Sermon Video: Cain: "sin is crouching at your door" - Genesis 4:1-7

The story of God's involvement with humanity continues in Genesis with the children of Adam and Eve: Cain and Abel. Cain's experience is a powerful lesson on both the reality of sin's tempting power, AND the ability we have (with God's help) to overcome it. Cain could have taken God's correction to heart, he could have learned from his mistake, but he chose anger instead, he chose to indulge sin. We need not follow in his footsteps.

Sermon Video: "No condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus"! - Romans 8:1-4

Having established, in Romans, that all of humanity is alike condemned for sin, the Apostle Paul has offered up salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, a gift from God, as the answer.  Here, in Romans 8:1, Paul emphatically declares just how far and how lasting that salvation really is.  Where once there was universal condemnation, now NO condemnation remains for each man, woman, and child who is in Jesus.  The implications are astounding (and the rest of Romans 8 will dive deeply into them), but for a moment just enjoy the wonder of being set free from sin and death.

When our polity fails us: Baptists and immoral pastoral leaders, what Johnny Hunt's 'restoration' teaches us

 

On January 15th, 2023 disgraced former mega church pastor and former executive vice-president of the  Southern Baptist Convention, Johnny Hunt returned, triumphantly and defiantly, to the pulpit.  It wasn't at his former church, but one under the pastoral leadership of a friend.  During his sermon, Hunt utilized Psalm 119 to lash out at his critics {portraying himself, the sexual perpetrator, deftly as the victim}, and made a case for pastoral infallibility that would have blown away our Baptist ancestors in the faith. {For a solid article with the details on Hunt's preaching appearance: Johnny Hunt, Disgraced Former SBC Pastor, Makes Defiant Return to the Pulpit - by Bob Smietana of Ministry Watch or Here’s Johnny! Embattled SBC pastor back in the pulpit and will headline a men’s conference - by Mark Wingfield of Baptist News Global

Building upon the thesis that God would have already known that one day Johnny Hunt would attempt to have sex with another man's wife (she characterized the incident as assault, he called it consensual), something that would normally be disqualifying for pastoral leadership in any church that takes seriously the Apostle Paul's high-demands for moral excellence and character on the part of pastoral leadership in the church, Hunt declared, "When God calls you to do something, and you begin to think you’re no longer qualified to do it, hold on just a moment—you don’t think he knew your past, your present, and your future when he called you? He already knew that, and yet he still placed his hand and his calling on you.”  In other words, because God knew Hunt would one day commit this sin, and because Hunt is convinced that his life in ministry was based upon a call from God, that call CANNOT now be revoked no matter what.  The implications of this are staggering theologically for a Church that has had far too many abusers, rapists, and murderers, and the like in pastoral leadership: as long as that person was already "called by God", they can continue to preach the Word of God.  Perhaps Johnny Hunt would object, and draw the line somewhere (beyond his own conduct, to be sure) to say that some sin is disqualifying, but why?  God would have known about the most heinous of sins ahead of time (true enough), and that individual was working in ministry, and thus presumably "called by God", therefore beyond being disqualified.  We know that Johnny Hunt believes in this thesis, he famously led a "restoration" ministry that was once so lauded by the SBC that they helped his church expand it nationally, returning an unknown number of pastors suffering from "moral failure" to active pastoral leadership: Ministry to hurting pastors to expand nationally - By Tobin Perry, Baptist Press, 2013 

The pastor of the church that offered Hunt the pulpit, Jason Rogers, said this, "We are thrilled to host Pastor Johnny Hunt at HomE Church. No one has been more greatly used of God to influence my ministry or as a greater, God-honoring influence on my family. Like myself, everyone in our church family, and everyone in the world, Pastor Johnny has not lived in sinless perfection as a believer. However, contrary to the ‘woke’ ideology that has sadly consumed the SBC and many believers, the Bible is clear that all sin is alike before the holiness of God. Sexual sin is not a greater sin in the sight of God. This is why we all need grace, mercy, repentance, and forgiveness."  Aside from the stunning lack of insight into how this glee looks in the wake of the SBC clergy abuse scandal, Pastor Rogers also fails to come to grips with the fact that while the Apostle Paul didn't expect Christians to be perfect, himself included, but he did purposefully write that pastoral leaders must be "above reproach, faithful to his wife" (1 Timothy 3:2).  Forgiveness from God?  Absolutely, if the repentance is genuine.  Reconciliation with the people of God and renewed fellowship?  Absolutely, again if the repentance is genuine.  Jumping right back into the pulpit (and lucrative conference lecture circuit)?  No, no, no.  

