place to begin.

It’s interesting to notice how Peter speaks to this situation in such a matter-of-fact manner. Doesn’t he understand how profoundly lonely it is to be married to someone who rejects the most important part of your identity? Has he no sympathy for the aching pain of knowing that, unless they turn from their unbelief, the person with whom you share your earthly life will not share eternal life with you?

I don’t know what was going on in Peter’s mind as he wrote these verses, but I can’t help but consider some of the ways in which his letter has already prepared a wife (or a husband) to face this situation with the necessary perspective:

• we are exiles and sojourners who don’t belong here (1 Pet 1:1, 2:11)
• our present life is full of grief as our faith is tested by various trials (1 Pet 1:6-7)
• our joy is to be found not in our present experiences but in the expectation of our inheritance (1 Pet 1:4-6)
• we must set our hope fully on the grace that will be brought to us when Christ returns (1 Pet 1:13)

That last point is especially relevant to the matter of marriage. So many Christian young people set their hope on marriage as their happily-ever-after. And the truth is that even a good Christian marriage can’t support the weight of those expectations. The best marriage will disappoint you. The best marriages are just temporary shadows of the real thing, which we’ll experience fully when Christ has returned (Matt 22:30, Eph 5:25-27, Rev 19:6-8).

Please hear: I’m not trying to downplay the real difficulty and suffering experienced by those married to an unbeliever. But is it possible to see God’s grace even in the pain? Is it possible to see in your situation a reminder that marriage is not our ultimate purpose in life, and was never meant to be our source of happiness? Is it possible that the sorrow you carry around is but one reminder that you’re not home yet, and the person you’re really longing for is still coming for you? As Laura Story has sang, “What if my greatest disappointments, or the aching of this life, is the revealing of a greater thirst this world can’t satisfy?”

That’s a big question to ask, but I think from heaven’s perspective we’ll see that anything which helped wean our hope off of this present world, and set it fully on the return of Jesus, no matter how hard and painful, was a gift. 

And this applies regardless of the various reasons someone might be married to an unbeliever. Some people came to faith in Christ after they were already married. (This does appear to be Peter’s primary audience in 3:1-6). Others married a professing Christian who later abandoned their faith. And still others, through ignorance or rebellion, chose to marry an unbeliever in spite of God’s warnings (1 Cor 1:29, 2 Cor 6:14-18).

It’s those in this last group who particularly need to remember that we serve a God who “does not deal with us according to our sins, nor repay us according to our iniquities. For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us. As a father shows compassion to his children, so the Lord shows compassion to those who fear him” (Psa 103:10–13). 

If you’re in a hard marriage, even if you chose it through your own sin or foolishness, God does not say, “You did that to yourself, so don’t talk to me about it.” Jesus was nailed to the cross for this sin, too. And if God gave up His Son for you while you were yet a sinner, He’s going to give you everything you need from Him today (Rom 5:8, 8:32). Repent and confess your sins to the Lord, and choose to walk in the grace of your compassionate Father who is working all things—even your painful marriage—together for the good of those who love Him (Rom 8:28). And then, “preparing your minds for action, and being sober-minded, set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 1:13).

Over the last three Sundays, the sermons from 1 Peter have touched on the revolutionary fact that the believer’s true family is his/her spiritual family as opposed to his/her physical family. Peter has told us that believers have been truly born again by the eternal word of God (1 Peter 1:22-23) as opposed to all flesh and its fleeting nature (1 Peter 1:24-25), and are being built up into a spiritual house (1 Peter 2:5). One of these recent sermons expanded on what Peter does not say about this reality:

And just in case it needs to be said, Peter is not telling us that now that we have a forever [or true] family, we don’t need to love our physical family any more. In fact, Peter’s argument makes sense because we love our physical families. If you love these people with whom you’re bound together by blood for several decades here on earth, then should you not love these people with whom you’re bound together by the eternal word of God for trillions and billions of years without end? So I hope we don’t hear Peter saying things he’s not actually saying. I hope we know that there is a very important space in between worshipping our families as if they were everything, and ignoring our families as if they were nothing.

Born Again Love, Part 2

Here’s the point: If you are a believer (1 Peter 1:21), then your true family consists of the blood-bought members of God’s family (1 Peter 1:18-19) rather than the blood-bound members of your family (1 Peter 1:23-24). However, this does not mean that your physical family is nothing—but it is not everything, either.

If the above statements are true, how then do you find the balance between your physical and spiritual family? In fact, someone asked a specific, practical question regarding this tension at our last small group Bible study: “How do I decide whether to attend a church gathering (like a potluck) or a family gathering that’s scheduled at the same time, especially in busy seasons like Christmas?”

Jesus and Family

I’d like to propose a way to navigate this tension based on Luke 2:41-51 and how Jesus deals with his physical and spiritual family. In this passage, Luke tells us that Jesus’ parents brought him to Jerusalem for the Passover Feast when he turned 12. However, after the feast was over and everyone was going back home, Jesus stayed behind without his parents’ permission to teach at the temple. When his parents finally found him after three days (three days!), they asked Jesus why he would treat them in such an apparently disrespectful way. The twelve year-old Jesus gives his parents an astounding response: “Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?” (Luke 2:49).

It is quite ironic that Luke has just said, two verses prior, that all who heard him were impressed at his answers (Luke 2:47), because I certainly wouldn’t have been impressed by this answer if I were this twelve year old’s dad!

Now, we need to remember that Jesus lived a perfect and sinless life (Hebrews 4:15), so we cannot assume that Jesus disobeyed his parents by staying behind in Jerusalem without their permission, nor that he dishonoured them with this response. Rather, Jesus recognized the greater priority in submitting to the authority of his true Father (Luke 2:49) over the authority of his temporary father (Luke 2:48).

Yet, it is also important to note that obeying God means obeying the human authorities that He has put in place (Romans 13:1). Thus, Jesus did not neglect to submit to the God-appointed authority of his physical father (Ephesians 6:1-4), which is clearly evidenced by his act of obedience to his parents after his seemingly rude response to them: “And he went down with them and came to Nazareth and was submissive to them. And his mother treasured up all these things in her heart” (Luke 2:51).

Clearly, Jesus submitted to the authority of his temporary father, but only after submitting to the authority of his true Father. Both fathers were essential, though not necessarily equal. We see this in the way that Jesus prioritized the agenda of his heavenly Father, which was to stay behind at his Father’s house in Jerusalem, over the agenda of his earthly father, which was to go back home to Nazareth. However, Jesus did so without neglecting his earthly father’s agenda. In other words, Jesus prioritized his spiritual family over his physical family, without neglecting the latter. 

Prioritizing Without Neglecting

So how do we decide whether to attend a church gathering or your family gathering that’s scheduled at the same time? I hope you can see that there’s no specific “yes” or “no” answer to this. But based on Luke 2 and the conclusions above, I am prepared to suggest that prioritizing our true family’s agenda over our temporary family’s agenda—without neglecting the latter—is a biblically appropriate balance to maintain in this tension.

Now, I am not necessarily writing to those who are, or are aspiring to be, in vocational ministry and might be prone to neglect their physical families for the sake of “ministry.” Though we could all use a reminder that ministry must include your physical family, since God has specifically entrusted you with them. Even in writing this article, I’ve had to assess whether I was neglecting my physical family in taking extra time this week to do this for my church family. (So you can ask my wife about that to hold me accountable!)

But what I am challenging here is the opposite side of the spectrum and the imbalance that most, if not all, of us tend to have—which is to over-prioritize our physical family at the risk of neglecting our spiritual family. Hebrews 10:24-25 commands Christians to “consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.” 

Consider Not Neglecting One Another

Not neglecting to meet together starts with considering how to stir up one another to love and good works, which suggests proactive action ahead of time. This means that considering how to fellowship with other Christians—especially with our local, visible church that we’ve committed to be the church together with—shouldn’t always take a back seat to our family plans that we schedule ahead of time. 

Could it be that we’re neglecting to put Sunday mornings/evenings or weeknight Bible studies as a high priority on our personal calendars because our primary schedules outside of work mainly consider spending time with close family and friends? According to Peter and Jesus, the closest family and friends that we need to primarily consider fellowshipping with are our blood-bought brothers and sisters in Christ.

Maybe you can consider how to proactively ask your boss to let you have most, if not all, Sunday mornings off so you can regularly meet together with your church family. If you’re present on Sunday mornings, maybe consider an earlier arrival or a later lunch for the sake of fellowship. Maybe consider how many Sunday evening church gatherings you can schedule into your calendar as opposed to absorbing the idea that Sunday nights are only and exclusively “family nights.” Maybe consider joining a small group or scheduling a free evening to fellowship with other Christians, especially those in your local church family.

Would this risk offending your physical family? 100 percent. Even when he was 12 years old, Jesus had his priorities straight and risked offending his family in the process. And as an adult, Jesus maintained these priorities: “While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. But he replied to the man who told him, ‘Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?’ And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother’” (Matthew 12:46-50).

Yet, we also have Scriptural proof that Jesus made sure to not neglect his widowed mother and brothers as an adult (see John 19:26-27). So yes, don’t neglect your physical family, but consider prioritizing your church family. As Galatians 6:10 says, “So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith” (Galatians 6:10). Whether it’s the author of Hebrews, the apostle Paul, Peter, or Jesus himself, the greater priority of the spiritual household is emphasized.

I’ll end with this story: Last Christmas, a couple in our church invited Emily, Luca and I to have supper in their home—and one of the proposed dates was Christmas Eve. That’s right, Christmas Eve! You could probably guess what my gut reaction was: Wouldn’t we be intruding in their Christmas family gatherings with relatives from out of town? Yet, the idea was that we could join them for their family supper. What a beautiful balance between their true and temporary family!

This is counter-cultural thinking, and I speak as someone who comes from a tight-knit family and a culture that idolizes family. Still, we can’t miss that God’s idea of a family tree has deeper roots than just blood-bound relatives: the blood-bought and Bible-bound believers in God through Christ. 

So, brothers and sisters, let us consider how to prioritize and not neglect one another.

It seems like most of the Christians we know don’t deny that the holiday has pagan origins, or that a lot of the elements associated with Halloween these days are clearly off-limits for the people of God. And yet, after acknowledging all of that, some still make a case for careful celebration.

One of the most common arguments I’ve encountered in favour of celebrating Halloween tends to sound like this: “If I turn off my lights and don’t answer the door, the neighbourhood kids will be hurt and confused, and their parents will think I’m some kind of a fanatic or recluse. They wouldn’t have a clue why I wouldn’t let my own kids put on a cute costume and go get a bit of candy. If I don’t participate in Halloween, it will really hurt my witness in this community.”

And as I shared with my friend today, after spending the last number of weeks preaching through 1 Peter, this kind of argument just doesn’t make sense to me anymore.

Here’s what I mean: Peter opens his letter by addressing his readers as exiles (1 Peter 1:1). While there’s a few possible backgrounds for this language, the dominant sense we get from reading the rest of the letter is that Peter’s readers found themselves on the outsides of their society due to their Christian convictions. In her fine commentary on 1 Peter, Karen Jobes explains that the word “exile” defines “the relationship between the Christian and unbelieving society.”¹Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter, ed. Robert W. Yarbrough and Joshua W. Jipp, Second Edition, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2022), 67. Elsewhere she explains this exile as the “abandonment of socially acceptable but morally bankrupt practices” which displays their “new identity as God’s chosen, providing the opportunity for society to view them with suspicion, mistrust, and disapproval. Nevertheless, they are not to feel shame or doubt because of the way their society responds to them, for the kind of suffering they are experiencing is God’s will (4:19) and an indication that the Spirit of God rests upon them (4:14).”²Jobes, 48. Jobes goes on to describe how exiles “dwell respectfully in their host nation but participate in its culture only to the extent that its values and customs coincide with their own that they wish to preserve.”³Jobes, 67.

This interpretation is strengthened by Peter’s statement in 1:17 that Christ ransomed them “from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers.” The language for “ways inherited from your forefathers” is roughly equal to our English word “heritage,” and had a similarly positive meaning to the peoples of Peter’s day.⁴J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, vol. 49, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1988), 64; Jobes, 119. Cultural and ancestral heritage was the very cornerstone of society for both Jews and Gentiles, and yet Peter, with very little qualification, calls it futile and says that Jesus died to save us from it. This is a teaching that, no doubt, would have created a significant sense of alienation between the Christians and their families, let alone surrounding societies.

In 2:11, we read “Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh.” By using “exile” language in this context, Peter seems to be implying that some of the “passions” we’ll need to abstain from are socially acceptable, even socially celebrated. Jobes also suggests that one of these passions is “the worldly desire to be accepted by society, which motivates ungodly behavior even though it is socially acceptable.”⁵Jobes, 170.

In chapter 4, Peter elaborates on how we can’t join the rest of of our culture in their sinful activities, and in 4:4 he explains the reaction we’ll get: “With respect to this they are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you.”

The upshot of this brief survey is that it’s normal and expected for Christians to look strange and out-of-place in their communities. In fact, this otherworldliness is an important part of our Christian witness, prompting questions about the hope that is in us (1 Peter 3:15). It’s not something to run from; it’s central to our identity as we wait for Christ’s return.

So while there may be valid arguments to be made for why Christians can or should celebrate Halloween, “I don’t want my neighbours to think I’m strange” isn’t really one of them. In fact, if your neighbours don’t already think you’re strange, you might need to ask yourself how consistent your Christian witness has been. And at the risk of pushing things too far, I’m almost tempted to suggest that not celebrating Halloween is a golden opportunity to make our “stranger-and-exile” status visible in a culture where it’s all too easy for us to blend in.

There’s a lot more to be said about Halloween, and no doubt it’s a topic where Christians will need to practice respectful disagreement. Wherever we land, lets make sure that we’re willing to follow the Lord even if that means sticking out. Because according to 1 Peter, looking weird to our neighbours is a feature, not a bug, of our Christian experience.

But then, through a series of circumstances he didn’t foresee, he found himself thriving in an unexpected capacity. Finally, he felt like he’d found what he was supposed to be doing.

Still, there seemed to be regret in his voice. “I can’t believe it took me until I was 25 to figure this out.”

My response to him went something like, “What you’ve just described is exactly what your 20s are for! You’ve been doing just what you should be doing: trying things out, taking steps forward, and figuring out how God put you together. You’re right on schedule.”

It seems like my friend had bought into a common myth: the idea that once you’ve finished college, you should be a fully-formed adult who understands yourself fully, knows exactly what you’re going to do for the rest of your life, and walks confidently into that future with full assurance.

I’m not sure where this myth comes from. Perhaps it comes from the few people who legitimately have had this experience. Early on, they decided what they wanted to do, they went for it, and they thrived. But in the 10+ years that I’ve served as a pastor to 20-somethings, I’ve seen that most needed some time and experience to figure out how God built them, what they’re good at, and how they can best serve Him and others. There was some trial-and-error before they had real clarity on their path ahead. Even for those who did have an early sense of what they were supposed to do with their life, it took some time to grow in maturity before they began to find the fruitfulness they hoped for.

A Biblical Pattern

When we look to God’s word, we don’t encounter the pressure to have everything figured out by 22. In fact, there’s an interesting pattern in Scripture that would suggest to us that 20-somethings are still under substantial development, and aren’t ready for some key tasks until they begin to move into the next decade of their life.

In ancient Israel, men were counted in the national census and enlisted to go to war from the age of 20 (Exodus 30:14, Numbers 1:3). Similarly, the unfaithful generation who died in the wilderness were those 20 years old and upward (Numbers 14:29). 

But when it came to enlisting those who would serve in the house of the Lord, the age limit was a decade higher: “The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, ‘Take a census of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi, by their clans and their fathers’ houses, from thirty years old up to fifty years old, all who can come on duty, to do the work in the tent of meeting” (Numbers 4:1–3). That age restriction (30 to 50) is repeated six more times in that chapter. 

Apparently, there was a greater maturity required to serve in the tabernacle. This is all the more surprising when we consider the age cap on the other side. Apparently, after the age of 50 most men at that time weren’t able to handle the physical labour involved in setting up, taking down, and transporting the tabernacle. And yet they waited until they were 30 before they could serve. God restricted this group to “men strong enough to transport the tabernacle and mature enough to care for such holy items.”¹D. A. Carson, ed., NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2018), 231. Emphasis mine.

It is interesting to see that later on, in Numbers 8:24, Levites aged 25 and up were able to serve with the tabernacle. Later still, the age seemed to have come down even further (1 Chronicles 23:24, 31:17; Ezra 3:8). Some have suggested that these years prior to 30 were an “internship” period of preparation and training. However we explain these discrepancies, it’s beyond a doubt that at one point in Israel’s history, God restricted the tabernacle workers to those 30 and older.

30 is how old David was when he began to reign (2 Sam 5:4). Some kings started out a lot younger than that, but David was the ideal monarch. While anointed by Samuel as a younger man, David was prepared by God for his task by long years of difficulty—running from Saul, living in the wilderness, dwelling among the Philistines. It’s not hard to see how God used this hard season of David’s life to prepare him for his task.

John the Baptist was around 30 when he stepped into his public role. Marked out from birth for a specific job, he spent years out in the wilderness waiting for it to begin. His actual ministry lasted months at most, and perhaps only weeks. But still he waited through his 20s until the time was right.

And then there is Jesus, the son of God, sent from heaven to earth. If anyone was ready for an early start to his life’s ministry, it was him. At 12 he was blowing the minds of the teachers in the temple (Luke 2:42, 47). Yet Luke 3:23 tells us that “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age.” And that ministry only lasted three years or so.

There’s a pattern here, and at the very least this pattern challenges the idea that someone in their early 20s should be fully formed and ready for anything. Instead, this Biblical pattern reinforces the idea that the 20s are a decade of significant development, maturing, and of growing into the adult that one is becoming.

Don’t Waste Your 20s

And so my advice to 20-somethings is that they shouldn’t feel the pressure to have their life fully figured out as soon as they are 20 or 22. They should expect that throughout their 20s they’ll be learning, growing, bumping into some walls, trying some things out, and developing a sense of how God put them together. They’ll learn what they flourish at, and what they can do to help others flourish. And while there’s no magic number, if they’ve done their 20s well, as they move into their 30s they’ll have a much better sense of the particular ways they can use their life to fruitfully serve the Lord and others.

On the one hand, this takes some of the pressure off. It’s okay for 20-somethings to still be figuring some things out. But on the other hand, this also puts some pressure on: it’s important for 20-somethings to actually be figuring things out! They need to make sure they actually are growing, developing, and taking steps forward. Others need to be able to see their progress (1 Timothy 4:15). Maturity doesn’t happen by itself, so it needs to be approached deliberately.

If someone wastes their 20s on TikTok or video games or pornography or endless late-night hangouts with their besties, they probably won’t be in any different place by their 30s, and they’ll end up needing to use their 30s to figure things out. Or maybe they’ll never figure things out, and prolong maturity indefinitely (a trend we’ve certainly seen increasing over the last number of years).

So what does it look like to use your 20s well? What does it look like to be diligent about growing in maturity? Out of the many things that could be said, here’s four suggestions that rise to the surface:

1. Stay Teachable

If what we’ve seen so far is true,  20-somethings still have some maturing to do. Some development to do. Some learning to do. And many young people resist this idea. One of the saddest hallmarks of youth is that we tend to be the least teachable right when we need the most teaching.

On the flip side, one of the marks of maturity is knowing that you still have more distance to cover (Philippians 3:13-15). In other words, if someone feels patronized when they’re told that they still have some growing up to do, they’ve just proven the point.

I was 32 when I stepped in to my present ministry role. I had felt ready for a role like it for at least a decade. And one of my reflections as I began this ministry was how much younger I felt at 32 than I did at 22. In my 30s I was so much more aware of what I didn’t know, and I was so much more hungry to learn from those who were older than me.

The first 9 chapters of Proverbs show us the importance of teachability. They’re written from a father to a younger man who is at least of marriable age, and over and over again the father pleads with his son to be teachable: listen, to pay attention, to have his ears open. If he doesn’t listen, he’s headed for disaster. But if he learns, he’ll find wisdom and life.

20-somethings will not use their 20s well if they think they know everything already. They will only make the most of their opportunities to grow if they know that growth is what they need.

2. Find Some Mentors

Joshua had Moses. Elisha had Elijah. Timothy had Paul. To every 20-something I would ask, “Who are you learning from, in a real, relational, life-on-life kind of way?”

The encouragement here is to find a mentor. Better yet, following the pattern of Proverbs, find some mentors. “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety” (Proverbs 11:14). Surround yourself with older fathers and mothers in the faith whom you can learn from (Titus 2:4).

“Older” is a key word here. Getting opinions from your buddies or besties is not the path to maturity. Remember Rohoboam, who “abandoned the counsel that the old men gave him and took counsel with the young men who had grown up with him and stood before him” (1 Kings 12:8)? We know how that worked out for him. And he was already 41 when that happened (1 Kings 14:21).

Using your 20s well includes seeking out and learning from older mentors.

3. Avoid False Substitutes

One of the ways people waste their 20s is by finding false substitutes for maturity. They find “easy” things that make them feel like they’ve grown up and accomplished something in life, when they actually haven’t.

For example, video games. I grew up with a Nintendo and actually find video games enjoyable to this day. But I’ve seen how they so easily short-circuit the maturing process by giving an artificial sense of accomplishment. They can make you feel powerful, or victorious, or adventurous, when all you’ve actually done is build thumb-eye coordination. And in the process they can sap away the God-given drive to actually go do things of real importance.

Pornography works the same way. Rather than feel the motivation to become a protector and provider who wins the heart of a real woman, pornography provides a guy with a virtual harem that requires no effort on his part whatsoever. Is it any coincidence that the emergence of pornography has coincided with the widespread delay of maturity in so many young men?

Even sports fandom can have the same effect. Attaching your identity to a favourite team or pursuing greatness through a fantasy league can be another way to derail real-life maturity.

Now, I get it: some people are able to maintain a well-balanced love for sports, even using it as a tool for God’s kingdom. I’ve seen this done really well.

But young men in particular need to be aware of the danger of investing too much of their time and identity into things that ultimately don’t matter. Your post-game commentary might impress your buddies, but isn’t improving anybody’s lives now or into eternity. I highly doubt you’ll get to the end of your life and and think, “I wished I had yelled louder at that ref,” or, “I wish I had just memorized a few more stats.”

The point is that if someone is going to use their 20s well, they’re going to need to get out and actually do some stuff. Work some jobs, hone some skills, try their hand at a craft or two, serve in different ministries—real things with real people. While expecting some trial and error as they learn about themselves and others, they should understand that very little of this important development is going to happen alone in front of a screen.

4. Love Your Church

This is where it all come together. God designed local churches to be greenhouses for maturity (Ephesians 4:15-16), and 20-somethings need to be immersed in the every-member ministry of the people of God at least as much as anybody else. Younger adults can serve and be served by people of all ages, whether that’s watching kids in the nursery, joining an all-ages small group, or going out for coffee with seniors who might be scared by the word “mentor” but would love to answer questions about things they’ve learned over the years. Surrounded by a supportive church family, they can grow in their giftings as they try their hand at various ministries and, through loving feedback and careful affirmation, develop a sense of what they’re good at and where they (and others) thrive. Through formal membership, they can learn the privilege and responsibility of commitment. The list could go on and on.

In short, a healthy local church is dripping with opportunities to help 20-somethings grow in maturity. And this is one of the reasons why, at Emmanuel, we deliberately don’t do a ton of activities just for 20-somethings as an isolated group. As much as possible, we want to encourage them to take their place with everyone else in the body, with whom they can “grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (Ephesians 4:15).

So, 20-somethings, you don’t need to have it all figured out. But you should be figuring it out. And getting deeply connected with your local church is one of the best ways you can help this happen.

The Psalms reached their final form sometime after the exile to Babylon, which we know because of the several Psalms directly addressing the exile or its aftermath (eg. Psalm 137). The final editors of the Psalms arranged the Psalter’s five books in a way that roughly follows the history of Israel, starting with David (Books 1 & 2, Psalms 1-72), moving into the darkness of exile (Books 3 & 4, Psalms 73-106), and then ending with the hope of promised deliverance (Book 5, Psalms 107-150).¹Bruce K. Waltke and Fred G. Zaspel, How to Read and Understand the Psalms (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2023), 6.

The intentionality of the Psalms’ arrangement can also be seen at an individual level, when we consider how specific Psalms are placed next to another.²Bruce K. Waltke and Fred G. Zaspel, How to Read and Understand the Psalms (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2023), 487–489. For example, think about the juxtaposition of Psalms 2 and 3. In Psalm 2, God speaks of establishing his anointed king in Zion, and laughs at those who would oppose him. In Psalm 3, that anointed king is running for his life away from Zion as he cries out to God for deliverance from his enemies. This contrast is not an accident: reading these two Psalms together causes us to consider how God’s plans often don’t take shape in the way that we expect, and invites us to faithfully wait on the Lord while we trust Him to keep His promises in His way.

Another sequential “story” is told in Book Five. As noted, this final set of Psalms looks forward to deliverance from exile, with Psalm 107 functioning as something of an introduction to this whole section. After the Psalms of Ascent (120-134), Psalms 135 & 136 look back to the Exodus and conquest of the Promised Land as they celebrate God’s power over the nations and their idols—an idea that would be particularly encouraging to the Jews at that stage of history.

Towards the end of Psalm 136, we read, “It is he who remembered us in our low estate… and rescued us from our foes, for his steadfast love endures forever” (Psalms 136:23–24). And almost in response, the next Psalm begins: “By the waters of Babylon, there we sat down and wept, when we remembered Zion” (Psalm 137:1). It’s not hard to hear the implied question: if God’s steadfast love endures forever, where is it now? Why are we still stuck here in Babylon? When is He going to rescue us from our foes?

The answer to these questions comes a string of eight Psalms attributed to David, each of which highlights David’s dependence on the Lord’s salvation while under threat from his many enemies. This Davidic material is noteworthy because Psalm 72:20 indicated that “the prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended.” We weren’t expecting any more Psalms of David. Psalms 138-145, then, are a surprise encore, saved until this point on purpose, which respond to Psalm 137’s lament with the reassuring reminder that David, too, found himself in exile away from his home where he waited for God to save Him. David, too, often found himself in a spot where it felt like God’s promises weren’t being fulfilled on schedule. David, too, often found himself vulnerable and needy and powerless. David, too, cried out to God in lament and question.

And God heard him. God saved him. God kept His promises. Just think of how these words from the conclusion of the final Psalm of David would be heard by the Jewish exiles: “The Lord is near to all who call on him, to all who call on him in truth. He fulfills the desire of those who fear him; he also hears their cry and saves them. The Lord preserves all who love him, but all the wicked he will destroy” (Psalm 145:18–20).

Do you hear the message? “Israel, look back to look ahead. Like David, cry out to God, and like David, trust in the Lord. Like he did with David, God will keep His promises to you.”

Finally, the Psalter closes with five Psalms, not of lament, but of praise. Each of these concluding Psalms open with the same words: “Praise the Lord!” Psalm 146 praises God for rescuing the oppressed. Psalm 147 praises God for healing the brokenhearted. Psalm 149 praises God as it looks to the day when the righteous will be God’s instruments of vengeance on the nations.

And then the whole book ends with Psalm 150, which simply calls for God’s praise in the most loud, exuberant, full-throated way possible. Placed there on purpose by a people still in exile, the last Psalm does not ask for deliverance from enemies or cry out “how long?” Instead, it’s a confident call for universal praise. In other words, it’s a statement of faith that God wins. God’s enemies will not have the last word. Even though the throne was empty and Jerusalem desolate, the son of David was going to come, God would keep His covenant promises, and one day there would be no more lament—only the whole creation responding in joyful praise.

Understood that way, Psalm 150 looks forward to the victory of Christ, the son of David, who did save His people from their sins, and will come again to reign over a creation made new and united under Himself (Eph 1:10).

Psalm 150’s calls for God to be praised by everything in the heavens above (v. 1) and the earth below (v. 6) find their fulfillment in the final book in the Bible, where we read these words: “Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, ‘Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!’ And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, ‘To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!’” (Revelation 5:11–13).

Arranged as they are, the Psalms tell a story, and their message is simply what the whole Bible tells us: God wins, and His praise will fill creation.

We’ve just heard from Ephesians 4:1-6, words which you asked to be read here during your wedding ceremony. This is a rich passage to ponder at the beginning of your marriage.

You two are no doubt aware that these verses come at the half-way point of the book of Ephesians. For the first three chapters of the letter, Paul has been unfolding God’s great works of salvation for His people, beginning with His sovereign plan in eternity past, when He chose us before the foundation of the world to be adopted as His children.

That plan of salvation moved into history as Jesus came and was crucified for us, suffering the judgement that we deserve, and paying for our sins with His own blood.

God then raised Jesus up and seated Him at His right hand, far above all other rulers or competitors. And together the Father and Son sent the Spirit to raise us up from being dead in sins, causing us to be born again, and bringing us together in the church. The Spirit dwells in us now as a downpayment—a first instalment—of the inheritance God is preparing for us to enjoy in the age to come.

And all of this is a gift. “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God— not the result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9).

There’s nothing we could do to earn this love. There’s nothing we could do to be worthy of this. There’s nothing about us that made us deserve mercy instead of judgement.  This is all an act of free mercy.

And that’s where Ephesians 4 comes in. After making sure we know how great our salvation is, Paul then urges us to walk—to live—in a way that’s worthy of this salvation.

The “order of operations” here is itself good news. Aren’t we glad that God doesn’t wait until we’re worthy before He saves us? Instead, He saves us by grace alone and then calls us to live worthy of this great gift.

He adopts us into His family, and then calls (and equips!) us to act like His children. He invites us to join the team—no tryouts—and then He teaches us how to play the game in a manner worthy of the number on our jersey.

And what does it look like to walk worthy of our calling? What does it mean to act like one of God’s children?

The answer is right there in Ephesians 4:2-3: it means living a life marked “with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”.

The next question is: what does all of this have to do with marriage? Why are we talking about this on your wedding day?

The Pattern of the Gospel

There’s a few answers to that question, each of them important. The first answer is that your marriage needs to follow this pattern of the gospel.

Just think of the pattern we’re seen: God invites us into the safety of an eternal salvation, and then calls us to live worthy of it.

Similarly, today the two of you are about to enter into a covenant of marriage. You will make promises, first to God and these witnesses, and then to each other, that you will be faithful to each other alone until death.

And then, within the safety of that covenant, you get to learn how to live out this covenant unity in real life.

And I’ll warn you again, as I’ve warned you before, it won’t be easy. Marriage doesn’t come naturally to anybody. Living out your unity as husband and wife will be one of the hardest things you’ll ever do.

And that’s why the safety of the covenant is so important. On the hard days, when you’ve misunderstood each other or hurt each other or just have no idea what’s going on, you can think back to this day and remember that you chose each other. You chose to give each other the free gift of covenant-keeping love.

You’ll remember that on this day, this person that you stand before, with all of their life ahead of them, has chosen you out of everybody else. They’ve chosen to give you the gift of the rest of their life. And if you don’t know it today, you’ll see in the years ahead just how much of a gift this is. You don’t deserve this. And yet, freely, they will promise to be faithful to you unto death.

And that means that on the hard days, there’s no need to anxiously wonder, “Are they going to leave me? Are they going to get fed up and move on? Are they going to find someone else more exciting?” Those questions should never even come into your mind.

Because on this day you pledged your love to each other. And going forward you will have something so much more than feelings or chemistry or even a good friendship holding you together. You have a covenant. You will be one in the eyes of God and these witnesses.

And now you get to learn how to walk in a manner worthy of this marriage. You get to live out your unity in the safety of this covenant. And in this way, your marriage gets to follow the pattern of the gospel.

The Power of the Gospel

But that’s not all. Your marriage also needs to draw on the power of the gospel.

On the hard days, or in the hard years, your love for each other won’t be enough to keep you going. If all you have is what the other person can give you, then you’ll run out eventually.

And you’ll so easily end up in a shell of a marriage that is full of pride instead of humility. Harshness instead of gentleness. Snappiness instead of patience. Complaining about each other instead of bearing with one another. A quickness to divide instead of an eagerness for unity. The knife of tension instead of the bond of peace.

I know that right now, what I’ve just described is not the marriage either of you wants. It’s not the marriage anybody wants on their wedding day. So how to you avoid heading that direction?

You live out the book of Ephesians. You marinate your souls in the truths of the gospel. You walk with God in the power of the Spirit, drawing deeply from the wells of His gospel grace, so that each day you have a fresh supply of that love and grace to give to each other.

And that’s why your relationship with each other is not your most important relationship. Your relationship with God matters more than anything. You need Him every hour so that you can walk with each other in the way Ephesians 4 describes.

Your marriage needs not just the pattern of the gospel but also the power of the gospel lived out between you.

A Picture of the Gospel

And as you do this, your marriage will be a picture of the gospel. Isn’t that what the next chapter of Ephesians tells us? 

Husbands are to love their wives “as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Eph 5:25), and that “as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands” (Eph 5:24). That passage goes on to tell us that marriage, from the beginning, was designed by God to be a picture of the saving, covenant-keeping love between Jesus and His people.

These verses are familiar, but they can’t be understood apart from the rest of Ephesians. Your marriage will only be a compelling picture of the gospel as you draw on the power of the gospel to love each other according to the pattern of the gospel. And as you do that, your marriage will preach the gospel. People will be able to look at you and say, “If that’s how Jesus and His church relate to each other, then I want to know Jesus like that, too.”

That’s a tall order. But it’s possible because the God who loves you and chose you and sent His son to die for you has given you His Spirit to empower you and to keep you until you enter in to the heavenly inheritance He’s preparing for you.

So here on this first day of your marriage, and on every day of your marriage hereafter, may God help you heed the Apostle’s urging to “walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:1-3).

There’s no doubt that women have particular gifts and strengths when it comes to hospitality. We do bring something unique to the table—literally! God created us to be caring and nurturing in particular ways, and these traits shine in environments of hospitality.

That being said, hospitality is not just women’s work. Like we see in 1 Timothy 3:2, elders are to be hospitable. Some women are married to godly men with whom they can show hospitality, as they and their husbands exercise their different gifts in harmony. For example, when we have people in for a meal, Chris doesn’t do much in the kitchen. He excels at the table, engaging people in conversation, providing a warm environment for them to share and talk and laugh, and he helps guide the conversation towards Christ.

Other women are not married, or they are not married to husbands who have a heart for hospitality. But that doesn’t mean for a second that they can’t show hospitality. Lydia was a single women who, in Acts 16, provided hospitality to Paul and Silas and later opened her home as the meeting place for the church in that city (Acts 16:40). 

Whatever situation we’re in, whatever gifts we think we have or don’t have, as women we all have a calling and a particular ability to show warm, Christ-honouring hospitality.

Here’s a few examples of the different opportunities for hospitality that the Lord has given me at different stages in my life.

Growing up, our home was always open and my mom and her mom lived out great examples of hospitality for as long as I can remember. They have always had an open door to take others in, have overnight guests stay, or have our friends over for after-school snacks. Every event had some sort of snack or food to fellowship over.

My parents invited my sisters and I to participate with them in hospitality, and it was a family effort—working together to have people into our home and seek to be a blessing to them. One of my life’s goals is to be like my grandma who can whip meals up in a matter of minutes. I remember one time Chris and I were dating and we went over to her place, and the question was, as always, “Are you hungry? Can I get you something to eat?” It was close to 9:00 in the evening, but we said, “maybe a little,” and minutes later she had plates of steaming fish and veggies in front of us. I want to be like her!

When I was in college, fourteen hours away from home, I was so blessed when I was invited into someone’s home. It was such a welcome break from campus life to have a meal with another family. I had a mentor who lived off campus and invited me to stay, after our meetings, to have supper with them. At the time they had three young children with another on the way. It was such a gift to participate in their family life, and a bonus was to be a fly on the wall, observing and learning what parenting and running a home looked like with a young family. 

After I graduated from my third year of college I had a desire to extend this same blessing to some of the many college students who attended our church. I connected with three young women who started coming over for supper every Monday night. I still lived at my parents’ house, but as I mentioned, they love hospitality and were totally on board, even while they gave me space to learn and grow in hostessing. It was during this time that I started honing in on some cooking skills as I made the ladies supper weekly, and it was great to have my mom around when I needed to ask questions.

Often the girls would bring a friend or two, and some weeks we’d play game after our meal, while other times they all brought homework and hunkered down in the living room to study afterward. 

Another opportunity I had not long after college involved a ministries internship at my church. At that point, the church was going through a building project, and the building crew was mostly made up of of volunteers. I’m not very handy, but I do enjoy being in the kitchen, and got to live out hospitality in yet a another aspect as I helped coordinate a team to provide snacks for coffee breaks, lunches, and suppers for the work crew.

I often made the meals for them as well, sometimes working alongside other women and learning from them. It was fun and challenging coming up with meals that would feed a bunch of hungry men, and I even got to try my hand at making waffles with four waffle makers going at a time. It was a good growing experience providing meals, rest and comfort alongside others in that old dimly lit church basement.

Shortly after this, Chris and I got married, and hospitality has looked very different at various stages in our marriage. There was a time early on where, once a month, we’d have a group of ten or so young adults over for supper in our small condo. We would add another table that would extend our eating area out into the living room, and then we’d need to take that table down to fit everybody into the living room for the Bible study that followed. Learning how to use crockpots to feed a crowd after I had worked all day was a new experience.

Since moving to Nipawin, we have tried to open our home and resources to neighbours. As we’ve met new neighbours I’ve tried making myself available, saying something like, “If you ever are in a pinch and need a cup of sugar, come on by.” I’ve had to ask a neighbour for baking soda and tin foil when I ran out last minute. Creating that openness in a relationship right off the bat is a good place to start as you open up your resources, home, and heart to them.

We continue to grow and learn as a couple (and now family) in practicing hospitality. We try to sit down at the beginning of each month and plan who we would like to invite over intentionally, while also leaving space for spontaneous hospitality. There was a season where we planned to have people over for lunch each Sunday. I know of others who pick a different day of the week and build hospitality into their schedule that way. I’ve heard from someone who heats up frozen pizzas and makes popcorn every Friday night and invites others to join them.

The point is, hospitality doesn’t need to be fancy or expensive. It’s something we can all do wherever we’re at in life. It’s about a posture of seeking to connect with and bless others, offering ourselves to the Lord and then to them for His sake.

More to come.

The other Sunday, when Wes Dobson came to preach for us, we heard an encouraging sermon on the obituary of Abraham which summarized his faithfulness to God—and how we today must have the same faithfulness as Abraham. Yet, in Genesis 25, we see that Abraham’s faithfulness to God is but a backdrop for what’s on center stage: God’s Faithfulness To Abraham.

The Children of Keturah

“Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. Jokshan fathered Sheba and Dedan. The sons of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim, and Leummim. The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah” (25:1-4).

Here, we see God’s faithfulness to Abraham in keeping his promises to make Abraham’s offspring like the dust of the earth (Gen. 13:16), the stars in the skies (Gen. 15:5), and the sand on the seashores (Gen. 22:17)—including his offspring through concubines like Keturah (1 Chronicles 1:32) or Hagar (Gen. 16:10). Midian is likely the most familiar name on this list, whose descendants will play an instrumental role later on in the life of Moses and the future of ethnic Israel (Exodus 2:11-22). 

However, it’s been quite clear throughout Genesis that the true and chosen offspring—Abraham’s “only son”—is Isaac, who goes on to receive the undisputed inheritance from his father.

The Inheritance of Isaac

“Abraham gave all he had to Isaac. But to the sons of his concubines Abraham gave gifts, and while he was still living he sent them away from his son Isaac, eastward to the east country” (25:5-6).

While Abraham gave gifts to the sons of his concubines, he gave all things to Isaac. On top of that, Abraham sent his other sons away from his son Isaac—in keeping with God’s affirmation of Sarah’s request to cast out the slave woman (Hagar) and her son (Ishmael), since only through Isaac shall Abraham’s offspring be named (Gen. 21:10-12). It’s important to note that Abraham did this “while he was still living” because Abraham himself makes it clear that Isaac is the legitimate heir who will receive all that he has (the inheritance) when he dies—since Abraham knew and understood that God’s faithfulness to him will extend beyond his lifetime.

The Life, Death and Burial of Abraham

“These are the days of the years of Abraham’s life, 175 years. Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people. Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, east of Mamre, the field that Abraham purchased from the Hittites. There Abraham was buried, with Sarah his wife” (25:7-10).

This passage is packed with evidence of God’s faithfulness to Abraham. First, God’s promise to Abraham from almost a century ago that he will die and be buried “in a good old age” (Gen. 15:15) comes to fulfillment here in the mourning and celebration of his “full” life as he was gathered to his people. 

Second, God’s promise to give Abraham’s offspring the land (Gen. 12:7; 13:14-15, 17; 15:18-20; 17:8) begins its course as “Isaac and Ishmael his sons” bury him with Sarah in the Canaanite land that he purchased and secured as property for a burying place (Gen. 23:17-20). Yet, despite Abraham being buried in the land by his two sons, only one son carries on the blessing to the nations.

The Blessing of Isaac

“After the death of Abraham, God blessed Isaac his son. And Isaac settled at Beer-lahai-roi” (25:11).

When God specifically blessed Abraham to be a blessing to the nations (Gen. 12:2-3), God’s blessing indicated that it will come through his family name. This is picked back up later on in Abraham’s life when God promises an offspring through Sarah, who will be blessed through her son—the only son of sacrifice, Isaac, through whom the nations will be blessed (Gen. 22:17-18).

God’s faithfulness to Abraham is seen in full display here, even through the place of Isaac’s settlement (Gen. 16:14). Yet, while God specifically blesses Isaac as the child of promise, God does not forget his promise and blesses him as Abraham’s physical offspring with physical blessings.

The Generations of Ishmael

“These are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s servant, bore to Abraham. These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, named in the order of their birth: Nebaioth, the firstborn of Ishmael; and Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah. These are the sons of Ishmael and these are their names, by their villages and by their encampments, twelve princes according to their tribes” (25:12-16).

Here, we see the fulfillment of God’s promises to Abraham regarding Ishmael. First, we see that Ishmael becomes a multitude of nations (Genesis 16:10; 21:13, 18). Second, Ishmael’s line produces kings—specifically, “twelve princes”—in keeping with God’s promise about royalty coming from Abraham’s offspring (Gen. 17:6, 20). In fact, God’s faithfulness to Abraham is seen even in the life of Ishmael itself as well as his descendants after him.

The Life of Ishmael

“(These are the years of the life of Ishmael: 137 years. He breathed his last and died, and was gathered to his people.) They settled from Havilah to Shur, which is opposite Egypt in the direction of Assyria. He settled over against all his kinsmen” (25:17-18).

When Abraham cried out in faith to God about saving Ishmael’s life (Gen. 17:18), Ishmael’s obituary here shows that God came through on his promise to bless Abraham’s physical offspring (Gen. 17:20). 

In fact, God also comes through on his promises when we hear about how Ishmael “settled over against all his kinsmen”—since God made promised that about Ishmael early on: “He shall be a wild donkey of a man, his hand against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he shall dwell over against all his kinsmen” (Genesis 16:12). While Ishmael was outside the scope of God’s promises, he was still in the scope of God’s purposes.

Jesus Christ, The Blessing To The Nations

Throughout Genesis 25:1-18, God’s faithfulness to Abraham is in full display. Yet, it is seen most clearly when Abraham makes sure to give all that he had to the heir of promise, Isaac—while he was still living. In turn, God blesses Isaac after his death. From this, we see that the blessing of Abraham is now passed down to the child of promise, Isaac—through whom the nations will be blessed. Many years later, we see that this blessing of Isaac finds its fulfillment in the one offspring of Abraham (Galatians 3:16)—Jesus Christ, the blessing to the nations. 

As Peter says to the men of Israel, “You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’ God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you by turning every one of you from your wickedness” (Acts 3:25-26).

Eventually, Paul explains that this blessing of the gospel extends to believing Gentiles outside of ethnic Israel by faith: “And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘In you shall all the nations be blessed’” (Galatians 3:8).

This blessing is good news for us today because the Scriptures tell us that Christ redeemed us from the curse of sin and death by becoming a curse for us when he died on that cross—so that in him “the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith” (Galatians 3:13-14). 

Today, if you believe by faith in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, then you will be blessed with the same gospel that was preached to Abraham many years ago! But for those of us who have already believed and received this blessing of the gospel, what then do we do with this blessing?

Passing On The Blessing

Much like Abraham ensured the passing on of the blessing to Isaac while he was still living, we who have been blessed by the gospel must proactively be passing on the blessing of the gospel to the next generation—while we are still living! Whether it’s children or younger people in our home, church, or community, we must do the good work of evangelism and discipleship with a sense of urgency today!

In doing so, we are also making sure to pass on the blessing of the gospel to the nations because we, like Abraham, will eventually breathe our last. When that day comes, we can trust that God will continue blessing the nations through those whom we have passed it on to. Either that or Christ returns, and I hope we would be found faithful in passing on the blessing as our Lord has commanded us: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:19-20).