I know that to write or say such things is to paint a huge bright target on my own back, and I'm ok with that.  I hold myself to this high standard that Paul requires as a pastor, and also as a husband and father.  I will never cheat on my wife, in deed or in spirit, as it would not be an "indiscretion" or "mistake", it would be a betrayal of everything I am and do, and just as importantly, guaranteed pain and trauma to the two people I love most in this world.  

So I say, can't we at least have this as a standard?  The ship may have sailed on having political leaders who are faithful to their spouses, but must the Church abandon this too?  Are we so hard up for pastoral leaders that we need to recycle those whose leadership included "moral failures"?  Do those cheering on Johnny Hunt not see the utter hypocrisy that the world sees when the champions of "family values" celebrate pastors who havw made a mockery of their marriage vows?

Where Baptist polity comes into the equation

In the end, Baptists of any denomination have little recourse in such matters, the SBC included.  When a self-appointed group of four pastoral friends of Johnny Hunt declared him ready to return to ministry, the current president of the SBC, Bart Barber wrote, "The idea that a council of pastors, assembled with the consent of the abusive pastor, possesses some authority to declare a pastor fit for resumed ministry is a conceit that is altogether absent from Baptist polity and from the witness of the New Testament. Indeed, it is repugnant to all that those sources extol and represent."  He went on to add that he would have "defrocked" Hunt if such power rested with the SBC president, but it doesn't.  Which is the whole point.  

Baptist pastors are appointed, and ordained, by local churches, as myself was by the First Baptist Church of Palo, MI.  The larger units: associations, regions, and denominations, have no power to do likewise, nor do they have the power to withdraw that local church approval because of immoral conduct or heretical teaching, only that local church retains the power {The local association can remove its recognition of what the local church has done in ordaining someone, or refuse to accept it in the first place, but that is all.}  Thus, unless the church that ordained Johnny Hunt were to act to revoke his ordination, it still stands in the eyes of Baptist polity.  Yet, even if they did, it would not prevent other Baptist churches from inviting Hunt to preach, a role that does not require ordination.  Long story short, there is nothing that any Baptist entity can do to stop Johnny Hunt from going on a victory tour and becoming a speaking celebrity once more.

We believe in local church autonomy for a number of reasons, having just finished teaching Baptist History and Polity, I could list them for you, perhaps another time.  Even so, we have to recognize the downside of that autonomy, such freedom isn't free, and in this case the cost to the Baptist reputation is high.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #9: Matthew 5:43-44

 

Matthew 5:43-44     New International Version

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you

How does the Kingdom of God advance?  By doing exactly what is contrary to fallen human nature.  Our natural response to having an enemy in life is to seek to crush that enemy, but disciples of Jesus Christ are called to a far more difficult and radical commitment: love our enemies and pray for them.

'Christian' Nationalism, by immersing itself in the fight for control of the kingdoms of this world, and the fights among those kingdoms (i.e. geo-political rivalries and wars), has chosen to live according to realpolitik rather than the commands of Jesus.  How can we love our enemy, they say, when we're at war with them for control of America?  The stakes are too high to trust lover over power is the lie they're telling themselves.  How can we pray for our enemy, they say, when they are a rival to our nation?  We are God's chosen nation, his instrument in this world, is the lie their pride is telling them.

Lip service that 'Christian' Nationalism may pay to Jesus' teaching and attitude aside, the reality demonstrated again and again is that the struggle for societal/governmental control and domination inherent to 'Christian' Nationalism's ethos has already concluded that what Jesus taught his followers is unrealistic, if not outright naïve.  In fact, one recent political figure mocked Jesus' command to 'turn the other cheek' at a gathering of supposedly Christian political operatives.  {Donald Trump Jr. tells young conservatives that following Jesus’ command to ‘turn the other cheek’ has ‘gotten us nothing’ - Baptist News Global, by Mark Wingfield}.  That gathering was sponsored by Turning Point USA whose website (at the time) proudly proclaimed: “We play offense with a sense of urgency to win America’s culture wars.”

Here's the thing, Jesus didn't call us to "play offense...to win America's culture wars."  Jesus called us to live self-sacrificially while praying for our enemies.  Will this strategy 'win' in this world?  Probably not, but that's not where our priorities are supposed to be as Christians.  'Christian' Nationalists may have a long and bitter list of enemies, people and organizations they're willing to fight to the death (sometimes literally) to defeat, but followers of Jesus Christ have been forbidden, by God, from indulging our sinful nature in this vain pursuit.  Our calling is higher, purer, and far more difficult: "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you."

Sermon Video: Jesus Christ: A Sacrifice of Atonement, Romans 3:25-26

On one level, the Gospel is as simple as knowing and accepting that Jesus Christ did for your sins, it is a message that a child can grasp and accept.  On a deeper level lie the questions about how this works and why it was necessary.  The Apostle Paul explains that the sins (rebellion against God) committed by those who have, or one day will, believed in Jesus are paid for by his shed blood on the Cross.  Jesus was a sacrifice of atonement, a substitution taking our place whose death satisfied the full and permanent cost of our sins, because Jesus was both God and Man, and because his life was without sin, his one sacrifice can cover multitudes beyond counting.

Sermon Video: The Death of Jesus - Mark 15:27-39

Six hours upon the Cross, three of them in darkness, culminating in a cry of "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" What did it all mean? What did Jesus accomplish? How? While hanging on the Cross, Jesus was mocked by those around him, his love was stronger. Everything that was necessary to complete the redemption of humanity was carried out that day by Jesus, and when he set his life down, giving it up willingly, it was not defeat but victory that he ensured.

Sermon Video: Judas at the Last Supper - Mark 14:12-21

In the midst of the Last Supper, as Jesus celebrates the Passover one last time with his disciples, a time for fellowship and fortification for the road ahead, Jesus drops a bombshell: "one of you will betray me." One of the chosen 12?? How is that possible?

Betrayal is a brutal subject, only those with whom we have a connection can betray us, or us them. Family, friends, co-workers, fellow countrymen, even those in our church. There's a reason why the we call it stabbing someone in the back. And yet, betrayal did not derail the plan of God, did not prevent Jesus from fulfilling his purpose and dying for the sins of the world. No matter how vicious the wound, it can be healed, no matter how ruthless you were, you can be forgiven; God can do this, Jesus knows what betrayal feels like, and he overcame it.

Sermon Video: "I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." Mark 2:13-17

After preaching yet again to large crowds, Jesus decides to add to his group of disciples by making an unorthodox addition: the tax collector Levi (Matthew).  After this stunner, for the tax collectors were viewed as traitors and thus outcasts in Jewish society, Jesus goes a step further and has dinner with Levi and his friends.  The Pharisees, shocked by this co-mingling with 'sinners' ask for an explanation.  Jesus famously replies, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, bu the sick.  I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."  Jesus reaches out to society's outcasts, 'lost causes', and villains, hoping to find there those who recognize their lost state who might be willing to repent.  Jesus calls us to do likewise, finding ways to connect with those who aren't like us, remembering the grace we have received, that we too might help the 'sick' find the Great Physician.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: "Son, your sins are forgiven." - Mark 2:1-12

 When crowds prevent access to Jesus, 4 faithful friends lower a paralyzed man into his presence so that he can be healed. Before he heals, Jesus says, "Son, your sins are forgiven." Religious leaders object that only God can forgive sins (true), so Jesus heals the man in front of them to demonstrate his claim as the Son of God. Forgiveness is a universal need, common to all of humanity, and only God can forgive. As Jesus demonstrated, he is the path to forgiveness.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Jesus' Opening Act: John the Baptist, Mark 1:2-8

It is not often that the Opening Act gains tremendous popularity, but John the Baptist, the one sent by God to prepare the people of Israel for the Messiah, drew large crowds to see his unique style and hear his message. What was that message? A baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. In other words, the same call as the prophets of old: repent. At the height of his popularity, John understood that his time in the sun was limited, and that the one he was the prelude to was far superior. Why? Because John could only wash with water, Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: "Everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved" Joel 2:12-32