Thoughts or feedback on this article? Send me a note! josh@ebcnipawin.ca

I recently had the chance to collaborate with my wife on some material relating to hospitality, which I’ll be sharing here over several posts. Today begins the series with a bird’s-eye view of hospitality in the story of the Bible.

At creation, God made people with bodies that needed sheltering and stomachs that needed feeding. He then met those needs by providing a safe place for Adam and Eve to live, and food for them to eat (Gen 2:15-16). Even after He sent them out of the garden, God clothed Adam and Eve. He likewise provided for Noah and Abraham and especially Israel, giving them a safe place to rest and providing food for them to enjoy.

God told Israel in Leviticus 25:23: “…the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me.” This doesn’t mean that they were strangers together with Him , but rather that they were his guests. David understood this when he prayed, “I am a sojourner with you, a guest, like all my fathers” (Psa 39:12).

David understood that he was living in God’s world, and that God was a generous host. This is what he describes in Psalm 23:5: “You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows.” In this verse David is not picturing God as a shepherd, but rather as a generous host who gives His guest a place to be safe, care for his body, and rich food and drink.

Isaiah described the inauguration of the age to come as a great feast (Isa 25:6). When the Messiah came, God’s people would once again be at home with Him and enjoy His hospitality. (See also Matthew 8:11.)

Which means that this is what Jesus came to do: extend divine hospitality. Think of his words, “In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also” (John 14:2–3).

Jesus died and rose again to bring His people into His family, His house. Revelation shows us the final goal of this when it says, “And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God” (Revelation 21:3).

God, the great Host, will dwell with His people forever on the world that He will renew for them.

Knowing this, it’s not surprising that much of Jesus’ ministry took place in settings of hospitality. Like making the wine at Cana (John 2:1-11), or sharing meals with tax collectors and “sinners” (Matt 9:10). In each of these settings, He gave a preview of the coming kingdom.

In this very brief survey, we can see a clear picture: God is hospitable. That means that when we are hospitable, we are being like Him. When Abraham rushes to provide a rich meal for his guests (Genesis 18:1-8), or when Israel was commanded to be hospitable to strangers (Lev 19:33-34), or when Boaz is generous with Ruth, these are all examples of imitating God. Each of us is a guest in His world, and just like God welcomes us and cares for us, so we are to show that same kindness to one another.

In fact, in the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25:31-46, showing hospitality to strangers is one of the marks of a real disciple.

So it shouldn’t be a surprise that we see a lot of hospitality in the early days of the Christian church. Think about the day of Pentecost, when 3,000 people became Christians and ended up staying in Jerusalem long past the feast. The Christians living in Jerusalem had to show extended hospitality to them, as is described in Acts 2:46: “And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts.”

Not surprisingly, there were logistical challenges in such a large-scale, long-term exercise of hospitality. Acts 6:1-6 tells how the apostles took these challenges very seriously, gathering the whole church together (all several thousand of them!) to implement a sustainable plan to ensure everyone was taken care of.

Hospitality continued to be a prominent feature of the Christian life as the gospel spread around the world. As people chose to follow Christ, many lost the supports of their family and friends, and depended on the hospitality of their new family in Christ (Mark 10:29-30). Additionally, as the gospel spread, missionaries relied on the hospitality of local Christians to give them a safe place to stay and to provide for their needs on their way (Titus 3:13–14, 1 John 3:5-8). Hospitality became a way of life, and as Christians opened their tables not just to each other but also to their pagan neighbours, many were drawn to Christ.

On top of these examples, we have the direct teaching of the apostles in regards to hospitality:

• “Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality” (Romans 12:13).
• “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares” (Hebrews 13:2).
• “Show hospitality to one another without grumbling” (1 Peter 4:9).
• “For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be… hospitable” (Titus 1:7,8)

What should we notice from these passages? We should see that Christians are to be hospitable to everybody: to each other, to Christian workers and missionaries, and to unbelievers.

These passage also show us that hospitality is not an option. There is no mention in the New Testament about the “gift of hospitality.” Rather, hospitality is an expectation for everybody. Which makes sense, because we are to be like God, and God is hospitable.

God has shown us incredible hospitality every day—which is one of the reasons most of us pray before we eat. We’re living in His world, eating His food, and we are grateful! Even more than this, in Christ He’s transformed us from enemies into His very family, bringing us into His very house, and has promised to live with us forever.

And so when this good news of the gospel gets into our hearts, it takes away the sense that our homes belong to us. Rather than castles where we go to retreat from the world, our houses and tables are ministry centres, loaned to us by God, where we get to invite people in to taste His generous gospel love—literally.

More to come.

But what do we mean by that?

I wonder if, much of the time, we use the phrase “Christ-like” as shorthand for Jesus’ “nicer” qualities: His gentleness. His humility. His silence before his accusers. His kindness to children. His attentiveness to the weak and the marginalized.

These are wonderful characteristics, and are certainly a significant part of what being “Christ-like” means. But is this all that it means? 

When we say, “I want to be Christ-like,” do we ever mean anything like the following?

• “I want to upset my hometown so bad that they try to kill me.” (Luke 4:28-29)
• “I want to speak strange and hard-to-understand truths that alienate large groups of potential followers.” (John 6:25-71)
• “I want to be homeless.” (Matt 8:19-20)
• “I want to engage in sustained, heated debate with my opponents.” (John 7:14-8:59, Matt 21:23-22:46)
• “I want to do the dirty jobs.” (John 13:1-20)
• “I want to make a whip and turn over tables.” (John 2:14-16)
• “I want to offend my family and make them think I’m crazy.” (Mark 3:21, 31-35)
• “I want to deliberately provoke the religious leaders, making them so mad they want to kill me.” (Matt 12:9-14, 23:1-36)
• “I want to pour out my life for others, only to be falsely accused, lied about, and slandered.” (Matt 26:59)
• “I want to die in the most painful and humiliating way imaginable.” (Luke 23:26-48)

Some might respond that Jesus’ disciples aren’t supposed to mimic every single activity He performed. Cleansing the temple is a good example; unless you drive chuckwagons, you should probably go put that whip away.

Nevertheless, Jesus Himself explained that being like Him means more than being nice and well-loved: “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you…Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you” (John 15:18, 20). Similarly, when Paul thinks about being “like Jesus,” he expresses his desire to “share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death” (Phil 3:10).

Does your definition of “Christ-like” include a cross?

The good news is that, just like for Jesus, our suffering and death are not the end of the line. “If we have died with him, we will also live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him” (2 Tim 2:11–12). If our definition of “Christ-like” includes a cross, it also needs to include an empty grave.

These are important truths for us to remember as we head into Good Friday and Resurrection Sunday. Praise God that Jesus died for us, as our substitute, so that we wouldn’t have to (1 Pet 3:18). But let’s not forget that Jesus also died and rose again so that we might die and rise with Him—here and now (Luke 9:23, 1 Cor 15:31, 2 Cor 4:10-12), and one day, truly and finally as we rise with Him to life eternal (1 Cor 15:49-52).

Soar we now where Christ has led

Following our exalted Head

Made like him, like him we rise

Ours the cross, the grave, the skies

John Wesley

• The first problem is seen in pastors who think that anyone who disagrees with them is being rebellious. The second problem is seen in people who genuinely are rebellious.
• The first problem is seen in pastors who think that their authority is the answer to every problem in the church. The second problem is seen in people who don’t think that authority has any place in the church whatsoever (particularly if it steps on their toes).
• The first problem is seen in leaders who quote Hebrews 13:17 to silence any dissent. The second problem is seen in people who think that any mention whatsoever of Hebrews 13:17 is itself a problem demanding dissent.
• The first problem is seen in leaders who are controlling. The second problem is seen in people who think that any attempt to lead them is controlling by default.
• The first problem is seen in pastors who feel threatened by congregants who ask good questions. The second problem is seen in congregants who feel threatened by a pastor who doesn’t do whatever they want him to.
• The first problem is bullies in pulpits. The second problem is bullies in pews.

The first problem is real and painful. It’s been getting more press lately, and for good reason. I’ve recently read Michael Kruger’s new book “Bully Pulpit” and found it to be helpful, well-written, and sadly necessary. Spiritual abuse needs to be addressed, and Kruger hits the nail on the head over and over again. Lots of people need to read this book.

Here’s my struggle, though: the second problem is also real and painful. It’s also gotten some attention in the last few years, albeit in a roundabout way: one of the sad lessons from the Covid experience is that a lot of church-goers really don’t like being told what to do. Today, as in ancient Crete, “there are many who are insubordinate” (Titus 1:10). And as I read Kruger’s book, I couldn’t help but read certain sections through the eyes of people who lean this way. I could picture them loving it, and for all the wrong reasons. It’s not hard to imagine “Bully Pulpit” being used as fuel for the fires of their spiritual anarchy.

That’s not Michael Kruger’s fault. He wrote a book about a specific topic, and he clarifies himself really well. The section called “Not Everything is Abuse” should help most people read the rest of the book properly. His target audience seems to be those who have excused or ignored abuse, as opposed to those who wave the abuse flag too quickly. For anyone who’s ever put up with a bully pastor because “look at all of the good he’s done,” this is an important—even necessary—book.

It still left me scratching my head, though. How do you get through to the abusive pastors themselves, who are likely to write off a book like this as “encouraging people to be rebellious”? And how do you get through to the folks on the other end, who buck at every call to biblical submission?

Maybe there is no human-level answer to these questions. “They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them” (Luke 16:29). Softening hard hearts is a job for the Holy Spirit. I’ve also been reminded that the twin issues of spiritual abuse and spiritual rebellion are primarily spiritual battles. We do not wrestle against flesh and blood (Eph 6:12).

Nevertheless, God uses human means in this great battle, and I pray that “Bully Pulpit” will be one of them. It’s an excellent book. I’m getting a copy for our church library, and I would love for many people to read it. I hope it will be a tool that will help us continue to safeguard our church from the tragedies which have brought so much shame to the name of Christ. By God’s grace, may it be so.

We could start with the word itself. In the New Testament, the word “church” is translated from the Greek word ekklēsia. An old idea that still gets passed around today is that ekklēsia means “called out ones,” given that ek means “out of” and klēsia comes from the Greek word for “called.”

This sounds nice—we’re the called-out ones!—but most of the time, this approach isn’t a great way to determine a word’s meaning. A butterfly isn’t a fly that likes butter, right? We need to look at how a word is actually used to know what it means, and by the time that the New Testament was written, the word ekklēsia did not mean “called out ones.” Instead, it had the basic meaning of “assembly,” and there’s two threads that tie together to help us understand this.

Old Testament Background

The first thread is from the Old Testament. In the centuries before Christ’s birth, the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek. This Greek Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was the Bible used by many Jews in the time of Christ. Many Christians today are surprised to find out that the word ekklēsia is used, by one count, 65 times in the Greek Old Testament. Most of the time, the word refers to the assembly of Israel—when the people of God would gather together before Him.

For example, Deuteronomy 9:10 speaks about the day when “the Lord had spoken with you on the mountain out of the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly.” The day of the ekklēsia. The day when they gathered together before the Lord.

Joshua 8:35 refers to Joshua gathering all Israel together to hear the law, and says that “there was not a word of all that Moses commanded that Joshua did not read before all the assembly [ekklēsia] of Israel.” And on and on it goes, 65 (or so) times. 

Political Background

Ekklēsia also has a secular background. The word was used within Greek politics to refer to the assembly of a city’s citizens. We actually see this use in the New Testament in Acts 19, which describes the riot in Ephesus. Verse 32 says that “the assembly was in confusion.” When the town clerk gets them quiet, he tells them in verse 39 that “if you seek anything further, it shall be settled in the regular assembly.” And then in verse 41, “when he had said these things, he dismissed the assembly.”

Guess what word is used for “assembly” in each of those verses? Ekklēsia. “Church.”

By now we can see how the word “church” basically means “assembly.” And that helps us understand one of the essential aspects of what a church is. A church is a group of people which gathers—assembles together—regularly.

The Myth of the City Church

There was a time that I really struggled with this. I was seeing all these uses of ekklēsia in the Old Testament and other places in the Bible, and saw that it was always talking about an assembly, an actual gathering.

But that observation was rubbing up against another idea I held to: the city church. Many Christians are familiar with the idea that, according to the New Testament, there’s a “church” in each city or town, made up of all of the Christians in that area. So the “church in Rome” was all of the Christians in Rome, and the “church in Colossae” was all of the Christians in Colossae. Those Christians happened to meet in little gatherings in different people’s homes, which were sometimes called “churches,” but nevertheless they were all a part of the one church in that city.

I struggled with this, because how could all those Christians be called an “assembly” (ekklēsia) if they were always meeting in smaller groups and never actually assembled together? If the “church in Rome” just met in a bunch of different houses, how could they properly be called a church?

I knew about the universal church—that all Christians from all times are sometimes called “the church.” Like when we read that “Christ loved the church” (Ephesians 5:25). But we know that all of God’s people from all time will be gathered together in the presence of God one day. Hebrews 12:23 speaks about this heavenly assembly or “church” (ekklēsia) as a spiritual reality even now.

But you can’t say the same thing for Rome or Ephesus. So I was really curious, and started doing some research.¹And was greatly helped by Jonathan Leeman in his book, One Assembly.

And what I found is that the idea of a “city church” is—if you’ll pardon the pun—an urban legend. When you actually look to see what the Bible says, it’s not there.

Let’s start with Rome. We know that there were multiple groups of Christians meeting in different “churches” in Rome. In Romans 16:5, for example, Paul sends greetings to Prisca and Aquila and “the church in their house.” So there’s at least more than one “church” or gathering in Rome. And yet Paul wrote his letter to “the church in Rome,” right? 

Wrong. The letter to the Romans is addressed “To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 1:7). There is no reference in the Bible to “the church in Rome.”

What about Colossians? We know that there were multiple smaller “churches” in Colossae. Colossians 4:15 talks about the church in Nympha’s house, and Philemon, written to a Colossian Christian (Colossians 4:9), speaks about “the church in your house” (Philemon 2).

But Paul wrote a letter to “the church” in Colossae, didn’t he? Once again, that’s not what we find. “To the saints and faithful brothers in Christ at Colossae: Grace to you and peace from God our Father” (Colossians 1:2).

Didn’t Paul write any letters to the church in a specific town? He did. 1 & 2 Thessalonians are two examples. Both are written to “the church of the Thessalonians.” And yet neither of them say anything about more than one church or gathering. Nothing about “the church in their house.”

There’s only two more letters written by Paul which are addressed to a church in a location, and those are the letters to the Corinthians. “To the church of God that is in Corinth” (1 Corinthians 1:2).

1 Corinthians is a long letter. Corinth was a big city. Surely there must be all kinds of evidence of multiple house churches in Corinth, right? Actually, it’s the opposite. 1 Corinthians is full of references to the church gathering as one.

• “When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:4).
• “For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you” (1 Corinthians 11:18).
• “So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another” (1 Corinthians 11:33).
• “If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?” (1 Corinthians 14:23).
• “What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up” (1 Corinthians 14:26).

There was a church in Corinth—a group of Christians who met all together regularly. On the other hand, when writing letters to groups of Christians who didn’t meet all together as one, Paul avoids referring to them collectively as “the church.”

So this idea of a “city church” has no evidence to support it. “Church” just means assembly—a group of Christians who actually gather together (Acts 14:27). When the New Testament speaks about “the church in” or “at” a specific city (such as in Revelation 2-3), the most natural conclusion is that there was a single church assembly in that town which met all together regularly. That’s what the word “church” means, and that meaning is fleshed out by the very specific way Paul uses the word in his letters.

Not Just A Gathering

So, a church is a gathering. A church is not just people—it’s people who assemble regularly. A church is never less than that. But a church is also more than this. In other words, there’s a major difference between a church and a random gathering of Christians hanging out.

That last statement may be controversial to those who believe that any time you get a group of Christians together, you’ve got something you can call “church.”

But that’s not what we see in Scripture. The Bible shows us that a church is a group of Christians who not only meet together regularly but who are bound together by a common commitment to each other—an agreement to be the body of Christ together. This means that the church is not just any gathering of Christians, but a specific group that gathers regularly and knows who each other are.

We find this as far back as the book of Acts, where the church demonstrated  a clear understanding of who was (and who was not) a part of them. Acts 5:12-13 says that the Jerusalem church was “all together in Solomon’s Portico. None of the rest dared join them, but the people held them in high esteem.” So in other words, it was a definite group. It wasn’t just whoever showed up on a given day. They knew, and the other people knew, who was a part of the church—and who wasn’t.

Acts 6:2 says that “the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples.” This assumes they knew who all the disciples were. It wasn’t just whoever wanted to show up. They knew when they were all present and accounted for.

1 Corinthians 5 is a significant passage about the nature of the church. A man was to be removed from the church for unrepentant immorality, and Paul’s instructions say that “When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 5:4–5).

Notice, first of all, “when you are assembled.” That’s important. It means that they had a way of knowing, “yes, we’re assembled,” or “no, not everybody is here yet.” Which means they knew who was and who was not a part of their church. It wasn’t just whoever showed up on a given day.

And then they were to remove that man from their community—putting him outside of the church, back into Satan’s kingdom. That makes no sense if a church is just any old random group of Christians. A church has a definite identity and a clear understanding of who is and who is not a part of that church (see also vv. 12-13).

Church discipline doesn’t work with an uncommitted, random group of people. It only works with a group of Christians who gather together regularly and who have agreed to some important things and made some level of a commitment to be a church together. Which means, that’s what a church is.

Now, there’s still more to it. According to 1 Corinthians 11, churches celebrate the Lord’s Supper when they gather together. The phrase “come together” is used 5 times in that chapter (vv. 17, 18, 20, 33, 34) and shows us that a church gathering as one to celebrate the Lord’s supper is a vital part of their life together. 

Another key element to a biblical church is having Biblical leadership. 1 Timothy and Titus tell us that churches are supposed to have elders and deacons who have been vetted and meet certain character qualifications. And one of the important jobs of the elders is to teach and preach the word to the assembled people.

There’s more we could add, but taken together this all shows us that a church is not just any gathering of Christians. A church is a group of Christians who meet together regularly and who have some measure of a commitment to each other to be the body of Christ together, which includes biblical leadership and biblical teaching and preaching and a proper celebration of the Lord’s Supper and a right application of church discipline.

Historical Perspectives

This is why John Calvin says that “Wherever we find the word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to the institution of Christ; there, it is not to be doubted, is a Church of God.”²John Calvin and John Allen, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 3 (New Haven; Philadelphia: Hezekiah Howe; Philip H. Nicklin, 1816), 18.

That’s actually a Lutheran understanding as well. The Augsburg Confession of 1530 states that “the Church is the congregation of saints [the assembly of all believers], in which the Gospel is rightly taught [purely preached] and the Sacraments rightly administered [according to the Gospel].”³Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes: The Evangelical Protestant Creeds, with Translations, vol. 3 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1882), 12.

The Belgic Confession of Faith states that “The marks by which the true Church is known are these: If the pure doctrine of the gospel is preached therein; if she maintains the pure administration of the sacraments as instituted by Christ; if church discipline is exercised in punishing of sin; in short, if all things are managed according to the pure Word of God, all things contrary thereto rejected, and Jesus Christ acknowledged as the only Head of the Church. Hereby the true Church may certainly be known, from which no man has a right to separate himself.”⁴Ibid., 420.

The Methodist Articles of Religion from 1784 state that “The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the sacraments duly administered, according to Christ’s ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.”⁵Ibid., 810

One of my favourite definitions of a church comes from the 1861 Swedish Baptist Confession of Faith: “We believe that a true Christian church is a union of believing and baptized Christians, who have covenanted to strive to keep all that Christ has commanded, to sustain public worship, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to choose among themselves shepherds or overseers, and deacons, to administer baptism and the Lord’s supper, to practice Christian church-discipline, to promote godliness and brotherly love, and to contribute to the general spread of the gospel; also that every such church is an independent body, free in its relation to other Christian churches and acknowledging Christ only as its head.”⁶W. J. McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 367.

These different traditions within the history of Christianity, many of whom have very different practices when it comes to the church, nevertheless share a common conviction that a church is a specific group of people bound together by more than just deciding to show up once in a while.

Why Does This Matter?

So, why does this matter? It matters because our spiritual future depends on being a part of a church.  It’s not enough to say “I’m a part of the church in such and such a town,” and meet one week for a small group over here, and hang out with our family over here, and go to a service over there, and think that that’s all “church.”

We need to be a part of a church. A real church. A church to which we are accountable. A church that knows us. A church that can remove us from their midst if we start living like the devil while still calling ourselves a Christian. A church where we’ll participate and serve and love and be an integral part of the body.

In this stage of history, God’s “Plan A” is built around local churches—and there is no Plan B.

So, if you haven’t yet taken your place as a committed member of a local church, would you ask the Lord to help you do that? Don’t waste any time. We don’t have forever.  “And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near” (Hebrews 10:24–25).

This is particularly true when the dispute includes the church leadership. Despite Paul’s command not to “admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses” (1 Tim 5:19, cf. Matt 18:16), many church-goers apparently feel very free to broadcast their leaders’ supposed shortcomings far and wide, with little impulse to actually talk to those leaders themselves first.

How do people find their way around such clear biblical mandates? The most common excuse I’ve heard for not having a Matthew 18:15 conversation is that the offended person didn’t think the offender will listen to them. This excuse can take many forms:

• “I really didn’t think that I’d be heard.”
• “That person just doesn’t listen to people.”
• “Last time I tried to talk to them, I didn’t feel heard.”
• “I didn’t think the conversation would go anywhere.”

Sound familiar at all? If so, how should we respond to this? Here’s four reflections on this apparent Matthew 18 loop-hole:

1. Being understood is not a prerequisite for obedience

Matthew 18:15 doesn’t say, “Go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone, but only if you think he’ll listen to you.” Whether we think the other person will listen should have nothing to do with whether we’ll obey Jesus or not. Why would we think that, just because the first conversation will be unsuccessful, we’re allowed to skip the process entirely?

Ironically, verse 16 and following contain a number of follow-up steps which describe what actions to take in the event that the offender doesn’t listen—and none of them involve not having that first conversation. Jesus expects us to obey Him, regardless of what we think the outcome might be.

2. “Feeling heard” may not be the same as being heard

Apparently, “heard” is a feeling—at least given how some people talk. Phrases like “I really felt heard,” or, “I didn’t feel heard” give the impression that our emotions are a reliable guide to the effectiveness of a conversation.

Sadly, some take it even further. In my experience, some people only “feel heard” if the other person agrees with them. When they have a problem with someone else in their church, or particularly their church leadership, they don’t come with a humble attitude that seeks understanding and clarification. It doesn’t occur to them that perhaps they have misunderstood, or even that they could be in the wrong. They come to deliver a verdict, and any attempt to help them see things from a different perspective will be interpreted as “not feeling heard.”

Once again, Matthew 18 puts us back on track with its careful checks and balances. The involvement of the body of Christ, first as one or two witnesses (v. 16), and then as the entire church (v. 17), prevents one person from acting as judge, jury, and executioner. Submitting to the Matthew 18 process requires each party to accept that they might not know, see, or understand everything perfectly.

“Love…does not insist on its own way” (1 Cor 13:4-5). And once we get that, we should have no problem with the fact that some people will hear us just perfectly—and still disagree with us.

I’m pretty sure Moses didn’t “feel heard” (at least in the modern sense) when he was dialoguing with God in Exodus 3-4. For every objection he offered for why he shouldn’t go to Egypt, the Lord had a powerful response. No doubt, the Lord did hear Moses—but that didn’t change the fact that Moses was still wrong.

I’m not suggesting for a moment that we shouldn’t be careful listeners (James 1:19). Often, it’s wise to help people know that we’ve really heard them before we respond. But it’s just as important to recognize that our emotions are an unreliable guide to reality, especially when we think we’ve been wronged and are feeling defensive. We need the humility to accept that “feeling heard” may not always be the same as actually being heard.

3. Sometimes, people don’t listen—but we’d better make sure

Sadly, there are cases where someone cannot truly be reasoned with. I’ve known some people like this. Through a deadly combination of insecurity and pride, it is literally impossible to help them see anything from any perspective other than their own. But—and here’s the important part—I didn’t come to this conclusion from a cool distance. I got there through many painful attempts at biblical, Matthew 18 conflict resolution.

Could we all agree that you shouldn’t accuse someone of “not listening” until you’ve actually talked to them and given them a chance to, you know, listen? And that this should probably be done multiple times before writing them off as “someone who doesn’t listen”?

Nevertheless, even when repeatedly approached in the most humble, gentle way, there will be people who still won’t listen. And there will be situations where Matthew 18:15-20 simply can’t be followed in a straightforward manner. For example, you might be dealing with someone outside of your local church. Or, perhaps the unreasonable person is a key leader in your church, and their abuse of power prevents a biblical charge from being brought forward even if it does come from two or three witnesses (1 Tim 5:19).

There may be even more extreme situations where spiritual abuse has reached a fever pitch and, for the sake of literal safety, someone needs to withdraw from a situation without any dialogue. (If you lived in North Korea, you wouldn’t have a sit-down with the government before trying to escape across the border, and sadly, North Korea is not an exaggerated metaphor for some dictatorial church environments.)

And yet, in all but the most extreme of these situations, it’s probably still the best plan of action to at least try to follow the Matthew 18 pattern as close as you can for as far as you can. We shouldn’t be in a rush to write someone off (1 Cor 13:7). We don’t want to assume the worst. We should long for restored relationship more than personal vindication.

4. A personal story

Shortly before I turned 20, I left a church I had been attending. It had its fair share of issues, many of them relating to the pastor and his family. I sought outside council, and was encouraged, on the basis of Matthew 18:15, to sit down with him to express my concerns.

I decided not to. Truthfully, I was intimidated by the prospect of such a conversation, but at the time I dressed it up in different language: “How could I follow Matthew 18 if the person I’m confronting is the pastor himself? It won’t work.” I didn’t think he’d listen, so I didn’t even try. Instead, I just left, and then—after I was gone—wrote a letter to the board detailing my criticisms.

My complaints were not all wrong. But they weren’t all right, either. By delivering a letter after my decision to leave was finalized, I closed myself off to the possibility of any push-back, questions, or even just clarification. I was happy to evaluate the church, but it had not occurred to me that my struggles with the church may have revealed areas in which I needed to be evaluated by them. Pride tends to blind you to those possiblities.

So I basically threw a grenade over my shoulder while walking out of the room. Because not all of my criticisms were wrong, they resonated. Two key leaders left the church shortly afterwards, with several others joining them. That church, small to begin with, was never the same.

It was a few years later when I came to realize that not all of my criticisms had been valid. Not only that, my entire approach had been wrong, driven more by cowardice than a commitment to Scripture. I did my best to follow up with the people involved and ask for forgiveness, but much damage had been done.

In the years since, I’ve had to have many Matthew 18:15 conversations. In every last one of them, I’ve come away learning something I didn’t know before. As I’ve led with questions instead of accusations, I’ve often realized how incorrect my initial perception of the situation actually was. I’ve had to say sorry more than once when I had previously assumed I was in the right.

I haven’t done this perfectly, and still have a lot to learn. I look forward to the journey, and am thankful for the patience of those who walk it with me.

May the Lord give each of us the humility to approach His word with faith and obedience, and each other with patient love, as we seek to walk “with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:2-3).

And then Elijah falls apart. A death threat from Queen Jezebel shows him that the war with Baal worship is far from over, and he crumbles. He starts running for his life and doesn’t stop until almost six weeks later when he finally arrives at Horeb.

When God asks him why he’s there, Elijah’s answer is revealing: “I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of hosts. For the people of Israel have forsaken your covenant, thrown down your altars, and killed your prophets with the sword, and I, even I only, am left, and they seek my life, to take it away” (1 Kings 19:10, 14).

Even though he should know better (18:13), Elijah has come to believe he’s the last prophet standing. And now that his initial bout of despair (19:4) has passed, self-preservation has become his main goal. If he dies, he thinks, so does all true religion in Israel. It all comes down to him. As I explained it to my kids the other night, Elijah seems to think he’s the main character in this story.

God’s response gently cuts him down to size. Elijah still has a job to do, a part of which includes appointing his own replacement (v. 16). Almost as a by-the-way, Elijah is informed that a full 7,000 Israelites will remain faithful to the Lord. Clearly, not everything rises or falls with Elijah. This story is a lot bigger than him.

The continuing narrative of 1 Kings itself reinforces this point. After the calling of Elisha, chapter 20 recounts a series of events involving Ahab’s wars with Syria. At least four unnamed prophets have a role in this account—but not Elijah. After briefly reappearing in chapter 21, Elijah once again fades into the background as yet another prophet speaks to Ahab in chapter 22. And then, after a final confrontation with a wicked king in 2 Kings 1, Elijah is taken off the scene. Elisha’s ministry then commences with a substantial string of miracles that outnumber anything recorded about Elijah.

The message in all of this is clear: Elijah was most certainly not the last man standing. God’s plans continued to unfold just fine whether Elijah was involved or not. God didn’t need Elijah’s help, and Elijah certainly wasn’t the main character of the story. God was.

Put another way, it was incorrect for me to write that this part of 1 Kings is “the section about Elijah.” These chapters are not about Elijah or any other human character. They’re about God, who graciously chooses to do much of His work through His often-weak servants.

There’s at least two lessons I’ve been reflecting on from all of this.

1. For Parents

First, for parents: please read the Bible to your kids. And by that I mean the real Bible in a reliable translation. We’ve used and appreciated several Bible storybooks and devotionals in our home, but there’s no replacement for the actual Bible when it comes to drawing out truths and principles like the ones we’ve been chewing on together here.

As a preacher, I get to spend hours each week studying the Bible, and yet some of my most profound moments with Scripture over the last few years have been while reading and explaining it to my children. Trying to help their little minds understand it has, time and time again, helped me understand it in a deeper or fresher way.

If you are going to use a devotional tool with your children—as a supplement to actual Bible reading— I’d encourage you to stay away from character-focused books like the Action Bible. The medium shapes the message, and when we try to re-tell the story of the Bible as if it was a comic book adventure, we inevitably end up warping the truth that God in Christ is the main character of the Bible, and that He typically does his best work through people who not super-heroically muscular but rather weak, ordinary and even unknown.

If the thought of opening the Bible with your kids seems intimidating, there’s a great little book by Jon Nielson called “Bible Reading With Your Kids” (church library link) that will be a big help as you get started.

2. For Everybody

Secondly, what’s this mean for all of us at the cusp of a new year? It means that, whatever stories 2023 will tell, none of them will be about us. You and I are merely supporting characters whose job is to bring attention to our Creator and Saviour.

God’s intention in 2023 is the same as it’s been for every other year of history: that in all things, Christ might be preeminent (Colossians 1:18). He is the main character of history, and of your story.

Life will not make sense as long as we think it’s supposed to be about us. The confusion begins to clear up when we realize that “from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen” (Romans 11:36).

So, amid the New Year’s hubbub about self-focused resolutions and self-improvement and self-care and self-whatever, don’t forget that 2023 is not about you. It’s about Jesus. It’s good to ask how this year could be different than the one before—but for Jesus’ sake, not just ours. Whatever our plans, intentions, hopes, or fears are as we think about the future, let’s enter this new year intent on making much of Christ, not ourselves.

As we turn the calendar over tomorrow, may the prayer at the bottom of our heart be “Not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to your name give glory, for the sake of your steadfast love and your faithfulness!” (Psalm 115:1).

My response, which may have surprised them, was that this sin is incompatible with being a Christian. Because sinning, period, is incompatible with being a Christian.

Here are three lines of Biblical evidence to support the conclusion that sin is incompatible with the Christian life, followed up by three questions this discussion may prompt.

1. The Accomplishment(s) of the Cross

The New Testament repeatedly tells us that Jesus died on the cross so that we would not sin.

This is not the first aspect of the atonement we tend to think about. If we did a game of word association, starting with “Jesus” and “died” and “sin,” the next word we’d often think of would be “forgive.”

Because Jesus died to forgive us for our sins.

And this is true, and infinitely precious. Jesus died to purchase our forgiveness—praise God! We desperately needed forgiveness when we first came to Christ, and we need forgiveness all throughout the Christian life. At our church, we confess our need for forgiveness every Sunday, and that’s because our pastoral prayers are modelled after “the disciple’s prayer” in Matthew 6:9-13. Jesus taught us to pray, regularly, for forgiveness—which means that we regularly need it.

Jesus died for your forgiveness! But that’s not all Jesus died for. He died for more than just forgiveness. Consider what the following passages say about the aim of Christ’s death:

“For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised” (2 Corinthians 5:14–15).

One of the aims of Christ’s death was His people living for Him instead of themselves.

1 Peter 1:18-19 reminds us that we were “ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot” (1 Peter 1:18–19).

We were not just ransomed from the penalty for sin. We were ransomed from sin’s ways themselves.

“He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness” (1 Peter 2:24). Dying to sin and living to righteousness was one of the goals of the death of Christ—just like Romans 6:6 tells us: “We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin” (Romans 6:6).

Titus 2:14 says that Jesus “gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works” (Titus 2:14). This is what Jesus died for.

And as John reminds us, “You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him… Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:5-6, 8-9).

Jesus died not just to take away sin’s penalty, but to take away our sins themselves, such that we might not do them anymore.

So yes, He died for our forgiveness and our justification, and praise God for that. But He also died to remove our sins and make us righteous. Therefore, since one of the outcomes of the death of Jesus is our triumph over sin, sinning is incompatible with being a Christian.

2. The Nature of Faith in Christ

The second reason why sin is incompatible with the Christian life has to do with the nature of faith. We can put it this way: that the faith that receives Jesus is a faith that refuses to make peace with sin. Or, the faith that saves is a faith that puts sin to death.

John shows us this dynamic when he writes,

“See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are… Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure” (1 John 3:1–2).

The faith that trusts and hopes in Christ is a faith that leads to purity. Romans 6:8-11 teases out this same dynamic: “Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Romans 6:8–11).

Notice how our belief in Christ flows right into our own relationship (or lack thereof) with sin.

One of the reasons for this dynamic has to do with the person of Jesus. Faith receives Jesus, and Jesus is not only our Saviour. He is also the Lord. We don’t get to pick and choose which parts of Jesus we believe in. Thus, faith will always result in to practical obedience to Jesus, because faith receives the whole Christ.

The Christ who said things like, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:18–20).

Even the book of Romans, which so repeatedly celebrates justification by the free grace of God, can describe our salvation in obedience-oriented language: “But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness” (Romans 6:17-18).

Christians are not justified by our obedience. But a Christian who has been justified will be obedient to the risen Lord Jesus. Therefore, sin is incompatible with the Christian life.

3. The New Birth and the Presence of the Spirit

The third line of evidence for why sinning is incompatible with the Christian life has to do with the way in which the Holy Spirit has caused us to be born again and continues to live within us. And this Spirit-wrought, Spirit-sustained new life is incompatible with sin.

“No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God” (1 John 3:9–10).

This was one of the great promises of the New Covenant: “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jeremiah 31:33).

It’s explained by Paul in this language: “If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you. So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God” (Romans 8:11–14).

The presence of the Spirit within us results in us putting our sin to death.

There’s much more than could be said, but these three lines of reasoning (the aim of the cross, the nature of faith in Christ, and the presence of the Spirit) help us to safely conclude, on the basis of the word of God, that sinning is incompatible with the Christian life.

Naturally, when things are put so starkly, some questions arise. Here’s three that may be going through some minds at this point:

“Are You Teaching Sinless Perfection?”

No, of course not. Jesus taught us to pray for forgiveness, which means, we’re going to need it. “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8).

The point is not that we will never sin. The point is that we will never make peace with sin. We will never stop fighting our sin.

Think of it this way: saying “sinning is incompatible with the Christian life” is kind of like saying that “weeds and pests are incompatible with a vegetable garden,” or, “cancer is incompatible with long life,” or, “the other team scoring points is incompatible with you winning the game.”

It’s not that a single weed in your garden means it’s all over, or that a single cancer cell means you’re dead, or that if the other team scores one point, you’re done.

It does mean that if you want a garden, you’ll deal with the weeds in short order. If you want to live, you’ll take action against the cancer. If you want to win the game, you won’t sit around and give the other team an empty net to score on.

Sin is the same way. Yes, Christians will still deal with sin in their lives. But they will deal with it. Yes, Christians will battle sin, but the point is they will battle. They’ll never sign a peace treaty with sin. They’ll keep up the offensive, putting it to death (Romans 8:13, Colossians 3:5). They will heed the warning in Hebrews to “take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called ‘today,’ that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end” (Hebrews 3:12–14).

So no, I’m not embracing sinless perfection or a Wesleyan view of “entire sanctification” this side of heaven. I am, on the basis of God’s word, rejecting the idea that our sin is ever something we can be okay with.

“Isn’t This Legalistic?”

This is a question that sometimes gets asked in these kinds of conversations. And it’s an interesting one, because we’re all afraid of legalism, right? Nobody wants to be called a legalist.

But, what is legalism? Can you find the word “legalism” in the Bible? Nope—it’s not there.

And isn’t it interesting how we use the word “legalism” to refer to fairly different attitudes or beliefs? Sometimes we use the word to describe the attempt to earn salvation by our good behaviour. Other times, “legalism” refers to man-made rules and regulations, like “Christians shouldn’t play cards or listen to rock music.” Or, we use “legalism” to describe those who, like the false teachers in the book of Galatians, think Christians need to still follow the law of Moses.

And of course, none of that has anything to do with what we’ve been talking about so far. All we’re doing here is considering what the Bible says about sin and the Christian life.

Sadly, in my experience, “legalism” can get used even in this context. Some people throw down the “legalism” card any time someone else starts taking the Bible a bit too seriously.

And that just makes no sense. Reading the Bible carefully and seeking to follow it diligently is not “legalism,” it’s just basic Christianity (Hebrews 4:12, 2 Timothy 3:16-17). So no, this conversation is not legalistic; it’s just about taking God at His word.

“What About Grace?”

The third question that might get asked is, “What about grace?”

My answer is, “this is grace.” Consider what Titus 2:11-14 tells us about grace: “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.”

That’s what grace does. It saves us and it trains us to renounce ungodliness, because Jesus died to purify us and make us zealous for good works.

What kind of a grace would save us from the penalty of sin, but allow us to keep indulging in passions and behaviours that destroy us and others? Forgiveness alone wouldn’t actually be all that gracious, would it be?

Now, we should recognize that it is grace which trains us to fight sin and live righteously. So we don’t pursue holiness in a panicked, uptight way. We’re not afraid that God is going to un-save us or cast us out of His family. We don’t pursue holiness because we’re trying to earn His love.

We fight sin because we already have way more of His love and grace than we’ll ever be able to fathom. And that love and grace will cause us to take our sin seriously and put it to death.

So take heart, and in the power of His grace, go to war against your sin. You can and must win, because that’s what Jesus died for.

And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

(Galatians 5:24)

We didn’t quite reach our goal. At the end of the series, we discovered a few Proverbs that should have fit within some earlier sermons, but got missed for some reason:

• “The blessing of the Lord makes rich, and he adds no sorrow with it” (Proverbs 10:22) points to the material nature of God’s blessings within the old covenant.
• “In the light of a king’s face there is life, and his favor is like the clouds that bring the spring rain” (Proverbs 16:15) is another comment on the basic approach to the king’s role that we unpacked a couple of weeks ago.
• “It is a snare to say rashly, ‘It is holy,’ and to reflect only after making vows” (Proverbs 20:25) is one more reminder to watch our words.
• “These also are proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied. It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out. As the heavens for height, and the earth for depth, so the heart of kings is unsearchable” (Proverbs 25:1–3). These Proverbs, also about the king, point to his role as a guide to wisdom.
• “Like a muddied spring or a polluted fountain is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked” (Proverbs 25:26) helps us understand the way in which righteousness and boldness should go together (à la Proverbs 28:1).
• “A rich man is wise in his own eyes, but a poor man who has understanding will find him out” (Proverbs 28:11) comments on the relative benefits of wisdom compared to riches.

In addition to these six proverbs which we missed, there was another group which didn’t find a home in our series. These are proverbs which address our emotions, and particularly the experience of a heavy or a sorrowful heart.

Some of these proverbs speak to the experience of sorrow in general. “Even in laughter the heart may ache, and the end of joy may be grief” (Proverbs 14:13). We all know what that’s like, don’t we? To pretend to laugh, but be aching on the inside?

“The heart knows its own bitterness, and no stranger shares its joy” (Proverbs 14:10). Only we know what’s really going on inside of us. Of course, this proverb also helps us see that this is true for everybody. We’re all carrying burdens others cannot see. “You are not the only one who feels like the only one,” as David Crowder put it.

Proverbs like these paint a realistic and unflinching portrait of our emotional experiences. This portrayal continues with a series of proverbs which comment on the way in which our emotional life affects our total person, including our bodies: “A glad heart makes a cheerful face, but by sorrow of heart the spirit is crushed” (Proverbs 15:13). “A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones” (Proverbs 17:22). “A man’s spirit will endure sickness, but a crushed spirit who can bear?” (Proverbs 18:14).

Anyone who has experienced depression or a season of sorrow can understand the truth of these words. And yet, we might wonder why they are recorded here. Particularly to someone who is experiencing sorrow or depression or a feeling of lowness, it might not feel exactly helpful to be reminded of how difficult that experience is. “All the days of the afflicted are evil, but the cheerful of heart has a continual feast” (Proverbs 15:15). Thanks, Solomon.

But maybe there’s more here. Maybe Proverbs, overall, is trying to help us see that the path of wisdom is the path of enduring joy.

Sometimes we glimpse this in the way the particular proverbs are arranged. For example, right after Proverbs 15:13 we read, “The heart of him who has understanding seeks knowledge, but the mouths of fools feed on folly” (Proverbs 15:14). Bruce Waltke comments that this second proverb “implicitly… traces the sources of the heart’s spiritual joy or trouble to whether it is discerning and seeks knowledge.”¹Bruce K. Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 1–15, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2004), 625.

In other words, a troubled heart may, at times, be simply another symptom of foolishness. Proverbs 14:30, which speaks of the folly of envy, points us in the same direction: “A tranquil heart gives life to the flesh, but envy makes the bones rot.” Recent studies have established an undeniable connection between depression, anxiety, and excessive social media use. How much of this Instagram-fuelled malaise is just the afterglow of envy? Are we crushing our own hearts as we covet each pixel-perfect “influencer” our thumbs swipe past?

We should chew on these questions. Still, we know that envy is not the only cause for sadness, and Proverbs does not intend to give us a complete manual on the human heart. But it does go on to give us a surprising amount of counsel on how to help others who, for whatever reasons, are struggling on the inside.

First of all, we’re told what not to do: “Whoever sings songs to a heavy heart is like one who takes off a garment on a cold day, and like vinegar on soda” (Proverbs 25:20). I think it’s clear, from the context, that not every song is in view here. This proverb is speaking about perky, happy tunes that would be out of place for someone who is suffering. In other words, if your friend is depressed, don’t send them Sandi Patti songs. That’s not going to help.

But that doesn’t mean there’s nothing you can do. Several different proverbs speak to the way in which good news and gracious words can help lift the downcast spirit:

• “Anxiety in a man’s heart weighs him down, but a good word makes him glad” (Proverbs 12:25).
• “A wicked messenger falls into trouble, but a faithful envoy brings healing” (Proverbs 13:17).
• “The light of the eyes rejoices the heart, and good news refreshes the bones” (Proverbs 15:30).
• “Gracious words are like a honeycomb, sweetness to the soul and health to the body” (Proverbs 16:24).
• “Like the cold of snow in the time of harvest is a faithful messenger to those who send him; he refreshes the soul of his masters” (Proverbs 25:13).
• “Like cold water to a thirsty soul, so is good news from a far country” (Proverbs 25:25). 

Good news has a powerful ability to encourage us when we’re low. And it’s hard to forget that, from our standpoint in the story of redemption, we have the privilege of knowing the best news of all. 

“Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us”.

Romans 5:1–5

The good news of Christ’s death and resurrection enables us to rejoice in our sufferings, even when that suffering is emotional. This does not mean that suffering stops being suffering. It is still suffering. But the gospel enables us to rejoice in it, because we know where it’s all headed.

“We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies” (2 Corinthians 4:8–10).

Even when God’s people suffer from unexplained and seemingly un-caused sorrow, we need not succumb to despair. The promise of the resurrection reassures us that the tomb-like darkness will ultimately be short-lived, because Jesus died and rose again to purchase for us eternal joy.

These are truths that we can carefully, prayerfully and sympathetically remind each other of when the nights are long and our souls are heavy.

One of the most beautiful illustrations of this that I’ve found comes from Joni Eareckson Tada in her short story about her friend Jackie:

At that moment, something changed. Someone had reached out and found me. Jackie had made Jesus, the Man of Sorrows, acquainted with my grief, seem to near; and that He understood. That night, I sealed that Jesus reaches where no medication can reach, where no doctor can go; where no surgery can heal. And thanks to my high school friend, Jackie, I found a new song to sing.

https://www.joniandfriends.org/my-friend-jackie/

I encourage you to read or listen to the whole thing, and may God empower us to put these truths into practice!