In the midst of a message of woe, the prophet Joel shares the desire of the LORD to relent and heal his people.  "Even now," the message begins, for it is not too late because God is "gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love," if the people will repent, God will forgive and save them.  This is the heart of the Gospel.  God is indeed a holy and righteous judge, and the great day of his wrath will one day come, but he also abounds in love and mercy and desires that all men would repent and be saved.  Why speak of judgment when offering a message of hope?  Because humanity's rebellion is a deep-seated condition, and most will not repent until they realize the extent of their danger and have given up trying to save themselves.  Hope remains, all those who call upon the name of the LORD, who hope in him, will be saved.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

A Refutation of: Easter isn't about sacrifice, it's about faith and love - by Jay Parini

The opinion piece from CNN was written by Jay Parini, an author and English teacher at Middlebury College.  It appears that his perspective is that of someone who believes Jesus to be a good example, but not the Son of God, and the Bible to be a useful book, but not inspired Scripture.  My comments on his essay will appear in italics and bold interspersed throughout.

(CNN)You think you know what Easter means?

Even when people have no idea about this season, around this time of year there is an awareness that something is happening. A person comes into the office or classroom with a charcoal cross on his or her forehead; a friend or colleague is taking a trip to see family for the holiday; the stores are selling Cadbury eggs.

Certainly the calendar marks off the day as something special, and there is also a general sense of the turning season: the long winter has ended and summer itself winks in the margins of daily life.

Indeed, Easter marks a change, and it has to do with the feeling of rebirth or regeneration. But it is more complicated than that.

I have a visceral sense of all this, having been raised in a fundamentalist household, and my memories of Easter reach back to beginnings: my father, a Baptist minister, understood the centrality of this special day, even the whole Easter weekend. As a boy, I fidgeted through long services on Good Friday and listened to readings of the seven last words of Jesus on the cross, which built up to the resounding: "It is finished."

I recall being quite upset, imagining the cruelty of the sacrifice of God's only son. I thought it was horrific. I didn't want him to have to die for miserable sinners like myself.

Soon enough I grew to dislike this version of Easter, with the crucifixion as some form of blood-revenge. Why would a God who had gone to the trouble to create humanity take such umbrage? Why would he need to put his only son on the cross and see him publicly tortured—brutalized--to satisfy his feelings of disappointment and anger at what his people had done? Was I missing something?

Short answer; yes, you were certainly missing a great deal.  First off, you should be upset imagining the cruelty of the sacrifice of God's Son, it is a horrific death of an innocent man.  Whether you wanted him to die on your behalf or not, isn't the question.  The real question is what God wanted to do, and God was not content to let humanity remain in rebellion against him, was not content to let that rebellion result in the destruction of those he had created in his image.  God decided to rescue humanity, and God alone had both the wisdom to understand what that would entail and the power/righteousness to carry it out.

The famous hymn about being "washed in the blood of the Lamb" sounded, to my young ears, increasingly disturbing. God is better than this, I thought. The human beings he had created were surely good enough for him?

One of the great conceits of the modern age: We can define God ourselves (or eliminate him altogether).  God is holy, perfect, free of any contamination of sin.  "Good enough" is not an option, it is not even close.  To be in the presence of God is to likewise be holy, or to be dead.  The design of the Tabernacle and Temple illustrated this barrier between God and humanity with its concentric layers of approaching God's presence and the limitation of only the High Priest on the Day of Atonement being allowed to enter into the Holy of Holies and see the presence of God between the cherubim of the Ark of the Covenant.  Why would a Messiah have been necessary at all if humanity was "good enough"?  And what would Jesus' mission have been if not the salvation of humanity?  Either Jesus Christ came to save Lost sinners, the only way that it could be done, or he died a failure upon that Cross.

Simplistic ideas about the meaning of the crucifixion still abound, and there is a vast industry founded on what is called "substitution theology." One can easily dig through the Hebrew and Greek scriptures to snatch occasional verses that seem to support this transactional theology, with God in a bargaining mode, needing "payment" for our sins.

This paragraph is dripping with disdain for those of us (that is, anyone retaining the Orthodox Christianity of the Early Church, Ecumenical Councils and Creeds, the Reformers, etc.  Not to mention the authorial intent of every NT author) who understand that what Jesus accomplished on the Cross was a substitute for the punishment that each of us has earned through rebellion against God.  And yes, one can easily read both the Old and New Testament and find passages of Scripture that support the understanding that what Jesus did was a payment for our sins.  This traditional, mainstream, accepted interpretation of the Scriptures on the question of the purpose and efficacy of the Cross is far from "simplistic", it is an awe inspiring act of Amazing Grace, unparalleled love, and selfless sacrifice.

But I've studied the scriptures carefully, especially the gospels and Paul's letters, and I see no reason to capitulate to this downsized version of Easter weekend, with a vengeful God putting up his own son on a cross for satisfaction of some kind.

"I see no reason to capitulate to the Scriptures"  Not exactly what he said, but the essence of the point.  I have no idea how God's willingness to redeem humanity from sin, and in the process destroy the power of sin and death, can be viewed as a "downsized version of Easter".  I am also at a loss how anyone can honestly have studied the Gospels and Paul's letters and not see the repeated quotations of Jesus that this is the plan of God (Mark 8:31 for example: He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again) and the repeated explanations of Paul that this sacrifice was on our behalf (Romans 3:25 for example:  God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—).  FYI, maybe read the book of Hebrews too, the entire thing is about the superiority of Jesus' sacrifice.

That Jay Parini thinks that Jesus upon the Cross has anything to do with vengeance shows a significant lack of understanding of the theology he has decided to reject.  Holiness, righteousness, justice, grace, love, and mercy are the themes around which the discussion of God's redemptive plan revolve, not vengeance.

In any case, the idea of satisfaction or "payment" is fairly recent, tracing back to St. Anselm in Cur Deus Homo? This treatise, written in the late 11th century, put forward the idea of the death of Jesus as atonement for human sins, a "satisfaction" for the wrath of God.

A century or so later, Peter Abelard famously rejected Anselm's theory, suggesting that the death of Jesus was simply an act of love, showing humanity a way forward, an example of divine benevolence. Jesus lived and died to teach us how to live and die ourselves, or how to "empty ourselves out," as St. Paul says. The crucifixion is first and foremost a prelude to the Resurrection.

This "fairly recent" argument is utterly specious.  I suppose you can't trace the idea of substitutionary atonement back to the New Testament itself if you utterly ignore the portion of Scripture that teach it (Matthew 20:28 or Colossians 1:19-20 for example).  It is true, but not some sort of important point, that nobody stated the theory expressed in the NT exactly the way that St. Anselm did until he did it, but perhaps Jay Parini has forgotten about St. Augustine who wrote the following in On the Trinity in the 5th Century, “What, then, is the righteousness by which the devil was conquered? What, except the righteousness of Jesus Christ? And how was he conquered? Because, when he [the devil] found in Him nothing worthy of death, yet he slew Him. And certainly it is just, that we whom he [the devil] held as debtors, should be dismissed free by believing in Him whom he [the devil] slew without any debt. In this way it is that we are said to be justified in the blood of Christ. For so that innocent blood was shed for the remission of our sins…  He conquered the devil first by righteousness, and afterwards by power: namely, by righteousness, because He had no sin, and was slain by him most unjustly; but by power, because having been dead He lived again, never afterwards to die. But He would have conquered the devil by power, even though He could not have been slain by him: although it belongs to a greater power to conquer death itself also by rising again, than to avoid it by living. But the reason is really a different one, why we are justified in the blood of Christ, when we are rescued from the power of the devil through the remission of sins: it pertains to this, that the devil is conquered by Christ by righteousness, not by power.”  The list could go on and on of those who believed that Jesus died for our sins from the Early Church Fathers to the Reformers, but if St. Augustine isn't enough of an example to ignore this paragraph of the essay, nothing else will be.

So this is the "grand vision" of Easter that he prefers?  Jesus lived and died to show us an example of how to "empty ourselves" {To what end?}  How is this a solution to the problem of sinful human nature?  How does this address the fundamental questions of sin, justice, death, and the afterlife?  To think that a perversion of Easter where Jesus dies as some sort of example, and accomplishes nothing else, somehow paints a kinder view of God is ludicrous.  What then of the prayer that the cup be taken away in the Garden?  What then of the refusal to save himself?  The entire Bible falls apart when you jerk away the foundation upon which it is build, to ignore so much of Scripture because you prefer that it say something else is not an option open to those who would have faith in Jesus Christ.

Jesus had faith in God, resting in the arms of an all-embracing love. That's a fancy way of saying that Jesus trusted that all would be well in the end, which is what Easter teaches us. And a crucial text here -- a key one -- is Romans 3:22, where Paul suggests that reconciliation with God, which is a better way to define "righteousness," is achieved through imitating Jesus in his self-abandonment on the cross on Good Friday.