Given that this series involved a number of different preachers, we didn’t have it completely planned out from the beginning. At this point we do have a good idea of what to expect in the coming weeks, and I thought I’d share a snapshot of that with you:

Aug. 14 – Work and Laziness
Aug. 21 – The Power of Words (Josh Bondoc preaching)
Aug. 28 – Contentment & Self-Control
Sept. 4 – The Royal Proverbs (dealing with the king and our response to authority)
Sept. 11 – On Godly Husbands and Wives
Sept. 18 – “This Is Our God” (The series conclusion: what Proverbs tells us about God and our response to Him)

I look forward to continuing to learn with you in these coming weeks!

Let’s review a brief history of the Ephesian project. Timothy and Paul first visited Ephesus on Paul’s third missionary journey (Acts 19). In fact, that whole third journey was spent mostly in Ephesus. Paul’s time there was one of the longest stays he made anywhere. After three months’ ministry in the synagogue, he set up shop in a hall where he taught daily for two whole years (Acts 19:8–10).

So thorough was his teaching that Paul was later able to say to the elders of the church, “I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God… for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish every one with tears” (Acts 20:27, 31).

Ephesus was a major centre, and one of the largest cities in the ancient world. Through Paul’s ministry there, the entire Roman province of Asia was exposed to the gospel (Acts 19:10). Within Ephesus itself, so many people became Christians that the local idol-making industry started to crumble (Acts 19:23-27).

After all this, while Paul was in prison in Rome, he wrote a letter to the Ephesian Christians, which was preserved in Scripture as the book of Ephesians. In this time Ephesus received the ministry of Timothy (1 Timothy 1:3), a godly young man who got parts of the Bible sent to him in the mail as he was personally coached by the Apostle Paul.

And then, though it’s not in Scripture, there is evidence from church history that the Apostle John made Ephesus his headquarters for a number of years. According to two early writers, it was from Ephesus that the Gospel of John and the letters of 1-3 John were written.

Talk about a place that got the best of the best! Multiple godly pastors poured their life into the Ephesian Christians. If we could think of one church in the 1st century that should have been strong and healthy, the one in Ephesus should be it, right?

Maybe not. Ephesus does come up in the Bible one more time, and it’s in Revelation 2:

To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: “The words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks among the seven golden lampstands. I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and found them to be false. I know you are enduring patiently and bearing up for my name’s sake, and you have not grown weary. But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent. Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.”

Revelation 2:1–7

After so many years of faithful shepherding and godly leadership, Ephesus stood on the brink of judgement by the Lord Jesus. Perhaps 40 years after Timothy’s tenure, their very existence as a church was in question.

Did Timothy Fail?

So did Timothy fail? Was his time in Ephesus a waste?

My answer is no. And that’s because the letters of 1 & 2 Timothy were never about being successful, at least in the way we tend to think about success these days. 2 Timothy in particular gives an unflinching assessment of the kinds of hardship and opposition to be expected in church ministry. Not once is Timothy promised that if he just does a few things right, his church will grow and stay healthy long into the future.

There is a particular kind of success Timothy was to pursue, however, and that is the success of personal faithfulness. Timothy could not guarantee what would happen to his church, but he was responsible to make sure that he himself stayed faithful to the end.

“But as for you, O man of God, flee these things… You then, my child, be strengthened by the grace that is in Christ Jesus… You, however… But as for you… As for you...” (1 Timothy 6:11, 2 Timothy 2:1, 3:10, 3:14, 4:5). Timothy’s success lay in his own faithfulness. Anything past that was up to the sovereign God.

The Nature of True Success

In this context, consider 1 Timothy 4:6: “If you put these things before the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus.” Aren’t there some parts missing from that verse? Shouldn’t Paul have said, “If you put these things before the brothers, and if a lot of them listen to you, and if you build a big church, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus”? Nope. Timothy’s status as a “good servant” depended on his faithfulness as Jesus’ messenger, and nothing more.

Or what about 2 Timothy 4:2? “Preach the word.” Why? What’s verse 3 say? “For expository preaching is really hot these days, and if you’re a good preacher you can draw an audience and build an awesome platform for yourself.” Nope. Timothy needs to be a faithful preacher precisely because people are not going to be interested in listening to him (2 Timothy 3:3-4).

So were Paul and Timothy successful? Not by many modern standards. Their ministries were full of painful opposition, their popularity shrivelled by the year, and less than a generation after their careers ended, Jesus was threatening to turn the lights off in a church they had poured much of their lives into.

And yet, from God’s perspective, there could not be a higher example of success. While we don’t know for sure how Timothy finished, Paul was faithful to the end. He did not turn aside. He guarded the deposit that had been entrusted to them. He made it to the finish line, still running strong.

Three Take-Aways

In summary, here’s three major lessons we can see in all of this.

First, let’s remember that God may not have the same idea of “success” as we do. As we evaluate our lives and ministries, are we using His scorebook, or one that we copied from our godless culture?

Second, don’t forget that faithfulness is hard. Finishing well is tougher than any of us think when we start out. Here in North America we hear a lot of advice for how pastors can grow their ministries; perhaps we need to talk more about how to simply stay in ministry in the first place. (The same goes for the Christian life in general: “Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life” [Revelation 2:10].)

Finally, understand that churches which are healthy today have zero excuse to assume that they will remain healthy into the future—apart from constant vigilance. A church will stay healthy only as long as its people actively pursue health today. Resting on yesterday’s laurels won’t cut it.

By God’s grace, may we each hear the call to faithfulness echoing through the centuries into our own ears, and may we each pursue our Master’s “well done” as we seek to please Him with our lives, right up until they end.

…rather than asking how to be a better small group member, let’s start with why… Does God have a why for us to join a small group? He does as it turns out. The reason God gathers us together in Christian communities is not just so we get to know people or feel the warmth of being part of a group of like-minded people—it’s for a specific purpose.

Keep reading here:

Why be a small group member?

As small groups get started for another year I thought it might be useful to write something on “How to be a small group member”. But then I thought better of it.

www.thepaynefultruth.online

…and when you’re done, why not join a small group at EBC?

There are probably situations where such an approach is appropriate. Much of the time, however, “let go and let God” is not the instruction Scripture gives us. Instead, God’s word often tells us that because the Sovereign One is powerfully at work, we need to get in the game and play the role He has assigned to us. Our God-empowered efforts are frequently the God-ordained means to God’s ordained ends.

We’ve met this idea multiple times in 2 Timothy. Here’s five examples:

1) “Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began” (2 Timothy 1:8-9).

Look at how much God has done for His people! Saved us, called us to a holy calling, and offered us His very power. And so what should Timothy’s response to this be? To actively, purposefully, share in suffering. Yes—by His power. But Timothy had an amount of agency in the matter, which is why Paul is telling him to do this.

2) “Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you” (2 Timothy 1:13–14).

Timothy has a responsibility to “follow the pattern of sound words” and “guard the good deposit.” The power and enablement comes from the Holy Spirit, but once again, this does not let Timothy off the hook of his God-assigned responsibility. By the Spirit, he is to guard the deposit.

3) “You then, my child, be strengthened by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also” (2 Timothy 2:1–2).

Timothy’s responsibility is to entrust the gospel to others, as he is strengthen by Christ’s grace.

4) “But God’s firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: ‘The Lord knows those who are his,’ and, ‘Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity'” (2 Timothy 2:19).

The false teachers were “upsetting the faith of some,” as verse 18 described. So Paul encourages him with a reminder of God’s sovereign and unchangeable purposes: the Lord’s firm foundation stands, and He knows who are His. And what is Timothy supposed to do about this? “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” He’s supposed to run from sin (v. 22). God’s sovereign knowledge and Timothy’s God-empowered effort go hand-in-hand.

5) “And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will” (2 Timothy 2:24–26).

When it comes to those who had fallen under the false teachers’ sway, Timothy had a responsibility: to kindly, patiently teach and correct them. And through this action God might step in to rescue them from Satan’s snare.

Together, these passages help us understand that God’s power and His people’s efforts are not opposed to each other. Rather, our efforts—empowered by Him—are often the very things He uses to fulfill His sovereign plans. “What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth” (1 Corinthians 3:5–6, see also 15:10).

So hang on, and let God.

Commenting on this, I said,

Let me give one more example here, which might be closer to home. I know we all want Covid to be over. That’s not wrong. But do you think it’s possible for that desire to turn into a craving that starts demanding for things to happen our way on our timeline?

Or what about the attitude we see all over the place these days that says “Don’t tell me what to do, and the more you tell me to do something, the less I’m going to do it.” Do you think that might be an example of an immature, sinful, youthful passion?

I think so. And the big idea I’m pointing to here is that lust is a bigger problem than we think. If we’re going to grow in holiness, we need to pay attention not just to our actions but to our cravings and our desires. Because that’s where it all starts.

“Run for Your Lives” (Feb 6, 2022)

More than one person picked up on the subtle reference I was making here to the “Freedom Convoy” currently engulfing the city of Ottawa, and I thought I’d take a few moments to unpack what I was trying to say in a bit more detail.

Thinking Politically

First, some political comments. As citizens of a democracy, we get to play an active role in determining how we are governed. The main way we do this is by voting every four years (or so). If we don’t like what the government is doing, we get to pick a new one in the next election. Until then, it’s the government’s job, and not ours, to govern.

Now, when we think the government is doing something wrong, we have the right (and, some would argue, the responsibility) to let them know. I was born in Ottawa, and some of my earliest memories involve taking part in pro-life protests on Parliament Hill. To this day I maintain that there is a time and a place for Christian citizens to engage in principled protest.

However, essentially telling the government “we will stay here and make your lives miserable until our demands our met” goes way beyond mere protest. Democracy is built on the principle that one group of people is not allowed to unilaterally impose their will on everybody else without consent. I’m sure that the convoy supporters think that the Ottawa elites are doing exactly this. Even if that is the case, the correct response is not to turn around and do the same thing ourselves. We don’t get to replace one kind of tyranny with another.

What I’m (briefly) arguing here is that, from a political standpoint, Canadian citizens are allowed to protest. But we don’t get to storm into the capital city and demand that things start happening our way or else. That’s not how this thing called “democracy” works.

Politics aside, how should Christians respond, in a biblical way, to the convoy and the grievances which provoked it?

The basic point I want to make here is that while Christians can certainly disagree with the government’s vaccine mandates, how we do so really matters. 2 Timothy 2:24 (which we’ll be studying this upcoming Sunday) says that the Lord’s servant must be “kind to everyone.” Everyone. That includes Justin Trudeau and the citizens of Ottawa.

Consider also what that verse goes on to say about “patiently enduring evil.” Or think about Titus 3:1-2, which instructs God’s people to “speak evil of no one” and “to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy to all people.” What do these words say about all of “F*** Trudeau” signs or the conditions which the people of downtown Ottawa have been subjected to since the convoy rolled into town?

Once again, I’m not denying that Christians can be opposed to the vaccine mandates and express that opposition in appropriate ways. I’m not denying that we can have understanding and compassion for the truckers and the frustration they feel. At the same time, I am suggesting that Christians should very carefully weigh their support for a movement which is so widely characterized by behaviours which are contrary to how God has told His people to act.

There’s so much more that could be said here, but to return to the big idea of Sunday’s passage, we need to watch our hearts in all of this. A desire for a good thing can turn into a bad thing really quickly when those desires run amok from God’s Spirit working through His word.

We all want this to be over. But what we do with that “want” is really important—now and into the future. May God help us navigate this season with all of the wisdom we so desperately need.

The Elders’ Position on Praying for the Sick

We understand that, as men (1 Tim 2:8) and spiritual leaders (Acts 6:4), we have a unique responsibility to pray for our church. We desire to pray for all people in our church, in all of the kinds of situations they may be facing. Prayer should be a significant part of what we do as elders.

Following the example of Paul (Eph 1:15-21, Phil 1:3-11, Col 1:9-12, etc.), we understand that the primary focus of our praying should be for their spiritual well-being of our church. However, we also understand that physical well-being is important. In addition to the healing miracles of Jesus and the Apostles, we see that a concern for physical health is expressed throughout the New Testament (1 Tim 5:23, 3 John 2).

When we pray for the sick, we understand that it is not God’s will for all to be healed on this side of Heaven (Rom 8:17-25, 2 Cor 12:7-10, 1 Tim 5:23, 2 Tim 4:20). We cannot demand nor expect that God will heal anybody. What we can pray for, with confidence, is the spiritual well-being of those who are sick: that in the midst of their suffering, the Lord will strengthen their faith, draw them to Himself, magnify His name, and so on. 

At the same time, we understand that Scripture nowhere tells us that God has permanently ceased healing people. We therefore believe that, if and when He chooses, God can and does bring glory to Himself by healing His people in supernatural ways. And so, in the spirit of “not what I will, but what you will” (Mark 14:26), we will ask God to heal those who are sick.

James 5:14-15 describes one who is “sick” calling the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil, with a promise that “the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up.” We understand that the meaning of this passage is not immediately obvious. The Greek word for “sick” can refer to (spiritual) weakness, and some interpreters believe that the details of this passage best describe a believer who is spiritually weak and giving into sin (especially v. 16).¹See Gary Millar, Calling on the Name of the Lord (New Studies in Biblical Theology) (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press), pp. 219-224. Others maintain that physical sickness is the best context within which to understand this passage.²See Ralph P. Martin, James, vol. 48, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1988), p. 206.

Even if this passage is describing a prayer for healing from physical sickness, this specific practice of calling the elders and being anointed with oil is nowhere else described (let alone prescribed) in in any other New Testament passage which speaks of sickness (1 Tim 5:23, 2 Tim 4:20) or healing (Acts 9:34, etc.). This suggests that we should not view James’ instructions as mandatory. James is not mandating the practice of anointing with oil, but suggesting one possible course of action.³“Elders who pray for the sick may [anoint with oil], and James clearly recommends the practice; but they do not have to do so.” (Douglas J. Moo, James: An Introduction and Commentary, ed. Eckhard J. Schnabel, Second edition, vol. 16, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries [Nottingham, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 2015], p. 226.)

A final observation is that James’ instructions seem to be referring to more extreme cases of either physical sickness or spiritual weakness. If we understand “sick” to refer to physical sickness, this person is unwell enough to be unable to leave their home; if they are spiritually weak, they appear to have reached a particularly low point.

Anointing with oil those who are particularly sick (or spiritually weak) is thus a permissible but not a necessary practice. As elders, we are happy to follow this practice if requested, but do not feel the compulsion to do so every time we pray for the sick (or the spiritually weak).

Finally, we wish to recognize the way in which the Lord uses “normal” medicine in the lives of His people (1 Tim 5:23). Within a robust doctrine of vocation, we understand that doctors and medical professionals can be seen as agents of God’s healing. When someone is helped through “normal” medical intervention, this is not a second-best to divine healing, but is rather the particular means which God chose to restore that person to physical health, and He should receive all of the glory for it.

But on a bigger scale this verse reminds us of the continuity of faith between what we might call “Old Testament” Judaism and “New Testament” Christianity. It reminds us that our faith in Jesus is not a brand-new thing but is rather a continuation of what God had been doing with Israel for centuries.

After all, the “sincere faith” that first dwelt in Lois and Eunice was, most likely, a faith in God which they had before they knew about Jesus. It was a faith like what we read about in Hebrews 11—a faith which believed God’s promises without fully knowing what those promises were going to look like when they were fulfilled.

Just think of Timothy as a child, being taught the Scripture like every other Jewish boy at the time (2 Timothy 3:15). Through those Scriptures, he was being taught to look for the Messiah, and as an adult he came to see that those sacred writings had been talking about Jesus all along. This means that when Timothy learned about Jesus and became a Christian, he didn’t become a follower of a totally new religion. Rather, he simply came to understand that Jesus was the fulfillment of the story of Israel, the one to whom the Scriptures had been pointing, and the answer to the promises they had been holding on to all along.

Paul points to this same experience in 2 Timothy 1:3: “I thank God whom I serve, as did my ancestors, with a clear conscience.” Paul served God, just like his Jewish ancestors did. They served God in the era of promise, and He served God in the era of fulfillment, and his faith in Jesus was simply the natural continuation of what had come before him.

This all reminds us that after Jesus was crucified and resurrected, God did not press pause on His plan for Israel and spin up a whole new project called “The Church.” Instead, what God is doing in this era of history is simply a fulfillment of everything He had already promised to do. (Remember, even the word “church” itself is an Old Testament word, being used in the Greek Old Testament to refer to the assembly or congregation of Israel. To a 1st century Jew, “church” was just a standard Bible word for the gathered people of God.)

For Paul and Timothy and Lois and Eunice, following Jesus was simply the continuation of the faith that they had been a part of all along. And if you’re a Gentile like me, it’s important to be humbled by the reminder that we’ve been grafted in to the ancient tree of God’s promises to Abraham (Romans 11:13-24). The Bible is one big story that fits together beautifully, we are a part of something old and wonderful, and our walk with God will be enriched the more we remember this.

We often think of prophecy as relating to what is yet future or to what is now beginning to happen in the world. And we easily forget that what is past for us was future for the prophets.

What we need to remember is that with the coming of Jesus Christ into the world, the days of fulfillment, proclaimed by all the prophets, began. And ever since the first Christmas we have been living in those days. The “last days” foretold by the prophets are not the twenty-first century. The last days began in AD 1….

All the prophets looked forward to the day when the Messiah, the Son of David, the King of Israel, would come, for that would be a day of great blessing for God’s people. And now he has come, his kingdom has been inaugurated, and we live in an age of fulfillment.

What we anticipate in the future at Christ’s second coming is not something completely new but rather the consummation of the blessings we already enjoy, because the promises have begun to be fulfilled in our lives.

Christmas cut history into two ages: the age of promise and the age of fulfillment….

This is where we live. The already of fulfillment is massive—incarnation, crucifixion, atonement, propitiation, resurrection, ascension, heavenly reign, intercession, outpouring of the Holy Spirit, global missions, ingathering of the nations, church, New Testament Scriptures, prayer in Jesus’s name, joy unspeakable, and purchased certainty.

But the not yet is real and wonderful and waiting for its time: the second coming, the resurrection of the dead, new and glorious bodies, the end of sinning, glorification, judgment on all unbelief, rewards, entrance into the Master’s joy, new heavens and new earth, Jesus present among his people face- to-face, no more misery, pleasures forevermore.

Christmas split history. Foretastes of the future abound. Drink deeply on what he achieved for us. And be filled with hope for all that is coming.

From John Piper, “The Dawning of Indestructible Joy” (Crossway Books, 2014), pp. 45-47.

You can download a copy of the whole book for free at desiringgod.org/books/the-dawning-of-indestructible-joy.

Please also know that I’m still unsure about clicking “publish” on this one. I’m a pastor, not a medical professional, and I know that I need to stay in my lane. But I’ve also come to realize that, at least in some places, the line between theology and medicine is blurry these days. Some think that their Christian convictions give them a “religious exemption” to any vaccine requirement. Others believe that Christ’s command to love our neighbour means that all Christians must be vaccinated.

Theology—good or bad—is being used to inform medical decisions. So perhaps a word or two from a pastor is not entirely out of order.

What I share here is primarily for the vaccine-hesitant. Yes, they’re still out there, in some numbers, especially in smaller centres like the one I minister in. And no, they do not all wear tinfoil hats. They don’t all believe that Bill Gates is using the WHO to inject microchips into everybody. They’re not all selfish “morons” (a favourite moniker used by some pro-vaccine friends of mine on Facebook) who smugly care more about their own personal right to say “no” than the lives of others.

I know this because I was one of these people up until recently. I didn’t get my first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine until the end of September. I’ve only been “fully vaccinated” for a few weeks now.

Why I Waited

So why did I wait that long? The single biggest reason, personally, was my sense of medical safety. The mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna) are new technology, and we simply have no idea what long-term negative effects, if any, they’ll have.

This is a bare fact. While it’s remarkable how these vaccines were  produced in such a short period of time, nobody—nobody—knows what long-term effects they might have, because they haven’t been around long-term.

I chuckle whenever I read that these vaccines have “no long-term side-effects.” The first human trials began less than two years ago, which is not a long time as far as medical research goes. We literally have zero data regarding the potential side-effects these vaccines might have on people’s bodies over the course of many years.

Medical history has had many “oopsie!” moments where something which seemed totally safe ended up having major negative effects through a mechanism that we simply didn’t understand at the time. So while some folks seem to believe that the mRNA vaccines are too simple and too elegant to possibly cause any long-term harm, I can’t help but view this as naive. Just because we currently can’t imagine how they might cause problems doesn’t mean that they can’t—or won’t.

And the fact is that some people have had short-term side effects (myocarditis, menstrual changes) for which we have no explanation. We don’t understand everything about these vaccines and their effect on people’s bodies.

Given that my odds of surviving COVID-19 were so high, assuming I even got it in the first place, for many months I was willing to wait things out rather than essentially join a clinical trial for a new technology. In my own specific case, I’ve had some additional reasons for being cautious: I have a weird immune system with a long list of allergies and intolerances, and I’ve gotten quite sick after some vaccines in the past. All of this has caused me to be extra-careful.

So, to those of you reading this who are hesitant about getting the vaccine for the reasons I’ve described, I get it. From my perspective, those hesitations are legitimate. And I don’t think it should be so hard for the pro-vaccine folks to admit the same. 

So why did I finally get the vaccine? There were three main building blocks in my reasoning, which went like this:

1. I’m No Medical Expert

I did a lot of medical research in this process. I spent a good chunk of time trying to dig past the sound-bytes, news clips, and memes (on both sides of the spectrum). I’ve already shared my suspicion of statements like “there are no long-term negative effects from these vaccines,” but I also did my best to apply these suspicions to those making the opposing claims.

If a “prominent medical doctor” came out against the vaccines, I looked them up. What was their track record? Their legitimate areas of expertise? If a “peer-reviewed” journal article claimed that the vaccine was worse than the virus itself, I looked up the authors, the journal publishers, and the “peers” who did the reviewing. (Along the way I found out just how easy it is to pose as a medical expert these days.) I tried my best to listen to the best arguments from all sides of the discussion.

I’m not telling you this to encourage you to trust my conclusions, but rather to do your own homework. Don’t just trust whatever you’re told on the news, but don’t just trust whatever you’re told by that guy on BitChute.

But as we do our homework, it doesn’t take long to realize that we’re not experts, right? My mom was a registered nurse, and I did pretty well in high school science, but I simply haven’t done the years of training required to stay abreast of the very complicated fields of virology, epidemiology, molecular biology, and immunology.

And so how do we decide which experts to listen to? How do we confidently say “I am going to disregard the opinions of this large group of highly-trained medical professionals who know way more than I do?” We simply don’t know everything there is to know. The experts don’t know everything, because COVID-19, let alone the vaccines, is still a relatively new phenomenon.

My limited knowledge couldn’t give me 100% certainly that the vaccine was 100% safe. But it also couldn’t give me 100% certainty that not getting the vaccine was 100% safe. And this leads me to the second building block in my process.

2. Either Decision is An Act of Faith

While there may be long-term effects from some of the COVID-19 vaccines which we don’t yet know about, there are longer-term effects from the SARS-COV-2 virus which we do know about, and perhaps longer-lasting effects we haven’t yet discovered.

Some people have gotten weird reactions from the vaccine. Some people have suffered greatly from the virus, and continue to suffer in debilitating ways to this day.

The spike protein in the vaccine might cause some problems in some people’s bodies. The spike proteins on the SARS-COV-2 virus itself have also caused a lot of problems in a lot of people’s bodies.

And so I came to the conclusion that there was not one, single, medically “safe” decision to make here. The vaccine may cause me problems. The virus might cause me problems, one of which could be death. And the solution to this uncertainly is not to live in fear of either option, but to recognize that, either way, I am trusting the Lord with my body and my health.

I realized that if I decided not to get the vaccine, I would be making a decision to trust God with my body and my health. I would be trusting Him with whether or not I even got COVID-19, and with what would happen to me if I did.

Conversely, if I got the vaccine, I would be trusting God with my body and with my health. I would be trusting His sovereign hand with whatever effects, if any, I might receive from the vaccine.

Neither decision was 100% “safe,” humanly speaking. Neither decision was without risks. Either decision was an act of faith in the Lord.

3. Love, Not Survival, Is the Goal of Our Life

So if being either vaccinated or remaining unvaccinated was an act of faith, then what motivated me to choose one route over the other? The answer to that question is best summed up by an older friend of mine. She was a nurse for decades, and in her retirement has taken on quite an active role ministering to other seniors in the building where she lives. She’s been skeptical of the official messaging surrounding COVID-19 from the beginning, and was very hesitant with the vaccines, but she was going to need (or at least be requested) to get one in order to keep up her ministry.

So she got the shot. And, in her own words, “If I perish, I perish.”

Except those aren’t actually her own words. That’s a quote from Esther 4:16, where Esther agreed to help her people even though it might cost her life. “Then I will go to the king, though it is against the law, and if I perish, I perish.”

Esther’s words point to a prominent biblical theme: love, not survival, is the goal of the Christian life. “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:12–13). “Laying down your life” isn’t just a nice metaphor here. Jesus spoke these words hours before he was nailed to a tree for us.

In my own case, it was back in September that I realized that my decision to not be vaccinated was all about me: my freedoms, my health, my body. I was thinking about me, and not about which decision would bring the most benefit to the most people around me.

Back when COVID-19 first emerged, many Christians spoke about pandemics of the past, like the Spanish Flu, and how God’s people have always been known to set their fears aside and step into harm’s way in order to serve and love those around them. At this point, ironically, making such a decision myself meant receiving the vaccine.

Now this was the case for me, as a pastor. My job involves being around a lot of people, many of them older. I want to do what I can to minimize the risk of making them sick, if such a risk exists. My job requires me to interact with folks who are hesitant to spend time with the unvaccinated. I need to care for those people, whether or not I agree with their hesitancies. My job requires me to be available, in person and in public. It’s important for me to be able to preach on Sunday, in person, rather than isolating at home because I was a “close contact” to a COVID case.

And so I chose to receive a COVID-19 vaccine as an act of faith, knowing that I might be putting myself in harm’s way, but also knowing that by doing so I would be able, within my particular context, to serve and love God’s people as freely as possible—which is not just my day job, but is central to the goal and purpose of my life as a follower of Christ.

Two Hesitations and an Encouragement

I have (at least!) two hesitations as I close off this article. First, there’s a lot I haven’t dealt with. I haven’t addressed a number of the reasons, good and bad, for either getting or not getting a COVID-19 vaccine. By not speaking to these reasons, I’m not saying they don’t exist or that they don’t matter. I simply wanted to outline what were the biggest factors in moving the needle for my own personal decision.

Second, writing as a pastor to my congregation, I really don’t want to be heavy-handed here. I’m not giving anybody medical advice here; that’s not my lane. For those of you who have not been vaccinated, I’m certainly not telling you that you must do so. Your situation may be different than mine; your job and relationships may look different than mine; and you may have additional legitimate reasons for or against the vaccine that I haven’t taken into consideration here.

But I’m going ahead and sharing this article anyways because I do want to encourage us all, vaccinated or not, to make sure that our thinking lines up with God’s word and not the latest trend on our Facebook feeds. I do want to encourage us to make decisions based on faith in God and love for others, not fear for our own survival.

And I want to end with a reminder to respect those who have made different decisions than us. Whether you agree or disagree with anything I’ve written here, let’s remember that a COVID-19 vaccine is small potatoes compared to what God’s people have in common. We share the same Father, the same Saviour, and the same indwelling Holy Spirit. May we never forget that our unity is found in the gospel and not which vaccine “camp” we find ourselves in.

Have you heard that phrase before?

I have, often enough, and typically from someone who was in the middle of a situation in which the following were both true: 1) the situation was directly addressed by the Bible, and 2) following the Bible’s instruction would prove to be difficult and/or costly to them.

I think of parents whose adult children had embraced openly sinful lifestyles while still claiming allegiance to Jesus, spouses who were looking for a way out of their difficult marriages, or even a choir director who wanted to make copies of the rehearsal CDs instead of paying hundreds of dollars to acquire them legally.

In these kinds of situations, God’s instruction in Scripture is not in question; our resolve to obey Him, no matter the cost, certainly is.

And so we pull out one of our great Evangelical magic tricks. “Oh, but you see, even though the Bible makes this certain statement very clearly, we aren’t supposed to be legalistic, you know. We need to follow the spirit of the law, not the letter.” And— poof!—the difficult text undergoes a stunning transformation. The need for hard obedience vanishes into thin air, and we’re left to fill in the blank with whatever we think the “spirit of the law” actually is. Which, most of the time, seems to look like “whatever is most convenient to me.”

This sleight of hand is deceptively effective because it sounds biblical at first blush. Doesn’t the Bible itself tell us to follow the spirit, not the letter? Isn’t that what we find in 2 Corinthians 3:6, which says “…not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”?

This is yet another place where context is so important. When we read the whole passage, we can see that 2 Corinthians 3 is not taking about anything remotely similar to how that phrase is commonly understood. Starting in verse 5, here’s what the whole passage actually says:

Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God, who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.”

2 Corinthians 3:5–11, ESV

In this passage, “the letter” refers to the Old Covenant, the law of Moses—”the ministry of death, carved letters on stone” (v. 7). That “letter” brought death because that’s what the law did—it condemned us (v. 9).

On the other hand, “the Spirit” (note the capital “S”) refers to the “new covenant” (see verse 6), the Holy Spirit-empowered, life-giving, righteousness-bringing, freedom-giving good news of the gospel (cf. 4:3-6).

So “letter” = Old Covenant. “Spirit” = New Covenant.

And the irony here is that the life-giving Spirit described by 2 Corinthians is Himself the one responsible for the specific words of Scripture. “For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21). See also 1 Corinthians 2:11, where Paul attributes his very words to the teaching of the Holy Spirit, or 2 Timothy 1:13-14, where he makes another close connection between the specific words of his teaching and the power of the Holy Spirit.

All of this shows us that “the spirit” and “the letter” are not two competing ways of reading the Bible—as if “the letter” is the words of Scripture, and “the spirit” is some deeper or softer meaning that is somehow different from what it actually says. Not only is such a view extra-biblical, not being taught by 2 Corinthians 3 or any other passage for that matter, but it’s actually unbiblical: it directly contradicts what the Bible tells us about the way its specific words were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

And so when God, in His word, directs us to obey Him in a difficult manner, let’s give up the search for spiritual-sounding loopholes. In the end, those are just avenues for disobedience. If Jesus is Lord, we who have counted the cost and taken up our crosses will follow His word, regardless of how difficult it is.

At this point in the story, God hasn’t promised us military victory over human enemies in a certain piece of land. But he has promised us forgiveness of sins and a righteous standing in Christ. He’s promised us His presence as we go to make disciples of all nations. He’s promised us all the things that a chapter like Romans 8 describes—that all things work together for good for God’s people, and that He’ll provide for us everything we truly need. He’s promised us our own resurrection and the restoration of all things.

Do you believe those promises? Do you believe that not one of God’s words to you will fail or fall to the ground?

Do you believe that one day, all of us who have trusted in Christ will stand together on a new earth, in new bodies, being more like Jesus than we ever dreamed possible? And maybe you and I will bump into each other and you’ll say, “Hey Chris, come look at what Jesus has given me to do here.” And we’ll go for a walk and spend a few hours, or maybe a few decades, talking about it together. And maybe you’ll write it all down and it will take more chapters to spell out all of the detail than these nine chapters today in Joshua.

And you might say “that sounds like fantasy.” And I would say, that is no more fantasy, that is no more a stretch, than God saying to an old man with no children, “To your offspring I will give this land” (Genesis 12:7). The book of Joshua would have seemed like fantasy to Abram and Sarai. It probably would have seemed like fantasy to Joshua at certain points in his life. But it happened. Not one of God’s promises fell to the ground and neither will His promises to us.

As we consider the certainly of God’s promises to us today, I doubt that most Christians think enough about what God has told us about Heaven and the New Creation. Perhaps it all just seems a bit too far-fetched to get very excited about.

My great-grandfather didn’t think that way. A man of deep faith, he believed what the Bible said about our eternity, putting regular thought into what Heaven would be like and what he would do when he got there. One of his greatest legacies was the following meditation, written in 1893, titled “A Glimpse Into the Future of God’s Children.” I’ll never forget reading this for the first time, and with the permission of my aunt, who translated this from the original Dutch, I’m happy to share it with you today.

He certainly uses his imagination here, just as I did in my comments above from Sunday. I’d argue that using our imagination in this way is probably one of the main reasons why God gave us an imagination. If Heaven is real, why wouldn’t we use our minds, within the bounds of what God has revealed to us, to stir up our hearts in this way?

I trust that this almost 130 year old writing will stir your heart and help you “set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:13).

A Glimpse Into the Future of God’s Children

May I, unworthy as I am, encourage the hope of one day entering the Father’s house, where there are many dwelling places, in the spotless robes of Christ’s righteousness, in the garb of glory, and there forgetting the fears of my soul?

May I nurture the expectation of entering that joyful rest, for which my battle-weary soul so desperately longs?

Shall an angel close my eyes in death and guide my soul to Him, who loved sinners and died to free them from sin?

Shall a palm-branch of peace fan me with a cool breeze that dispels the searing heat of striving; and shall a crown adorn this bowed head, that was bent here under trial upon trial?

Lord, You know it—You alone!

Yet, let me in these quiet hours dream that it shall be so — let me for a few moments contemplate this wonderful expectation—and these thoughts will revive me and grant my heavy heart new courage.

How good it will be when suddenly the bands of sin are broken, when the burden of trouble falls away, when the sufferings of the body are ended, when the light-beams of the eternal morning shine their friendly light on our souls, never more to be hidden behind the clouds.

Then comes our rest; then comes the love of God in its full measure; then comes union with Jesus—noble, pure, holy and complete.

But only then—when the body has been resurrected—is the glory made perfect. Then the gates of Heaven open to the countless multitudes whose tears God has counted, and surrounded by angels, the citizens of Heaven take occupancy of their unsurpassable kingdom. The Lord is in the midst of them. His friendly eyes recognize each one; his gentle voice gladdens every heart; His hands of blessing are extended over all. No one is forgotten.

The children, who greet Heaven with jubilation, exult in the love of the Great Children’s Friend; the elderly, with youthful strength, sing His praises; the martyrs recount the glory of their Lord; the preachers of the Word delight in the fruits of their labours; the merciful receive a full measure of mercy; and the earth has become the inheritance of the meek. All tears are wiped away and sorrow has fled.

Wonderful fellowship! The Almighty Himself is their eternal Light; the Lamb is their Shepherd; and the Water of Life quickens them always.

Shall I be there? Shall I see Jesus? Shall I attend the feast in the company of rejoicing angels? Shall I come face to face with this great company of heroes, martyrs, and the faithful of the land, the Patriarchs, Prophets and Apostles—and delight in their company?

O, how uplifting is this latter thought! I’ll meet Paul, and ask him—o, so many things, that were unclear to me here; I’ll surely shake hands with Peter, and hear from his own lips how he loves his Lord—Who didn’t reject the Apostle in spite of his denial; I’ll see Thomas—the Thomas in whose negative side of character I sometimes recognize myself. I will see the tender, loving, sombre disciple walk the streets of Heaven with not an iota of doubt or depression.

And there I’ll see Augustine, whose Confessions were a balm to me; and Luther, united in brotherhood with Calvin; and William of Orange, who is still after three centuries, the beloved monarch; and Bunyan, the Pilgrim on his way to Zion; and Spurgeon, the watchful labourer in the Lord’s vineyard.

And the Waldensians, whose bleached bones covered the Piedmont valleys, will also be there; and the Huguenots who fell under the murdering steel of fanatical bigots; and the many thousands whose flesh was consumed by the flames of Karel’s burning pyres; and those who were beheaded by the wrath of the Duke of Alva.

Tell me, can you imagine a more shining assembly than this? The lordly Abraham with his son Isaac, forever united; Jacob and Joseph, who will never again be separated; David, the Sweet Singer of Israel, with his bosom friend, Jonathan; Jonah, who certainly won’t want to flee from this place!; the Baptizer in the wilderness, whose exhortations will be replaced by hymns of praise—they will all be there, with the holy ones of the New Covenant.

And the King of Sweden, who gave his life striving for Jesus in Lutzen, will there meet the kings of Israel who also served God in righteousness. And poor Lazarus will there wear a crown, just like the magnificent Solomon—for there no one will rank lower than those who were once kings.

There Job will never curse the day he was born; and Jeremiah will find no cause to lament. The Exile of Patmos will be in his Fatherland. No more fearful visions of woe will be revealed to him.

Heavenly music will sound from golden harp-strings, and songs, transcending the finest music earthly skill ever produced, will fill the courts of Heaven with praise to the Almighty Creator, the Loving Deliverer, and the Holy Comforter.

And there will be beauty that the eye may drink in without being tempted to sin; and there will be joy that never turns to foolishness; and there will be no more Fear, or Doubt, or Suspicion, but eternal love will surround and keep all. Each breath will bring JOY, each glance will see glory, and each sound will be melodious.

Is it any wonder that Moses, “looking to the reward”, rejected Egypt’s treasures and pressed on toward that wonderful inheritance?

Written by Eduard Marinus van der Maas in 1893. Translated by his granddaughter Margaret van der Maas – Osborne.

Last Sunday, we looked at Joshua 2 and how Rahab lied to the soldiers of Jericho about hiding the Israelite spies to protect them: “‘True, the men came to me, but I did not know where they were from. And when the gate was about to be closed at dark, the men went out. I do not know where the men went. Pursue them quickly, for you will overtake them.’ But she had brought them up to the roof and hid them with the stalks of flax that she had laid in order on the roof” (Joshua 2:4-6).

Many well-meaning Christians have landed on different sides regarding this passage, so what I’m about to propose here is more of a suggestion for you to consider as opposed to a “Thus saith the Lord” statement. While I will try to argue as biblically as I can (since this topic requires some logical insight), I hope that we can shake hands and recognize God’s Word as the absolute authority of our life and convictions—whether we agree or disagree at the end of this blog!

First, let’s talk about what we should agree on: God is truth (John 14:6; 1 John 5:20), so He cannot lie (Numbers 23:19; Hebrews 6:18). Therefore, God desires His people to be truthful like him (Ephesians 4:25; 1 Timothy 3:15; Revelation 21:27). On the other hand, lying for selfish gain and unjust outcomes are clearly and explicitly condemned as sin throughout Scripture (Leviticus 19:11; Proverbs 12:22). Now, the question remains: Is it ever morally permissible for God’s people to tell a lie? Or are we required to tell the truth in every circumstance—no matter the cost?

In light of Joshua 2, let’s rephrase the question: Was Rahab’s lie justified by pointing the soldiers the other way to protect the spies? Or should Rahab have told the truth and trusted God to deliver the spies himself? Let’s examine Joshua 2 and other passages throughout Scripture to help answer this.

Righteous People Lying to Wicked People…

In Joshua 2, notice that Rahab lied to the soldiers (2:4-6) of wicked Jericho (2:1) who sought to kill the Israelite spies (2:7), in order to protect them. Because of this, Rahab is rewarded for her faith in God: “By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given a friendly welcome to the spies” (Hebrews 11:31). While some Christians argue that Rahab was commended for her faith as opposed to her lie, one cannot deny the fact that Rahab’s “works” were an act of betrayal against the king of Jericho and, in turn, a pledge of allegiance to the King of Israel—which included her lie to protect the Israelite spies. In a sense, we could summarize this by saying that Rahab lied to the wicked soldiers—in good faith.

Another example of this is found in the God-fearing Hebrew midwives in Exodus 1 who disobeyed Pharaoh’s command to kill all male newborns. When asked about why they disobeyed, they lied to wicked Pharaoh by saying that “Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women, for they are vigorous and give birth before the midwife comes to them” (Exodus 1:19). If these God-fearing midwives sinned by lying to the wicked Pharaoh, then it would be a really good opportunity to hear about God’s disapproval of them immediately. Instead, we find out that “God dealt well with the midwives. And the people multiplied and grew very strong. And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families” (Exodus 1:20-21).

In both of these situations, the main detail we need to notice here is that righteous people lied to wicked people with wicked desires—and God rewarded them for their actions. This begs the question: why?

…for God’s Greater Good.

We hear about this principle of God’s greater good when Jesus criticizes the religious leaders in his day: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others” (Matthew 23:23). When the Pharisees sought to accuse him for healing on the Sabbath, Jesus—who was fully aware of what the law says about the Sabbath (Deuteronomy 5:12-14)—said to them: “Which one of you who has a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath’” (Matthew 12:10-12). In short, we see that Jesus deems the law’s intent to be weightier than its specific prohibitions, and thus doing good on the Sabbath is more valuable than a strict obedience to the command to refrain from activity.

Perhaps the strongest evidence of this principle being applied is seen in Jesus’ confrontation of the Pharisees regarding the temple bread: “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? I tell you, something greater than the temple is here” (Matthew 12:3-6). While David clearly violated the Law (Leviticus 24:5-9), nowhere is he condemned for it in the Scriptures—not even by Jesus Himself—because he broke that specific law for the greater good of staying alive as he fled from Saul.

It is through this principle that we can understand the “righteous lies” in Exodus 1 and Joshua 2. In Exodus 1, we see that the lie of the midwives was used to protect the Hebrew babies—which leads up to the birth of Moses (Exodus 2:1-10), the one whom God would use to call His people out of Egypt. In Joshua 2, the same thing is at work: Rahab’s lie ensured the safety of the spies and the success of their mission. The kicker? Nowhere in Scripture are the midwives or Rahab condemned as sinners. In fact, James says that Rahab was counted as righteous like Abraham: “‘Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness’—and he was called a friend of God… and in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified?” (James 2:25).

For God’s Greater Good, Not Ours

To sum up so far, we have seen that there are occasions in the Bible where righteous people lying to wicked people for God’s greater good is not condemned as sin. However, we have also agreed that God is truth and lying for selfish gain or unjust outcomes is sin. Therefore, I want to be clear that the only exception for a “righteous lie” is God’s greater good, not ours. Any lie is sinful unless it is done to protect an innocent party from a wicked person with wicked motives. As Sam Storms describes it, “A lie is an intentional falsehood that violates someone’s right to know the truth. But there are cases in which people forfeit their right to know the truth.”¹Sam Storms, “Perplexing Passages: Do Exodus 1 and Joshua 2 Permit Christians to Lie?,” The Gospel Coalition, January 2018. Retrieved from https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/perplexing-passages-do-exodus-1-and-joshua-2-permit-christians-to-lie/

And so I want to be clear that this article is not a propaganda for Christians to be complacent in telling the truth at all times. We must never lie for selfish gain.

But did Rahab lie to the glory of God by protecting the spies from the soldiers of Jericho? My answer is yes. She told a lie to wicked people to save the righteous, for God’s greater good, not her own.

In conclusion, I’ll offer a more modern example. If I lived in Europe during WWII and was hiding Jews in my house, and a Nazi soldier came to my door in search of them, I would (like Corrie Ten Boom) tell a lie to save their lives—much the same way that Rahab did so many centuries earlier.

Thoughts or feedback on this article? Send me a note! josh@ebcnipawin.ca

All this because of Jonah’s disobedience.

In Acts 27, the Apostle Paul ran into a terrible storm on that same sea. It was so bad that the ship also needed to be supported against breaking up (Acts 27:17). The sailors were desperate and also threw much cargo overboard (Acts 27:18-19). They, too, expected to die (Acts 27:20).

All of this in spite of Paul’s obedience. And this was to become his fourth shipwreck (2 Corinthians 11:25, written at an earlier date)!

Holding these two stories up beside each other reminds us of the need to be cautious as we interpret events in our life. In Jonah’s case, the sailors believed the common notion that something bad was happening because someone had done something bad (Jonah 1:7). In that particular case, they happened to be right.

But just as often, hard things happen to us on the path of obedience. We see this in the story of Job. We find it in Psalm 44, which describes a painful season of suffering for God’s people, and then says, “All this has come upon us, though we have not forgotten you, and we have not been false to your covenant. Our heart has not turned back, nor have our steps departed from your way… Yet for your sake we are killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered” (Psalm 44:17-18, 22). Notice how Paul quotes this psalm in Romans 8:34-39, a classic New Testament passage on suffering. And, as we’ve seen, we see this all lived out again and again in the life of Paul himself (2 Corinthians 11:23-12:10, Acts 9:16).

So what about us? Here in this New Covenant era, does God still ever bring suffering into His children’s life as a result of their disobedience? Most certainly. “For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world” (1 Corinthians 11:29–32; see also Hebrews 12:3-11).

The question then becomes, “how can we tell whether we are suffering for our obedience or our disobedience?”

There are probably many helpful ways to answer that question, but I’ll suggest three.

1) Know the Bible. “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12). If difficulty comes your way, and you’re unsure of whether or not God is disciplining you for some sin in your life, don’t rely on introspection alone. Turn to God’s word. Objectively, it is the standard of what is sin and what is not. Subjectively, it has the power to cut through our blindness and show us what’s really going on in our hearts.

Our own sense of right and wrong can get mixed up sometimes. God’s word is what we need to set us back on track.

2) Listen to the right people. It’s too easy to get stuck inside our own heads and interpret God’s providence in foolish ways. I remember hearing about a prospective missionary who had finally arrived in the foreign country he had been preparing for. Within the first few days, he encountered some unexpected difficulty, and concluded—on his own—that God was telling him something. He promptly flew back home. How different it could have been if he had reached out to others who reminded him that difficulty is normal, and encouraged him to persevere!

On the flip side, Hebrews 3:13 reminds us of how much we need others to help us truly see sin in our hearts: “But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called ‘today,’ that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” Sin is deceitful; it lies to us. It makes us think we’re fine when we’re not. And so we need others who will speak the razor-sharp word of God to us to help us see clearly.

3) Understand that God is always disciplining us. Even if God is not disciplining us for a particular offence, as in the case of 1 Corinthiains 11:29-32, we should understand that “discipline” is a broad category. It includes not just corrective discipline but also the proactive discipline that God applies to us as He makes us more like Jesus.

None of us are finished products. We haven’t been made perfect yet. And so we all need the ongoing discipline of our Father. Even when we suffer for the gospel, God is proactively using that suffering to make us holy.

“So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited. Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Corinthians 12:7–9; see also 2 Corinthians 1:8-9).

The next time you find yourself in a storm—actually, or figuratively—remember that your Father is up to something. Search the Scriptures, listen well to trustworthy brothers and sisters, and don’t forget that, whatever you have or haven’t done, no suffering is ever wasted by God. “For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:17–18.)

If I raise my children in the “fear and admonition of the Lord” they will follow Christ and carry on a Christian legacy for another generation.

If I live a chaste single life, pursuing God with all my heart, he will provide a spouse for me.

If I follow Christ, surely I’ll be spared the worst tragedies (we expect suffering but not too much suffering).

If I preach the gospel faithfully, people will come to Christ and the church will grow.

Mike Emlet, in an article called “Slot Machine Christianity,” considers how “Such a mindset reveals a subtle ‘health and wealth’ pseudo-gospel whispering lies in our ear.” And what is at the heart of these lies? “We assume that if we put in enough time, effort, and faithful service—enough quarters in the slot—in the end it will turn out well for us.”

I’ve encountered these ideas often in my own heart and in the Christian community throughout my life. When my mom was dying of cancer we’d often hear things like, “I just don’t know why this is happening to such a good Christian family.” According to Emlet, that’s just another example of “slot machine” thinking.

In his article, he goes on to ask, “So how do we turn from slot machine Christianity? …It’s a lifelong process but we start by recognizing that all of life is a gift from the Lord, even the ‘quarters’ we use. It’s not our money to begin with. We’re not trying to earn God’s favor by drumming up faithful obedience. All is of grace…”

I encourage you to read the whole thing here:

Slot Machine Christianity | Christian Counseling & Educational Foundation

I’m not sure I fully understand the appeal of slot machines. Drop a couple of quarters into the slot, pull…

www.ccef.org

I’m not a fan of the song for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I think the phrase “modest is hottest“ (which West certainly didn’t invent, and might even be mocking) completely misses the point of modesty by tying it to the very unhelpful term “hot” and thereby reducing it to just another way of increasing sexual attractiveness. Dressing modestly out of a desire to be “hottest” is supremely missing the point.

Secondly, the song trivializes and even parodies what is no laughing matter: the responsibility that dads have to shepherd their daughters’ hearts on the issue of clothing choices. In my experience, most Christian dads out there don’t need to be told to lighten up or have fun poked at them on this issue. The opposite, in my experience, is true: most Christian dads are either terrified of speaking up about the way their teenage daughters dress or they are completely clueless that they have any responsibility in the matter in the first place.

In other words, I have almost the opposite problem with the song that lots of other people did. And that saddens me the most. The response that West received from the evangelical community is just another demonstration of how poorly we actually understand the issue of modesty and how far from the Bible our thinking on the matter has drifted.

This is something I talked about in a sermon on Genesis 3:20-24 back on May 30–almost 3 weeks before West’s song dropped. You can read or watch those comments here:

I have a fifth observation on this passage which might sound really obvious when I first make it, but here goes: God clothed Adam and Eve when they were the only two people on planet earth.

Just think about that: they were not covering up for anybody else. It was just them. From this point forward, the normal state for humans was to be clothed.

We can assume that Adam and Eve would not have worn these skins when they were being intimate together as husband and wife. But except for those special times, the two of them wore clothes.

This verse is where the basis for our understanding of modesty comes from. We should cover our bodies. When we don’t cover our bodies, we are making a invitation to intimacy, whether we intend it that way our not. That’s just what’s happening. With rare exception, it’s baked into us from this point onwards.

I’m spelling this out because we live in a culture today that says that people can show as much of their bodies as they want, and if you have a problem then it’s your problem. You’re the bad guy, not them.

And sadly, many Christians have bought into this. There’s been a real rebellion against the whole idea of modesty in recent years. Instead, I hear Christians saying things like “it’s my body, and God made it good, and I can show as much of it as I want, and if you take that in a wrong direction then it’s your problem.”

And Genesis 3:21 shows us how silly these new ideas are. Back when it was just Adam and Eve, clothing was normal. Being unclothed was inherently intimate.

That’s why advertisements so often portray people wearing suggestive clothing. When we see someone unclothed, or clothed in a way that draws our attention to what’s underneath their clothing, we experience an invitation to intimacy which can feel incredibly compelling.

Now please hear me: as Christians, we must reject any invitation to intimacy that doesn’t come from the person we’re married to. We’re not helpless. We must say no and look away. But I’ve found that fleeing from lust is actually easier to do when I understand what’s going on. A visual invitation to intimacy has been made. It’s up to me to reject that invitation. But that is what’s going on. This is who we are.

And by the way, this is the reason that if you look throughout the world and history you’ll see that any culture with low standards of modesty also has low standards of morality. I’ve heard people talk about the Pacific Islands and how great it was that they didn’t wear many clothes before the missionaries arrived. What we’re not told is that they had basically no morality when it came to physical intimacy. Faithfulness in marriage was not a thing at all. You could be intimate with whoever you wanted whenever you wanted. And you see similar patterns the world over. From the time of Adam and Eve onwards, there is an almost unbroken connection between modesty and morality.

So here’s what I’m really saying here: modesty is not just a cultural idea. Modesty is baked into us as humans because we are all sons of Adam and daughters of Eve. And we Christians should not throw in the towel on the idea of modesty. We shouldn’t be surprised that our culture is doing that, but we should know better.

Full message: ebcnipawin.ca/sermons/beginnings/the-first-exile/

Today I was asked by the two of you to speak about the gospel. And it’s worth asking, why would you want me to talk about the gospel at your wedding ceremony? Isn’t this your special day? Why have me speak so much about Jesus and His death and resurrection?

What does the gospel have to do with marriage?

I think you know the answer is that the gospel has everything to do with marriage. Or, rather, marriage has everything to do with the gospel.

And what I want to do in these next minutes is briefly touch on two ways that the gospel and marriage intersect with each other.

The Gospel is the Power for Marriage

The first comment is that the gospel provides the power for marriage.

Take a moment to look at each other. Don’t you look great? But I have news for you: you are each sinners. Each of you is a son of Adam and a daughter of Eve and you’ve inherited a nature capable of toe-curling sin. There is literally no end to the selfishness, greed, and sinful passions that you are both prone to.

And today, you are choosing to get married. You are choosing to enter in to the closest of all human relationships. You have chosen the other person as the one with whom you will share your very life, your very self.

And what that means is that you have chosen the other person to be the person who will sin against you the most. 

While you’re dating, while you’re on your best behaviour, you can keep it looking pretty good. But by entering in to marriage together, you are each going to get a front-row seat to all of the faults and flaws and sins that you work so hard to keep hidden from everybody else.

And as you really start to get to know each other, beginning today, as you encounter each other’s sin, as you are hurt by each other, you will be faced with a constant choice.

A choice to withdraw, to protect yourself, to keep score, to hurt the other person back. To love them only as much as they love you.

Or, a choice to engage, to bless, to keep no record of wrongs, to show undeserved grace to each other again and again and again. To love the other person better than they deserve no matter how little you get in return.

And this is why the gospel is the power for marriage. Because showing that kind of love, that kind of grace, that kind of forgiveness, is only possible at the foot of the cross of Jesus Christ.

He died for you. He took your sins and your sorrows and made them His very own, taking your burden to calvary where He suffered and died alone. For you. 

And if Jesus has shown you that much grace, how can you not freely show grace when you yourself are sinned against?

And you can go a step further and look at your spouse right when they have hurt you and know that the Son of God was already punished for what they just did to you. So how can punish them with your anger or sullenness or whatever it’s going to be? Full atonement has already been made for everything wrong you will both do for the rest of your life.

Knowing this as you enter into marriage will give you a freedom to love without limits.

And on the nights when things feel so hard and your heart is not responding to these truths the way it is today, you can remember that Jesus Christ did not just die for our sins but He walked out of the grave for us. And if He is powerful enough to overturn death He is more than powerful enough to conquer the hardness and the hopelessness that so often finds a home in our own hearts.

In these and in so many other ways, the gospel is the power for marriage.

The Gospel is the Purpose for Marriage

The second truth we want to consider this morning is that the gospel provides the purpose for marriage. You know that marriage is not just a celebration of how you feel. Marriage is a covenant in which you promise to be faithful no matter how you feel.

And this covenant was designed on purpose by God to be a reflection of His covenant relationship with His people.

In the letter to the Ephesians, Paul quotes Genesis 2:24: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” And then he adds: “This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church” (Eph 5:31–32).

This whole thing—Adam, Eve, marriage, you two, the covenant of marriage—is all about Christ and the church.

Jesus is the groom who left his Father’s side to seek out a bride, His church. Us. And Jesus laid down His life in the place of His bride to make her beautiful and perfect and spotless.

And not even death could do us part. Jesus walked out of His own grave, and today is watching and waiting and working for His bride to be complete and to be ready.

He is coming for His bride, His people, His church, and we will enjoy our covenant relationship with Him forever.

Your marriage is a miniature of that marriage. Your covenant is about that covenant. Your marriage is not about you but was designed by God to show the rest of us what Jesus is like, and what we, as His church, should be like.

In the years to come, people should be able to look at you two and say, “If Jesus loves his church that way, I want in. If submitting to Jesus brings as much blessing as I see in that marriage, I want in.”

So what does the gospel have to do with marriage? Everything. And we’ve just scratched the surface today! You two, if God wills, have years, decades, to discover together the power and the purpose of the gospel in marriage.

The serpent had done his deceiving work, but his day was not to last forever. Someone was coming from Eve’s line who would crush the serpent’s head. In that act he would be injured—his heel would be bruised—but the serpent’s head injury would be fatal.

Through many lines of evidence, the Bible presents Jesus as this serpent-crusher who became a man so “that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Hebrews 2:14). As we reviewed on Sunday, Jesus delivered this death blow at the cross when He died for His people, and Satan’s final finishing-off is depicted in Revelation 20:10, where “the devil …was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur… and… will be tormented day and night forever and ever.”

What that means is that at our place in the story, living in between the first and second coming of Christ, Satan is a defeated enemy. He’s still around, and is still an enemy, but his ultimate power over us has been broken. And, in fact, God actually uses His people to trample on the serpent’s head as we await his final defeat.

We see one of the first clues of this in Luke 10:

¹⁷ The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!” ¹⁸ And he said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. ¹⁹ Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you. ²⁰ Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” 

Luke 10:17-20

It’s hard to miss that Jesus is quoting Genesis 3:15 when he talks, in verse 19, about treading on serpents. In the context, he’s referring to the power that He had given the 72 to cast out demons. As they authoritatively commanded Satan’s legions to release their grip on people, they were participating with Jesus in His serpent-crushing work.

What about you and I today? Do we have similar power? Should we expect to engage in “spiritual warfare” in a similar way? It’s a difficult question, and one which bible-believing Christians disagree on. I can’t help but notice that the statements on casting out demons are always directed to specific groups: the apostles, the 72. Nowhere are all Christians instructed to directly engage with demons in this way.

Most of the time, the New Testament describes our part in spiritual warfare in more “normal” terms. Consider this passage from Romans 16:

¹⁷I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. ¹⁸ For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. ¹⁹ For your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, but I want you to be wise as to what is good and innocent as to what is evil. ²⁰ The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. 

Romans 16:17-20

Many of us memorized verses 19 & 20 by singing the song at Bible camp. In context, we can see that Paul has false teachers on his mind. After warning the Roman Christians about these false teachers and division-causers, he shows them the way to resist them: obedience, wisdom, and innocence (v. 19).

Paul is not changing the subject when he gets to verse 20: “The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.” Rather, there’s a tight connection here to the rest of the passage. False teachers are elsewhere referred to as Satan’s servants (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). Through their obedience, wisdom and innocence, God’s people resist these servants of Satan and thus participate in Jesus’ serpent-crushing work. They carry out Christ’s victory over Satan as they stand against Satan’s attempts to harm the church.

What this means is that spiritual warfare can sometimes look a lot more “normal” than we sometimes think. It can look like doing what’s right, even when we don’t feel like it. It can look like reading God’s word to grow in our wisdom of what’s good. It can look like turning off the TV when inappropriate content starts playing in order to remain “innocent as to what is evil.”

In these seemingly normal ways, you and I actually get to partner with Jesus in his serpent-crushing mission.

In other words, there’s no such thing as a “normal day” when you’re a follower of Jesus. Everything we do is dripping with ancient, cosmic significance. May God give us the faith to see this and the obedience to follow it through!

But if that’s all there is to biblical genes roles, then what do you do with the teaching—which we explored this past Sunday—that God created Eve to be Adam’s helper? If a husband takes care of all the work outside the home, and a wife takes care of all the work inside the home, then in what sense is she actually helping him? She’s not actually going with him to lend a hand around the office or job site. On the other hand, he does come home from a day at the office or job site and “help out” around the house. So who is helping whom?

I want to suggest that the answer here lies in what we explored two weeks ago: husbands and fathers are the ones ultimately responsible for what God has put under their care.

For example, do you know who is responsible for the children in a home, according to God? “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4). Dads, bringing up your children is ultimately your responsibility, not your wife’s. By extension, so is your home (c.f. Luke 1:40). You really are the man of the house.

Therefore, you are not helping your wife when you load up the dishwasher after supper. Rather, she was helping you all the times she loaded up the dishwasher while you were at work that week. You were not helping your wife the last time you changed a dirty diaper. Rather, your wife was helping you all the times that she changed diapers when you weren’t around. You’re not helping your wife when you read the Bible to your kids before tucking them into bed. She was helping you with everything she did with the kids while you were at work.

Men, you are ultimately responsible for how your children are raised, for how your home is kept, and for what you and your family do here on this earth. The more you understand this, the more you will appreciate the richness of your wife’s role as your helper.

There’s two further comments I want to make about this big idea.

First, I’m not suggesting that there’s nothing to the scheme of men working outside the home and women working inside the home.

It is true that, before the Industrial Revolution, most industry happened inside the home, which means that men didn’t leave home to go to work. Much like many farmers today, home was their place of work.

Today, we live in a different world than this in which much (most?) income-generating work happens outside the home. In this new reality, it is fitting and appropriate for men to carry the primary responsibility of providing for their families by “going to work.” In other words, I don’t think being a stay-at-home dad is a biblical option.

Nevertheless, a dad must never forget that his responsibility for his wife and children is greater than simply providing for them. When he walks out the front door to go to work, he never stops being responsible for everything that’s still happening behind that door. Thus, what his wife does to care for the home and the children, she does in her role as his helper.

Second, a man must never forget that his sole purpose in life is not just to go to work. Jesus has a mission for his people: “make disciples” (Matthew 28:19). And within this great mission we each have a job to do, a role to play, a particular way that Jesus intends to use our lives for His glory on this earth.

All the different elements in your life—your job, your house, your children, your relationships with your neighbours, your ministry at your church—all fit in to this mission given to us by the Lord Jesus.

It is in this context that a husband should view his wife as his helper. In other words, “helping” is about so much more than who does the chores. “Helping” is about a whole-life orientation towards accomplishing the mission that God has given to us. It includes your children, it includes household chores, it includes your job, but it’s about so much more than any one of these things in isolation.

I think one of the most important questions a Christian man can answer is, “In what particular way will I—and my family, if I have one—serve the mission of Christ in our generation?” As a man answers that question, he will be developing a vision for his life and his family. And as he leads his family into fulfilling that vision, both he and his wife will quickly realize the richness, beauty, and significance of her indispensable role as his helper.

No, me neither.

Over a year into this whole situation, our different viewpoints continue to proliferate. A few months ago, the issue was masks; today, it’s vaccines. What hasn’t changed is the apparent willingness of many Christians to fight and divide over their viewpoints.

As I’ve been thinking about all of this, I wonder if it might be a good time to hear a reminder from Romans 14:

As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand… Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother?

Romans 14:1–4, 10

Last September I got to preach on this passage, and we considered the parallels between what the Roman churches were dealing with and what we’re dealing with today. Here’s a clip from that message, both from the video and my notes:

Here’s the deal: when it comes to Christian fellowship, we should have a disposition that holds unity as a significantly higher value than our personal rights and freedoms. We should have a heart that willingly surrenders our personal rights and freedoms and comforts and privileges for the sake of unity with our brothers and sisters.

That’s what it means to be “eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3). We’re eager to please others, not ourselves (Romans 15:1-2). And if some of our personal freedoms need to fall by the wayside, we’re good with that, because unity with the blood-bought body of Christ is what we’re eager for.

So let’s talk really practically about what this passage and these lessons might mean for us at this stage of our life together as a church. The first is obviously the whole COVID-19 scenario. One of the real difficulties of this situation, especially for us here in Nipawin, has not been the virus itself, but rather all of the differences of opinion over the virus situation and the way that those differences tend to create rifts in between Christians.

And so one of the major lessons coming to us out of Romans 14 this morning is that we are in sin if we allow our opinions about the virus to cause division between us and our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Here’s another way we can put this: whatever your opinions and convictions and beliefs are about the virus, about the government’s response to the virus, about the use of masks—about any of this stuff—, there are sincere, godly Christians who are trying their best to honour the Lord and who hold to the exact opposite position that you do.

I know because we here at the church hear from both sides. There are some Christians who are bothered by the way that we’ve gone along with the provincial government’s guidelines on meeting and masks. They think that we as a church are compromising by complying with these guidelines. And there are other Christians who don’t think that the guidelines have been strict enough, and that we as a church should have been doing more to protect people.

So there’s not just two positions, but three. There’s those who say that this is a serious public health crisis, and we should be doing our utmost to love our people by keeping them safe. There’s us as church leaders, saying “We’re not experts, so we’re just going to submit to our government leaders, just like Titus 3 says, and just like we do with speed limits and building codes.” And then there’s those who say “And what’s next, then, the Mark of the Beast?”

And less you snicker or laugh, each of those positions are held by people whom Jesus loves so much that he agonized and bled and died for on the cross. And the question for all of is, what’s more important to us: our position on the virus situation, or our relationships with our brothers and sisters whom Christ died for?

As I was thinking about this, I reflected on how much these tensions are fuelled by information. We take our different positions because we listen to different sources of news or information. Maybe you know someone or listen to someone whom you are convinced gives you better information than anyone else has.

And it reminded me of the words of 1 Corinthians 8, which addresses a very similar situation as Romans 14. The first three verses of that chapter say, “Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that ‘all of us possess knowledge.’ This ‘knowledge’ puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, he is known by God” (1 Corinthians 8:1–3).

Even if you have the best information and knowledge on the virus situation, if this knowledge is puffing you up over and against your brothers and sisters, instead of fuelling the really important work of love building up your brothers and sisters in Christ, then there’s a problem.

Because building up the body of Christ as we carry out our mission together is what really matters.

If you notice, as I preached last week about our mission together as a church this year, I didn’t say a word about COVID-19. Because this whole COVID-19 situation is tiddlywinks compared to the great work of the gospel that we’ve been called to do together.

I remember hearing that when the Canucks were doing really well in the Stanley Cup playoffs, back in 2011, the emergency rooms in Vancouver were empty. People took a Tylenol and sucked it up because there was history being made and they wanted to be a part of this great moment with the rest of their city.

That’s such a great illustration about how our opinions and ideas and convictions about COVID-19 need to take a back seat to the work of the gospel and our unity as a church.

From https://ebcnipawin.ca/sermons/various/a-united-church-in-a-divided-age/

I was tempted to supplement these (brief) comments with some specific examples of where The Chosen strays from the Biblical text and puts words in Jesus’ mouth which are either non-biblical or even un-biblical. But therein lies the issue itself: the fact that I’d even need to to that. Should not God’s people know the Bible well enough that they could spot these examples themselves?

In response, I had a couple of people email me to ask, “Couldn’t you give just one example?” And I do see their point. So, what follows are some comments about one particular moment from season 1, episode 8. You can watch the brief scene at this link if you’d like to.

The background to this scene comes from episode 5, where Simon Peter is shown telling his wife about his first encounter with Jesus, and how he had been called to become a disciple. His wife is emotional as she responds, “This is the man I married… of course He chose you… someone finally sees in you what I’ve always seen. You’re more than a fisherman.”

Three episodes later, Jesus meets Peter’s wife and says, “You saw it first, you know.” She replies, “What do you mean?” And he says, “What I see in Simon. You were the first person to notice, when no one else did. That connects us.”

Peter’s Path

Most careful readers of Scripture don’t find it too difficult to identify quite a progression in Simon Peter. In the four gospels, he’s portrayed as impetuous and impatient. But then we read his sermon at Pentecost in Acts 2, see him in action throughout the next several chapters in Acts, and then finally read the two letters he authored, we we witness a man who became a powerful, mature, and stable leader.

His growth certainly didn’t progress in a straight line. He was at his worst the night Jesus was betrayed: refusing foot washing, loudly proclaiming his faithfulness to Jesus unto death, and then denying Him, publicly, three times.

This makes his actions in Acts 2, a mere seven weeks later, all the more surprising. Which is why Christians have traditionally attributed this change to the transforming power of the Holy Spirit who came at Pentecost and made him someone whom he had not been before. This is a wonderful theme we see many times in Scripture, and which is described in the first chapter of 1 Corinthians:

For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

1 Corinthians 1:26–31.

God does not choose us because of how great or gifted we are; more often, He chooses us because of how weak we are in order that He might receive all of the glory when He uses us.

What Gets Missed in The Chosen

The Chosen‘s treatment of Simon Peter doesn’t just get this wrong, it turns it completely on its head. Jesus calls Simon because he “sees” something in him. Simon had potential; he was already destined for greatness; he already was “more than a fisherman.” All it took was someone to see what was there all along.

As a result, Jesus is not pictured as the sovereign one who choses “even things that are not.” Rather, he’s reduced to the level of a talent scout who simply had the eyes to see Simon’s inherent greatness. Except that he’s actually a step behind Simon’s wife, who saw it first. (Like, before Jesus?) And this “connects” them? That’s a wonderful sounding 21st century catchphrase (just like “I see you” in the same scene), but are these fitting words in the mouth of the Son of God, especially given the subject matter? Is this remotely the kind of thing Jesus ever says to anybody at any place in the Bible?

Then there’s this whole idea of “seeing something” in someone, of just “knowing” that they are “more than a fisherman.” This fits with many of our modern assumptions about personhood and ambition and the “true self” we’ve been told is hidden inside each of us. We’ve been raised on movies and talent shows and fairy tales which celebrate the ones who break out of their ho-hum existence to embrace their true destiny which had been buried deep inside them all along.

The problem? This is not what the Bible teaches, and it’s certainly not at all how people in the 1st century thought. Simon Peter was a fisherman in all likelihood because his father was a fisherman and his sons were going to be fishermen and there’s very, very little chance that he—or anyone else around him—ever had a whiff of ambition for anything else. That’s how we think, but historians can point out how these ideas were developed and came into our Western cultural awareness over the last few hundred years. Before then, that’s simply not how people thought.

And so this scene in The Chosen exemplifies what I’d suggest are the two major errors of the series. First, Jesus’ divinity is minimized for the sake of his relatability. He’s made to say or do things (like “that connects us”) which make him feel compelling to us as a man, but are simply not an accurate portrayal of who He is as the Son of God. Second, the characters—including “Jesus”—speak and act in a way that fits with our 21st century Western assumptions, but which are totally out of sync with the actual culture and worldview in which the Gospels first took place.

Why Does This Matter?

Maybe this second point doesn’t feel important to you. Why not “modernize” the story to help us connect with it better? My answer begins with the fact that, as a pastor, I have a huge burden to help my church understand the Bible accurately. I see, up close and personal, all of the damage that comes into people’s lives when they don’t understand God’s word properly. I’ve also seen, up close and personal, all of the growth and richness that come into people’s lives when they do begin to receive the Lord’s word with understanding.

An important step to properly understand the Bible is to recognize the cultural differences between us and the original audience. God’s word was written for us, but not to us. It was written to people in a very different cultural setting than us. And, in a great many cases, we need to understand those cultural differences in order to really get what the Bible is saying to us, today.

This is why I’m such a big fan of good study Bibles. And careful preaching. And anything that helps God’s people better grasp He was really saying to His people back then, so that we can understand what He’s really saying to us today.

And this is why I’m not a fan of anything which reinforces our tendency to misread the Bible, which I think The Chosen does. By minimizing the cultural differences between us and its first recipients, and portraying the characters in very modern, Western ways, it reinforces our tendency to misread the Bible in very modern, Western ways. It might feel great in the short term, but in the long term it sets us back from really understanding what God has to say to us in His word.

So, let’s wrap up with the example of Peter. The Bible doesn’t tell us that Jesus chose Peter because He “saw” something in Him. Instead, Jesus chose Peter and then made him into who he became. And you? Maybe you don’t feel like there’s anything special in you. Maybe nobody has ever looked at you and said “I’ve always known you were more than a (fill in the blank).” And guess what? That’s ok. God loves to work with those who know that they are nothing. Follow Jesus, and let Him make you into who He wants to make you. Often, this will involve dying to your idea of your “true self,” but the rewards are so, so worth it (Matthew 16:24-25).

Did you notice how Matthew begins? “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ.” God preserved and passed on the truth about Jesus to us in a book. A book that can be read and thought about and studied.

God chose to use the written word to communicate the truth about Jesus to us. And this has been the case from the beginning.

Just think about the Israelites coming out of Egypt, a very visual culture where their alphabet itself was pictures. And yet God told them in the second commandment not to make a carved image to represent Him. From the beginning of His relationship with His people, He wanted to be known through words, not through images, no matter how difficult this was for them.

Now it’s true that Jesus was born as a man, a man who could be looked at and seen. But we can’t miss what He left behind: no statues or portraits capturing his facial expressions. And not even writing that emphasized his mannerisms or tone of voice or emotions. But rather, four books, like Matthew, which tell us the objective truth of who Jesus is, what He did, and what He said.

Here’s what I’m getting at: if we want to get to know Jesus, we need to get to know Him on these terms, the terms that God has set for us. On the one hand, that means really knowing the Bible. And on the other hand, I’m suggesting this means being really careful about non-Bible representations of Jesus, especially pictures, and perhaps especially movies.

That might seem really strange to you, because we’re so used to pictures and movies of Jesus, especially in the last few decades. You might be surprised that many Christians throughout history, especially around the time of the Reformation, have expressed this same caution over making images of Jesus.

And I think we need to be especially careful of that these days in the movie era, where a human actor portraying Jesus needs to fill in all kinds of blanks in terms of facial expression and body language and tone of voice. Those are all things which really impact how we hear the words that are being spoken, and yet they all need to essentially be made up because they’re not actually in the text.

This is a factor even if the actors are only speaking words that come straight out of the Bible, because they still need to supplement those words with tone of voice and facial expression and body language. This caution grows even more when we’re dealing with movies or shows that portray Jesus saying and doing things which aren’t found in the Bible. I’m thinking of “The Chosen” here, which has been really popular lately. I have a lot of concerns about “The Chosen,” especially because some of the things it portrays Jesus saying and doing flatly contradict some of what we do see in Scripture.

I think this kind of thing is especially dangerous these days when so many Christians know so little of the Bible itself. I’m especially concerned for children, who might read the Bible in a certain way for the rest of their life because those images are so strongly impressed in their minds.

Here’s the big idea here: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are books about Jesus, and this is not by accident. Getting to know Jesus on His own terms means reading and studying and thinking deeply about the written word, just like we’ve done here this morning.

From https://ebcnipawin.ca/sermons/the-gospel-of-the-kingdom/this-is-our-king/

I was tempted to supplement these (brief) comments with some specific examples of where The Chosen strays from the Biblical text and puts words in Jesus’ mouth which are either non-biblical or even un-biblical. But therein lies the issue itself: the fact that I’d even need to to that. Should not God’s people know the Bible well enough that they could spot these examples themselves?

And so I’ll put it in the form of a question: if you’ve enjoyed The Chosen or are wondering about checking it out, are you familiar enough with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John that you could spot every time where The Chosen strays from, adds to, or removes from the Biblical account?

If not, are you sure it’s wise for you to be watching The Chosen? Should you be spending all that time with a very human interpretation of Jesus when you’ve not spent enough time with the real thing?

If it takes a TV show to make us feel like we’ve really connected with Jesus, what does that say about how, and how often, we’ve been reading the Bible? Is God’s word, read in the power of the Holy Spirit, really enough for us?

Even if you love The Chosen and are unpersuaded by my arguments here, I hope we can all agree that when it comes to the Bible, we can’t skip the book to watch the movie. God chose to communicate with us using words; the Bible is His appointed means for knowing His Son. Let’s not ever assume we know better than Him or have improved on His methods.

Here’s a slightly different English version, if you want to better understand the captions and Scripture references:

It’s not a perfect portrayal of Matthew 7:13-14 by any stretch of the imagination. It’s clearly dated, and I have some theological quibbles with the way a few things are represented.

And yet, looking back, I don’t think I can overestimate the influence that this single picture had on my life and thinking as I grew up. I’m sure I spent hours, over the years, studying it in detail. And every day, there on my wall, was a reminder of the fact that there were only two possible paths to walk in life. That this world was going to continually try to tempt and seduce me away from loyalty to Christ. That following Jesus was going to be really hard. That the reward in store for me was going to be surpassingly worth it.

Two key lessons spring to mind as I contemplate all of this. First, grandparents, don’t underestimate the influence you can have on your grandchildren. My Opa, as we called him in Dutch, was old and in quite poor health by the time I was born. In almost all of my memories of him, he’s just sitting in his easy chair listening to the radio. He certainly wasn’t a “fun” grandpa. He barely talked to us, let alone got down on the floor and played with us.

But this grandpa gave me a gift when I was five which was used by the Lord to profoundly affect my life. Little is much when God is in it. Invest your gifts, small as they are, and be amazed at what the Lord can do with them.

Secondly, don’t underestimate what children are capable of. Some people would have said that this painting was too mature for a five-year old, what with it’s portrayals of drinking and dancing, insinuations of sexual immorality, and, to top it all off, the terrifying depictions of hell in the top left. Was it intense? You bet—but so was the world I was about to head into. I’m so glad that my Opa didn’t shield me from reality.

This painting is the antithesis of Veggie Tales. And it’s what I needed. So parents, grandparents, Sunday school teachers: don’t be afraid of telling kids the truth. Don’t feel the need to sanitize every Bible story. Kids are exposed to so much in today’s world, and this image helped prepare me, as a tender 5-year-old, for many things I would soon face.

At the end of the day, you don’t need to like this painting or agree with my grandpa’s choice to gift it to me. What does matter are the words of Christ which inspired it: “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few” (Matthew 7:13–14). However you do it, make sure that your children understand those words and what they mean. Their life depends on it.

A week ago, I wrote an article here on my church website called “Don’t Call it Persecution,” about the arrest of James Coates. In the days since, I’ve been getting emails about the article from people all over the country. Apparently it’s been circulated far more widely than I ever would have guessed.

And I’m sad. I’m sad about this whole situation. I’m sad about all of the division in the church that is so evident through all of this. I’m sad about all of the emails repeating, yet again, that “our church is really divided on this issue.” I’m sad that I had to write a critical article about a brother with whom I have so much in common. I’m sad that the church in Canada seems to be reflecting—and sometimes revelling in—the polarizations that characterize public discourse in our era. I’m sad.

My Respect for James Coates

In last week’s article, I stated my appreciation and respect for James Coates. Those were not just filler words. I really meant them. He is someone with whom, as far as I can tell, I have a lot in common. Like him, I have a very high view of preaching. Like him, I have a very high view of pastoring and shepherding. Like him, I have a very high view of the church.

Like him, I believe that a church is not “just the people,” as I’ve been hearing lately. Like him, I believe that a New Testament church is the people gathered. Like him, I believe that watching a livestream on your couch is not a biblical reflection of the church.

(If some of this sounds confusing to you, I preached some messages on the nature of the church last spring—which you can find here—which unpack all of this.)

I didn’t spell all of this out in last week’s article, because it was written primarily for my own church, who understands all of this. When our church was still live-streaming last spring, they heard me say almost every week, “This is not the way things should be. We should be together. But this is better than nothing during this season.” My church knows that we moved to a local gym last fall, going through all the work of setting up and tearing down each week as if we were a church plant, just so that we could all be together in one room. Even at the current time, when we’re meeting in four separate gatherings, they’ve heard me say, “These are not church services. These are gatherings of a part of our church until such a time as we can gather together as a body again.”

All of this this contributes to my sadness this week. I don’t enjoy criticizing anybody, but especially not someone with whom I have much in common.

Our Polarized Age

We live in an age of polarization. “Polarization,” according to one dictionary, is “division into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs.” It describes the practice of picking sides and painting everybody on the “other side” with a big, broad brush.

The COVID-19 situation has tended to be polarizing among Christians. Many people have seen this issue as one of “sides,” and they’ve been quick to pass judgement on those on the “other side.”

If, for example, you believe that Christians should be submitting to the government guidelines during this season, it’s probably been easy for you to think that everybody on the “other side” is rebellious, or has bought into conspiracy theories, or cares more about civic freedoms than following Jesus, or doesn’t care about the people actually dying of the virus, etc.

If you are on that “other side,” you might be encouraged to see all of the guideline-followers as “sheeple,” or those with no courage, or people with a low view of the church, or people who will roll over and play dead to any demand the government ever makes of us in the future.

I listened to an interview this week with someone close to the GraceLife situation, and they were asked about Canadian pastors who have publicly disagreed with James Coates. Their response went along the lines of, “It’s so sad to see so many people today who have a low view of the church and a low view of God, and what are we going to do when the government starts mandating that we can’t teach a biblical view of marriage?”

This is what I mean by “polarizing.” I may happen to agree with this person that many Canadian Christians don’t have a high enough view of the church, but in that context, their answer was not helpful. It only deepens a sense of “us-vs-them,” furthering the notion that if you don’t support James Coates then you must be a coward with bad theology.

Their answer, furthermore, did not take into consideration that some people might disagree with Coates simply because they have some reservations with his interpretation of Romans 13 and some disagreements with his read on the severity of the COVID-19 situation.

This is why, if you go back to my article last week, you’ll see that I made no comments on James Coates’ attitude, character, motivations, or heart. I simply addressed his words and his actions. Just the facts. I disagreed with him, but did not pass judgement on him, a crucial distinction often missing in current dialogue. I have no intention nor desire to paint Coates—or any of his supporters—with a broad brush. I disagree with him on some issues, but probably agree with him on more.

Christians must be able to respectfully disagree, carefully interacting with each other’s differences with clarity and conviction, without descending into trench warfare. I’m saddened that such charitable disagreement seems to be in such short supply these days.

In Summary

So to reiterate what I said last week, I disagree with James Coates’ interpretation of Romans 13. I don’t think he’s correct on that file. I also disagree with his take on COVID-19. And I would still argue that, given Alberta’s health restrictions (which are allowing churches to remain open at the same capacity as retail spaces, while theatres and libraries are all closed), it is not accurate to describe his arrest as persecution.

(If you’re still struggling with this, let me describe it for you this way: if our church outgrew our building’s rated capacity, and we wanted to keep packing people in anyways, and the government started to fine us for exceeding fire code capacity, would that be persecution? And if we replied that “the risks of fire around here are really small, and only a few people per capita die each year of fires—and they are usually quite old anyways— and Caesar has no authority over the church,” would that be a biblical position to hold? Nothing has convinced me what James Coates is facing is, in principle, any different than this.)

But with that being said, I do admire him for standing up for his convictions, something I said (and meant!) in my article last week. I believe that every pastor in Canada must be ready to take the kind of stand that he is taking, which is again something I said (and meant!) in my article last week.

In conclusion, my sadness this week has driven me to prayer for the church in Canada. We belong to the Lord Jesus Christ. We are citizens of His global kingdom. We’ve been bought with His blood and invested with a mission of eternal significance that transcends times and cultures. COVID-19 and our differing opinions about it are small beans compared to the great and glorious things we have in common.

May the Lord help us to disagree well even as we stand together for His glory in our generation.

I do want to affirm my respect for Coates and his courage to stand by his convictions. The kind of stance that he is taking is something that all Christians must be willing to take, just as our brothers and sisters around the world do every day.

However, I don’t think that Coates’ convictions and actions are a good and necessary consequence of Scripture’s teaching. Put simply, I don’t think his position is a biblical one. Thus, what he is suffering should not be confused with persecution. He was not “arrested for preaching,” as some sensationalized (and blatantly false) headlines have proclaimed. He is simply experiencing the consequences of breaking the law.

Submitting to God and Government

This past year has forced many Christians, myself included, to wrestle in a new way with our relationship with the government, and how this relationship interfaces with  our allegiance to Jesus. Much of the ensuing discussion has centred on Romans 13:1-4, which is one of the main passages of Scripture which clearly addresses these issues. Coates himself just preached a sermon on the passage (https://gracelife.ca/sermons/directing-government/) which I will get to.

First, however, I want to suggest that a fixation on Romans 13:1-4 can distract us from a significant number of other New Testament passages which, taken together, should also shape the way that Christians respond to the government during seasons like this. Here’s a sample of some of those passages, with a few brief comments on each.

In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be registered, each to his own town. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child.

Luke 2:1–5

Caesar’s decree was hardly made for the purest of motives. And the taxes he would raise from this census were hardly going to be designated for godly means. Instead, we can assume they’d be used for building temples for Roman gods, funding the Roman army, and paying for gladiatorial games. And yet God used the actions of this vain power-monger to accomplish His purposes, landing Joseph and Mary back in Bethlehem for the fulfillment of the ancient promise.

Tax collectors also came to be baptized and said to him, “Teacher, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Collect no more than you are authorized to do.” Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”

Luke 3:12–14

Tax collectors were viewed by their Jewish countrymen as traitors who extracted money from God’s people to fund the enterprises of the Roman Empire. Roman soldiers were the muscle of the empire, enforcing the desires of Ceasar and his governors—which meant jobs like conquering foreign nations and crucifying Jewish insurrectionists.

And if anybody was going to tell them to quit their job and have nothing to do with this ungodly government structure, it would be John the Baptist. Instead, he tells them to play by the rules and not use their position for their own personal agendas.

You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil…And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.

Matthew 5:38-39, 41

In order to understand this passage, we need to recognize that the principle of “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” was not about personal revenge. The right to extract an “eye for an eye” belonged to the Jewish courts, not to individuals. Thus, this passage is not so much about not taking revenge as it is about not fighting for your legal rights.

Verse 41 has the most significant implications for our interaction with the government: “And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.” This refers to a practice that would have been familiar to Jesus’ original hearers. In the Roman Empire, there was a law that allowed a Roman soldier to force any civilian, at any point, to carry his luggage for a maximum distance of one mile.

This law is the background to Matthew 27:32: “As they went out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name. They compelled this man to carry his cross.” In the original language, that word “compel” is the exact same word used by Jesus in Matthew 5:41, and it’s talking about the same practice. 

How do you think the Jewish people liked this law? Hint: not very much. They hated it. It was an infringement on their rights and freedoms. It was a constant reminder that they were under the thumb of Rome. And, on top of this, by carrying a load for a soldier, they were actually assisting the enemy. They hated it.

But Jesus says not to resist the one who is evil, and if forced to go one mile, to go two. In other words, assist your oppressor twice as much as what he’s allowed to ask, all without complaining or fighting back.

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”

Matthew 16:24

This verse has been so over-allegorized over the years that many Christians assume the “cross” we need to take up is something difficult in our life, like a cranky neighbour or a health condition. Jesus’ original hearers would not have made the same mistake. A cross was an instrument of torture, death, and dehumanization used by the oppressive Roman government to make the statement, “this is what will happen to all who oppose Rome.”

Jesus was on His way to be crucified. He was not going to “rise up” against the government but submit to their abuse, silent as a lamb before its shearers. Being one of His disciples means that we follow in His steps (1 Peter 2:19-23). We stand ready to carry our own crosses on our own shoulders, willing at any point to walk out to the place of our own crucifixion.

Again, for those tempted to make this a metaphor, we should remember how many of Jesus’ apostles died by crucifixion. They literally did pick up their crosses and follow in the footsteps of Jesus all the way to a death like His at the hands of an oppressive government.

Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people.

Titus 3:1–2.

I’m not sure much comment needs to be added to this one, except to point out that Nero was the emperor when these words were written.

Romans 13

Finally, we come to Romans 13. Here’s the passage itself:

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

Romans 13:1–7

This is the passage so many Christians jump to right away, and it’s the passage that James Coates preached on this past Sunday. He began with verse one and a clear statement that the government authorities have been instituted by God. Therefore, their authority derives from the authority of God. So far, so good, right?

He went a step further, however, by stating that the government’s authority is only valid insofar as it aligns with the word of God, from whom their authority derives. In his words, a government “must govern by the standard by which they will be judged. Which is what? The Word of God. They are going to be judged by the word of God. They are accountable to God. And therefore they must govern in accord with the word of God.”¹https://gracelife.ca/sermons/directing-government/

In other words, the government can only tell us to do stuff that fits with what God has already told us in His word. And when they don’t? Again, I’ll quote Coates himself:

“You see, complying with unbiblical unjust government laws is neither faithful nor loving… Is every government law an ordinance of God? We would have to say no. Otherwise when government orders an evil unjust law, God would be ordering evil. So no, when the government orders an unjust law it is not an ordinance of God. God does not order unjust laws… Do all government laws come with the authority of God? Again, we would have to say… no. Since their authority is delegated to them, their laws must be consistent with the law of God.”²https://gracelife.ca/sermons/directing-government/

Such an interpretation makes sense logically. It’s surely compelling to many Christians who don’t like the idea of obeying their government, especially when their government is telling them to do things they don’t like (such as staying home for an extended period of time). The problem is that this interpretation it is completely at odds with what Romans 13 itself is saying.

Think of it this way: if Christians only needed to obey the government insofar as the government lined up with God’s word, then why did Paul have to write Romans 13 in the first place? His letter to the Romans had already established that Christians submit to God and live to please him. It would seem awfully strange if the whole point of Romans 13 was to say, “Oh, by the way, you also need to obey God when the government is telling you to do what God wants.”

Instead, Romans 13:1-7 had to be written because Paul understood that the Roman Christians would struggle to obey their ungodly government. He knew full well that the Roman government was using its authority in ways that were not in full alignment with God’s word (like running pagan temples and gladiatorial games). And so the Roman Christians needed to be reminded of the importance of submitting anyways.³As Leon Morris wrote in his 1988 commentary, “On what Paul says the Christian is not justified in refusing obedience to the state because he has his doubts about the legal standing of the government… Paul is making it clear that the believer is to respect the state and not make himself the final arbiter.” Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press, 1988), 461-462. The same could be said for those on Crete. Titus needed to “remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities” (Titus 3:1) precisely because doing so is difficult and not always obvious.

We could state things this way: just because the government’s authority comes from God does not mean that they must only be obeyed insofar as they are in alignment with God’s word. Consider, in this context, this exchange between Jesus and Pilate:

So Pilate said to him, “You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have authority to release you and authority to crucify you?” Jesus answered him, “You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. Therefore he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin.”

John 19:10-11

Pilate had the authority to crucify Jesus. This authority had been given to him “from above,” i.e. from God. He was about to use it in an unjust way, way out of alignment with God’s word. But Jesus acknowledges that his authority is still valid, and He submits to it.

Should We Ever Disobey?

At this point I want to acknowledge that there are certainly cases where God’s people cannot obey the government—specifically, when we are being commanded to disobey a clear command from God. This was the situation when Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego refused to bow down to the golden image, or when the Sanhedrin called in the apostles and “charged them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered them, ‘Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard’” (Acts 4:18–20).

These examples do not, however, imply that we are exempted from obeying any governmental command that doesn’t line up with God’s word. Again, see the example of Jesus. Or consider His teaching about carrying the load for the Roman soldier. If the Roman government were basing their laws on God’s word, that particular law would not exist. Conscripting civilians to do your grunt work isn’t exactly just, nor does it line up well with the mandate of Romans 13:3-4, but Jesus says to obey anyways.