Yes, Jesus had faith in God (more specifically the Father, Jesus himself was just as much God as the Father), and yes, he knew that all would "be well in the end" (Hebrews 12:2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.)  But that is NOT what Easter teaches us.  Hey man, just chill out, it will all work out just fine in the end.  Sigh, We are so far off from Orthodox Christianity and the traditional accepted meaning of Scripture that it is hard to find a point of commonality.  The quotation of Romans 3:22, certainly an important passage, is odd to say the least.  Paul is NOT suggesting that reconciliation/righteousness is achieved through OUR imitating Jesus; quite the opposite in fact.  Paul is stating categorically that our righteousness comes FROM God through faith in Jesus (Note the crucial parallel discussion in Ephesians 2:8-9, For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.).  If only he had kept reading, for in Romans 3:24 the true source of our justification (the repair of our relationship with God) is made clear, "and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."  Are we to imitate Jesus?  Absolutely.  Does that imitation reconcile us to God?  Not in the least, and for a very good reason.  We have no chance, no hope, of imitating Jesus until AFTER we have been reconciled to God through faith in Jesus, at which point we receive the Holy Spirit who empowers us to live like Jesus.  Neither our salvation nor our subsequent imitation of Jesus is on our own merit, nor does it puff up our pride, all of it is according to God's grace.

I would translate this critical verse in this way: "We are reconciled with God by imitating the faith of Jesus, and we hold him dearly for this." (I always prefer to use the phrase "hold dearly" for "believe," as this is the root of the word. It has no reference to "belief" in the epistemological sense of that term.) There is clearly a huge difference between having "faith in Jesus" -- a nod of assent -- and imitating the "faith of Jesus."

This entire paragraph is meaningless.  You do not have permission to translate Scripture in ways that suit your fancy.  Yes, there can be more than one acceptable translation of the Bible's Hebrew and Greek into English, and they do vary slightly, but not like this.  The original Greek of Romans 3:22 and Jay Parini's preferred self-translation are saying the opposite.  Paul wrote about God's righteousness, available to us through faith in Jesus.  Parini's mis-translation is about our own supposed righteousness achieved through our own effort.

Yes, there is a difference between having "faith in Jesus" (necessary for salvation) and imitating the "faith of Jesus" (discipleship).  One is how we become reconciled to God, the other is how we walk once we have received reconciliation.  He evidently wants to eliminate the need for "faith in Jesus" and replace it with imitating the "faith of Jesus"  Nope, we need both, and we need "faith in Jesus" first.

Easter teaches Christians this, I believe: to emulate the faith of Jesus in the goodness of the universe-- to rest in God, whatever we mean by that great holy syllable, which seems a stumbling block for so many in our highly secular world. It teaches us about what it means to lose ourselves, our petty little selves, in order to gain something larger: reconciliation with creation itself.

Christians all walk with Jesus out of the tomb on Easter morning, reborn as free people, released from the straightjacket of time itself. And this is nothing but joy.

Holy non-sequitur Batman; Jesus had faith in the goodness of the universe??  The universe is not good (or evil), how can an inanimate object have a moral quality?  God is Good.  We are NOT to seek reconciliation with Creation itself (some sort of Pantheism?).  Our sole need/priority/purpose is to be reconciled with God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).  Jesus died to make that reconciliation possible for us, he was raised to life again to proclaim his victory over sin and death and to give us the hope that if we place our trust in him we too will be raised to life on the Last Day.  

I pity an interpretation of Easter that is about relaxing and not getting too caught up in a busy life.  We need not be liberated from time itself.  We are not prisoners of time.  We, as human beings, are enslaved to sin (rebellion against God).  Our only hope, our only recourse, is to stop trying to dig our way out of the hole, put our trust in what Jesus Christ has already done on our behalf (shedding his blood in payment for our sins and rising from the dead), and start living by the Spirit according to Jesus' example and God's Word.  The true meaning of Easter?  Give me that old time religion, it's good enough for me.  Jesus Christ died for the sins of the world, nothing less; my hope is in the crucified and risen Savior.