In other words, this idea that we only need to comply with laws that are consistent with God’s laws is totally out of sync with God’s word itself. So is Coates’ statement, made in the message, that “the church, of all institutions, has this obligation, to call the government to its God-ordained duty.”⁴https://gracelife.ca/sermons/directing-government/

There is simply not a scrap of evidence in the New Testament for this assertion. Christians are told to submit to the government and to pray for our government leaders (1 Timothy 2:1-2), but nowhere are we told to “direct the government to it’s duty,” as the title of Coates’ sermon suggests. Such instruction is simply not there. 

“The So-Called Pandemic“

Now, let’s ask an obvious question: why are we talking about all of this? The answer is certainly COVID-19, and the response of our governments to the virus situation. Ordinarily, if the government were to simply tell us “you Christians can’t meet together on Sunday mornings,” it would be fairly clear-cut. God’s word commands us otherwise (Hebrews 10:24-25), and this would be a case where we’d need to listen to God, not man (Acts 4:19).

But not everyone thinks its so clear-cut these days. It goes without saying that many Christians think the COVID-19 situation is quite serious, and that the government’s restrictions and health orders are a proper part of their duty to keep us safe. In fact, I know some Christians who think that the government isn’t going far enough, and who have criticized our church for being reckless when we have simply complied with the provincial guidelines.

So why is GraceLife church, and those who agree with them, suggesting that it’s time to disobey the government? It’s because they don’t think COVID-19 is as big of a deal as the government is making it out to be. As Coates said in his recent sermon, “I realize, at that point, you might say ‘But this is a pandemic. So these are extenuating circumstances.’ And if you said that, you would be wrong on two fronts. One, it isn’t a pandemic…”⁵https://gracelife.ca/sermons/directing-government/

As a statement on the front page of GraceLife’s website explains in detail (https://gracelife.ca/), the church leadership disagrees significantly with the government’s understanding of and response to the virus.

If you’ve done some research on this issue, you’ll know that there is some basis to what the GraceLife leadership is suggesting. Some scientists and medical professionals have those opinions.

But many do not. The scientific and healthcare community is not unanimous in their understanding of COVID-19 or their support of governmental policies like lockdowns. Show me five doctors who think that the government has gone too far, and I’ll give you five others who don’t think they’ve gone far enough.

This may stem from the fact that the empirical data itself can appear confusing. For example, some studies show that asymptomatic transmission is not happening⁶https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w, while other studies show that it accounts for more than half of all cases⁷https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774707. COVID-19 is still an emerging situation, the kind that often takes years or even decades to fully understand. If the scientific community has not reached full consensus on every point, we should not be surprised. There’s so much we don’t know.

And so I offer the following questions to those who challenge the government’s take on COVID: what are your qualifications for deciding which experts are right, and which are wrong? How do you evaluate which doctors, researchers and epidemiologists you agree with, and which you don’t? What are your medical or scientific credentials which have equipped you to sift through all of the evidence from both “sides” and arrive at the conclusion that one significant group of highly-trained medical professionals is incorrect and that its advice should be disregarded, even when it is enforced with governmental authority?

Personally, I came to the conclusion early on that the COVID-19 situation is going to take a fair bit of time to fully understand, and that I am simply not equipped to evaluate between the competing opinions of the medical and scientific communities on this issue. Thus, it would be foolish of me to make any grand gestures related to disobeying the government’s guidelines, especially if it would encourage others to do the same.

Don’t Call It Persecution

James Coates and the leadership of GraceLife church disagree with the Alberta government regarding their understanding of and response to COVID-19. That’s fine and fair. They are allowed to do that. They have chosen to take their disagreement to the next level by not complying with the provincial guidelines, and are now suffering the consequences for this non-compliance.

This is what’s going on—not religious persecution. Churches in Alberta are not being targeted with more stringent measures than other organizations. They are simply being asked, along with everybody else, to comply with guidelines in the face of what the government believes to be a significant public health risk. GraceLife has not done this, and James Coates is now experiencing some of the consequences.

Why do I think that this distinction is important? Why did I feel compelled to write this article? My answer is that religious persecution is a real thing. Christians all over the world are targeted by governments for their faith every day. It’s not beyond the pale that we might experience the same thing here in Canada.

If that ever happens, we’ll need to be clear as to what is going on. We’ll need it to be obvious that we are being targeted for our religious convictions and not our obstinance, disobedience, or for acting on our unqualified scientific opinions. Picking a fight with the provincial government over an emerging and highly complicated epidemiological situation, and then calling that persecution, only muddies the waters and encourages an unnecessarily negative perspective of Christians.

For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.

1 Peter 2:20

If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name.

1 Peter 4:14–16

I’ve prayed for James Coates and his family this week. I encourage you to do the same. I don’t encourage you to follow in his footsteps. But if you do, and you suffer the consequences, please don’t call it persecution.

Read my follow-up to this article here.

Once again, Christians are faced with shock and grief at recognizing that someone we trusted, looked up to, and learned so much from was living a double life. Public Ravi and private Ravi were two different people.

In the wake of these grievous revelations, many people have been asking, “How can someone like Ravi fall like that?“ It seems that we still think that if someone is a famous Christian leader, they must be a better Christian than the rest of us.

In recent years I’ve come to realize that the question itself is a big part of the problem. “Famous Christian leaders” are increasingly more prone to fall than the rest of us because of the harmful leadership culture in so many of our churches and organizations, especially when it comes to a “celebrity” like Ravi Zacharias.

The report from RZIM confirms the pattern: Ravi was well-respected and highly trusted. He was given a very long leash. He was “held accountable” not by a local church, but by the organization he himself ran. He was surrounded by people who feared and revered him and who allowed him to do basically whatever he wanted. He used generosity to manipulate. When he began to travel with a personal masseuse, or spend weeks alone overseas, the only people who could question him were people on his payroll—people he had immense power over.

And we’re surprised at what happened?

Ravi didn’t go wrong the first time he started messing around with massage therapist. Ravi went wrong when people started treating him special because “he’s Ravi Zacharias!” Things went wrong when people assumed that his public gifts meant he was holier than the rest of us and didn’t need what the rest of us need. And the result is that he became insulated in a culture where he was above questioning, above suspicion, above accountability, and cut off from the normal means of grace that every Christian needs.

“But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called ‘today,’ that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin” (Hebrews 3:13). We should not be surprised when those who are isolated fall; we’ve been warned all along.

King David fell hard with Bathsheba, and every Christian should recognize the capability we each have for evil. Therefore, a wise Christian leader will embrace accountability, transparency, and humility. They will not assume that being a Christian leader means they are above the church. They will be a part of a church, regularly opening themselves up to the uncomfortable but wonderful fellowship and accountability that comes from recognizing we are all on equal ground at the foot of the cross.

As a pastor, I have actually been instructed by an older pastor that we are essentially above accountability because we’re supposed to just have it all together. Large and in charge, a pastor dare not be vulnerable with anybody “under” him because that could give them material with which to attack him. Vulnerability and transparency are for the common folk, I’ve been told; Christian leaders must be strong and never show any weakness to anybody.

These are the assumptions which pervade so many churches and “Christian” organizations, and these are the assumptions which create men like Ravi Zacharias.

This is why, in my first week on the job at EBC, I established a pattern of regular, deliberate, transparent, and often uncomfortable accountability between me and the rest of the elders. If I’m not doing well in any area, they are the first to know about it. It’s also why I look for regular opportunities to be appropriately vulnerable with people, honestly sharing what’s going on in my life and asking for prayer.

I’m not telling you this to toot my own horn—in fact, it’s the opposite. I know what we’re all capable of, and I’m no exception. I need others just as much as anybody else. Pastors are among, not above, the flock (1 Peter 5:1-5).

So what are we to make of Ravi? Ever since the days of Judas Iscariot, Christians have wondered how a man can do so much public ministry in Jesus’ name while hiding so much private wickedness. Years before Judas became a household name, Jesus Himself warned us about those who would do “many mighty works” in His name while inwardly being “workers of lawlessness” (Matthew 7:22-23). Lord willing, I’m going to get to preach on that passage at the end of March, and I’m looking forward to unpacking some of the answers Jesus gives us to our questions.

In the meantime, I’d encourage you not to let Ravi’s fall cause you to question the truth that he himself proclaimed. Rather, let us be disillusioned with the unhealthy leadership culture in so many churches and “Christian” organizations, where men like Ravi are treated like celebrities, act like CEOs, and think that their position gives them permission to disengage from normal, messy, local church life.

“Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love” (Ephesians 4:15–16).

This is how Jesus designed us to work. No Christian can survive without the local church, where we are meant to have close relationships with other “normal” Christians who will speak the truth in love to us. You need this. I need this. Pastors of megachurches need this. World-famous Christian speakers need this.

And so in summary, the real surprise of Ravi’s story is not so much that he fell, but that so many of us thought that someone could stand for Jesus without ever being a real part of Jesus’ body, the church.

My encouragement for you is simple: don’t make that same mistake with yourself. Come, gather with God’s people tomorrow, and when someone asks how you are doing, try offering an honest answer. Ask for prayer. Confess your sin. Ask how you can pray for them. “Consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near” (Hebrews 10:24-25).

You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.

Matthew 5:38–42

A common reaction to this passage is, “Are there ever times where we’re allowed to stand up for ourselves?” I very deliberately avoided most of those questions on Sunday. Rather than hunting for the exception clauses, I felt the need for us to “simmer” in the words of Jesus and wrestle with the way our hearts tend to respond to this teaching.

But the “so what about?” questions do matter, and they do have a place, and so, as promised, here is my attempt to answer some of them. What follows are eight qualifying statements, drawn from elsewhere in Scripture, that help us better understand when Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:38-42 apply (and when they do not).

1. “Do not resist the one who is evil” does not include Satan. 

James 4:7 says, “resist the devil.” (See also 1 Peter 5:9: “resist him.”) James and Peter are not contradicting Jesus; instead, they are addressing different situations. Jesus is speaking to inter-personal relationships in the context of revenge and retaliation. James and Peter are speaking about sin and temptation to worldliness and pride and anxiety. When the devil pounces on you to destroy your faith, don’t turn the other cheek. “Resist him, firm in your faith” (1 Peter 4:9).

2. “Do not resist the one who is evil” does not mean “do not avoid the one who is evil.” 

Jesus said not to resist the evil person, and if they’ve already slapped you, turn your other cheek to them. He did not say that we needed to go chase down people who were likely to hit us on the cheek and make sure to spend lots of time with them in order to provoke the slap in the first place.

Jesus himself regularly avoided situations of danger before His time had come. “And they rose up and drove him out of the town and brought him to the brow of the hill on which their town was built, so that they could throw him down the cliff. But passing through their midst, he went away” (Luke 4:29–30). “After this Jesus went about in Galilee. He would not go about in Judea, because the Jews were seeking to kill him” (John 7:1). “So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple” (John 8:59).  “Again they sought to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands” (John 10:39). 

Similar behaviour is seen in the life of Paul who escaped from Damascus by night to avoid arrest (Acts 9:23-25) and often fled from one city to the next when opposition was stirred up against him.

When Jesus had already been arrested, He did not fight back. But these passages show us that He deliberately avoided arrest until He knew the time was right.

3. “Do not resist the one who is evil” does not necessarily mean we will never take advantage of our legal rights.

The apostle Paul was a Roman citizen, which meant that he had legal protection from being punished before a trial, and there are situations where we see him using this legal protection.

…the tribune ordered him to be brought into the barracks, saying that he should be examined by flogging, to find out why they were shouting against him like this. But when they had stretched him out for the whips, Paul said to the centurion who was standing by, “Is it lawful for you to flog a man who is a Roman citizen and uncondemned?” When the centurion heard this, he went to the tribune and said to him, “What are you about to do? For this man is a Roman citizen.” So the tribune came and said to him, “Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?” And he said, “Yes.” The tribune answered, “I bought this citizenship for a large sum.” Paul said, “But I am a citizen by birth.” So those who were about to examine him withdrew from him immediately, and the tribune also was afraid, for he realized that Paul was a Roman citizen and that he had bound him.

Acts 22:24–29

Paul’s Roman citizenship was not a bullet-proof protection against being whipped or flogged. In 2 Corinthians 11:23-25 he describes his life “…with countless beatings, and often near death. Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned…”

And in Acts 16:37 he doesn’t mention his citizenship until after being mistreated: “But Paul said to them, ‘They have beaten us publicly, uncondemned, men who are Roman citizens, and have thrown us into prison; and do they now throw us out secretly? No! Let them come themselves and take us out’” (Acts 16:37).

Paul certainly did not expect his Roman citizenship to be a ticket out of all  persecution. He did not demand his rights or fight for his rights or even use many of his rights (c.f. 1 Corinthians 9:15). But there was at least one situation where simply mentioning his citizenship helped him avoid a needless beating. This shows us that there are some situations, even in the context of persecution, where it is not out of place to use and benefit from our legal rights.

4. “Turning the other cheek” can have a powerful effect on the cycle of violence.

Most scholars seem to agree that the “slap” Jesus referred to in Matthew 5:39 is more likely a slap of insult rather than a physical assault. We can’t press this conclusion too far, however, because of the way that Luke’s gospel records Jesus’s words: “To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also” (Luke 6:29). That word for “strike” could easily refers to a punch or other blow.

Some people recoil at this, imagining that we’re just supposed to lie there while getting beat up. In truth, however, not hitting back can be a very effective way of diffusing physical violence, especially in the long run. Bible scholar James Edwards writes, “To ‘turn the other cheek’ is not a passive response, but a provocative response… The purpose of such calculated vulnerability is not to invite aggression, but, by ceasing to offer resistance, to provide no further cause for aggression.”¹James R. Edwards, The Gospel according to Luke, ed. D. A. Carson, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Apollos, 2015), 198.

He goes on to give the example of Martin Luther King Jr.’s policy of non-violence, and how he “put himself in a defenseless posture vis-à-vis powerful aggressors in order to shame them into repentance by the evil in their hearts.”²Edwards, 199.

In other words, non-violence is not necessarily an invitation to more violence—it very often has the opposite effect.

5. “Turning the other cheek” does not necessarily mean “do not attempt to deter or defend against all and any physical aggression.”

The key passage here is Luke 22:35-38:

And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.” And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”

Luke 22:35–38

Many people think that Jesus’ mention of a “sword” is a symbol for something else, such as spiritual warfare or general “preparedness,” but this seems quite unlikely to me. They moneybag and the knapsack were literal; why would the sword not be?

Still, some object that this totally contradicts Jesus’ teaching about turning the other cheek. I’d respond that, in the context of Luke 22, Jesus is speaking to His apostles about the next leg of their mission, which will involve travel and danger (two things which often went together back then). A sword was a necessary piece of travel gear in the ancient world, as much as a moneybag and knapsack, given the prevalence of robbers. The fact that Jesus’ disciples had two swords present with them shows that such means of defence were not absolutely forbidden by Jesus.

At the same time, we need to take into account what happened just a few verses later: “And when those who were around him saw what would follow, they said, ‘Lord, shall we strike with the sword?’ And one of them struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his right ear. But Jesus said, ‘No more of this!’ And he touched his ear and healed him” (Luke 22:49–51). Matthew’s account adds, “Then Jesus said to him, ‘Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword’” (Matthew 26:52). 

My conclusion from these passages is that Jesus does not prohibit His disciples from using weapons to deter and defend themselves against violent robbers while travelling. In that type of situation, the robbers would not be targeting them simply because they were Christians; instead, it was simply a matter of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. In such a case, self-defence is permitted. That is not necessarily a “turn the other cheek” type of scenario.

However, Jesus (and His disciples) will not use weapons to defend themselves when they are being specifically targeted for persecution. This is why Paul never fought back when he was being beaten for preaching the gospel. Jesus let Himself be arrested; that was not the time for His disciples to use their swords.

Jesus’ disciples will also not use weapons against a legitimate government. That seems to be the the point of Jesus’ statement to Peter that “all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” If you fight against the government, you can expect to be punished (c.f. Romans 13:4). Notice, however, that Jesus did not tell Peter to get rid of his sword, but rather to put it back in it its place. In other words, it was OK for Peter to have a sword, but not to use it against the government forces in defence of Jesus.

A final remark on this point: the “turn the other cheek” teaching seems to assume a measure of relationship and familiarity with the person giving the slap. After all, the context is one of retaliation, revenge, and “an eye for an eye.” So again, this would suggest that defending yourself against some random robbers out on the road at night is a different kind of situation.

To sum this point up: if your neighbour gets mad at you and hits you in the face, Jesus tells you not to fight back. If the government wants to arrest you for being a Christian, don’t fight back (at least not physically). But if someone is breaking into your home at night, grab the baseball bat. These are are completely different types of situations. 

6. “Turning the other cheek” is about you, not those under your responsibility.

Again, we need to remember the context of this passage: revenge and retaliation. Jesus is not speaking about our responsibility to defend others or to protect the weak. To return to a previous example, if my neighbour punches me in the face, I’ll take it. But if my neighbour punches my wife or one of my kids in the face, that’s a different story. I will not take personal revenge, but I will protect my family. They are two entirely different types of situations.

7. “Go with him the second mile” does not mean “show up at the army barracks first thing every morning to volunteer to carry heavy loads all day.”

Enough said. We will carry the heavy load if forced to, but that doesn’t mean we’ll seek out this kind of experience. Similarly, Jesus said that if someone has already sued us for our cloak we should give them your tunic. He did not say that we should offer our tunic to the next guy who gets angry at us.

8. “Give to the one who begs from you” does not mean “give him exactly what he asks for.”

Matthew 5:42 prompts some of the biggest “so what about” questions in this whole passage. Should you give money to a guy who is just going to use it for drugs? Aren’t we actually hurting him by giving him what he asks for?

I have used that kind of reasoning many times to say “no” to people on the street asking for money. This is one reason I found this passage so challenging. Jesus said to give and not refuse, and who am I to think that I know better than Jesus? Indeed, I had some repenting to do this week.

With that being said, we should notice that Jesus did not say, “when someone begs from you, give them exactly what they ask for.” Sometimes what someone needs and what they ask for are not identical. Giving to the one who begs from us may mean giving them something other than what they requested.

An example is Peter and John in Acts 3. A lame beggar asked them for money, and Peter said, “I have no silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk!’ (Acts 3:6). Peter did not give the man what he asked for. But he did give to him, as Jesus instructed. And in this case, what he got was a lot better than what he asked for!

I know of some people who work in the inner city and are routinely asked for money by panhandlers. Their practice is to carry a number of $5 Tim Horton’s gift cards in their wallet. This allows them to “give to the ones who ask of them” while meeting a real need (food and drink) instead of funding someone’s destructive habits.

A tough passage in this context is 2 Thessalonians 3:10, which says, “For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” If a brother or sister in Christ can provide for themselves, but refuses to work, then other Christians should not give to them. How does this jive with the words of Jesus?

The first thing to realize is that Paul had to give and repeat this command to the Thessalonians. This says something huge. The Thessalonians, as disciples of Jesus, had a default response to help those who were in need, and so this special situation required a special injunction.

In this situation, where a Christian can work but doesn’t, we’re not actually helping them by giving to them. We’re simply funding their laziness. But by saying “no” to their request for help, we are contributing something meaningful. The grumble in their stomach is our gift, one that will teach them the importance of hard work far better than any of our words.

We should also recognize that Paul’s instructions address a different context than those of Christ. “Give to the one who begs from you” is suggestive of the many beggars in the ancient world. To these social outcasts, the generosity of Jesus’ disciples would have been a powerful demonstration of God’s love.

I remember one time in my early 20s when I was out with a friend and some people on the street asked us for coffee money. We replied that we didn’t have any change, but we’d be happy to walk to Tim Hortons with them and buy them a coffee ourselves. Along the way one of them asked us, “You’re Christians, aren’t you?”

2 Thessalonians 3:10, on the other hand, is speaking about those who have already confessed the gospel and become a part of the Christian community, and who have the ability to support themselves, but instead refuse. They know better, and have no real excuse. We should remember that those inside the church are always held to a higher standard than those outside (see 1 Corinthians 5:9-13).

But in general, Jesus’ disciples will have an inclination to give and lend generously, just like Jesus Himself. “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich” (2 Corinthians 8:9).

In Conclusion

So there we have it. No, Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:38-42 are not the only guidance offered by Scripture on these matters. Yes, there is an appropriate use of physical defence and protection in some situations. Yes, our generosity should be matched with wisdom. 

And yet—and yet!—I really hope that the effect of these eight statements is not to weaken or soften what Jesus has said to us in this passage. I hope you’ve noticed that Scripture, and not my personal comfort level, has been the basis for what I’ve written here. And as I conclude, I really hope that nothing I’ve written here will be taken to “let us off the hook” of radical obedience to Christ.

We can never forget that Jesus came to this earth knowing what would happen to Him. He did not avoid the cross forever. And often He does call us to embrace suffering and pain as we serve Him, laying down our pride, convenience and material possessions, and willingly embracing suffering rather than taking revenge or fighting for our own rights.

And rather than looking for loopholes in His words, disciples of Jesus hear, believe, and, by the Spirit’s power, joyfully obey the words of our King, for His glory alone.

“In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 5:16).

In the Old Covenant, the covenant community—the people of Israel—contained some who had faith, and some who did not. Some who knew the Lord, and some who didn’t. Some who had soft hearts, and some who heart hearts. And so laws like “an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” (just like the laws about oaths and divorce) were needed in order to limit the effects of human sin within the community.

But the New Covenant, inaugurated by Jesus, is much different—and so much better:

Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Jeremiah 31:31–34

In the Old Covenant, people would have to say “know the Lord!” to their neighbours and brothers, because so many people didn’t know the Lord. But the New Covenant community (i.e. the Church) is different. It is made up of those who have been born again and who do know the Lord.

And this is why we practice church membership the way that we do.

Let me explain: our Sunday morning gatherings are not private meetings. We don’t have “members only” signs on the doors. This is on purpose. We want our gatherings to attract many people who are curious about Jesus and who want to know more about Him. This is in keeping with 1 Corinthians 14:23-25, which assumes that a normal church will have “outsiders or unbelievers” in attendance at their gatherings.

We want to be welcoming to “outsiders or unbelievers,” to use the Apostle Paul’s phrase again. But it’s just as important, long-term, that we be able to identify them as such. We don’t want to make the mistake of assuming that an “outsider or unbeliever” is a member of the New Covenant community simply because they’ve been attending for a few Sundays in a row.

This becomes especially important when it comes to deciding who should hold leadership positions or have a voice on the church’s decisions. It would be unwise, to say the least, to allow those who don’t know the Lord to have a controlling interest in the direction of our church.

This distinction is also crucial when it comes to the kind of situation described by 1 Corinthians 5, in which the church needed to remove someone from their midst who was living in gross sin.

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.“

1 Corinthians 5:9–13

In order for a church to obey this command, they need to have a clear understanding of who is “outside” and who is “inside.” It would be wrong to discipline an “outsider,” and it would be equally as wrong to not discipline an “insider.”

I know that those words “insider” and “outsider” can make us cringe. So please understand: this does not mean a church will be unfriendly. A church should be incredibly friendly and hospitable to outsiders. But the long-term health of a church depends on its ability to discern between who is an outsider and who is not.

And so a church needs a process in order to tell the difference between those who might happen to attend on a Sunday, and those who are actually members of the New Covenant—who have actually been born again, who personally know the Lord, and thus who should be included in the church’s decisions and discipline.

At EBC, we call that process “church membership.” That’s the process we’ve agreed upon together, in which we examine candidates to discern their profession of faith in the Lord, acknowledge their commitment to us, and invite them to participate as a decision-maker in this local New Covenant community called Emmanuel Baptist Church.

See, church membership isn’t all about politics or having different “tiers” of Christianity. Church membership is about the New Covenant. Becoming a member is about standing and being counted as someone who knows the Lord and who has decided to join this particular congregation.

I often get a question at this point. It goes something like, “What about people who have been born again, have been baptized, and are—in some sense—committed to our local church, but they haven’t become members? Where do they stand?” My answer? “If that’s all true of them, then they should be a member. I’ll get them an application today!”

I hope you can hear my heart on this. When I talk about how important membership is, I’m not trying to exclude people. It’s the opposite: we need church membership because we are (hopefully) welcoming and attracting many unbelievers, who gather with us out of their desire to learn more about this Jesus whose love has transformed our lives and community.

And I’m certainly not trying to exclude those among us who are believers but are not yet members. Again, it’s the opposite: I’m trying to encourage us to get to the place where if someone is a baptized disciple of Jesus, if they’ve decided that EBC is going to be their church, and if they don’t have any issues with our doctrine, then they just become a member. It’s just the most normal and natural thing for them to do.

If you’re reading this, and that’s you—you’ve been saved by Jesus, and you’ve decided this is your church—then I encourage you to stand and be counted. Send me an email (my address is below) and I’ll get you a membership application today. 

We’ll be singing a new song together that celebrates the gospel and God’s love for us while we were still His enemies. It’s called “All I Have is Christ,” and I encourage you to get familiar with it by listening below:

I’ve written two articles already about Christians and conspiracy theories, and how popular views on the end times have tended to negatively influence our approach to the COVID-19 pandemic (links here and here), and I don’t need to rehash all of that again. What I do want to address is this view, held by some, that the COVID-19 vaccine(s) are the mark of the beast described in Revelation 13:16-18.

And as you can tell from the title of this article, I think this view is quite mistaken: these vaccines are not the mark of the beast. As I say this, please understand that I’m not telling you to go get the vaccine. I am not an immunologist, and I am not qualified to give you medical advice. (By the way, the same goes for many of those guys on Facebook. But I digress.)

What I am saying is this: as you evaluate whether or not you should get one of the vaccines, you do not need to be worried about whether or not you will accidentally get the mark of the beast in the process.

Ever since the 1970s, many Christians have been very concerned about the mark of the beast, and there’s been a general fear that it will come disguised in some secret way that everyone will get tricked into, like a payment card or a Social Insurance Number (which is ominously acronymized as “SIN”).

I’d suggest this idea of getting tricked into receiving the mark is quite out of step with what we actually see in Revelation 13.

Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed. It performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people, and by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.

Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.

Revelation 13:11–18

As you can see, the context of this passage is not that of a secret, sneaky, conspiracy type of event. This is out there in the open. The inhabitants of the world are being made to worship the “first beast” (v. 12). There are “great signs” being performed, including fire coming down from heaven and an image being made for worship (vv. 13-14). Those who don’t worship the image of the beast are being executed (v. 15).

And in this context of extreme persecution comes the “mark” in verse 16, the mark of “the name of the beast or the number of its name,” without which no-one can buy or sell.

I have my doubts that we should take this as a literal mark that will be applied physically to people’s bodies. That doesn’t seem to fit the context of chapter 13, which begins with a multi-headed beast coming up out of the sea. Almost all interpreters understand the beast (and his heads and horns) to be symbolic. Why would we not understand his mark in the same way?

This would also fit with Ezekiel 9:4 and Revelation 7:3, where God’s people are similarly marked on their foreheads. In both of those contexts, this appears to be a symbolic way of signifying those who are God’s. It would seem that the mark of the beast is a satanic counterpart, signalling those who are not God’s.

However, even if the mark is literal and physical—which is possible—I still protest the idea that it will be rolled out as a grand trick. As in, people go to get something normal like a bank card or a vaccine, and then they find out that—oops!—they actually just signed their eternal salvation away.

Not only does this not fit the context of Revelation 13, but it’s also out of step with the several other passages in Revelation which mention the mark of the beast (Revelation 14:9–10, 14:11, 16:2, 20:4). In each of these, receiving the mark is connected with worshipping the beast and/or its image. In other words, people didn’t just get this mark by accident. They got the beast’s mark because they were beast-worshippers.

That’s why Revelation 14:9-11 says that those who receive the mark will be punished with God’s eternal wrath: they worshipped the beast instead of God.

Therefore, a genuine Christian could not get tricked into getting the mark of the beast, any more than a genuine Christian could get tricked into losing their salvation. It’s just not possible.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

John 10:27–29

Whether the mark is physical or symbolic, it will be clear that to receive it is to rebel against God, and deliberately choose to worship the beast instead of Him. This is a choice that someone who has been saved by Jesus will not—and indeed cannot—make.

So make a wise decision on whether or not you should get a vaccine, when one is made available to you. Do your homework, and don’t just believe whatever you read on the Internet. But don’t be worried that these vaccines are the mark of the beast. According to the Bible, that’s just simply not how things will work.

Each year, you should choose a word to represent the year you have in front of you. Think long and hard about one word that will serve as a guidepost for what you want to do and be in the year to come… One word that will remind you of what’s important when you need it most. One word to mean everything you want your year to be, and one word that will be a guiding light when times get tough and you’re not clear on what your priorities are.

Claire Diaz-Oritz, “Design Your Day,” p, 16.

Many Christians invest this practice with spiritual significance. They look to God to “give them a word” or a phrase for the year, perhaps by seeking to feel an impression in their heart or by looking for something to pop up repeatedly around them.

Because Romans 8:28 is true, I won’t deny that having a “word for the year” has sometimes been helpful for people. I’m sure there’s been situations where it’s reminded them of something important. But in general, I would suggest that it’s not a great idea. It’s highly subjective, it borders on superstition, it’s inherently self-focused, and—more to the point—it’s not something God has ever told us to do.

God has not promised to give us a “word” for this upcoming collection of 365 days we call 2021. He’s already given you a lot of words, and they are found in a book called the Bible.

And as we were reminded again this past Sunday, the Bible is not about you. Life is not about you. 2021 is not about you.

Instead, the Bible tells us that we are supporting characters in a grand drama centred on Jesus Christ, who is the fulfilment of all God‘s promises and the main character of the biggest story ever told (Ephesians 1:9-10, Hebrews 1:1-2).

Therefore, if you were to choose a word or a phrase to focus on in 2021—based on everything God has told us in his word—it would not sound like “determination” or “moxie” or even “rest” or “peace.”

Instead, it would sound like “Jesus Christ.”

Jesus Christ must be the focus of your 2021, because Jesus Christ is God’s focus for 2021. Jesus Christ has been God’s focus for every single year since the world began. The Father’s passion is to exalt his Son through a worshipping people called the church (John 17:1-5, 22-24), and thus our purpose in 2021 is to know, trust, love, obey, and proclaim Jesus for the glory of his name among all peoples.

And there is no better way to prepare yourself to do that than to regularly spend time in God’s word, the Bible. Your love for Jesus, your knowledge of Jesus, your ability to be a disciple of Jesus, your passion to make Him known to others—all of this will rise or fall with your knowledge of God’s word and your time spent with Him in that word.

So don’t pick a word for 2021. God has already done that for you. Determine instead to soak yourself in God’s word this year, allowing your heart and life to be shaped by it. Refuse to put the Bible on the shelf; refuse to allow the distractions of a noisy world to drown out the God who is there and who is not silent.

Several weeks ago I posted a few links to some excellent daily devotionals which can help you not only spend time in God’s word this year, but also help you understand it. Here’s that link again: Getting Your Daily Bread.

One of the more significant of those devotionals is “Read Your Bible” from The Gospel Coalition and Crossway. This daily resource, available by text or audio at the link above, is also available by email subscription (and podcast). It uses the M’Cheyne Bible reading plan, which walks you through four different sections of the Bible at a time. If done in a year, you would read the New Testament and Psalms twice and the Old Testament once.

The daily readings are also paired with short devotionals by D. A. Carson which help you understand how the passages connect up to the big story of the Bible. This plan would be an excellent way to read the whole Bible in 2021, especially if you’ve never done that before.

Alternatively, perhaps you’ve done a Bible-in-a-year plan once or twice already, and you’d like to try something a little bit different this time around. Reading the whole Bible more slowly—perhaps over two or three years—and taking the time to study what you’re reading can also be an excellent method.

In that regard I would comment D.A. Carson’s “For the Love of God.” (Amazon links here and here.) These two books contain the exact same readings you’ll find in the “Read the Bible” plan above, but by having them in book form, you’ll be able to go through them at your own pace. Pairing these volumes with a good study Bible would be an excellent way to dig in to the Scripture with a focus on understanding what you’re reading.

Whatever you plan on, make a plan. “I want to read the Bible more in 2021” is not a plan. That’s a wish, and a wish that will likely go unfulfilled if you don’t turn it into something more concrete.

“I will set my alarm 15 minutes earlier on weekdays and spend that time reading the Bible, using this specific resource and/or reading pattern” is a good plan. It’s specific, measurable, actionable, and realistic. It’s a plan you can share with a friend who can help keep you accountable. It’s a plan you’re likely to do this year.

So, let’s review: you don’t need to pick a word for 2021. Instead, you need to spend time in God’s words in order that you might better glorify His son Jesus Christ.

Do this, and you will do well this year, whatever 2021 has in store for us.

Tomorrow evening at 7:00 (after our 5pm prayer service) there are two great Christmas concerts happening online which I wanted to make you aware of.

First is Andrew Peterson’s Behold the Lamb of God. Watching a livestream of this concert has become an important part of our family’s December traditions, and we can’t wait to enjoy it again tomorrow. Tickets do cost $20, and ticket holders can watch the concert (in its entirety) anytime until Jan 31.

• Information and tickets: https://www.andrew-peterson.com/btlog

The second event is “Songs of Hope,” an advent concert being hosted by the Gospel Coalition. Some of my favourite artists will be taking part, like Caroline Cobb, Future of Forestry, Josh Garrels, Keith and Kristyn Getty, and Shane & Shane. This one is free, and again is available to be watched anytime after tomorrow.

• Information and link: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/video/songs-of-hope-tgc-advent-concert/

We’ve also been enjoying the Christmas music playlist put together by the Gospel Coalition—featuring many of the artists who will take part in the concert. It’s available on Apple Music or Spotify.

I trust either or both of these events will be a blessing to you this December as you remember and enjoy the good news that God is with us.

In recent months, we’ve noticed them being taken less often, and in the interests of good stewardship we are evaluating whether we’ll continue to order them in (at least in the quantities that we have in the past).

If you have used and appreciated “Our Daily Bread,” we do encourage you to begin to subscribe to it yourself. If you visit www.odb.org/subscription/canada, you can easily get the print edition (in regular or large print) shipped directly to your mailbox. They also have email delivery options, as well as a free app. If someone you know has been using Our Daily Bread, and they are not internet-savvy, this is something you could help them with.

I also want to let you know about some other daily devotional resources which you might want to get familiar with. These devotionals come from trusted teachers and ministries and, like all good devotionals, are not intended to replace your reading of the Bible. Instead they can help you understand, appreciate and apply the Bible in your life on a regular basis.

• Truth for Life (Alistair Begg)
  • www.truthforlife.org/resources/daily-devotionals/
  • You can read these devotionals on their website or subscribe by email.

• Solid Joys (John Piper)
  • www.desiringgod.org/solid-joys
  • Available on the website or by podcast, email and free app, this is a resource I’ve really appreciated.

• Grace to You (John MacArthur)
  • www.gty.org/library/devotionals
  • They have a number of daily devotionals available on the web or by email subscription. You can also purchase them in book form.

• Read the Bible (The Gospel Coalition/Crossway)
  • www.thegospelcoalition.org/devotionals/read-the-bible/
  • This devotional is based off of a one-year Bible reading plan, with devotional notes to help you understand the passages.
  • It’s available on the website, by email and podcast, and also through Facebook.

• Tabletalk Magazine
  • tabletalkmagazine.com
  • This magazine (which has a free trial, after which it does cost a small amount) contains a rich daily devotional guide to the Scriptures as well as helpful and top-notch articles.

On the cusp of a new year, why not explore some of these valuable resources to help you engage with God and His word in 2021?

This reminds me of a story involving Tertullian, a theologian who lived in the early centuries after Christ. According to the story, a silversmith, who made his living crafting idols, became a disciple of Jesus.  Now he had a dilemma on his hands: his job was incompatible with his faith in Christ. He spoke to Tertullian and rationalized that if he gave up making idols, he would have no way to feed himself. “And I must live,” he finished.

“Must you?” was Tertullian’s reply.

In other words, no compromise.

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

(Matthew 16:24–25.) 

Jesus’ hunger introduces us to a number of ironies to which Matthew more or less explicitly alludes:

– Jesus is hungry (v. 2) but feeds others (Matthew 14:13–21; 15:29–39);

– he grows weary (Matthew 8:24) but offers others rest (Matthew 11:28);

– he is the King Messiah but pays tribute (Matthew 17:24–27);

– he is called the devil but casts out demons (Matthew 12:22–32);

– he dies the death of a sinner but comes to save his people from their sins (Matthew 1:21);

– he is sold for thirty pieces of silver but gives his life a ransom for many (Matthew 20:28);

– he will not turn stones to bread for himself (Matthew 4:3–4) but gives his own body as bread for people (Matthew 26:26).

D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, Mark, Luke, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 112.

That’s why October 31 is sometimes celebrated as “Reformation Day,” and the Sunday prior as “Reformation Sunday.”

Why would we care about something that happened in Germany 503 years ago? Is the Reformation even relevant for us today?

These are the questions answered by a new video series by the Gospel Coalition called “Echoes of the Reformation.” Available on YouTube or as an app for your Apple TV or Roku, this six-week study on the five “solas” of the Reformation will help you understand where we’ve come from—and where we need to go.

Check out the videos and study guide here:

Here’s what I mean by this: God had firm plans for His son Jesus. The angel had told Joseph, “He will save His people from their sins” (Matt 1:21). Not might save, not could save, but will save. Centuries of prophecy had pointed to this one child.

And yet the the angel comes and says, “Herod wants to kill him, so you need to run.”

At this point, Joseph could have said, “Look, you said that this child would save His people from their sins. Mary was told that this child would reign on David’s throne forever. So there’s no way that God is going to let Herod kill him. There’s no way that Herod can interfere with God’s plans. This child is safe as safe can be. I don’t need to run anywhere. I’m going back to sleep.”

But Joseph didn’t say this. Joseph just obeyed. And here lies the big lesson for us: yes, God had made promises about this child, and no, Herod could not stop God’s plans. But the way that God kept His promises—the way that God Jesus safe from Herod—was to have Joseph bring Jesus to Egypt.

In other words, God used Joseph as a part of His plan. Joseph’s obedience was one of the ways that God kept His promises.

God could have kept Jesus safe in other ways. He could have had Herod die of a heart attack. He could have confused the soldiers so they didn’t find the house where Jesus was staying. He could have used many different means. But He chose to warn Joseph in a dream, and have Joseph heed the warning and bring Jesus to Egypt.

Seen from this angle, the story of the flight to Egypt is a really helpful illustration for some other teachings in the Bible, especially the issue of eternal security.

Many Christians wrestle with the question, “Am I safe for eternity?” On the one hand, it seems to be a simple question. Many times God’s word promises us that when Jesus saves us, we cannot become un-saved, but instead are safe and secure in Jesus for all eternity.

Just think about Jesus’ promise in John 10:28 concerning His people: “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.” Or Philippians 1:6: “And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” Those are just two of many promises (John 6:39-40, Romans 8:29-30, 35-39, etc.) which tell us that if we’ve been saved by Jesus, we’re safe forever.

And yet, on the other hand, we also hear warnings like this: “But the one who endures to the end will be saved” (Mark 13:13). Or Hebrews 3:14: “For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.” We can remember the warnings in 1 Timothy against making shipwreck of our faith and wandering away from the faith. And then there are the chilling warnings against falling away found in Hebrews 6:1-12 and 10:26-31. (See also Romans 11:21-21 & Colossians 1:22-23.)

So which is it? Are we safe and secure in Jesus, or do we need to heed the warnings against falling away?

I would suggest this question is almost the same as asking, “Was baby Jesus going to grow up and be our promised saviour, or did Joesph need to heed the warning and flee to Egypt?”

The answer to both questions, as we’ve seen, is yes. God kept His promise of making Jesus the saviour by warning Joseph to get up and flee. Joseph’s obedient actions were a part of God’s plan to keep Jesus safe from Herod. The warning to flee to Egypt was the way that God preserved Jesus so that He would grow up and save us from our sins.

And so it is with our salvation. Is our eternal salvation secure in Jesus? Most certainly. And some of the ways that Jesus keeps us secure include warning us not to wander, telling us to endure and persevere, and helping us heed these warnings by the power of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 1:12-14). Just like Joseph fleeing to Egypt, our Spirit-empowered perseverance is a part of God’s work and plan: His chosen means to His chosen ends.

So when we read passages in Scripture which warn us against wandering away from our salvation, let’s be like Joseph, who heeded and obeyed the angel’s warning. As we do that, let’s look to God for the strength to persevere. And when we arrive safely in God’s presence, we’ll give Him all of the glory for rescuing us from every evil deed and bringing us safely into his heavenly kingdom (2 Timothy 4:18).

For many years, it’s been assumed by scholars that while the world of the first century was largely based on honour/shame, and while the same is true of many Eastern cultures in the world today, here in the West we tend to be more concerned about other experiences—like innocence and guilt—more so than honour and shame.

This may have been true in the past, but in recent yers the West appears to be taking on more and more characteristics of an honour/shame culture. Those of you who are familiar with social media know how the experience of “shaming” is so prevalent today, and how people can have their entire careers and public lives “cancelled” if they do or say something outside of the accepted norms.

This is what the experience of “shame” is like in an honour/shame culture, and is along the lines of what being “shamed” could have been like for Mary.

Abdu Murray, a senior VP for Ravi Zacharias International Ministries, wrote an excellent article for the Gospel Coalition in which he explains how honour/shame dynamics have taken a hold here in the West, and how we as Christians should respond. I recommend it highly:

Canceled: How the Eastern Honor-Shame Mentality Traveled West

Cancel culture is a Western version of the East’s honor-shame culture dynamics. Jesus answers both.

www.thegospelcoalition.org

Jesus Christ proclaimed himself greater than Solomon, challenging his disciples to hear his incomparable wisdom (Matt. 12:42). His superiority to Solomon and to his wisdom can be seen in the following contrasts, citing Solomon’s proverbs first and then New Testament references.

– The Queen of Sheba testified to Solomon’s wisdom in this world, but she will rise at the judgment to condemn people for not listening to Christ’s superior wisdom (Matt. 12:46).

– Solomon taught his disciples to wait for God to repay the wrongdoer, but Christ himself will repay them (Prov. 24:12; Matt. 25:41–46; Rev. 2:23; 22:12; cf. Rom. 2:6–8; 2 Tim. 4:14; 1 Pet. 1:17; Rev. 20:12–13).

– Solomon depended on God to discipline those he loves, but Christ himself disciplines those he loves (3:11–12; Rev. 3:19).

– Solomon taught that those who share with the poor will be rewarded by God, but Christ identifies himself with and as the poor and as the one who rewards those who sacrifice for them (Matt. 25:31–45).

– Solomon focused on health and wealth now and minimized present sufferings; Christ focused on present suffering for righteousness and maximized future, eternal glory (3:1–10, 34; Matt. 5:3–12; 25:1–13)

– Solomon offers eternal life opaquely, but Christ by his resurrection brought immortality into the full light of day (8:35; Matt. 25:46; 2 Tim. 1:10).

– Solomon motivates his disciples to please their parents, but Christ, while upholding the honor of parents, teaches his disciples to love the triune God more (10:1; 19:13; 23:22–25; 27:11; 29:3; Matt. 5:45; 7:21; 10:32, 33, 35, 37; 15:4; 23:9; 25:34; Luke 9:60).

– Solomon’s wisdom is a bubbling brook, but Christ offers streams of water from within (18:4; John 7:38).

– Solomon offers a banquet of food and drink, but Christ himself is the Christian’s food and drink (Prov. 9:1–3; John 6:53).

– No human ascended into heaven to comprehend the whole, but Christ both descended from heaven and ascended into it (30:4; John 3:13; 6:33).

– Solomon depended in part on the sayings of others, but Christ speaks as the authoritative Son of Man from heaven (Prov. 20:23; Matthew 12).

– Solomon calls on his disciples to write his teachings on their hearts, but Christ sends his Spirit to write God’s word on their hearts (Prov. 3:3; 2 Cor. 3:3).

– Solomon calls for obedience, but Christ’s Spirit empowers his elect to obey (Prov. 1:20–21; Rom. 8:1–8).

– Solomon anticipates a future ideal king (16:10–15), but Christ is the Messiah (Matt. 27:37).

– Solomon pointed to atonement by showing reliable love to others, but Christ showed such reliable love to his own that he died to atone for their sin (Mark 10:45; 2 Cor. 5:14).

– Solomon himself failed to obey his wisdom, but Christ is the perfect example of his (3:2; 25:26; 1 K. 11:9–10; Luke 2:52; Heb. 4:15).

– Solomon lost his kingdom, but Christ builds his (1 K. 11:10; Matt. 16:18).

– Solomon called on his disciples to feed their enemies, but Christ died for his enemies (25:21; Rom 5:8).

Nevertheless, even though Christ’s wisdom is so much greater than Solomon’s, we do not discard the latter any more than we would throw away a five-dollar bill because we also owned a twenty-dollar bill.

It might be helpful to review some of what we learned about the Lord’s Supper back in May. Below is a link to that message—called “Do This in Remembrance of Me”—which you can read, listen to, or watch.

Below you can also listen to Andrew Peterson’s excellent song “Remember and Proclaim.” It’s a song that captures perfectly the fact that communion is something we should celebrate; it shouldn’t feel like a funeral.

I am so looking forward to remembering and proclaiming with you on Sunday!

The sin that Solomon warned against in Proverbs 6:25 is the sin of coveting beauty, of wanting it for ourselves. The following prayer, from Douglas McKelvey’s “Every Moment Holy,” is written to help us guide our hearts away from coveting beauty, and towards celebrating beauty in a way that honours its Creator.

Lord, I praise you for divine beauty
Reflected in the form of this person.
Now train my heart so that my response
To their beauty would not be twisted
Downward into envy or desire,
But would instead be directed upward
In worship of you, their Creator—
As was your intension for all such beauty
Before the breaking of the world.

Douglas Kaine Mckelvey, Every Moment Holy. Nashville, TN: Rabbit Room Press, 2017. Page 248.

We can carry this idea a step further into even more uncomfortable territory. Yes, we need unity because of the battle. But we should be aware of the ways in which unity itself might invite the battle by drawing the fire of the enemy.

Think about the words of Jesus in John 13:35: “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” Doesn’t that sound so great? As we sing the song, “They’ll know we are Christians by our love,” don’t we picture people flocking to Jesus because they’ve seen our love for one another?

But what did Jesus Himself say about being His disciples just two chapters after this comment? “Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you…” (John 15:20). 

If we love each other, the world will know we are Christ’s disciples, and some of them will hate us for that. They will treat us like they treated Jesus. Unity is the uniform that will draw their fire.

We see this principle written all over this passage from Hebrews 10:

But recall the former days when, after you were enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings, sometimes being publicly exposed to reproach and affliction, and sometimes being partners with those so treated. For you had compassion on those in prison, and you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one.

(Hebrews 10:32-34)

Notice the connection between “having compassion on those in prison” and “joyfully accepting the plundering of your property”? I’ve heard it suggested that they went together, hand-in-glove. You’d go visit your Christian brothers and sisters in prison, and that would mark you out as “one of them,” and you’d come home to find your place ransacked.

Unity can be dangerous. And perhaps this is why the author of Hebrews had to tell them, just a few verses earlier, to not neglect meeting together (Hebrews 10:25). Maybe their reasons for not meeting together weren’t North American reasons like sports and fishing and sleeping in. Maybe they were neglecting to meet together because they were scared about having their homes ransacked and being thrown in prison.

And yet not meeting together was not an option. The more the enemy fires on us, the more we need each other. Because what’s the alternative? Being hardened by the deceitfulness of sin and watching our faith shrivel up, alone?

Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.

(Hebrews 3:12–14)

Unity might be dangerous, but not near as dangerous as trying to do life by ourselves. Let’s commit ourselves to walking in a manner worthy of the gospel—a path of dangerous, missional, joy-filled and ultimately victorious unity.

Many churches are now resuming our meetings, or will soon. But these new services feel strange. Our sensitivities are heightened, our differences are on display, and we have to endure restrictions and protocols that are awkward, inconvenient, and frustrating. Then, no matter how safe we make it, some of our church family still can’t come.

With all this in mind, some believers may feel tempted not to come at all. If our restored gatherings are so different and restricted, our online options so available and convenient, and our physical presence a genuine vulnerability, why should we even meet in person?

Thus begins an excellent article by David Gundersen I highly recommend to you:

10 Reasons to Come Back to Church after COVID-19

Many churches are now resuming our meetings, or will soon. But these new services feel strange. Some believers may feel tempted not to come at all.

www.crossway.org

Some pundits have prophesied that COVID-19 will be the end of the local church as we know it. I disagree. God made us to gather, and this isn’t the first time in history our gathering has been interrupted. In my observation, this time of being apart is going to strengthen the local church as we come to realize just how important it is to be together.

In that vein, I commend this recent article by Bob Kauflin, called “God Made Us to Gather.” It’s a good follow-up to Sunday’s message, and a good way to prepare your heart for this upcoming Sunday and beyond, as we keep looking to the day when we’ll be able to be all together in one place again.

God Made Us to Gather: The Fresh Wonder of Corporate Worship

One day we’ll gather again. And when we do, many of us will feel the wonder of corporate worship in a way we never have before.

www.desiringgod.org

We use the word “church” in this way when we speak about “the church across the globe today.” Jesus used it this way when He said that He would build His church (Matthew 16:18). Not churches, but church. Singular.

Here’s an important question we need to ask: if the word “church” basically means “assembly,” and refers to the assembly of the citizens of the Kingdom of God, then how can we use the word “church” to refer to all of God’s people in this way?

It makes sense to speak about churches, because local churches actually assemble together. But can we really use the phrase “the church” today, when God’s people are spread all over the world and it is impossible for them to all gather in one place at one time? Why call us an assembly if we never will assemble?

Here’s a way of thinking about it: have you ever seen those little shirts or other merchandise given to babies that say something like “Class of 2038”? (Here’s an example.)

When a parent puts a onesie on their baby that says “Class of 2028,” it’s like they’re saying, “If everything goes well, this child is expected to graduate in 2038. And so we are calling them something today based on what we hope they will be then.”

I know that “Class of 2038” onesies are a bit of a joke. But I hope you can see the idea: that you are referring to someone today based upon who they will be in the future. Perhaps you can think of other examples of this yourself.

I want to suggest that something quite similar is going on when Scripture refers to God’s people as “the church.” God is looking forward to the day when the kingdom will come and we will all be together with King Jesus. In that day, the citizens of the kingdom from all times and all places will be assembled together. 

Jesus calls us His “church” today on that basis. We are members of the people who will be assembled all together in the future. And today, as we live in this season of already-but-not-yet, we already get to participate in that spiritual reality.

A passage of Scripture that makes this point really well is found in Hebrews 12:

For you have not come to what may be touched, a blazing fire and darkness and gloom and a tempest and the sound of a trumpet and a voice whose words made the hearers beg that no further messages be spoken to them. For they could not endure the order that was given, “If even a beast touches the mountain, it shall be stoned.” Indeed, so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, “I tremble with fear.” But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

(Hebrews 12:18–24, ESV)

One day, we will experience these realities fully. But today, we already get to participate in them spiritually. (See also Ephesians 2:6 & Colossians 3:1-4). We are already a part of this heavenly “assembly of the firstborn.”

And guess what that word “assembly” is? εκκλησια (ekklēsia). That’s the word for church, and “church” is actually how the NIV and the KJV translate that word in this passage.

So let’s sum this up: one day, when the kingdom comes in its fullness, there will be a literal assembly of its citizens, gathered together from all times and all places. That assembly is the “church” that Jesus is building today. If we have been saved by Jesus, we can be assured that we’ll be a part of that future assembly.

But we don’t have to wait until then to share in its life. Today, we already get to spiritually participate in its heavenly realities. And even more than this, we already get to start living out kingdom life in community with other brothers and sisters in Christ. We assemble together with them into local churches (“assemblies”), which are outposts and anticipations of that great assembly, and in which we live according to the ways of the kingdom and exercise our authority as citizens of it.

So being called “the church” is kind of like a baby wearing a “Class of 2038” onesie. But it’s so much bigger than that. Because it’s like we’re already being treated as graduates and invited to participate in that post-graduation life even as we wait for it to come.

The church is so much greater than we think.

We should notice that the doubt of some is reported very factually: “Some doubted.” There’s no mention of the reasons why, and no resolution (like “But when they heard his voice all doubt vanished”). It just says that some doubted.

If Matthew (or some other author) was making this story up, telling tales and myths about Jesus that never actually happened, do you think he’d invent this detail? “Some doubted.” Of course not, because it raises too many questions. “Why did they doubt? Was something ‘off’ about ‘Jesus’? Should I doubt too?” The only reason you’d include this difficult detail is because it actually happened and you’re just telling things the way they were. 

A similar example occurs earlier in chapter 28. Who were the first witnesses to the resurrection? “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” (Matthew 28:1). In Matthew’s day, women were not seen as being very trustworthy. Their witness didn’t mean much legally and held no water in a court of law. And so, if you were making this up, you’d surely say that the first witnesses to the resurrection were men, and likely men of influence and repute. The only reason you’d say they were women is if things really happened that way and you were just reporting on the facts. 

Matthew’s willingness to include potentially damaging details in his report boosts our confidence that he was actually telling the truth, and had been all along.

Why is it, though, that so many Christians seem so intrigued by conspiracy theories? I does appear that, as Ed Stetzer has recently written, “Christians seem to be disproportionately fooled by conspiracy theories.”

I wonder if our fascination with Biblical prophecy has set us up for this. Since Hal Lindsay’s 1970 bestseller “The Late, Great Planet Earth,” many western Christians have accepted a view of Biblical prophecy which makes some pretty big connections between the pages of Scripture and the pages of the newspaper.

I’m sure you’ve heard many of these proposals: that the “ten kings” in Revelation 17:12 refers to a one-world government, or that the “mark of the beast” in Revelation 13:16-18 refers to an advanced technological system, like a chip embedded under our skin connected to a computer database.

If we accept these conclusions, a certain posture tends to follow. We’ll be decidedly against globalization. We’ll be wary of each new advance in payment technology. We’ll keep our eyes on world news, following any developments that could fit in with our prophetic scheme. (“Could this world leader be the antichrist?”) In short, we’ll be on the lookout for conspiracies.

Christians who adopt this posture are not deterred by failed predictions, of which there have been many. They adapt and adjust their predictions based on trends in news and current events, always convinced that the latest big story (in our days, COVID-19) is a key part in the end times.

Why do I believe that this approach—which I’ll refer to as “Newspaper Theology”—is fundamentally mistaken? It’s not because I don’t believe that Jesus is coming back, or that there won’t be signs of His return. Rather, it’s because I believe that Newspaper Theology significantly misunderstands biblical prophecy on several points.

For starters, it misunderstands the point of prophecy in general. It tends to treat the book of Revelation like a giant crossword puzzle for biblical prophecy experts to solve. But this is not accurate. The book of Revelation is a book written to ordinary Christians in ordinary churches in the first century (Revelation 1:10-11). It’s purpose was not to make us news junkies, but to encourage us to endure in the face of persecution (Revelation 2:7, 10, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21; 13:10; 14:12), knowing that Christ is going to return and deliver His people. Revelation is a book that even children can understand (a belief I take seriously, having just finished reading it to my children for bed-time devotions. Chapter 5 was their favourite).

Newspaper Theology also often stands on shaky footing when it insists that certain portions of Revelation must be interpreted “literally.” For example, in chapter 13, everyone understands that the description of the two beasts is symbolic. There won’t be an actual, literal beast rising out of the sea—rather, that is language which symbolizes a man or a kingdom. And yet, when they get to verse 16 (which describes the “mark of the beast”), there is no symbolism permitted. They insist this must be an actual mark on people’s actual hands or foreheads.

Doesn’t this seem inconsistent? Shouldn’t the highly symbolic nature of Revelation (and much of Biblical prophecy) make us cautious about planting our flag and insisting that certain elements must be interpreted non-symbolically? (I recommend reading or listening to this interview with Bible scholar Thomas Schreiner for more perspective on how to interpret the symbolic language in Revelation.)

A further misunderstanding exists. Even if Revelation 13:16 is describing an actual, literal, physical mark on people’s hands or foreheads—which is certainly possible—Newspaper Theology fails to recognize that such a prophecy is not waiting on technology or political development to materialize. The Roman government in the first century could easily have decided to tattoo it’s citizens on their hands or forehead, and only allow those who had the tattoo to buy and sell. Similarly, if Revelation 17 does describe a one-world government, we’ve been terribly close to such a reality in the past. Just think again of the Roman Empire, or even the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. The United Nations or the European Union doesn’t hold a candle to the kind of global power that was wielded in the past by emperors and popes.

What I’m suggesting is that even if these prophecies in Revelation are describing actual, literal, physical realities, they could have come to pass at many points in the last 2,000 years. All those failed predictions theoretically could have been true.

Now please hear what I’m not saying. I’m not saying we shouldn’t learn the lesson from the fig tree, as Jesus instructed us to do, and pay attention to the signs of the times (Matthew 24:32-33). I’m just pointing out what Jesus Himself also told a group of Christians in the first century: that He was coming soon (Revelation 22:20). He’s coming, and He’s not waiting on technology to finally develop to the point where the mark of the beast is possible. That’s always been possible. He’s not waiting on political machinations to make the one-world government finally possible. It’s always been possible.

If He’s waiting on anything, it’s for His people to finish their mission of bringing the gospel to every tribe, language, people and nation (Revelation 5:9, Matthew 24:14). And this brings us back to the point of Biblical prophecy: God did not give us these prophecies so that we could spend a lot of time talking—or worse, arguing—about them amongst ourselves. He told us these things to make us holy people who would talk to other people about the gospel. (See Matthew 25, where Jesus follows up His teaching on the end times with repeated lessons about living obedient and fruitful lives in anticipation of His return.)

And so I’d remind us again that in this season of COVID-19, we only do harm to the church and the name of Jesus when we get swept up in spreading conspiracy theories. Whether they are true or not, we have bigger, better, real-er things to be focusing on.

“Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Peter 3:11–13).

At around the 1:22 point in the trailer, you can hear a song start to play, a song that also features in the movie itself. That song is “She Waits” by the Gray Havens, and its lyrics are a poetic reflection on Romans 8:19-21: “For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.”

Here is the song in its entirety, followed by some of its lyrics:

Dressed in chains, now she waits
Looking back upon that day
When the dawn first held its gaze
Upon the son and the daughter’s face

But strange now it seems
Like some dark and distant dream
Still, she hopes and longs to be
Once again, and finally free

So she waits, she waits
She waits
So she waits, she waits
She waits

She’s seen empires come and go
Watched the kingdom’s children grow
Sparks and embers far from home
Born to shine, and to behold

‘Cause on her chain is a lock and the key
Is the radiance she will see
From the light that’s gonna be
Cast from the sons and the daughters free

She’s a captive ’til she sees
By the morning light
Redeemed sons and daughters

“She Waits” by Benji Cowart & Dave Radford

This song has gripped me in recent days. Not only is it beautiful and moving, but the way it portrays creation waiting is particularly meaningful in this season.

Most of us are waiting. We are waiting for the lockdown to be over. We are waiting for a cure for COVID-19 to be discovered. We are waiting for “normal” to come back to us again.

But in reality, this present pause is just one tiny part of a much bigger wait, a period of waiting which began in the Garden and continues to this day. It’s the waiting of creation. The waiting for all of God’s promises to come to fulfillment. The waiting for Jesus to return and His people to be resurrected and revealed in glory.

Creation does not wait for this alone. “And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience” (Romans 8:23-25).

This waiting really puts our present waiting into perspective. COVID-19 will pass. That wait will be over in a relatively short time. But our real wait will continue: our eager “waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13).

Are you waiting for this? Is your life built around this wait, shaped by it? This waiting is not like many other waits we’ve experienced here on earth. It’s not like waiting in line or waiting on hold. It’s an active waiting, a waiting that propels us to good works (Matthew 24:36-25:30, Titus 2:11-13, 1 Peter 1:13-21).

Today, creation waits. Our present circumstances present us with a beautiful opportunity to intentionally join in that waiting, fixing our eyes on what’s ahead and saying, in some of the last words in the Bible, “Come, Lord Jesus” (Revelation 22:20).

The sheer number of theories, and the way they contradict one another, should make us hesitant to hitch our wagon too quickly to any of these counter-narratives.

But there’s more going on here. As Christians, how should we be thinking of and approaching conspiracy theories in general?

I’ll admit that, in the past, I was a sucker for a good conspiracy theory. It didn’t take much to convince me that the government and the mainstream media were hiding the truth from us, and that we were all victims of subterfuge on a global scale.

My attitude changed when I began to study the Bible more intentionally and was confronted with its teaching about Satan. Consider passages like 1 John 5:19: “We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.”

Or Ephesians 2:1-3: “And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.”

The world system is being run by Satan. If someone doesn’t know Jesus, then they are marching to Satan’s drum, whether they know it or not. And this understanding makes conspiracy theories completely irrelevant.

Here’s why: people are following Satan and doing what he wants whether he’s using secret societies or not. Whether someone is a globalist or an anti-globalist, a part of the mainstream or the independent media, a deep state elite or a grassroots freedom fighter, a communist or a capitalist— if they have not been rescued by Jesus, they are lying in the power of the evil one and following his will.

For us as Christians, this means that we can’t get caught up with the conspiracy theories which enthral others. The theories may be true, or they might not be, but at the end of the day, “we do not wrestle against flesh and blood” (Ephesians 6:12), and we have the work of the Kingdom of Jesus to be busy with.

Furthermore, whether these conspiracy theories are true or not should have absolutely no impact on our obedience to Titus 3:1-2: “Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people.”

That passage does not say, “Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, unless some guy on YouTube convinces them that the government is covering something up. Be obedient, until it threatens your comfort level. Speak evil of no one, and show perfect courtesy to everyone, except for that group which the conspiracy theorists are blaming all of the world’s problems on. Avoid quarrelling, unless you’re sharing inflammatory material online. Be gentle, unless you’re posting on Facebook.”

If COVID-19 is one big global conspiracy, it would not make a shred of difference for how God’s people should be acting and communicating in this time. As citizens of the Kingdom of Jesus, our marching orders are clear. This pandemic situation is not a time to get caught up in conspiracy theories, but a season to invest ourselves in the cause of Christ, using our interactions with others to reflect Him well and bear witness to the Truth which sets us free (John 8:31).

For many of us, this season of COVID-19 means lots more time at home than we’re used to. Families with small children may be on the prowl for worthy activities to fill their days. Hopefully you’ll find some help below.

Others of you, once the projects have all been caught up, may find yourselves with time on your hands: time you can waste, or invest wisely. I encourage you to use this time for the kingdom of God, and one way you can do that is by developing, learning and growing yourself.

Whatever your situation looks like right now, I offer you this collection of resources. Here you’ll find websites, books, podcasts, videos, and so on. Consider this informational; I don’t necessarily endorse the full contents of everything you’ll find here. However, I have placed things on this list which I have a certain level of trust for and which I expect to be helpful to you.

Also, this is just a start. I hope to keep this list updated.

Books and Online Resources

• Free (or Discounted) Books to Read in Quarantine
  • Spend some time with this list from the Gospel Coalition. It is full of many excellent resources.
  • In addition to books, you’ll find online resources, ebooks, and streaming video.

• Coronavirus and Christ
  • This short book by John Piper is highly recommended.

• The Final Days of Jesus Video Series
  • “In this video series, well-known New Testament scholars explore the background and significance of the history-shaping events that occurred during Jesus’s last week on earth.”
  • Videos are about 5 minutes each.

• Free Subscription to ESV.org
  • You’ve heard me talk about the ESV Study Bible a bunch. It’s now available online for free, along with a bunch of other fantastic Bible study resources.
  • Crossway is also giving away other resources for free at this page.

• Creation and Marine Biology
  • This is a four-part lecture series from Dr. Gordon Wilson of “The Riot and the Dance” (see below).
  • The password to access is RIOTFAMILY

For Families and Children

• The Riot and the Dance: Water
  • This excellent, Biblically-based documentary is streaming free on VidAngel.

• “The Biggest Story” Short Film
  • Based on the excellent book by Kevin DeYoung, this 26-minute animated film walks through the big story of the Bible in a way that will captivate and benefit the whole family.

• Free homeschool curriculum from Logos Press
  • Contains some excellent, high-quality curriculum our family uses.
  • There are giving away two week’s worth for free.

• Big Picture Bible Crafts
  • Crossway is offering this as a free PDF. It is full of fantastic crafts and activities for children.

• New City Catechism
  • A time-tested way to pass on the faith using a question-and-answer format.
  • Available as a free app, it comes with songs for children and devotionals and prayers for the whole family.

Podcasts

General:

• Gentle and Lowly: A New Podcast for Anxious and Discouraged Christians
• 5 Minutes in Church History
• The Bible Project Podcast
• The Briefing with Albert Mohler
• The Crossway Podcast
• Let My People Think with Ravi Zacharias
• Renewing Your Mind with R.C. Sproul
• Solid Joys with John Piper
• Truth for Life with Allistair Begg

For kids:

• Jesus is Better with Alicia Yoder

For women:

• The Daily Grace Podcast
• Journeywomen
• Risen Motherhood
• What Have You
• Women Encouraged

How do we engage our brothers and sisters in more meaningful conversation? How can we do this even in the hustle and bustle of a Sunday morning?

The following short video from Biblical counsellor Ed Welch, drawing on his book “Caring for One Another: 8 Ways to Cultivate Meaningful Relationships” (on order for the church library) highlights two simple questions you can use, even on a Sunday morning, to help you break past the small-talk barrier.

Click below to watch:

2 Simple (Yet Profound) Questions to Ask Someone at Church This Sunday

What does it look like to strike up an intentional conversation aimed at deepening our relationships?

www.crossway.org

And so this verse reminds us that it all really happened. Jesus was really born, He really lived, He really died, and He really walked out of His grave. The grace of God has appeared.

I know that this concrete reality of Jesus in the flesh can seem distant to us, after 2,000 years of human history has passed. And so I want to encourage you to bring it home for a moment by taking a breath. Literally: just take a breath right now. Here’s the stunning truth: according to statistics, as you took in that breath, you drew molecules of air in your lungs that were inside the very lungs of Jesus.

There’s only so much air in the atmosphere, and so as we breathe it in and out, it all gets mixed around over time. We literally do all share the same air, and that goes for Jesus, too.

In fact, in your lifetime, you have probably breathed some of the air which flowed out of Jesus lungs when He breathed His last breath on the cross. And you have most likely breathed air that flowed into Jesus’ lungs when He took that first breath in when He rose from the dead. Some of that air may even be in your lungs at this very moment.

This is all just just science and statistics—which you can find out more about here—but thinking about things in this way brings the reality of Jesus to bear on my heart. The grace of God really did appear, bringing salvation. And like we heard yesterday, that same grace is still at work in our lives today, training us for godliness as we wait for Christ’s return.

Back in 2014, someone asked John Piper about “church hopping” and the importance of committing to one church. If you’re still unsure about the importance of church membership, his eight-minute answer (link below) is well worth your time.

All of this is true, and yet there is another angle to this phrase “servant of God.” In the world of Paul’s day, while being a servant or slave was a humble position, getting to be a servant to a great person was honourable. If you were Caesar’s servant, for example, that was nothing to be ashamed of. It was a great thing.

And so to be a servant of God was no small matter. We see this even clearer when we look back across Scripture and see the other people who are referred to as God’s servants. They include Moses (Psalm 105:26, Revelation 15:3), Abraham (Psalm 105:42), David (2 Samuel 7:4-5, 8), and the prophets (Jeremiah 7:25, 25:4, Amos 3:7, Haggai 2:23, Revelation 10:7). Being a servant of God puts you in very honourable company.

This perspective is important to help us through the times when we struggle to submit to God’s will, or the times when we want to run our lives instead of obeying Christ’s commands. In those moments, being His servant feels lowly and limiting.

That’s when we need to remember that being His servant is a high and noble calling, one we don’t deserve in the slightest. Apart from His grace, we would be condemned criminals, enemies of God. To be saved and forgiven is a gift beyond our wildest dreams. To be then invited to serve our Saviour with our lives should take our breath away.

And it’s when we embrace our identity as God’s servants that we actually find our greatest freedom. We were made for Him, and serving Him is how we, ironically, discover our truest selves. “Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God” (1 Peter 2:16).

This week, may the Lord help you to see yourself as his servant, and then to live like one.

God has promised to provide for our real needs of food and clothing (Matthew 6:25-34, 1 Timothy 6:8). If He gives us anything beyond this, it’s so that we can use it for good (1 Timothy 6:18). This perspective changes everything. Your money is not your money, so it’s not a question of you deciding how much you’re going to give away. It’s all God’s money, and so you just need to decide how much of God’s money you’re going to keep for yourself, freeing up the rest for His purposes.

This principle is one of the reasons for why I don’t believe in tithing. The main reason is that we are in the New Covenant, and tithing, as a part of the Law of Moses, does not apply to us any more than the temple sacrifices do. But beyond this, a strict adherence to tithing encourages us to think about our money as being ours, and to imagine that we’ve done our duty once we’ve given 10% of it away.

It’s far better to see things in reverse. How much of God’s money do I need to survive on? How much of God’s money is He okay with me using for recreation, and even entertainment, as a part of Him richly providing me with everything to enjoy (1 Timothy 6:17)?

Once we’ve answered these questions, then we get to figure out how to use the rest of the money God has entrusted to us to accomplish as much good as possible.

The same questions apply to our time. You belong to Jesus. You’re His. Therefore, your time is His. So it’s not a question of how much of your time you will give to Him. It’s a question of how much of God’s time you need to use for work, family, rest and relaxation, and other responsibilities. Then the rest gets used for Him.

As you think about these matters more, I’d highly recommend the following article written by Randy Alcorn. Randy has thought and written much about a godly use of money, and this article distills many of these wise principles into some practical next steps you can apply to your life today.

Are you ready to seriously re-think how you can honour God with the money He has entrusted you with? Prayerfully read and apply these words, and be prepared to experience a new level of freedom in your heart.

It Matters How We Handle God’s Money – Eternal Perspective Ministries

The everyday choices we make regarding money and possessions—which affect nearly everything we do—are of eternal consequence.

www.epm.org

But as for you, O man of God, flee these things.

In last week’s passage, we learned Timothy was not just supposed to deal with the false teachers. He also needed to make sure that he never became like one of them himself.

You may have heard that old phrase, “If you can’t beat them, join them,” and there’s some scary truth to those words. I’ve seen many times over the years how easily people can become the very thing that they used to fight against. Often, it’s not a deliberate process. It “just happens” as they drop their guard and stop fighting.

How do we avoid this? What is the secret to long-term endurance in faith and ministry? The answer is just that: long term endurance. We never quit.

Just think about those commands Timothy received:

• “Flee these things” (1 Timothy 6:11a). If something is chasing you, if doesn’t matter if you do a great job fleeing for a period of time. If you stop fleeing, it will get you.

• “Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness” (1 Timothy 6:11b). If you are pursuing something, it doesn’t matter how well you have been chasing it. If you stop, it’s going to get away.

• “Fight the good fight of the faith” (1 Timothy 6:12a). In a battle, it doesn’t matter how well you fought. If you stop fighting now, you’re going to loose.

• “Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called” (1 Timothy 6:12b). If you take hold of something, you will only obtain it if you keep holding on to it.

• “Keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Timothy 6:14). It only takes one stain to make something dirty. Keeping the commandment unstained and free from reproach requires continual care and vigilance.

So many professing Christians only ever try to avoid sin and dabble in the fruit of the spirit and reach out for eternal life every once in a while. This passive approach to the faith is a sure path to wasting your life and often, sadly, wandering away from the faith entirely.

1 Timothy 6:11-16 shows us that the Christian life is one of motion and action. One of fleeing, pursuing, fighting, holding on, and keeping, all empowered by the Spirit, all for the glory of God, and none of it stopping until we are at rest in the presence of Christ.

I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing. 

2 Timothy 4:7–8, ESV

One reason for this, in my experience, is fear. We know that people have objections to the Christian faith, and we don’t feel like we have all of the answers. We’re afraid of being put on the spot and having nothing to say.

If that’s a part of your struggle, I want to remind you that sharing the gospel is not about you having the best answers or solid comebacks. The most important thing for you to know is the gospel itself. That message will be foolish to many people. But to those whom God intends to save, the gospel message itself will be the power of God.

“For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Corinthians 1:18).

Many times I’ve found comfort in Paul’s words from the next chapter of 1 Corinthians. “And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God” (1 Corinthians 2:1–5).

Are you not good at public speaking? Do you not feel very wise? Does the thought of sharing the gospel with others make you feel scared, and even make you physically shake? Are you not sure that your words will make sense and convince anyone?

You’re in good company, right up there with the Apostle Paul. God delights to use people like you in the spread of the gospel because all of the glory goes to Him. Our weakness makes it clear that God is the One who saves. Sharing the gospel becomes less about us and more about pointing away from ourselves to the Saviour.

So, if you are scared of being public with your faith, ask God for courage, ask for His perspective, and focus on building your understanding the gospel message itself. That’s where the power of God is found.

Now those of you in the first category—who thought about the Bible, not the band—might be asking the question, “Why in the world would a band give themselves a name like that?”

The answer is that this band was formed during the early 70s in the throes of the “Jesus Movement.” This was an incredible time in history as hundreds of thousands of young people, coming out of (or at least influenced by) the hippie movement, turned to Jesus. And all across North America the church grew and changed in unprecedented ways.

One of the defining marks of the Jesus Movement was a real dissatisfaction with the existing church. It was seen as too stuffy and traditionalistic and out of touch with young people in that day. 

This sentiment is summed up well in the 1972 song “Little Country Church,” sung by Love Song, another influential Jesus Movement band.

Little country church on the edge of town
Do do do do do do do
People comin’ everyday from miles around
For meetin’s and for Sunday school

And it’s very plain to see
It’s not the way it used to be

Preacher isn’t talkin’ bout religion no more
He just wants to praise the Lord
People aren’t as stuffy as they were before
They just want to praise the Lord

Chuck Girard | Fred Field ©1971 Dunamis Music

It’s not hard to imagine why these “Jesus People” were very interested in Acts 2. After all, Acts 2 describes the day when 3,000 people came to faith in Jesus in one event, and how for some time they all lived together in Jerusalem sharing their food and possessions with one another. As you read that chapter, especially verses 42-47, it sounds like a hippie’s dream come true.

Former hippies in the 70s weren’t the last Christians to be infatuated with this vision of Christianity. In my lifetime I’ve heard many people point to Acts 2, or at least use the more general phrase “the early church,” to describe the way we should be as the people of God.

Their sense is that the contemporary church is too structured. Too institutionalized. Recently I’ve heard several voices saying that pastors shouldn’t take salaries, churches shouldn’t own buildings, we should stop working so hard on having a great weekend service, and instead we should embrace this Acts chapter 2 kind of thing. No structure, no institutions, just spirit-filled people having authentic relationships and meaningful conversations with one another.

And I’ll admit that at times in my life I’ve tasted the allurement of the Acts 2 thing. “Sell the buildings, fire the paid staff, cancel the pension plans, and lets just love each other the way Jesus said we should!”

Today, though, I’m convinced that this perspective is shortsighted and naive and ultimately doesn’t square up with what the Bible itself actually teaches us about the church. And I can say this because the New Testament didn’t conclude with Acts chapter 2. That’s chapter is not the final word. Rather, it’s just the very first look at what happened when the risen Jesus sent His Holy Spirit upon His people.

For a very short period of time, the church did exist in a somewhat free-flowing stage of shared, communal life. But they didn’t stay that way. No group of people can stay that way—not even Spirit-filled Christians. Any group of people trying to do anything long-term and effective together will require structure and yes, institutionalization.

We get the first glimpse of this in Acts 6:1-6, where the distribution of food ran into problems, and the church appointed seven men to oversee that ministry. Fixing that problem needed more than a prayer meeting: it required the creation of an administrative structure.

And this is one of the significant themes we’ve seen so far in our study of 1 Timothy. Chapter 5, especially, reads like a policy document as it specifies the eligibility requirements for financial support, gives direction regarding remuneration for preaching elders, lays out disciplinary procedures for leadership, and so on.

In other words, the church did not stay in Acts chapter 2, and we should be grateful for this. The Holy-Spirit inspired administration and structure given in 1 Timothy was required for its long-term health. Let’s receive this instruction with gratefulness!

On a recent Sunday we asked, “How do you actually do this? What would this practice actually look like?”

For the past couple of years I’ve benefited from the following resource by Dr. Whitney. It starts with ten questions designed to help us self-evaluate ourselves in the light of God’s word. A series of follow-up questions guide us even deeper as we scan the dashboard of our heart.

Reviewing these questions regularly would be a great way to practice 1 Timothy 4:16. In fact, Whitney suggests asking them of yourself at the beginning of each new year—be that your birthday on on New Years. With January 1 coming up, why not print these off, grab a notebook and pen, and prayerfully spend some time with them over the holidays?

1. What’s one thing you could do this year to increase your enjoyment of God?

2. What’s the most humanly impossible thing you will ask God to do this year?

3. What’s the single most important thing you could do to improve the quality of your family life this year?

4. In which spiritual discipline do you most want to make progress this year, and what will you do about it?

5. What is the single biggest time-waster in your life, and what will you do about it this year?

6. What is the most helpful new way you could strengthen your church?

7. For whose salvation will you pray most fervently this year?

8. What’s the most important way you will, by God’s grace, try to make this year different from last year?

9. What one thing could you do to improve your prayer life this year?

10. What single thing that you plan to do this year will matter most in ten years? In eternity?

http://biblicalspirituality.org/10-questions-to-ask-at-the-start-of-a-new-year-or-on-your-birthday/

Read the follow-up questions here: 10 Questions to Ask at the Start of a New Year or On Your Birthday.

May the Lord encourage your heart this week with the good news of great joy (Luke 2:10) found in our Saviour, Jesus.

On Sunday we explored the “pillar and buttress” metaphor in some detail. What we didn’t explore—quite as much—is the rich Old Testament background behind those first two descriptions.

“Household of God”

Let’s consider this first phrase. Households typically live in houses. And, in fact, both words—“household” and “house”—are translations of a single Greek word “house,” which could have either meaning, depending on context.

In the Greek Old Testament, the phrase “house of God” was often used to speak about the the place where God dwelt.

Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely the LORD is in this place, and I did not know it.” And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.”

(Genesis 28:16–17, ESV)

Later on this phrase was used many times to refer to the tabernacle and then temple.

Praise the name of the LORD, give praise, O servants of the LORD, who stand in the house of the LORD, in the courts of the house of our God!

(Psalm 135:1–2, ESV)

In the New Covenant, we understand that we are God’s house. As Ephesians 2:22 says, “In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.” And if we turn back a few verses in that chapter, we find that there’s not a huge gap between the idea that we are God’s “house” and that we are also His “household.” Look at how these two ideas come together in verses 19-21:

So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord.

(Ephesians 2:19–21, ESV)

This is who we are: the structure where God lives, and the family that lives with Him inside.

“Church of the Living God”

A similar Old Testament background stands behind the phrase “church of the living God.” Like we learned on Sunday, “church” is translated from the Greek word that means “assembly” or “congregation” or “gathering.”

This word is used many times in the Greek Old Testament to speak about God’s gathered people. When Israel gathered before Mount Sinai, this was known as “the day of the assembly” (Deuteronomy 9:10). Joshua 9:8 speaks about the “assembly of Israel,” and Judges 20:2 tells us of the “assembly of the people of God.” 2 Chronicles 6:12 says, “Then Solomon stood before the altar of the LORD in the presence of all the assembly of Israel…”

This word is used in the Psalms to describe the gathering of God’s people for worship, and it’s often translated as “congregation” in our English Bible. “I will thank you in the great congregation; in the mighty throng I will praise you” (Psalm 34:18).

Understanding this connection between the words “church” and “assembly” helps us bridge the gap between the people of God in the Old and New Covenants. Many Christians still speak about “Israel” and “the Church” as if they are two distinct entities, or two separate peoples of God. Nobody living in the 1^st Century, reading the New Testament for the first time, would have made this mistake. They would have understood that “church” (or “assembly”) was a standard term to refer to the gathered people of God. The New Covenant “church” is simply the assembly of God’s people, Jew and Gentile, who have been saved by faith in Jesus the Messiah (See Ephesians 2:11-22).

As we come together again on Sunday, we should do so with the knowledge that God is the living God, and we are His gathered people who stand in a long line of assemblies—from Mount Sinai to Jerusalem to Ephesus all the way to Nipawin. More than this, we are also God’s very house. When people enter our gathering they should be able to say, along with Jacob, “Surely the Lord is in this place!” Not because of our building, but because we ourselves are God’s house and household, and the Lord Himself is dwelling in our midst.

We saw this yesterday in Ephesians 3, where Paul wrote, “To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ” (Ephesians 3:8). The grace given to him was the ministry of preaching to the Gentiles.

This same language appears in several other passages as well. Consider the following:

But on some points I have written to you very boldly by way of reminder, because of the grace given me by God to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

Romans 15:15-16

On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.

Galatians 2:7-9

Perhaps the most startling example is found in 2 Corinthians 8:

We want you to know, brothers, about the grace of God that has been given among the churches of Macedonia, for in a severe test of affliction, their abundance of joy and their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of generosity on their part. For they gave according to their means, as I can testify, and beyond their means, of their own accord, begging us earnestly for the favor of taking part in the relief of the saints—  and this, not as we expected, but they gave themselves first to the Lord and then by the will of God to us. Accordingly, we urged Titus that as he had started, so he should complete among you this act of grace. But as you excel in everything—in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in all earnestness, and in our love for you—see that you excel in this act of grace also.

2 Corinthians 8:1-7

In order to truly understand this passage, we need to know that the word translated as “favour” (in bold above) comes from the very same word that is translated as “grace” elsewhere in the passage.

God gave to the Macedonians the ministry of sacrificial giving. The Macedonians properly understood this ministry opportunity as a gift of grace from God to them, and so begged Paul for the grace of “taking part in the relief of the saints”—i.e. of giving sacrificially.

This passage is particularly relevant after yesterday’s congregational meeting. This past year, we made a decision to hire a new staff member, and as a result we’ve had to increase our budget for 2020. Meeting this budget will require generosity from all of us at EBC.

As we anticipate the ministries which the Lord has set before us as a church, and the opportunities he will give us in 2020, the question before us is, “Will we see this opportunity to give as a ministry, and a gift of grace from the Lord?” As the Lord enables us to have that perspective, it will radically alter our approach to generosity.

Jesus has set ministries before each one of us. Like Ephesians 4:7 says, “Grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift.” One of those ministries is the grace of generosity. Let’s embrace that ministry together by the enabling power of the Holy Spirit as we look together towards 2020.

So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock.”

This passage reinforces two connected truths about church leadership.

1) Church Leaders Are a Team

Notice how Peter speaks to the elders, plural. They, not one single person, is responsible to “shepherd [pastor] the flock of God.” It’s also hard to miss that Peter includes himself among this group: “So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder.” Peter was an apostle who had been with Jesus, and yet here he refers to himself as just a fellow elder. 

This reinforces the Biblical pattern which describes the church as being led by a team of elders/overseers/pastors, none of whom have any more inherent authority than another.

One or more of those elders/overseers/pastors may be paid staff, a situation that 1 Timothy 5:17-18 anticipates. As paid staff, they are freed up (and expected) to carry more responsibilities than the non-staff elders. They will probably be the ones to preach more often, do more visitation and counselling, and so on. 

Some elders may also have particularly pronounced giftings, and may be delegated by the rest of the team to function in a leadership capacity—kind of like a team captain. Timothy, for example, may have had this role while in Ephesus. But these staff- or lead-elders still have the same basic office as the rest of the team, and hold no more inherent authority.

We can think of it this way: a pastor is just a staff elder. An elder is just a non-staff pastor.

This can be a tough idea for us to wrap our heads around, especially if we have gotten used used to the “pastor-as-CEO” or “pastor-as-priest” model that pervades many North American churches. But it is the Biblical pattern.

2) Pastors/Elders/Overseers Are Still Just a Part of the Church

To glimpse the second truth, notice Peter’s use of “among” in verse 1: “So I exhort the elders among you.” Peter’s letter (like most of the New Testament letters) was not written to the elders who then read it to the church. No, it was written to the church, and the elders were there among the church, receiving it from Peter. 

The elders were a part of the church, among the church—not above them. 

Notice also how verse 2 tells them to “shepherd [pastor] the flock of God that is among you.” Not underneath you, but among you. The shepherds were among the sheep, and the sheep were among the shepherds, and they were all a part of the church together.

Perhaps we struggle with the first truth—that pastors are just a part of the team—because we don’t understand the second. We’ve subtly come to believe that pastors are a special class of people who exist on a higher spiritual plane above everybody else.

The Roman Catholic Church teaches this kind of thing. Ordinary people are a part of the “laity” who do “secular” work, whereas the priests are a part of the “clergy” who do “sacred” work. Their prayers are seen to be more special than everybody else’s, and they are viewed as the ones through whom the people draw near to God.

The Bible, on the other hand, teaches that all Christians are priests (1 Peter 2:4-5) who each approach God through our one high priest, Jesus (Hebrews 10:19-22). Pastors/overseers/elders don’t exist on a higher spiritual plane than everybody else. Their prayers don’t have more inherent power than anybody else’s. In one sense, they are still sheep themselves. They lead the church as a part of the church.

This is God’s good design, and we will find great blessing and freedom as we follow it.

1. “Pastor” (or “shepherd”), “elder” and “overseer” are three titles for one single leadership position.
2. The New Testament describes churches as being led not by a single pastor but rather by a group of pastors/elders/overseers.
3. One or more of those pastors/elders/overseers may be paid by the church to do his work full-time (see 1 Timothy 5:17-18), but he still occupies the same office or position as any of the others, and has no more inherent authority than any of the others.

This leadership model—of multiple pastors/elders/overseers leading a church together—is often referred to as a “plurality of elders.” In their excellent book The Deliberate Church, Mark Dever and Paul Alexander wrote a section called “The Practicality of Plurality,” in which they described some of the many practical benefits that come to a church through this model. Here’s what they had to say:

We’ve seen some of the main biblical arguments for the distinction between elders and deacons, for the roles of each, and for a plurality of elders in a single church. What are the practical benefits of having more than one elder in each church? In other words, is it worth the trouble to switch from a single pastor/multiple deacon leadership structure to a plurality of elders leadership structure with multiple serving deacons? Let’s think about some of the advantages of making the switch.

It balances pastoral weakness. No pastor is broadly gifted enough to do all the work of the ministry equally well by himself. There are weaknesses in every pastor’s game. We all need other people to balance out our all-too-human deficiencies. When you surround yourself with godly men whose gifts, passions, and abilities balance yours, you provide more well-rounded leadership for people to follow.

It diffuses congregational criticism. Under the single pastor/multiple deacon model, the pastor often takes the brunt of the criticism alone. Tough decisions can be misperceived, motives can be misconstrued, and before too long the pastor becomes the target of all the critical remarks because he is the one who is perceived to be making all the decisions and casting all the final votes—and under this model, he often is. Within a plurality of elders, however, leadership is shared with a body of non-staff elders who have been recognized and affirmed by the congregation. This provision alleviates the pastor from bearing all the criticism, because now leadership and decision making responsibility are shared among the group. Other men can now stand in the gap with the pastor, and they can take both responsibility and criticism together. Also, the congregation likely will be more willing to follow the tough decisions of a group of both staff and non-staff elders than to follow those made alone by a paid pastor. So some criticism may be avoided simply by the increased trust that a plurality of congregationally recognized non-staff elders engenders among church members.

It adds pastoral wisdom. Sharing leadership with a group of godly, able non—staff elders will almost invariably keep pastors (especially young ones) from saying or doing dumb things, or from saying or doing the right things in unhelpful ways. None of us is omniscient. We all need to humble ourselves, share leadership, and ask advice. In fact, many of us are impatient when it comes to implementing a vision for godly change. Godly elders can help us select a pace for change that the congregation can keep up with. They can also help us formulate plans, articulate goals, and handle sensitive situations better than we may do if left to ourselves.

It indigenizes leadership. That is, it roots leadership in non-staff members. This is important because the congregation needs to be able to function and continue to grow even if something awful happens to the paid pastor. The last thing we want to do as vocational pastors is to make the congregation so dependent on us that the church would fall apart if we died, got called somewhere else, or (God forbid) fell into some disqualifying sin. We want our work to continue to bear fruit long after we’re gone! But that means leadership must be rooted in non-staff members. The best, most biblical way to do that is to incorporate a structure of leadership based on a plurality of elders in which the non-staff elders outnumber the staff elders.

It enables corrective discipline. Without corrective discipline, the church has no way to protect the purity of her public corporate witness from the hypocrisy of members involved in scandalous sin. Yet the discharge of corrective church discipline is far more difficult without a plurality of elders. Performing corrective church discipline requires a leadership structure that won’t buckle under the spiritual and relational pressures of the process. By adding wisdom, diffusing criticism, balanc- ing pastoral weaknesses, and indigenizing leadership, plural eldership helps transfer the load of corrective discipline across the multiple pillars. Plural eldership, then, is critical for the discharge of corrective discipline and therefore is critical for maintaining the corporate witness of the local church in the eyes of the unbelieving community as well.

It defuses “us vs. him.” When disagreements happen between a pastor and the congregation regarding the direction of the church or a difficult decision that affects the whole congregation, an unhealthy “us vs. him” mentality can crop up. This can make the pastor feel extremely isolated and can often breed adversarial attitudes underneath a surface of congenial pastor/congregation relationships. Granted, a plurality of elders may simply shift the relationship into the “us vs. them” gear. However, it relieves the isolation of the pastor, and it may prevent such antipathies from ever arising if the pastor is wise enough to receive godly counsel. Again, by adding wisdom, diffusing criticism, balancing pastoral weaknesses, and indigenizing leadership, a plurality of elders can go a long way toward defusing the “us vs. him” bomb.

Mark Dever and Paul Alexander, The Deliberate Church (Wheaton, Il: Crossway, 2005), 133-135.

After describing the fact that “Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (1 Timothy 2:13-14), Paul wrote these perplexing words: “Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control” (1 Timothy 2:15).

This week I’ve read through pages of commentaries on this verse. There are at least 7 or 8 major interpretations offered by scholars for how to understand this verse. Some see “childbearing” as a reference to the birth of Jesus. Others take the word to be a summary of domestic life, and see this verse as an encouragement for women to reject the false teaching that forbade marriage (1 Timothy 4:3) and instead chose to “work out their salvation” by accepting their God-given role as a mother (see also 1 Timothy 5:14).

However, the interpretation most compelling to me is one put forward by Henry Alford over 100 years ago. He suggested that we should understand verse 15 in the same way as 1 Corinthians 3:15: “If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.”

The word “through” in this setting does not mean “saved by means of fire,” but “saved in spite of fire.”

Let’s test this idea out on 1 Timothy 2:15. This verse is following up on v. 14, which described Eve’s deception and sin. In this context, we can’t help but think about God’s curse on Eve for her sin: “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children” (Genesis 3:16).

“Nevertheless,” says verse 15, “she will be saved in spite of this curse of painful childbearing—if they continue in their Christian faith, which is marked by faith and love and holiness, with self-control.”

John Piper has written an excellent article which explains this all in a bit more detail and unpacks its application for mothers today:

How Are Women Saved Through Childbearing?

“[Women] will be saved through childbearing — if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.” What does that mean?

www.desiringgod.org

He has also done a 9-minute Bible study video unpacking the same ideas. It’s worth a watch:

1 Timothy 2:15: How Are Women Saved Through Childbearing?

Women are saved by faith in Christ. In what sense then, according to 1 Timothy 2:15, are they saved through childbirth?

www.desiringgod.org

In recent years I’ve encountered resistance from other Christian leaders about this teaching. “The church in Canada does not have time to worry about issues like the role of men and women,” they say. “We’re barely staying afloat in this hostile culture and we need to focus on issues that unite us—like reaching people with the gospel—instead of issues like this, which only divide.” The point seems to be that we should not worry about men’s and women’s roles, because we’ve all got bigger fish to fry.

My response is that the Apostle Paul apparently didn’t get the memo. If you read Acts 19 or Ephesians 6, you’ll discover that the church in Ephesus was also in the midst of a hostile environment. They were also trying to reach their community (and surrounding province) with the gospel. They were up against all of the same pressures that we face today. And when Paul wrote to Timothy—during the reign of the emperor Nero—those pressures had almost certainly increased.

In fact, the church’s mission in the face of these pressures is the whole focus of 1 Timothy chapter 2.¹See the message on 1 Timothy 2:1-7, The Point of our Praying. The advance of the gospel in a hostile culture (1 Timothy 2:1-7) is the very context in which Paul teaches on the differences between men and women (1 Timothy 2:8-15).

In fact, there’s a significant missiological echo within verse 8 itself, which begins, “I desire then that in every place the men should pray” (1 Timothy 2:8). Many assume that “in every place” refers to the various house gatherings within the Ephesian church.

But when we look at little bit deeper at those words, and see how they are used by Paul in his other letters, we discover a more significant meaning. These words are best understood as a deliberate echo (or quotation) of a prophecy in Malachi: “For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering. For my name will be great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 1:11).

This prophecy stresses the very same truth that Paul was at pains to explain in 1 Timothy 2:1-7: God’s plan is to save for Himself a people from every nation. When the Ephesian men prayed “for all people” “in every place,” they were both fulfilling Malachi’s prophecy and contributing towards it’s continued fulfillment.

As Philip Towner has written, the phrase “in every place” is a deliberate echo of Malachi 1:11 and is “designed to invite the readers/hearers to understand the significance of their entire worship activity in the … framework of God’s redemptive promise to save the nations.”²Philip H. Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006), 203.

This observation, besides being fascinating and significant, does serious damage to the idea that any discussion about gender roles is a petty distraction from our real mission. If we care about reaching our nation with the gospel, we’d do well to learn from all of 1 Timothy 2.

The problem was that they were adding to this foundation with made-up stories, an overemphasis on family ancestry, and a confused approach to the law (1 Timothy 1:4, 7). And Paul’s instruction is that they be “commanded” not to teach any different doctrine (1 Timothy 1:3).

I’ve been a part of a number of conversations throughout the years where we’ve been discussing someone who teaches one form or another of “different doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:3). And it’s been very common to hear someone say, “Well, they are our brothers and sisters in Christ. And they mean so well. And didn’t Paul tell the Philippians that even if someone preached Christ in the wrong way, he was ok with it?”

The passage that’s being referenced is Philippians 1:15-18: “Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from good will. The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. The former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely but thinking to afflict me in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.”

In Philippi, some people were preaching Jesus in order to harm Paul. He was ok with that, as long as Christ was being proclaimed. But there is no indication that these troublemakers in Philippi were false teachers or were corrupting the gospel with “different doctrine.” From everything we can tell, they were preaching the gospel in all of its truth. Their motives were wrong—they were trying to score personal points and hurt Paul—but insofar as he was concerned, Paul rejoiced in the gospel’s advance.

In Ephesus, the situation was totally different. That group of teachers was causing trouble because their teaching itself was wrong. And so even if their motivation was spot-on—even if they were trying to serve God and were doing their best according to what they understood (1 Timothy 1:7)—they still needed to be stopped.

For ourselves, personally, we should obviously strive to speak the truth and do it for the right motives. After all, that’s why Paul wrote Philippians chapter 2. “Selfish ambition” is wrong, even if you are preaching the gospel. But in terms of evaluating others, it’s the content of someone’s teaching we should be most concerned about. Someone can be sincere and godly and still cause a lot of damage to the church through false teaching. And in Timothy’s case, the most loving thing for him to do was to command them to stop.¹“As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine… The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.” (1 Timothy 1:3, 5)

1. God (who He is in relation to us)
2. Us (who we are and what our problem is)
3. Jesus (what God did to solve our problem)
4. Response (what our response to God’s saving work needs to be)

To share the gospel clearly, we need to have a solid understanding of these four “building blocks” and how they relate to one another. To change up the metaphor, we should understand that these four big ideas are like links in a chain: each “link” depends on what came before it, and impacts what comes after it.

For example, how we understand God is foundational to everything else. How we understand our problem depends on how we understand God, and will impact what we say about the work of Christ. And finally, what we say about the work of Christ will directly impact what we say about our response. If Jesus just came to set us a good example, then our response is to follow that example and live a good life. But if Jesus came to actually save us, then our response is to trust that He actually did this.

Sharing the gospel clearly, then, requires that we understand how these four links connect with one another to form a solid chain.

To share the gospel correctly, our understanding of these four links needs to be completely shaped and informed by Scripture. It is wise to use the actual words of Scripture as often as we can.

1. God
   • According to Scripture, the most foundational truth about God is that He is the creator. (Genesis 1:1, Acts 17:24).
   • As the creator, He has certain rights over His creation.
   • When we see how amazing His creation is, we recognize how amazing He is and how much He deserves.
2. Us
   • As creatures, we owe everything to our Creator.
   • We all do recognize How amazing He is (Romans 1:19-21).
   • Nevertheless, we do not give our Creator the thanks and honour that He deserves, choosing to give our affections and allegiance to the things God has made instead of to God Himself. The Bible calls this sin, and we’ve all done it (Romans 3:23).
   • God’s judgement against our sin is physical and eternal death (Romans 6:23).
3. Jesus
   • In accordance with thousands of years of prophecy and preparation, Jesus, the Son of God, lived a perfect life for us and then died as our substitute, taking God’s judgement instead of us (Romans 3:23-25, Galatians 3:13, Romans 5:6-9, Isaiah 53:4-6, 2 Corinthians 5:21).
   • He accomplished our salvation on the cross. He didn’t just die to make us save-able; He actually saved us (1 Peter 3:18, Romans 5:1,10).
   • The preceding verses show us that our salvation largely consists in being reconciled to God. He is what makes the good news good.
   • Jesus rose from the dead, has been crowned Lord of all, and is gathering people into His kingdom in preparation for the day when He will finally reunite Heaven and Earth (Revelation 5:9-10, 21:1-3)
4. Response
   • Because Jesus saved us, there is nothing we can add to His gift. All we can “do” is receive it with empty hands. The Bible calls this “faith” (Romans 4:5-4, John 3:16).
   • Because Jesus is the king, believing in Him always results in a change of heart, mind, and behaviour, and a life of submission to His kind and loving rule (Romans 6:1-4, Romans 8:1-4, Colossians 3:1-17).

To share the gospel confidently, we need to be so familiar with the message that we don’t need to stop and scratch our heads when we do have the opportunity. 1 Peter 3:15 instructs us to be always “prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.” 

When it comes to being always prepared, there is little substitute for actual practice. Practice on your own. Practice with a good friend. Get so familiar with the gospel that someone could wake you up at 3 in the morning and you’d be able to explain the gospel to them.

It’s true that there are times when it’s best to help someone understand the gospel one piece at a time, in the context of a relationship. In those cases, really understanding the four building blocks is so important. We’ll know where to begin, and how to help someone really grasp the gospel as we work our way through the building blocks over the course of what might be several conversations.

But on the other hand, it’s also important to be ready to share the gospel all at once, in a condensed way, with little notice.

I remember a co-worker (who knew I was a Christian) once asking me, “So, what does God need to forgive us for?” Without realizing it, I had been disobeying the command to be “always ready,” and so I blundered my way through several minutes of disconnected ideas before the conversation fell apart.

I wish I had been ready. I wish I had been able to say to him, “I believe in the God who made you and me and everything we see. This God deserves our honour and thanks and worship, but we’ve all chosen to rebel against Him and worship the things He’s made instead of He Himself. And because of that we deserve His judgement, and we can see His judgement on display in the pain and misery of our world today.

“But in His great mercy this same God sent His son Jesus who came and lived a perfect life and then died on the cross for my sins. He took my place and paid the penalty for my sins instead of me. And after three days He rose again as King of the universe. And God has forgiven my sin and made me a part of His family and kingdom all because of what Jesus has done. And that can be true for you, too. If you believe in the Lord Jesus you will be saved.”

That’s one example of what it can look like. Now why not try it yourself?

This post was updated on Aug. 23, 2025.

Membership in the Bible

The language of “membership” itself comes from the Scriptures. “For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Romans 12:4–5). As the people of God, we are members of one another, as connected and inter-dependant as the limbs and organs of our own bodies.

In the book of Acts, we see that becoming a Christian—becoming a member of the body of Christ—was an act of significance and public commitment. “…and they were all together in Solomon’s Portico. None of the rest dared join them, but the people held them in high esteem” (Acts 5:12–13). Many people respected the Christians, but actually joining that gathered body wasn’t something you did casually. Joining the church had a public aspect to it, formally associating you with the assembly.

And yet, this did happen every time someone came to faith in Jesus. “…and the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved” (Acts 2:47). Becoming a Christian meant that you were “added to” the church. You were count-able. You had become a part of the body of Christ, the group which publicly represents Jesus here on earth.

As we read further in the New Testament, we discover that while the church was instructed to be welcoming towards outsiders (1 Corinthians 14:23), they were also taught to maintain a very clear distinction of who was, and who was not, a part of their fellowship.

For example, in 1 Corinthians 5, we read about a man who was living in public and unrepentant sin. Paul instructed them to remove this man from the church: “…Let him who has done this be removed from among you….When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus…you are to deliver this man to Satan…” (1 Corinthians 5:2, 4–5).

If the church is the body of Christ, it is vitally important that it represent Jesus well. This requires identifying and removing those who persist in grossly misrepresenting Jesus.

But what did it practically mean for that man to be “removed from among” them? How would other people have known this had happened? How would the Corinthians have known who was and who was not supposed to be a part of their “assembling” together to formalize this removal? As we think about these questions, it becomes clear that the Corinthian church must have had a clear understanding—matched with a public recognition—of who was and who was not a part of their assembly. (See 1 John 2:19 for a similar dynamic.)

But Why Make It Formal?

So, did the early church have a formal membership process? It’s uncertain. In the early days, simply standing with the assembly in Solomon’s Portico would have expressed a high level of public commitment. The same is true in much of the world today. Many of the churches in China, for example, do not need a formal membership process; the risks of simply showing up mean that only the committed are present.

However, the same is not true for us here in North America. Most of our towns are home to multiple churches, and we have a high level of freedom to come and go from these churches as we desire. This makes it difficult, even impossible, for any one church to know who is (and who is not) a committed member of their body apart from a formal membership process.

A comparison can be made to marriage. In Genesis 24:67, Isaac began his marriage with Rebekah by simply bringing her into his tent. In that culture, this was all he needed to do in order to express the commitment of a public marriage. Today, things have changed: people come and go from each other’s bedrooms with no implied commitment whatsoever. This is why Christians recognize the importance of beginning a marriage with a formal, public ceremony known as a wedding.

An identical line of reasoning applies to membership. Given the culture here in North America, it is impossible for us to know with clarity who is (and who is not) a committed part of the body without a formal membership process.

Formal membership, therefore, is not a practice we have added to the Bible’s teaching on the life of the church. Instead, it is something we practice in order to recover an important aspect of the Bible’s teaching on the life of the church: the joyful privilege of a public, committed identification with the body of Christ.

Are you a follower of Jesus Christ, a member of His body? Do you attend Emmanuel Baptist Church? If you are not a member here, would you accept our invitation to express your participation in the body of Christ through membership at EBC?

If you have questions or feedback about this article or the process of membership at EBC, I would invite your response! Please get in touch with me at this link.

The author’s big idea is that we all have a job on Sunday mornings: welcoming newcomers. To that end, she proposes three “Rules of Engagement” to help us understand and apply ourselves to this very important yet very simple mission.

I highly recommend you take a few minutes to read it as you prepare for our service this week!

Make Sunday Mornings Uncomfortable: Three Rules of Engagement at Church

Not everyone can lead worship. Not everyone can preach. Not everyone can usher. But all can welcome the stranger among us.

www.desiringgod.org

David is trusting in God’s promises to deliver him from his enemies (2 Samuel 7:9-11), and so he describes, in very visual language, what will happen to the enemies who have driven him out into the wilderness. They will die and descend down into Hades. They will be killed by the sword in battle, and jackals—which are basically coyotes—will eat their dead bodies.

I’m not sure how comfortable you are with this language. The truth is, we read this kind of language often in the Psalms: God’s people speaking with expectation about the way that He will save them by destroying their enemies.

Many Christians struggle with this kind of thing. They think, “Didn’t Jesus tell us to love our enemies and turn the other cheek? How do these things fit together?”

We can’t resolve this tension by pitting the Old Testament against New Testament, as if they were opposed to each other. At least twice, the New Testament favourably references this “cursing” language from the Psalms: Romans 11:9-10 quotes Psalm 69, and Acts 1:20 quotes Psalm 69 and Psalm 109. The book of Revelation also records the saints in heaven longing for God’s justice in a way strikingly reminiscent of the Psalms (Revelation 6:9–10).

At the same time, there is a progression in the story from the Old to the New Covenant, and we are helped when we remember that we live in a different place in the story than did David. God’s people are no longer gathered under one political ruler. Instead, we’ve been sent out with the mission of reconciliation. Like 2 Corinthians 5:20 says, “Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.” Ambassadors don’t wage war. They don’t use any weapons. Instead, we implore people to be reconciled to God.

But we can’t forget that the reason we do this is because the judgement of God is coming. And the reason we don’t fight against our enemies is because God has promised to do so Himself.

Just listen to this passage from 2 Thessalonians chapter 1:

We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers, as is right, because your faith is growing abundantly, and the love of every one of you for one another is increasing. Therefore we ourselves boast about you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions that you are enduring. This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed.

(2 Thessalonians 1:3–10)

When Jesus returns, He will return to make war against His enemies. Passages like 2 Thessalonians 1:3-10 and Psalm 63:9-11 remind us of this fact. They remind us that rebelling against God (which is what David’s enemies were doing—cf. Psalm 2:2) is a really big deal, and one day will be punished in the most decisive way.

On the one hand, that realization should motivate us to proclaim the gospel. But on the other hand, it is OK—even, important—for us to be comforted as we remember that justice will be done, and in the end, God wins.

Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not frightened in anything by your opponents. This is a clear sign to them of their destruction, but of your salvation, and that from God.

(Philippians 1:27–28)

Excellent Jerome,

You ought to rejoice in this temptation of the devil because it is a certain sign that God is propitious and merciful to you.

You say that the temptation is heavier than you can bear, and that you fear that it will so break and beat you down as to drive you to despair and blasphemy.

I know this wile of the devil. If he cannot break a person with his first attack, he tries by persevering to wear him out and weaken him until the person falls and confesses himself beaten.

Whenever this temptation comes to you, avoid entering upon a disputation with the devil and do not allow yourself to dwell on those deadly thoughts, for to do so is nothing short of yielding to the devil and letting him have his way.

Try as hard as you can to despise those thoughts which are induced by the devil. In this sort of temptation and struggle, contempt is the best and easiest method of winning over the devil.

Laugh your adversary to scorn and ask who it is with whom you are talking.

By all means flee solitude, for the devil watches and lies in wait for you most of all when you are alone. This devil is conquered by mocking and despising him, not by resisting and arguing with him. . . .

When the devil throws our sins up to us and declares we deserve death and hell, we ought to speak thus:

“I admit that I deserve death and hell.

What of it?

Does this mean that I shall be sentenced to eternal damnation?

By no means.

For I know One who suffered and made a satisfaction in my behalf.

His name is Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Where he is, there I shall be also.”

Yours,

Martin Luther.”

Source: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/martin-luthers-personal-letter-close-friend-struggling-spiritual-despair/

As we’ve been discussing financial matters as a church board, a few of us have recently listened to, and appreciated, a sermon series by John MacArthur called “Whose Money Is It, Anyway?”

When was the last time you thought about money—how to get it, how to spend it, how to save it, how to invest it, or how to borrow it? It’s an important subject, and there certainly is a place for saving, for wise planning, and for meeting your needs.

But first you need to know what the Bible says about handling money and God’s plan for giving it.

In Whose Money Is It, Anyway? John MacArthur discusses the purpose of money, how you should and shouldn’t use it, and the why, where, when, and how of giving it. If you’re feeling intimidated, or even guilty, about your financial situation or giving habits, this study can help you get back on track.

The summer would be a perfect time to enjoy a series like this. You can listen while you’re on a road trip, working in the garden, or relaxing in the backyard. Just follow this link:

Whose Money Is It, Anyway?

The Money Question When was the last time you thought about money?how to get it, how to spend it, how to save it, how to invest it, or how to borrow it? It?s an important subject, and there certa…

www.gty.org

In recent years there’s been push-back to this perspective from some top psychiatrists; I shared some of this info in the first sermon in our Psalms series back in April. It’s also important for us to think about this issue from a thoroughly Biblical standpoint.

In an excellent article called “The Heart of Depression,” Biblical counsellor Ed Welch does just that, using the Bible’s wisdom to probe the physical and spiritual roots of depression. Whether or not we’ve struggled with depression ourselves, we all should seek to be able to help those who do, and reading this article would be a great place to start:

 

The Heart of Depression by Edward Welch

The causes of spiritual depression depend on how you define it. If spiritual is narrowly defined to mean depression that is caused by sin, the quest for a cause is over. But…

www.ligonier.org

A poignant example of this kind of attitude comes from the life—or, more properly, the death—of Jonathan Edwards, America’s greatest theologian and a man powerfully used by God during the 18th-Century Great Awakening.

Having just been installed as president of Princeton college, he received a rudimentary smallpox vaccination that went terribly wrong. Sensing that his death was approaching, he summoned his daughter and communicated these words to her:

Dear Lucy, it seems to me to be the will of God that I must shortly leave you; therefore give my kindest love to my dear wife, and tell her, that the uncommon union, which has so long subsisted between us, has been of such a nature, as I trust is spiritual, and therefore will continue forever: and I hope she will be supported under so great a trial, and submit cheerfully to the will of God. And as to my children, you are now like to be left fatherless, which I hope will be an inducement to you all to seek a Father, who will never fail you. And as to my funeral, I would have it be like Mr. Burr’s; and any additional sum of money that might be expected to be laid out that way, I would have it disposed of to charitable uses.

Days later, at the age of 54, Edwards died. This is how his wife Sarah shared the news with her daughter:

My very dear child!
     What shall I say? A holy and good God has covered us with a dark cloud. O that we may kiss the rod, and lay our hands on our mouths! The Lord has done it. He has made me adore his goodness, that we had him so long. But my God lives; and he has my heart. O what a legacy my husband, and your father, has left us! We are all given to God; and there I am, and love to be.
     Your affectionate mother,
     Sarah Edwards

That’s what it looks like to trust in the God of the storm. The storm itself does not go away, but our experience in it is completely transformed as we rest in the sovereign mercy of Yahweh.

Source: http://scriptoriumdaily.com/how-jonathan-edwards-died/

Do you know why there are no windows on adult book stores? Or do you know why there are no windows on certain kinds of nightclubs in the city? I suppose your answer would be, “Well, because they don’t want people looking in and getting a free sight.” That is not the only reason. You know why? Because they don’t want people looking out at the sky. You know why? The sky is the enemy of lust. I just ask you to think back on your struggles. The sky is a great power against lust. Pure, lovely, wholesome, powerful, large-hearted things cannot abide the soul of a sexual fantasy at the same time. 

I remember as I struggled with these things in my teenage years and in my college years. I knew how I could fight most effectively in those days. Now I have developed other strategies over the years that have proved very effective. And one way of fighting was simply to get out of the dark places — get out of the lonely rooms. Get out of the boxed-in places. Get out of the places where it is just small — me and my mind and my imagination, what I can do with it and get to where I am just surrounded by color and beauty and bigness and loveliness. And I know that when I used to sit in my front yard at 122 Bradley Boulevard with a notepad in my hand and a pen trying to write a poem, at that moment, my heart and my body were light years away from the sexual fantasizing that I was tempted by again and again in the late night, quiet, secluded in-house moments. There is something about bigness, something about beauty that helps battle against the puny, small, cruddy use of the mind to fantasize about sexual things.

And then turn it around. It works this way, too. We know from experience that if we give way to sexual fantasies and yield to lust and dwelling on unwholesome things, our capacities for seeing the sky are cut in half and then cut in half again and then cut in half again until you are just a little worm on the ground and your language and your mind is nothing but smut. It can happen to anybody. And so I just commend to you: Don’t let that happen. 

Battle lust along with all of the other weapons that you are given in the Scriptures — battle it with the upward glance of the magnificent blue and the thunder and the lightning and the sunrises and the sunsets and the glory of God. And say to yourself, “If I give way in this hour to that kind of thinking, I won’t enjoy this. I won’t have a large heart. I won’t have a capacious mind. I won’t be a noble person. I will just be an old gutter person.” Preach to yourself like that and then give yourself over to the ministry of the sky and let it help free you from lust. 

From https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/do-you-see-the-joy-of-god-in-the-sun-part-2#/listen/excerpt

We can see a lot of this glory-displaying handiwork just by looking up, but in recent years, tools like the Hubble Space Telescope have opened our eyes even wider to how vast this universe is—and how great is the God who made it all.

This video from the American Museum of Natural History shows the place of our own planet within the known universe, and will give you a sense of how big things really are out there:

After watching that video, it might be easy to forget just how large a single galaxy is. This next video will help fix that problem:

For some more perspective, think about this: after the Sun, the nearest star to earth is 4.3 light years away. Scientists have named it Proxima Centauri, and it’s quite close to us in the scope of the whole universe.

Now consider the world’s fastest aircraft, the Lockheed SR-71, which has a top speed of about 4042 km/hr. It flew from New York to Los Angeles in a single hour. It is literally faster than a speeding bullet.

If you were able to get an SR-71 and fly towards Proxima Centauri at top speed, it would take you about 267,176 years to get there.

And that’s just the closest star.

Now, for the icing on this astronomical cake, check this out:

Psalm 33:6 says, “By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host.“

Isaiah 40:26 tells us, “Lift up your eyes on high and see: who created these? He who brings out their host by number, calling them all by name; by the greatness of his might and because he is strong in power, not one is missing.”

And finally, hear from Psalm 103:11: “For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him.”

This is our God! Let the heavens lead you in worship to Him today.

How would this make you feel? Would you believe it? If you did, would you have the uneasy realization that the nice, polite country you lived in was actually a bit of a facade? That Canada was a lot more dystopian, a lot closer to, say, Nazi Germany, that you might have thought?

And now what if I told you that such a news article would be basically true, with one small detail changed: each of the babies were still living inside their mother’s womb when the murder happened? With that adjustment in place, everything you read is 100% fact. These are the bloody facts about abortion, Canada’s silent holocaust.

I’m not sure how you react to a discussion on abortion. Many Christians feel uncomfortable with it, given its perception as a political issue. I felt that way for years. I think it’s time to move past that assumption. Abortion is a moral issue, and one that touches a surprising amount of our population.

Personally, I do not have much hope that Canadian politicians will ever do much about abortion. But I do have a lot of hope that individual Canadians, armed with the facts, can influence the way their fellow citizens think about this issue, and thereby play a role in saving innocent lives from being murdered.

I also believe that abortion is a golden opportunity for Christians to speak about the gospel. Many women deeply regret their abortions, and walk through the rest of their life suffering the effects of a guilty conscience. They need to know about the One who was crucified in our place to pay for all of our sins—including the sin of being an accomplice in the murder of your own child.

In our small group a few weeks ago, we discussed how difficult it can be to share the gospel with Canada’s middle class, given its climate of moral complacency. “How can you tell a successful, outstanding citizen with a perfect-looking suburban life that they need Jesus?” The bloody facts about abortion may be just the thing to rip the mask off of our illusion of morality and lead someone to seek God’s forgiveness.

I grew up in Ottawa, and some of my earliest memories include joining my family in pro-life marches on Parliament Hill. After years of neglecting and trying to ignore this issue, I’m too bothered to keep doing nothing. And so this year, my wife and I have decided to financially partner with Samuel Sey, a man who works on the front lines of the pro-life movement with the Canadian Council for Bio-Ethical Reform. Samuel is a solid Christian and I really believe in the work that he’s doing.

I’d encourage you to find out more about Samuel and his work, if only to grow in your knowledge about the kinds of things that are being done to fight against this great evil in our country, and some of the ways that you can play a part:

I’m Joining The Staff At The Canadian Center For Bio-Ethical Reform

Reactions to the late-term abortion bills in New York and Virginia illustrate the contrast between America and Canada. Late-term abortions are controversial in America, but they are conventional in Canada. 

slowtowrite.com

Hopefully this resource is helpful to you should you ever want to revisit any of the material, or serves as something you can point others to.

Click below to access the page, or navigate to ebcnipawin.ca/youarehere:

Music can really help us out here. This week I’ll be listening to Andrew Peterson’s 5-song EP called “Resurrection Letters: Prologue,” which reflects musically on the darkness of that first Friday, as Christ died, and Saturday, as His followers wept in anguish.

You can enjoy the whole thing right here:

«

Prev

1

/

1

Next

»

"Last Words (Tenebrae)" by Andrew Peterson

"Well Done, Good and Faithful" by Andrew Peterson

"The Ninth Hour" by Andrew Peterson – Official

"Always Good" by Andrew Peterson

"God Rested" by Andrew Peterson

«

Prev

1

/

1

Next

»

Then I saw in the right hand of him who was seated on the throne a scroll written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals. And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” And no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it, and I began to weep loudly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. And one of the elders said to me, “Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals.”

And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain, with seven horns and with seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth. And he went and took the scroll from the right hand of him who was seated on the throne. And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song, saying,

  “Worthy are you to take the scroll
     and to open its seals,
   for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God
     from every tribe and language and people and nation,
  and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God,
    and they shall reign on the earth.”

Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice,

  “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain,
  to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might
  and honor and glory and blessing!”

And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying,

  “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb
   be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!”

And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped.

Revelation 5:1-14 (ESV)

But it’s not the end of the story. Being a disembodied soul in heaven is not our ultimate hope. Our ultimate hope is the resurrection from the dead, when our souls will be reunited with new bodies and we’ll dwell with God forever in His city on a new earth (1 Corinthians 15:12-56, Revelation 21:1-3).

It’s this hope of a perfect, embodied existence on a restored earth that has fuelled the faith of God’s people throughout the ages.

“By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (Hebrews 11:8–10). 

“These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city” (Hebrews 11:13–16). 

Here’s the stunning reality: this “better country,” this heavenly city, this New Creation, is still a future reality. It hasn’t come yet.

Which means that Abraham is still waiting for it. Isaac is still waiting for it. Jacob is still waiting for it. All the saints we read about in the Old Testament are still waiting for it. They have not yet received everything they were promised.¹Surprisingly, Revelation 6:9-11 pictures at least some of the souls in the present heaven experiencing dissatisfaction, even in God’s presence, as they await the fulfillment of God’s purposes.

When will they receive them? When will they finally arrive in this city with foundations, in this better country they have longed for? At the exact same time as you and I will. When the events of Revelation 21 take place. After the return of Christ, after the final judgement, when God finally creates the new heavens and new earth.

And then, on that day, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, Samuel, and you will arise, together, in new bodies on a new earth, and will finally experience, together, what God has promised to us. As Hebrews 11 goes on to say, “And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect” (Hebrews 11:39–40).

The ESV Study Bible says about this verse, “The saints of the [Old Testament], along with those of this era, will partake together of the same end-times perfection: sinless selves in deathless resurrection bodies.”²Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2382.

We really are a part of this story today, and we really will be a part of it on that great day, when all of God’s people from all of time will be made perfect, together.

I hope you catch the dominant note here, the primary reason and the ultimate goal of our mission: God’s glory, which is to say, God being worshipped by all the nations. John Piper has capsulized this truth in these unforgettable words:

Missions is not the ultimate goal of the church. Worship is. Missions exists because worship doesn’t. Worship is ultimate, not missions, because God is ultimate, not man. When this age is over, and the countless millions of the redeemed fall on their faces before the throne of God, missions will be no more. It is a temporary necessity. But worship abides forever. So worship is the fuel and goal of missions. ¹John Piper, Let the Nations Be Glad!: The Supremacy of God in Missions, 3rd ed., Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group, 2010. Page 15.

When we connect this truth up to what we learned about prayer a week before, we discover that the very first thing Jesus taught us to pray for—”hallowed be your name” (Matthew 6:9)—is a prayer for the mission. As we pray for God’s name to be glorified, we are praying that more and more people would love and honour and worship Him.

“Hallowed by your name” is just another way of saying, “Let the peoples praise you, O God; let all the peoples praise you!” (Psalm 67:3).

I think I first learned this concept from John Piper. In a recent podcast, he was asked the question, “How do I pray the Bible?” In his answer, he said, “praying the Scriptures is so important in the Christian life. If we don’t form the habit of praying the Scriptures, our prayers will almost certainly degenerate into vain repetitions that eventually revolve entirely around our immediate private concerns, rather than God’s larger purposes.”

He goes on to explain how to pray the Bible and gives some practical examples of what it actually looks like. You can listen to or read the whole thing here—it’s very much worth your time:

How Do I Pray the Bible?

Praying the Bible keeps us from focusing on our immediate private concerns to the exclusion of God’s larger purposes.

www.desiringgod.org

One Psalm that captures this truth beautifully is Psalm 67:

May God be gracious to us and bless us
     and make his face to shine upon us, Selah
that your way may be known on earth,
     your saving power among all nations.
Let the peoples praise you, O God;
     let all the peoples praise you!

Let the nations be glad and sing for joy,
     for you judge the peoples with equity
     and guide the nations upon earth. Selah
Let the peoples praise you, O God;
     let all the peoples praise you!

The earth has yielded its increase;
     God, our God, shall bless us.
God shall bless us;
     let all the ends of the earth fear him!

Psalm 67:1-7, ESV

“May the Peoples Praise You” is a new song we’ll be singing this Sunday, based on Psalm 67 and 1 Peter 2:9 Give it a listen below, and come ready to sing on Sunday! (Click here for lyrics.)

We saw three answers to that question in Sunday’s message, but there’s a fourth that we’ll explore here today. And it’s this: regularly praying for what God has promised keeps us aware of how much we need Him. It keeps us dependent upon Him. It keeps us from believing the lie (so often celebrated today) that we are enough.

Think about it this way: if God provided for our daily bread and forgave our sins and gave us strength and used us to advance the gospel without us ever praying for any of it, how long would it be until we began to think of ourselves as naturally strong and holy and effective people? How long would it be until we forgot about the Lord altogether?

But God knows what’s best for us. He knows that we need Him more than anything. He knows that our deepest satisfaction and joy will be found in relationship with Him, not in being super-charged, highly-efficient people. And so He doesn’t give us a lifetime supply of grace and strength all at once. He answers our requests in smaller doses than we’d prefer. He makes sure that we need to stay close to Him and never forget how much we need him.

In other words, He keeps us praying.

And so prayer repeatedly and continually highlights God as the source of all things. And when we think about it this way, we realize that prayer itself is an act of worship—an act of bringing glory to God.

Which means—get this—that prayer itself is an answer to that first request Jesus taught us: “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name” (Matthew 6:9).

What a thought. And what a reason to pray.

But what about those times when it’s not normal? What about those times when the forces of darkness appear to manifest themselves in more direct and obvious ways? Is Ephesians 6:10-20 really good enough in those circumstances?

In his article “Stand Up to the Powers of Darkness,” biblical counsellor David Powlison shares the following story, which I trust you’ll find helpful:

Christians often argue that people living in animistic contexts need some special sort of demon deliverance. Some believe that a history of occult practices and beliefs necessitates a kind of ministry that is completely different from Ephesians 6. This may initially seem plausible because the phenomena and symptoms are bizarre. But Scripture gives striking examples of occult practitioners being ministered to by normal, biblical spiritual warfare: for example, Manasseh (2 Kings 21; 2 Chron 33) and Simon (Acts 8). Here is a contemporary story that corroborates with what Scripture leads us to expect.

A European friend of mine went to rural West Africa in the 1980s as a long-term missionary. He taught in a theological college, did church planting, and pastoral ministry. When he arrived, the implicit rationalism of his Western world view was blown away by the disturbing forces he encountered: animism, witchcraft, amulets, manifestations of bizarre voices and various other physical effects, trance states and hallucinations, a visceral sense of being in the presence of uncanny evil. He encountered these phenomena both in professing Christians and in non-Christians. He began to adopt the common demon-deliverance version of spiritual warfare, and experienced apparent success.

But as time went by, he increasingly doubted both the legitimacy and efficacy of what he was doing. For one thing, a deliverance event, however dramatic in the moment, proved to be no predictor of any good thing in a person’s life over the long term. It did not result in blessing, or stability, or spiritual growth, or freedom from symptoms. In contrast, those who turned from their sins and came under Christ did live changed lives. Those whose lives became fruitful were people who did the “normal” things of faith. Normal did not mean rote, perfunctory, or mechanical. It meant embracing Scripture, honest confession and repentance, candid faith in prayer and worship, vital fellowship and accountability, and practical obedience—what this article has been about. But the people in whom normal things did not take root continued to live in sin, fear, and animistic chaos. Normal things were the difference maker in delivering people from Satan’s power. Deliverance ministry made a lot of noise, but made little difference. It even reinforced the core assumptions of animism.

As my friend continued to reflect on Scripture and his experience, he concluded that the demon deliverance world view and practice was a failure and did not add up biblically. So what was going on with the darkly bizarre symptoms that he was encountering? The evil one and his agents were intimately involved. But most of the varied phenomena—the sense of uncanny moral evil, the lies, fear, confusion, and hostility—point toward normal human experience in a world of suffering. As touched on in the discussion of Psalm 28, people suffer terribly under many things: the hardships of disease and poverty, hostility and injustice from others, anguish of conscience, the cruelty of the Slave Master, the imminent threat of death. It is always right to earnestly cry out to God, “Deliver us from evil. Be merciful, O Lord.” But the animistic world view provided the suggestion that the brokenness of life calls for a power encounter with an inhabiting spirit. My friend came to see the deeper human need, and began to change his approach.

He started to dig carefully, to proceed more patiently, to do more pointed ministry of Word and prayer. He sought to find out what else was going on in the lives of people. He found dark secrets and relational problems—and the miseries of life that both tempt to sin and result from sin. He found secret adulteries. He found financial corruption. He found Christians who, in their anguish over a sick child or extreme poverty, began visiting witch doctors and wearing amulets. Most frequently, he found bitterness and hatred, relationships that had been broken and never reconciled. False accusations were also a common relational problem. In the context of suffering and unexpected death, the traditional culture looked for someone to blame. The finger of accusation often pointed to “witches” or “witch children” as the cause. (Even secular studies of witchcraft observe that relationship breakdowns lie behind the bizarre phenomena, and that the problem is solves by confession and forgiveness.)

In all these cases, bizarre manifestations appeared. The Liar, Accuser and Murderer is at work in all this—but not in the way it was being interpreted. The animistic worldview they lived within was yet another lie—a “teaching” that comes from demons about demons, fueling superstition and fear (1 Tim 4:1). My friend was uncovering complex spiritual and moral problems, but there was no need to sort out where “flesh” ends and “world” begins, where “world” ends and “devil” begins. The forces of evil work in concert. We don’t need to determine where the devil’s role in moral blinding and in inflicting destruction begin and end. We can’t see through the fog of war. But Christ’s truth and power address all dimensions simultaneously. We intercede with our Lord to comprehensively deliver us from evil.

My friend normalized the abnormal and humanized the bizarre, seeking to get behind confusing appearances, seeking to minister. He dealt with bizarre evil the way the Bible tells us to deal with evil of any sort: clear Scriptural truth; bold, faith-expressing prayers that plead the mercies and power of Christ; heartfelt worship; meaningful fellowship. People brought their sins, fears, and confusion to the light. They found Christ’s mercy and aid, and acted in newness of life. The bizarre symptoms disappeared. Biblical reality increasingly supplanted their false worldview.

My friend had come to mission work with a Christian faith somewhat tilted toward Western rationalism. The initial shock of cross-cultural experience had somewhat tilted his faith toward the traditional animistic worldview. Further ministry experience and biblical reflection increasingly shaped a humble, bold, truth-speaking, prayerful, loving approach to people.

True spiritual warfare normalizes the abnormal and helps people live in Christ’s reality, not the haunted universe of animism. He was waging true spiritual warfare against the powers that enslave people in the confusion of sin and fear.

Powlison, David, “Stand Up to the Powers of Darkness,” Journal of Biblical Counseling 31:2, 45-47.

For $2, you can purchase and read the rest of this excellent article here: https://www.ccef.org/shop/product/stand-powers-darkness.

We’ll also be learning a new song to go along with this theme. It’s called “O Church Arise,” and here’s a video so you can get familiar with it. Click here to read the lyrics as well.

It shouldn’t be a big surprise by now that I am a fan of study Bibles. I believe that a good study Bible is one of the most important things a Christian can own.

I also believe that Christians should not be afraid to use a study Bible during their regular devotional time. I didn’t always think this way. I’ve counselled people, “Use a study Bible for study, but for your regular devotions, just use a plain Bible so that it’s just you and God.” I now think of this as fairly wrong-headed advice. What good is it to read the Bible if you have no clue what you’re reading? 1 Corinthians 14:6-12 suggests that we are only built up by God’s truth when we understand it. God has chosen to reveal Himself to us in a book, and we should do everything we can to understand it.

This is why study Bibles are so wonderful. They allow you to read the Scripture text, then read the study notes, and then immediately read the Scripture again, this time with (hopefully) more understanding.

In other words, a study Bible can play the role of Philip from Acts 8:31-31: “So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ And he said, ‘How can I, unless someone guides me?'”

Now, what I’m describing here requires a good study Bible, one which is designed to help you understand Scripture better. Not all so-called study Bibles have this focus, and there are many which should be avoided.

Here are some study Bibles I recommend:

ESV Study Bible
This is the gold standard of study Bibles. The sheer size of it gives things away: it’s almost more of a small library than just a study Bible. It is built on the excellent ESV translation, and is packed with charts, maps, book introductions, and illustrations. There’s a supplement at the back full of helpful articles.

The study notes themselves—the main feature of any study Bible—are spot-on, assembled by an international team of top-notch scholars. They are in-depth enough and readable enough to be helpful to a broad swath of people. I wish I could put this resource into everybody’s hands; it’s that good. If you can just get one study Bible, I heartily recommend this one.

• More info: https://www.crossway.org/bibles/esv-study-bible-none-case/
• Click here to view print copies at Amazon.ca (multiple cover options available)
• Click here to see the compact Personal Size, which has all the same notes but not the extensive articles. (They’re still available free online for purchasers.)
• Available electronically through the web or ESV mobile app at https://www.esv.org/subscription/

ESV Global Study Bible
This is a slightly-stripped down and mildly simplified version of the ESV Study Bible. It’s also more affordable. In fact, it’s free online or in the ESV mobile app if you create an account at https://www.esv.org/subscription/.

• More info: https://www.crossway.org/bibles/esv-global-study-bible-hconly/
• Click here to view print copies at Amazon.ca

ESV Concise Study Bible
A condensed version of the ESV Study Bible, this is a good option for those new to Christianity or to Bible Study in general.

• More info: https://www.crossway.org/bibles/esv-concise-study-bibletrade-hc/

NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible
Like many, I have some concerns about the new NIV translation, and wouldn’t recommend it as your main Bible. However, as a secondary study resource, the NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible has a lot going for it. The study notes and articles are on par with the ESV Study Bible in terms of content and quality, and have a particular focus on explaining the unfolding story of Scripture. This would be a worthwhile addition to your library.

• More info: http://www.zondervan.com/p/biblical-theology
• Click here to view print copies at Amazon.ca

ESV Story of Redemption Bible
This study Bible which would be a good choice for a new Bible reader or even someone who doesn’t yet believe the gospel. It’s focus is on helping the reader grasp the big story of Scripture and how it all fits together and points to Jesus.

• More info: https://www.crossway.org/bibles/esv-story-of-redemption-bible-case/
• Click here to view print copies at Amazon.ca

ESV Student Study Bible
This is a version of the ESV Study Bible specifically adapted for high school and college students. The notes have been made more accessible, and it contains additional helpful tools like a glossary of key terms.

• More info: https://www.crossway.org/bibles/esv-student-study-bible-tpb/
• Click here to view print copies at Amazon.ca
• Available electronically through the web or ESV mobile app at https://www.esv.org/subscription/

For Children
Crossway (publishers of the ESV) also have some excellent Bibles for children which contain notes, illustrations, and helps aimed at different age groups. Click on the titles below for more information:

• ESV Following Jesus Bible
• ESV Big Picture Bible
• ESV Children’s Bible
• ESV Holy Bible for Kids

1 Corinthians 2:14 by itself doesn’t give us much help: “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” Things only begin to clear up when we consider the wider context.

Beginning in verse 6, Paul had been speaking about himself and the other apostles, and how they had been given the Holy Spirit so that they might understand the things God was revealing to them.

In verse 13, he narrows his focus somewhat: not only was the Holy Spirit revealing truth itself to the Apostles, He was revealing to them the very words with which they were to teach this truth. “And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” (1 Corinthians 2:13). 

In other words, as the Apostles taught or wrote books like 1 Corinthians and Romans and Galatians and 1 Peter, their very words were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

In the second half of verse 13, Paul makes an important qualifier: his teaching ministry is only received by those who themselves have the Spirit. That’s what he means by “interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.”

“Spiritual” in this context doesn’t refer to a special kind of Christian who prays loudly in restaurants and listens to sermon podcasts instead of CBC. Instead, it simply refers to someone who has the Holy Spirit—in other words, a Christian. And it is only to these spiritual people that the Apostles interpret these spiritual truths.

Why is this? Why not teach everybody? The reason comes in verse 14: “The natural person [in other words, a person without the Holy Spirit] does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14).

So let’s make sure we’re piecing this together: in verse 13, he told us that he used Spirit-taught words to interpret (or explain) Spirit-inspired truths to those who have the Spirit. And in verse 14 he says that those without the Spirit do not accept “the things of the Spirit of God.”

It’s like if you overheard someone saying “Mom made roast beef last night, but Billy was too sick to eat supper.” You would understand that “supper” and “roast beef” are talking about one and the same meal. This family (less one unfortunate member) ate roast beef for supper last night.

So it is with 1 Corinthians 2:13-14: when we read that the Apostles imparted spiritual truths using Spirit-taught words to those who are spiritual, but that the natural person does not accept “the things of the Spirit,” we understand that these different phrases are pointing to the same thing. “The things of the Spirit” are those Spirit-inspired truths and words.

And so when Romans 8:5 says that “those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit,” we’re safe to assume that Paul had the same idea in mind.

What this means for us today is hopefully obvious: “the things of the Spirit,” these spiritual truths and Spirit-taught words, have been preserved for us in the Bible. Which means that if you and I want to walk by the Spirit, that’s where we need to set our minds.

For example, when Adam and Eve were pure and sinless and the only two people on planet earth, all they needed to know was to have babies, subdue the earth, and eat from every tree except for that one (Genesis 1:28, 2:16-17).

When God confirmed His covenant with Noah, the situation had changed: sin was in the world. And so while God did repeat many of the same commands originally given to Adam, He also gave new instruction: Noah was allowed to kill and eat animals, but was warned not to eat blood or to kill other humans (Genesis 9:1-7).

At each of these points, the instruction God gave His people was what they needed to know, at their specific spot in history, in order to fulfill their mission and have a right relationship with God and with each other.

And so the law God gave through Moses was the particular instruction that the nation of Israel needed at their particular setting in history. They were a nation living in the Bronze Age in a predominantly agricultural society, and so we’re not surprised to see that many of their laws had to do with things like farming and community life in that kind of society. Loving one another, at that spot in the story, required knowing what to do when your neighbour’s donkey was injured under your care (Exodus 22:10).

Further to this, Israel had a particular mission to fulfill: they were to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exodus 19:6) in the midst of some very corrupt cultures. And so in order to fulfill this covenant mission, they needed to stick out and be different from the nations around them. Many of the laws God gave Israel were designed to help them think and to act this way.

For example, “You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material” (Leviticus 19:19). Laws like this, rather than being silly and arbitrary, reminded the Israelites that they were separate and distinct from the nations around them, and trained them to think in those kinds of categories.

Thus, the law was an expression of the unchanging righteousness of God for Israel in their particular setting. And the reason why New Testament Christians are allowed to wear cotton/polyester blends isn’t because God’s righteousness has changed, or because the rules he gave to Israel were silly. Rather, it’s because our setting has changed.

We live in a different covenant, in which the death of Christ has made things “clean” which were once considered “unclean” (Acts 10:9-16). We also live in very different time in history and have a different mission. Christians don’t all live together in one country; instead, we have been sent out into all the nations. We don’t fulfill our mission by being culturally different from the people around us, but rather by becoming culturally like them wherever possible (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). It’s our good works which should make us stick out (1 Peter 2:12), not the fabric content of our clothing.

These issues can be difficult to figure out, and that’s why we were given the New Testament. It helps us understand how to learn from the Old Covenant law while living righteous lives at our place in the story. I’m looking forward to exploring these ideas more this upcoming Sunday, and I hope you are too.

Having let that truth sink in, it’s important for us to clarify a further point. While it’s true that family is not everything, this does not mean that family is nothing. In fact, the New Testament has some important things to say about our legitimate responsibilities to our family.

A key example is when the Apostle Paul tells us that “if a widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show godliness to their own household and to make some return to their parents, for this is pleasing in the sight of God… if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Timothy 5:4, 8). 

Adult children have a responsibility to provide for their parents when necessary. We see this in action with Jesus Himself. As the first-born son, and with Mary more than likely a widow at this point, Jesus had the responsibility of providing for His mother. And while He was in the midst of the anguish of the cross, He fulfilled this responsibility by tasking John with her care (John 19:26-27).

This example is an important counter-balance to our text on Sunday, in which Jesus ignored Mary in a way that would have been quite offensive in that culture (Mark 3:31-35). While at times it was necessary to keep Mary at arm’s length, especially when she was threatening to interfere with His ministry (see also John 2:4), this did not erase His responsibility to provide for her.

Family is not everything. Family is not nothing, either.

Take heed here lest you minimize what I am saying and do not hear how radical it really is. I am not sentimentalizing singleness to make the unmarried feel better. I am declaring the temporary and secondary nature of marriage and family over against the eternal and primary nature of the church. Marriage and family are temporary for this age; the church is forever. I am declaring the radical biblical truth that being in a human family is no sign of eternal blessing, but being in God’s family means being eternally blessed. Relationships based on family are temporary. Relationships based on union with Christ are eternal. Marriage is a temporary institution, but what it stands for lasts forever. “In the resurrection,” Jesus said, “they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven” (Matt. 22:30).

And when his own mother and brothers asked to see him, Jesus said, “‘Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?’ And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers!’” (Matt. 12:48–49). Jesus is turning everything around. Yes, he loved his mother and his brothers. But those are all natural and temporary relationships. He did not come into the world to focus on that. He came into the world to call out a people for his name from all the families of the earth into a new family where single people in Christ are full-fledged family members on a par with all others, bearing fruit for God and becoming mothers and fathers of the eternal kind.

“Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed!” a woman cried out to Jesus. And he turned and said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” (Luke 11:27–28). The mother of God is the obedient Christian—married or single! Take a deep breath and reorder your world.

“Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel,” Jesus said, “who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life” (Mark 10:29–30). Single person, married person, do you want children, mothers, brothers, sisters, lands? Renounce the primacy of your natural relationships, and follow Jesus into the fellowship of the people of God.

John Piper, “This Momentary Marriage: A Parable of Permanence.” Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 2009. Page 73.

As I said on Sunday, I don’t believe that this idea is Biblical. Here are several reasons why.

1. Just like in English, the Greek word for gift (charisma) can mean special ability. For example, “he has a real gift for the piano.” In this sentence, the “gift” is the unique ability to play the piano well. But just like in English, charisma can have a wider range of meaning. For example, “he was given the gift of a piano.” In this sentence, the gift isn’t the ability to play the piano; the gift is the piano itself. We should pay careful attention to a passage before we assume “gift” means “special ability.”
2. When Paul writes that “each has his own gift, one of one kind and one of another,” he is designating both marriage (“one of one kind”) and singleness (“one of another”) as gifts. The New Living Translation is accurate when it paraphrases this verse as follows: “God gives some the gift of marriage, and to others he gives the gift of singleness.” Nobody thinks that “the gift of marriage” is a special ability to be married: the “gift” of marriage itself is very clearly marriage itself. Thus, according to the plain grammar of this passage, singleness itself is also a gift.
3. In the rest of the chapter (1 Corinthians 7:8, 25-40), Paul’s whole line of reasoning makes little sense if he thought of “the gift of singleness” as a special ability to be single. Instead, he gives the single Corinthians all sorts of reasons to help them see the benefit of singleness and consider it for themselves.
4. It is true that verse 9 encourages people to marry “if they cannot exercise self-control” (1 Corinthians 7:9, c.f. vv. 2-6), and later on in the chapter, the ability to keep one’s desire under control is mentioned as a deciding factor in whether or not they should seek marriage (1 Corinthians 7:37). But this does not mean that a self-controlled person has a special ability to be single; they simply are experiencing more of a fruit of the spirit (Galatians 5:23) which they are then able to apply to their particular situation.
5. In verse 39, Paul addresses widows, and gives them permission to remarry. But then he says, “Yet in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is. And I think that I too have the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 7:40). Paul does not encourage these ladies to try and discern if they have a “special ability” to be celibate, and the very idea is a bit of a stretch given their previously married state. Instead, they’re simply given the freedom to make a decision—remarry or remain single. And we should not ignore Paul’s Spirit-filled, Apostolic advice that one of these options will bring greater happiness. 

Taken together, we can understand that the gift of singleness isn’t a special ability to be single. The gift is being single. It is a gift because it gives one a certain measure of freedom from trouble (1 Corinthians 7:28) and distraction (1 Corinthians 7:32-34) and thus can help them be more undivided in their devotion to the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:35). In other words, singleness can allow someone to give themselves more fully to the good works for which they were created (Ephesians 2:10).

Two more things need to be said: first, if “the gift of singleness” is not itself a special ability, this doesn’t mean that God will not enable and empower single people to live their lives for His glory. God regularly enables us for what He calls us to do, and the single life—no less than the married life—is dependent upon God’s power (cf. 2 Corinthians 9:8).

Second, none of this means that marriage is bad. Marriage is a gift, too (1 Corinthians 7:7). It can function as a measure of protection against the distractions of sexual temptation (1 Corinthians 7:1-8), and therefore may help some find greater effectiveness in their life and ministry. And marriage to the right person can mean a fruitful life of ministry together (as was the case for at least some of the other Apostles—cf. 1 Corinthians 9:5).

The point of 1 Corinthians 7 is that at our place in the biggest story ever told, both marriage and singleness are gifts, and should be received as such—and esteemed as such by the church.

The Stoics with whom Paul dialogued in Athens (Acts 17:18) had argued the necessity of marriage on cosmological grounds. The social universe depended on cities, which in turn depended on family units, which in turn depended on marriage. Human being has a duty to marry for the sake of preserving the world and its institutions. Paul counters the Stoic argument by appealing to a more expansive cosmology [i.e. view of the universe]. The survival of the world is not dependent on human marriage since the very form of the present world is already passing away in anticipation of the coming eternal kingdom of God. Something greater than the present age had broken into history, and Christians were to herald its coming.

The cosmological horizon of the Christian subsumes [includes or absorbs] the present age into the eternal one. This means that the plans and purposes of the present age are subsumed [included, absorbed] into the plans and purposes of the anticipated eternal kingdom of God. This is not a denigration of the present world but a radical relativizing of the current age in light of the eternal age, recognizing that one’s true sufficiency and fulfillment will be realized ultimately only in the coming age of the King and the kingdom.

From the standpoint of Paul’s expanded cosmological horizons, singleness is no longer to be considered a liability because it does not further the physical race of humankind. Rather, it can be viewed as a cosmological asset and visible sign of the coming new age [i.e. the New Creation]. However, the fact that individuals may be single and Christian does not necessarily make them vibrant witnesses of the new age. When people choose to remain single for the sake of the kingdom of God because they recognize that their true sufficiency is found only in their relationship to Christ and the coming of his kingdom, and they orient their lives around this conviction, they become in their singleness visible signs of the coming new age.

They serve as signs because the world does not have a category for this kind of intentional singleness. Singles who live with this conviction provide powerful testimony to the sufficiency of Christ for all things—to those both inside and outside the church.”

Barry Danylak,  Redeeming Singleness: How the Storyline of Scripture Affirms the Single Life. Crossway, 2010. Page 207-208.

It’s plain from Genesis 2:15 and following that Adam was created first, and that he was the one initially given a job to do. Eve was created after this, to help Adam in that mission. This order of operations helps us understand why, at least generally, women seem to be more relationally oriented then men.

After all, the first thing Eve encountered in her life was another person with whom she was already connected. Her relationship with Adam quite literally defined her existence. Adam, on the other hand, began his life alone, tasked with steep responsibilities. His relationship with Eve quite literally came second to his work.

I’ve spoken to several men who are struggling in their marriages and tell me something like, “I don’t get what the problem is—I’m working so hard for her! I leave home early in the morning and I work late every night to provide for her, and I’m never just sitting around, and I don’t get why there’s this distance between us.” 

Those are the words of a fallen son of Adam—a man who can see only his work, and nothing else. A man who has forgotten, or was never taught, that he married a daughter of Eve. And so I tell those men, “You’ve just described the problem. To have a relationship with your wife, you need to sit around a little. As in, sit down on the couch with her and a cup of tea and ask her about her day. Cherish her, just like you promised you would.” And then we go to Genesis 2:15-25 and Ephesians 5:25-33 and talk about what it means to love someone who is inherently different from you.

Pastor Ray Ortlund has helpfully explored these dynamics from a slightly different angle:

God made Adam first and put him in the Garden with a job to do, a mission to fulfill.  In the heart of every fallen man is the self-doubt that wonders, “Am I man enough to climb this mountain God has called me to?  Can I fulfill my destiny?”  A wise wife will understand that question at the center of her husband’s heart.  And she will spend her life answering it, communicating to him in various ways, “Honey, I believe in your call.  I know you can do this, by God’s power.  Go for it.”  In this way, she will breathe life into her man.

God made Eve from Adam, for Adam, to help him follow the call.  In the heart of every fallen woman is the self-doubt that wonders, “Do I please you?  Am I what you wanted?”  A wise husband will understand that question at the center of his wife’s heart.  And he will spend his life answering it, communicating to her in various ways, “Darling, you are the one I need.  I cherish you.  Let me hold you close.”  In this way, he will breathe life into his wife.

Men and women are wonderfully different. Many of the reasons why are found right back in the story of our creation, and we need to understand that story in order to understand, and celebrate, one another today.

God is pleased with a marriage that doesn’t dwell and consume itself and get caught up in its own roots and vines, but is seeking to reach out to the world around it and have an actual, lasting impact for His kingdom.”

We considered some examples of this on Sunday, but here’s another one: do you remember Jabez from 1 Chronicles 4? Apparently his birth wasn’t too pleasant, and so his mom essentially named him “Pain.” But then we read that Jabez “called upon the God of Israel, saying, ‘Oh that you would bless me and enlarge my border, and that your hand might be with me, and that you would keep me from harm so that it might not bring me pain!’ And God granted what he asked” (1 Chronicles 4:9–10).

Jabez was praying that God would give him more land and keep him from suffering. In other words, he was praying for material, physical blessing. And that was okay for him to pray for, because material blessing and freedom from suffering was a part of what God had promised them in that covenant (Deuteronomy 28:1-14). Jabez was essentially asking that in spite of the “curse” of his bad name, God would still keep His covenant promises to him.

Therefore, the way that we should apply Jabez’ example to our lives is not to pray his prayer verbatim, even though a very popular book a few years ago recommended this. Instead, we should ask, “Which covenant are we a part of? What are the promised blessings of this covenant?” And then we will ask the Lord to fulfill those promises to us. This line of thought will lead us towards passages like Ephesians 1:3-23, in which the Apostle Paul lists our New Covenant blessings in Christ, and then responds in prayer.

A second example of this principle at work is found when we consider God’s words to Solomon in 2 Chronicles 7: “When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command the locust to devour the land, or send pestilence among my people, if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land” (2 Chronicles 7:13–14).

I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard this passage applied to us today, taking it to say that if we Christians will confess our sins, then God will bring blessing and prosperity to our land, which must be Canada. But this passage was not addressed to New Covenant Canadians; it was addressed to Old Covenant Israel, and in it, God was simply repeating and reminding Solomon of His covenant promises from Deuteronomy 30:1-10.

While these specific promises of Deuteronomy 30 may not apply to us New Covenant Christians, that doesn’t mean that this passage has no meaning to us. We should apply this passage to ourselves by remembering that God Himself has not changed, and so He will be faithful to fulfill the promised blessings of the New Covenant to us.

“For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope” (Romans 15:4).

We’ve seen this week that the Bible’s teaching on work points us 180° in the opposite direction. Work isn’t something we have do to so that we can get on with our life; work is our life. Good works are literally what we’ve been created for (Ephesians 2:10).

An important question is raised by all of this: what about rest and leisure? Are we ever allowed to take time and relax? Is watching a movie or spending a day at the beach even allowed in the Christian life?

Common-sense wisdom would suggest the answer is “yes.” Life is a marathon, not a sprint, and if we want to make it for the long haul, we need to pace ourselves.

We also see an instructive pattern in the Old Covenant. Taking one day in seven to rest was a command (Exodus 20:8-11), and there were several other layers of divinely-instituted rest woven into Israel’s life. (See Exodus 34:21-24 & Leviticus 25:1-22 for examples.) Work was to be sustained by regular rest.

In the New Covenant, we are not bound to observe the Sabbaths and Feasts (Colossians 2:16-17), and yet we’d be foolish to ignore the wisdom of these patterns God established for His people. After all, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for … training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16–17). One of the ways that the Old Testament Scriptures equip us for every good work is by showing us the importance of regular rest.

However, it bears repeating again that work is not something we need in order to enjoy rest; rather, rest is something we need in order to be able to give ourselves more fully to our work.

I recently read an article in which renowned theologian J.I. Packer wrote of his enjoyment for light reading—especially detective novels. And the question that Packer himself asked is, “[Should I] repent of time wasted in…light reading?” His answer was a clear “no”: “If overloaded academic and literary people never read for relaxation, their brains will break…Light reading is not for killing time (that’s ungodly), but for refitting the mind to tackle life’s heavy tasks (that’s the Protestant work ethic, and it’s true).” ¹https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/j-packer-reads-mystery-novels-defense-light-reading/

I believe that Packer hits the nail on the head, and his statement about killing time is one we should thoughtfully apply to ourselves. Do we use rest and hobbies and leisure to kill time? Or, do we understand that killing time is ungodly (see Ephesians 5:15-16), and instead use our rest and hobbies and leisure, as needed, to rejuvenate ourselves so that we can get back into the game?

If we are truly devoted to good works (Titus 3:8, 14), we can say “Thank God it’s Friday.” But we’ll say it genuinely, and with perspective. We’ll say it because we’re looking forward to using our weekend both for rest and for good works. And we’ll also be thanking God when it’s Monday, and we get to go back to work for the glory of God.

It’s important to recognize that at many stages in world history, people didn’t have a lot of choice as to what kind of “normal” work they did. The job market wasn’t always as wide open as it is for us today. This is especially true when we think about the slaves and bondservants whom Paul wrote to (Colossians 3:22-25, Ephesians 6:5-8, 1 Corinthians 7:21-24, Titus 2:9-10). They had no choice but to do what they were told. And it would have been encouraging for them to hear that their work, whatever it was, mattered for eternity when they did it for Jesus.

But many of us—especially those of us who are younger—have a lot more choice in the kind of work that we will do. And so I would encourage all of us to consider ways in which we can make our “normal” work line up with our good works as much as possible. If you have the freedom to choose what kind of work you’ll do, why not choose work that allows you to do as much good work as possible, and which connects as closely as possible with God’s purposes for planet earth?

I have a book on my shelf called 80,000 Hours, published by an organization of the same name. Their goal is to help people make a difference with their careers, and so they ask questions like, “what are the world’s most pressing problems?” and “which jobs help people the most?” The goal, according to them, is to choose a career that will do the most good for the world.

To my knowledge, these folks aren’t Christians and aren’t operating out of a Biblical worldview. I disagree with many of their specific suggestions. And yet I believe that this way of thinking is on the right track. If you get to pick what you do, why not pick something that does as much good as possible?

What would it look like for followers of Christ to think this way within a Biblical worldview? Yes, it’s true that all of our work (as long as it’s not sinful or harmful) can honour the Lord and count for eternity. We know that so many of our “normal” jobs have eternal impact, like we discussed on the blog here this week.

But if we have the option, why not choose a job that lets you do as much good work as you can? Parents, as you talk to your children, why not encourage them to choose a career that puts them as close to the front lines of the mission of God in the world as possible?

Making these kinds of choices is easier than ever in today’s globally-oriented economy, in which so many “normal” jobs are valuable assets around the world. I love hearing stories about mechanics and bankers and teachers who choose to move overseas and do their “normal” work in a part of the world untouched by the gospel. I love hearing about university students who intentionally get a degree in a field that will give them access to an otherwise restricted country. These people might not look like your typical missionaries, but they are in that country—working their jobs, building relationships, starting conversations, using whatever opportunities they have—for the sake of the gospel.

This is just one example of a way to more intentionally connect your work with the good work God has called us to. Have any suggestions of your own? Any questions about how you could do this more yourself? Send me a note; I’d love to talk.

Tax collectors and soldiers were a key part of the Roman force which was occupying Judea at that time. To the Jewish people, they were the oppressors, the enemy. These were the guys who made them pray and long for the Messiah.

And so we might expect radical, repentance-preaching John to tell these guys to quit their jobs. To stop collecting money for the Roman government. To stop fighting Rome’s wars and oppressing Judea. To lay down their moneybags and swords and become a part of God’s people.

Instead, what does John say to the tax collectors in verse 13? “Collect no more than you are authorized to do.” In other words, be a good tax collector. Be ethical. But keep doing your job.

And what does he say in verse 14 to the soldiers? “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.” In other words, be a good soldier. Don’t abuse your position.

John does what nobody expected him to do. He refuses to say that these guys’ jobs were inherently bad. Repenting of their sin didn’t mean leaving Rome’s employ.

That much is clear. But there’s actually a lot more going on here behind the scenes, especially regarding these two particular jobs of tax collecting and soldiering. To begin to explore that, consider Galatians 4:4, which tells us that “when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son.” There was a reason God waited until He did to send His son. The time had to be “full.” Certain things had to be ready, in place.

A significant part of that readiness was the Roman Empire. It’s easy for us to forget that throughout those 400 years of history in between the Old and New Testaments, the world was in upheaval. The Babylonian Empire had been taken over by the Persian Empire which was conquered by the Greek Empire which fell apart and fought amongst itself until the Romans took over.

Yet even then there were constant civil wars between the different Roman generals, riots in the cities, and tension across borders. In the hundred years before Christ was born, Rome descended to a place of almost total lawlessness. And all this meant that the world was a dangerous place—especially when it came to travel and communication. Pirates made the seas dangerous, robbers made the roads dangerous, and angry revolutionaries meant the cities were often little better.

But around 30 BC, Caesar Augustus began to accumulate power for himself, uniting Rome as an Empire and becoming it’s very first Emperor. He used his new power to bring stability and peace to the Roman Empire, ushering in a period known as the Pax Romana (the “Peace of Rome.”) What he was able to accomplish has been referred to by some historians as a miracle.

Augustus hired a professional army to stop riots and keep the peace. He established patrol squads to clear the seas of pirates, making shipping and sea travel safer. He built a huge network of roads that connected the whole Empire together, and had them patrolled with soldiers, making distant travel easier and safer than it ever had been. He established a courier service to deliver news and documents around the Empire. He worked to regulate the food supply.

All of this took money, of course. And so Augustus reengineered the taxation system to make it safer and more efficient, and he ordered Empire-wide censuses so that he could accurately tax the provinces.

“In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered…” (Luke 2:1).

Yes, this first Emperor was the Caesar Augustus of Christmas-story fame. And it was this Roman Empire into which Jesus was born. And it was also this Empire into which Jesus sent His disciples, saying “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19)

And go they did. In an astoundingly short period of time—mere decades—the gospel spread and took root all over the Roman world. This rapid explosion of the church is yet another “miracle of history” from that period of time.

If you’ve read through the book of Acts, you’ll be familiar with Paul and his missionary journeys. He travelled far and wide by land and sea. He wrote letters and sent them all over the Empire, and was able to receive money from a great distance.

What we might not realize is that none of this was possible, at least at that scale, before that point in human history. And yet it was possible then because of the Pax Romana. Because of Caesar Augustus. And more specifically, it was possible because of Caesar’s tax collectors and Caesar’s soldiers. 

Tax collectors were the ones who funded the whole thing. They collected the money which made it possible for Rome to build the roads hire the soldiers, who in turn did their part of keeping the roads and seas safe, and the cities peaceful.

So do you see how this all connects up? God used Caesar Augustus, and his tax collectors and soldiers, to get the world ready to receive the gospel. They prepared the way for Jesus’ representatives—the Apostles—to carry His good news far and wide.

This adds so much irony to John the Baptist’s interaction with these two groups. We know that John’s mission was to “prepare the way of the Lord” so that “all flesh” would “see the salvation of God” (Luke 3:4, 6).

And whether they knew it or not, those tax collectors and soldiers had the exact same job. They, too, were preparing the way for the Lord. They were levelling the paths and making it possible for all the world to hear about God’s salvation.

And this meant that their work had significance. Their jobs weren’t just futile and pointless. God was using their “normal” work to enable His gospel to spread and His church to grow.¹A similar perspective is shared by the Apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 2:1-4, where prayer for government leaders is connected to the church’s role in the Great Commission.

If you think about it, the same can be said about so many of our jobs today. I once saw a list of all of the jobs required to get one missionary onto the mission field. It was astounding. So much “ordinary” work is needed in order for the “spiritual” work to take place.

Or think about what’s happening right now. I’m typing these words on a computer, and you’re reading them on a device, each of which required thousands of hours of research and development—and thousands of people working on assembly lines—to produce.

What about the last time you read the Bible? Think about the trees harvested, the pages printed, and everything else which made that possible.

Or just remember the last meal you ate. It didn’t fall from the sky. God kept His promise to provide for you (Matthew 6:30-33) using the “ordinary” work of farmers, truck drivers, and grocery store workers, not to mention the engineers and construction workers who designed and built the roads and the trucks and the grocery store itself.

It’s absolutely staggering to step back and consider all the “ordinary” work that has been required for every “spiritual” experience we’ve had in our lives. And this helps us understand a big-picture truth: because Jesus is at work building His church on planet earth, so much of our work actually means something now. It’s no longer vain and meaningless, like the writer of Ecclesiastes lamented. Every day, God uses our ordinary work to do His eternally-significant work.

And this is surely at least one reason why the tax collector and solider were not told to quit their jobs. God was going to use their jobs for the most important thing in the world. And so, their work mattered for eternity.

If you have a job, think about your work. What does it contribute to the world? Who does it help? What does it enable? It might not take you very long to think of ways that God can and will use your work to do His own work.

I trust this perspective will be energizing and encouraging to you in all your work this week and beyond.

“[God] has begun a new creation through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. When Jesus burst from the tomb on that first Easter, he was the first man in the new creation. By believing in Jesus, we are joined to him. We become part of the new creation [2 Corinthians 5:17]. We form the new humanity [Ephesians 2:15] which God is creating.

“Unlike the first creation, where God began by making the world and afterwards made creatures to live in his world, in the new creation he has begun by creating the new humanity and afterwards he will make the new world in which they are to live.”

You can listen to the song below, and hopefully grow familiar with it by Sunday!

By stating things in such a direct way, Paul is underlining that the New Creation is really here: no qualifications, no apologies.

It’s like if I said to my son, “When you’re done your school work, playtime.”

By using as few words as possible, all the focus is put on the arrival of that one, wonderful thing. It’s almost as if Paul is wanting to shock us into seeing how real and how dramatic this really is.

The New Creation is really here, and we’re really a part of it. May God grant us the faith to see and believe this today!

— From “The Valley of Vision: A Collection of Puritan Prayers and Devotions.” p. 112 (Banner of Truth Trust)

“Hail, thou ever-blessed morn!
Hail, redemption’s happy dawn!
Sing through all Jerusalem,
Christ is born in Bethlehem.”

– Edward Caswell

“‘She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.’ All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: ‘Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel’ (which means, God with us).”

  – Matthew 2:21-23, ESV

Below, you can read some of the ways that this verse is referred to by Jesus and the authors of the New Testament. Hopefully, this helps you understand even more what King Jesus is doing right now, how important Psalm 110:1 is in helping us understand this, and what this all might mean for us as His subjects.

“Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying, ‘What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?’ They said to him, ‘The son of David.’ He said to them, ‘How is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls him Lord, saying, “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet‘ “? If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?’ And no one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions.” (Matthew 22:41–46. See also Mark 12:36 & Luke 20:42.)

“This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” ‘” (Acts 2:32–35)

“But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.” (1 Corinthians 15:20–26)

“I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.” (Ephesians 1:16–21)

“If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.” (Colossians 3:1)

“Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.” (Hebrews 1:1–4)

“And to which of the angels has he ever said, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet‘?” (Hebrews 1:13)

“Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the holy places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man.” (Hebrews 8:1–2)

“And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” (Hebrews 10:11–14)

“Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.” (Hebrews 12:1–2)

“Jesus Christ… has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.” (1 Peter 3:21–22)

Perhaps you’re unsure of what I meant by that last word—“nationalism.” Maybe you’ve heard it used as an antonym for “globalism,” which is certainly not the sense I had in mind. So what is “nationalism”? The Encyclopedia Britannica defines it as an “ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests.”

Mirriam-Webster defines it like this: “loyalty and devotion to a nation especially: a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.”

According to these definitions, I hope it’s clear why Christianity and nationalism are incompatible. As followers of King Jesus, our primary emphasis should never be to promote the culture and interests of our country, but rather the interests of the Kingdom of God. Similarly, our devotion and loyalty to Christ must be greater than all other loyalties—including our loyalty to our country. Because, as Hebrews 11:13 says, God’s people have always been “strangers and exiles on the earth.” Similarly, 1 Peter 2:11 refers to us as “sojourners and exiles.” And Philippians 3:20 reminds us that “our citizenship is in heaven.”

And like we heard on Sunday, Christians should have a special interest in those from other nations, because God does, and He’s told us to have the same (Matthew 28:19).

Of course, this doesn’t mean that Christians can’t be patriotic or practice good citizenship. It doesn’t mean that Christians should be apathetic about political issues like immigration policy or state sovereignty.

What it does mean is that the interests of the Kingdom of God should take first place in our heart, and that we view all of these other issues—and all of the individuals represented by these issues—through the lens of the Great Commission, which is to say, God’s heart to bless the nations.

You just need to read the next few verses to hear how that ended. Short version: not well. There’s humour in the fact that God had to “come down” to see the city and tower (Genesis 11:5), and He was not at all interested in their plans to make a name for themselves.

There’s rich irony, then, in the fact that this chapter ends by introducing us to a man from this very same part of the world (Genesis 11:27-28) who hears the following promise from God: “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great” (Genesis 12:1–2).

“I say to the boastful, ‘Do not boast,’ and to the wicked, ‘Do not lift up your horn; do not lift up your horn on high, or speak with haughty neck.’” For not from the east or from the west and not from the wilderness comes lifting up, but it is God who executes judgment, putting down one and lifting up another. 

Psalm 75:4–7, ESV.

“Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw. And all the people were amazed, and said, ‘Can this be the Son of David?’ But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, ‘It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.’”

As you read through the gospels, it’s apparent that, unlike so many religious fakes today, Jesus was doing his miracles right out in the open. He didn’t rent a private venue and sell tickets to his supporters; He routinely performed miracles right in the plain sight of the public—which included His critics.

And those miracles were so legitimate that not even the worst of those critics could deny that they had actually taken place. The Pharisees didn’t even try to say, “He’s not really casting out demons. It’s just a show.” It was obvious even to those who hated Him that He had this power, and so their only alternative to actually believing in Him was to cook up the weak excuse that His power came from Satan.

John 11:45-48 is another passage that demonstrates this dynamic: “Many of the Jews therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what he did, believed in him, but some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council and said, ‘What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.’”

There’s a lot of hucksters around today who claim to perform miracles. It’s easy to be skeptical of so many of these claims, and that fact alone puts them in a different category than Jesus. His miracles were so public, so verifiable, so legitimate, that nobody tried denying them. And that says a lot.

Come, Desire of nations, come! Fix in us Thy humble home:
Rise, the woman’s conquering Seed, bruise in us the serpent’s head;
Adam’s likeness now efface, stamp Thine image in its place:
Second Adam from above, reinstate us in Thy love.

I trust those last two lines strike you as especially meaningful after Tim’s sermon on Sunday. They are a direct echo of 1 Corinthians 15:45, 47 & 49: “Thus it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit… The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven… Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.”

This Sunday, we’ll be considering how Christ is the serpent-crushing offspring of Eve. As we prepare our hearts to hear that word, let’s ponder and pray that second line from this verse: “Rise, the woman’s conquering Seed [Offspring], bruise [crush] in us the serpent’s head.”

I’m looking forward to Sunday, and trusting you are as well!

This song’s melody and arrangement are new, but the words are from a hymn over one hundred years old, which was itself an adaptation of Psalm 72. As we learned in the sermon about the Davidic Covenant, Psalm 72 is full of references that clearly connect the Son of David to the promised one spoken of in Genesis 3:15 and 22:17-18. As this page explains, “Psalm 72 is a prayer for blessing upon God’s anointed king, probably intended for use in a liturgy for coronation. Later Jewish traditions and the early church saw in it a description of Messiah’s righteous reign.”

“Hail to the Lord’s Anointed” is masterfully written, and makes clear who the words of Psalm 72 are really about: Jesus Christ, David’s greater Son (Matthew 1:1). Can’t wait to sing it with you on Sunday! 

We saw how the book of Judges prepared us for this, by helping us recognize that a good king would bring some much-needed stability and leadership to the nation (Judges 21:25).

But if we go even further back then this, all the way to Deuteronomy 17, we’ll discover that God had long foreseen that Israel would ask for a king, and He decreed back then—before they had ever crossed the Jordan—that the king was to have a crucial role in leading the nation in faithfulness to God’s covenant.

Deuteronomy 17:14-15 says, “When you come to the land that the LORD your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ you may indeed set a king over you whom the LORD your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you” (Deuteronomy 17:14–15).  

And then after warning them about the kinds of things the king should not do, the Lord says this in verse 18: “And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the LORD his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statutes, and doing them, that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel” (Deuteronomy 17:18–20). 

God knew that Israel would eventually want a king, and so He declared that this king was to be a man of His word, a man who knew and kept the covenant—and thus, a man who would lead the nation to do the same. His rejection of Saul and choice of David (1 Samuel 13:14) shows His determination to give Israel this kind of king.

There’s a wonderful irony at work here—Israel’s desire for a king, which was in many ways the capstone of their rebellion against God (1 Samuel 8:7-8), was at the same time the very thing that would secure their obedience to God.

By trying to push God away, they found themselves closer to Him than ever before.

There’s three main benefits to doing things this way. First, it forces me to think through absolutely every part of my sermon, helping me to discover leaps of logic or “where did that come from?” moments. I’ve found it’s easy to scratch out an outline that looks good enough, only to discover in the manuscripting process that I’ve left huge gaps in the flow of thought that need to be filled in.

Second, it’s a safety net for those Sundays when I’m not in top shape. I’ve had to preach with the flu and a fever, or while otherwise being “out of it” physically, and if all I had on those weeks was an outline or some note cards (or worse, just my memory!), it would not be good for anybody involved.

The third main benefit for writing a manuscript is that it forces me to be ruthless with rabbit trails. Like many other preachers, I’m often tempted to try and fit the whole counsel of God into every single sermon. A manuscript allows me to step back and spot material that distracts from the message’s main flow of thought.

But the sad part about blocking off every rabbit trail is that not all rabbit trails are an evil. Many sub-points (or side-points) have to get axed because they would take too much attention away from the main point of the message, but in and of themselves they contain some really valuable truth. So the rabbit trails get removed, but now the rabbits have nowhere to run, and I finish writing many sermons with a whole group of them looking up at me with twitching noses and sad faces.

So, this blog. This will be a place for the rabbits to run: a place to paste some of the material I had to cut from my sermons each week. I hope to explore certain points in more depth, answer some questions more fully, and point to other resources that will hopefully help us all understand Sunday’s passage(s) better. Especially with our new series, where each sermon could be a series in its own right, I hope this blog will be a valuable supplement to our times together on Sunday morning.

If you have a question about anything I write here, I’d love to hear from you. You can email me at chris@ebcnipawin.ca.

What is that evidence? It starts with the language of Adam and Eve being made in God’s image, after His likeness (Gen. 1:26). As we explored in the message on Creation, this language carries the idea of Adam and Eve being God’s representative here on earth. Combined with God’s commands to Adam, this assumes some sort of formal relationship.

And in fact, Hosea 6:7 points to this when it says, “But like Adam they [the people of Israel] transgressed the covenant.” This verse strongly suggests that Adam was in a formal covenant relationship with God.

Probably the biggest evidence for a covenant with Adam is the very language used by God in relation to Noah, when He says, “Behold, I establish my covenant with you and your offspring after you” (Gen. 9:9). Every single time that this Hebrew phrase for “establish a covenant” is used in the Old Testament, it speaks of making good on or upholding a previously existing covenant, as opposed to making a brand-new covenant.¹See Peter J. Gentry & Stephen J. Wellum, “Kingdom through Covenant.” p. 155.

All of this points to the fact that God had made a covenant with Adam, and through him, the creation over which Adam was to rule as God’s representative. Adam broke that covenant, and so, with Noah, God comes to (re)establish that covenant: to make good on His pre-existing covenant promises.

Even the covenant with Adam, however, may not be the first covenant in the history of redemption. In the second week of this series, when we talked about everything God was doing before the beginning, we saw evidence of a covenant between the Father and the Son. It’s there in those words from Titus 1:2, which speak of God promising eternal life “before the ages began.” It’s on this basis that some theologians speak of the “covenant of redemption” made between the members of the Trinity before the world was made. (See, for example, https://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-covenant-redemption/).

What an incredible realization—that God has been building the story of redemption on the framework of His covenants from before the beginning of time itself! And as we’re going to keep learning in this series, these covenants will play an increasingly key role as the storyline progresses.

Stay tuned!

Now right at that point, right after hearing the serpent flatly contradict the word of God, what should Eve have said, had she been thinking clearly?

She should have said, “Why are you talking to me about this? My husband is the one who heard the command from God. Let me go find him.”

But Eve didn’t do that. Instead, she allowed the serpent to assume leadership over her.

Eve also should have said, “Why should I believe you instead of God? Who are you? You’re an animal. I’m supposed to have dominion over you. Why should I listen to your version of the story instead of God’s? Why would I ever doubt that God has given me the truth?”

But Eve didn’t say that. Eve laid down her charge to have dominion over the animals. And she decided to listen to a source of truth other than God. And then she decided that she could weigh and evaluate the claims of God herself. She decided to consider the possibility that God was either lying or didn’t know as much as this serpent. And she decided to trust herself, instead of God, as a reliable judge of these matters.

Eve should have said, “I trust God. I trust He loves me. I trust that He would not withhold anything good from me or command me to do anything not good for me.”

But she didn’t do that. She doubted God’s wisdom and love and care for her.

Eve should have said, “There is no way I can be more like God than I already am through my own attainments. God is the Creator. I’m something He created. It’s ridiculous to think that I could become like Him through things that I would do. And why would I want to? I’m content for Him to be God, and for me to be me.”

But she didn’t say that. She bought into the idea that she and God were equal players, and that she could work up to His level on her own. And that this was somehow a good idea to pursue. She wasn’t content to trust God. She wanted to be God.

Eve should have said, “God said not to do this. I may not understand everything perfectly, but I don’t want to disobey him. I don’t want to hurt my relationship with Him by doing what he doesn’t want me to do. And besides, that tree isn’t mine. It’s his. I don’t get to take something that doesn’t belong to me.”

But she didn’t. She gave no thought to God or how this would impact her relationship with Him. She disobeyed and she stole.

When you lay it out like that, when you really break down the levels of the decision that Eve was making here, it seems ridiculous, doesn’t it? It’s insane that she would survey all of this and say, “Nope, I’m going to do my thing. I’m going to trust this serpent instead of my Creator.”

But here’s the rub: she didn’t survey all of this and come to a logical conclusion. Sin doesn’t work that way. Nobody sins because of a logical assessment of the facts. Like we saw on Sunday, the answer to the question “what was she thinking?” is, “she wasn’t.” Verse 6 tells us that Eve was driven to eat the fruit because of lust. “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate” (Genesis 3:6).

And so it was Eve’s desire for the fruit which made the serpent’s ridiculous lie seem believable—just like the sluggard of Proverbs 22:13, whose sinful desire to avoid work makes the fantasy of a lion in the street seem plausible. This is what Romans 1:18 calls “suppressing the truth in unrighteousness.” It is the illogical, truth-twisting, soul-destroying sin we are all captive to—apart from the saving work of God in our hearts.

May this knowledge of the subtlety of sin cause us to heed the powerful warning of Hebrews 3:12-13: “Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called ‘today,’ that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.”

But I also hope you noticed that the biblical teaching on creation is 100% incompatible with the idea that life on planet earth emerged through a slow, gradual process of evolution.

Some people want to soften this point, and try to make the Bible seem less out of step with “science” by arguing that Genesis 1 & 2 are not to be interpreted literally. That’s a discussion worth having, but as I see it, there are two main reasons why the Bible’s teaching on creation is incompatible with the theory of evolution regardless of how we understand Genesis 1 & 2:

1) Adam and Eve. Scripture repeatedly portrays Adam and Eve as real, historical people who were the real ancestors of all of humanity (Acts 17:26). We needed to be saved by a literal Jesus because we are all fallen in a literal Adam (Rom 5:12-21, 1 Cor 15:21-22).

2) Death before sin. Scripture is likewise clear that the sin of Adam and Eve brought death into the world (Rom 5:12). The “futility” we witness in the world around is is a result of God’s curse on Adam and Eve’s sin (Rom 8:18-21). Darwinian evolution, on the other hand, assumes that death itself is the creative force that brought humans into existence in the first place.

That’s how evolution works: everyone is in a fight for survival, and those who develop positive mutations do a better job at survival, and so pass those positive traits on to their children. The entire process is driven by the reality of death.

Put shortly, Darwin teaches that man came into the world because of death, the Bible teaches that death came into the world because of man, and those two views are impossible to reconcile.

Well, then, but what about “the science”? My response is, what about it? We believe that Jesus died and then walked out of his own grave on the third day. If you want a faith that will pass the approval of the scientific establishment, Christianity is simply not going to work for you.

And yet, the issues are more complex—and perhaps more reassuring—than this simple answer can provide. For example, work in recent years by the Intelligent Design community (see the Discovery Institute) amply demonstrates that the science is far from settled. “Scientific consensus” is a public relations term that means less and less the further you probe.

The bigger issue, however, is that science itself is not a neutral exercise, and an honest investigation into the philosophy of science will show this. Scientific inquiry is based upon philosophical presuppositions about the universe which only stem from, and make sense within, a biblical worldview. This 6-minute audio clip from Greg Bahnsen explains this point well.

This is the reason that most of the founding fathers of modern science were Christians, at least in a broad sense, and operated from the assumption that the Scriptures are true. As this video describes, their assumptions about the discoverability of the universe were grounded in beliefs about the nature of God as revealed in Scripture.

Therefore, the scientific establishment as we see it today is something of a hijack operation. Christians got this plane off the ground, and now it’s been taken over by a group of people who are using the PA system to loudly deny the existence of flight. It’s that ridiculous, when you look at it properly.

The point of all of this? We should not be ashamed to praise our Creator, in a full-throated-way, the way Psalm 104 tells us to. There’s no need to keep looking back over our shoulders to see if all the people in lab coats are nodding in approval or not.

Many people hear a passage like this and think, “that can’t be right. God doesn’t choose some people and not others. God wants everybody to be saved, and it’s up to us to choose God. So if God is writing names down in His book, choosing people from the foundations of the world, that must be because He looked forward in time and saw those who would choose Him. And so God wrote down the names of everyone who would choose Him.”

But that’s actually not what the Bible tells us. It tells us repeatedly that we choose God because He chose us, not the other way around.

One of the clearest places we see this is in the book of Acts, in chapter 13. The apostle Paul is preaching in the city of Antioch, and had shared the gospel with a group of people. And Acts 13:48 says, “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.”

Who are the ones who believe? Those who were appointed to eternal life. They weren’t appointed to eternal life because they believed; they believed because God appointed them to eternal life.

That’s what the Bible teaches. But we should acknowledge that even in the face of Scripture like this, many people are still uncomfortable with these things. Many people are uncomfortable with words like “election” and “predestination,” even though both of these words are used right in the Bible! Many people are freaked out when they are taught that God is this sovereign.

I used to be one of those people. I used to be uncomfortable with the idea of a God so big and so sovereign that it was His choice, not my choice, that determined the way things were going to be. And I used to go on the internet and argue with people about this.

A part of the reason some of us struggle with this, and I think I struggled with this, is that we’re very used to the idea of democracy. When we think about the word “election,” we think about something we do to choose a leader. We give our leaders power. If we don’t like them, we get a chance to choose a new one.

In our modern way of thinking, we are each self-determining. We get to choose what we do and when. There is nobody bigger than us who has power over our lives to decide our destinies. We are the captains of our own fate, the masters of our own soul.

But in times past, people were far more used to the idea of a king. An absolute monarch, with absolute sovereignty. You didn’t elect Him. He had imperial power, and you bowed before His will.

God is a king like that. He has absolute, unconditional sovereignty. 

In Daniel chapter 4, King Nebuchadnezzar–a man quite used to having imperial power–said this about the God of Heaven:

“His dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom endures from generation to generation; all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, ‘What have you done?'” (Daniel 4:35).

He does according to His will—in other words, whatever He wants—among the inhabitants of the earth, and nobody can second-guess Him.

This is the same thing the Apostle Paul said in Romans 9 when He was defending the absolute sovereignty of God. Listen to this passage:

“So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?” (Romans 9:18–21).

Now please hear me: there are legitimate questions about how this teaching meshes with everything the Bible says about the offer of salvation and God’s genuine desire for all to be saved. We see some of that tension resolved in passages like the one we just saw from Acts, where the Apostle Paul preaches the gospel freely to all, and trusts that the ones God had chosen will respond.  I’ve been further helped with some of these legitimate questions by John Piper’s excellent essay “Are There Two Wills in God?”, which I would commend to you.

But I think it’s important to start with the Bible’s basic teaching that God is God, and we are not, and we must be okay with that. We have to come to peace with God being the king who has absolute sovereign sway over us.

Because the place we should be at is one of praising and thanking God for His sovereignty. We should realize that if He had not chosen and called us, we would not have come. We were dead in our trespasses and sins, but God made us alive together with Christ, like Ephesians 2:4 says. We’ve been resurrected, called forth from the grave just like Lazarus.

And that’s why Paul explodes with worship when He writes, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:3–4).

God choosing us is a breathtaking blessing that we should praise God for. The doctrine of election should be fuel for more than our questions or our arguments－it should ignite our worship.