Sermon Video: God's Chosen People: Bound together in love - Colossians 3:11-14

Having already told the people of the church at Colossae of the need to "put to death" their earthly nature with all of its vices, now Paul advocates for the virtues that the people of God must embrace as they disavow vice: compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience.  As a precursor to this list, Paul reminds the church that "here", that is, in Christ, all of the distinctions and categories by which people divide themselves into subgroups no longer apply, for "Christ is all, and is in all."
In addition to the need to develop and employ the virtues listed by Paul, a significant challenge, but one God's people can achieve through the Spirit, we are also told of the need to pursue these virtues while at the same time forgiving each other when we fail.  Lastly, and most importantly, is the need to "put on" love over all of these efforts, binding them together and leading to harmony.

*As a bonus, this sermon begins with an illustration about brotherly love drawn from the experience of the 9 members of the Fellowship in Tolkien's LOTR.*

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: God made you alive with Christ - Colossians 2:9-15

In his ongoing effort to express the supremacy and all-sufficiency of Jesus Christ, Paul compares what circumcision was unable to accomplish, the removal of the "whole self ruled by the flesh", with what baptism in Christ can accomplish, namely the destruction of that nature enthralled to sin when those who believe in Christ are "buried with him" and "raised with him" by God's power through faith.  In addition, Paul reiterates that before Christ, "you were dead in your sins" but have since been "made alive with Christ."  This dramatic reversal, the hinge of history, is illustrated by Paul with a courtroom metaphor wherein Jesus takes the legal charges of our debt to God because of our sins, from our powerless hands, and nails it to the cross, allowing God to then cancel out our debt as having been paid in full. 

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: In Him we have redemption - Colossians 1:12-14

The 4th of Paul's examples of what it means to "live a life worthy of the Lord" (The first three were: bearing fruit through good works, growing in the knowledge of God, and being strengthened by his power) is the one that he chooses to expound upon: giving joyful thanks to the Father.  We have, as followers of Jesus Christ, ample reasons for ongoing gratitude toward God, here Paul chooses to focus upon how we became disciples of Jesus in the first place: God rescued us from darkness and brought us into the light.  All of the verbs that Paul uses to describe our redemption are passive and past tense.  In other words, it is something which God, and he alone, accomplished, and it is something that has already happened.  In addition, Paul reminds us that the mechanism by which God rescued us was the payment of our sins (redemption) by the Son, which made the forgiveness of our sins possible.  In the end, we have every reason to continue in joyful thanks to the Father.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video - Judas: The Hopeless Sinner, Matthew 27:1-10

Peter disowned Jesus, repented of his failure with bitter tears, saw the empty tomb and believed, and was finally restored by Jesus and made useful again for the kingdom.  Judas betrayed Jesus, was remorseful and admitted his guilt, despaired of the future, and killed himself.  Have you ever wondered, why Peter's outcome was so different from that of Judas?  In the Gospel of Matthew, these two episodes are consecutive, highlighting the commonalities of the failure of these two disciples of Jesus.  In the end, the attempted repentance of Judas, for all we can tell sincere, failed because he didn't seek mercy and forgiveness from God, instead giving in to hopelessness and committing suicide. 
Hopelessness is a major issue in our world, it always has been, the numbers of suicides annually are staggering.  So many people without hope, and yet, the Church has hope, we have been given hope through the Holy Spirit and can therefore share that hope with those around us in desperate need.  The priests turned Judas away when he expressed his remorse saying, "What is that to us?"  May the people of God, his Church here on earth, not make the same mistake.  It is our solemn duty to make it easier, not harder, for the Lost to find Christ, helping those living in darkness to see the light.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Peter Disowns Jesus - Matthew 26:69-75

In a well known and dramatic trio of confrontations, the Apostle Peter, formerly the most vocal and brash of Jesus' disciples, fails to acknowledge Jesus as his friend, rabbi, or Lord, when challenged by bystanders during Jesus' sham trial before the Sanhedrin.  Each of Peter's denials increases in their fervency, from his initial attempt at pretending to not understand the question, to a denial containing an oath, and then finally a denial backed up with the calling down of a curse if he should be lying.  In many ways, the experience of Peter parallels that of so many people who have followed a road of temptation into sin, each step of the way increasing the severity of the rebellion against God and the eventual guilt.  The Gospel of Matthew doesn't mention Peter again, but fortunately for Peter and for us, his story doesn't end with Peter outside weeping bitterly.  The Gospel of John contains the fullest account before Peter's central role in the book of Acts, in it Jesus repeats to Peter three times, "Do you love me?" as a means of restoring Peter's confidence that he was not permanently damaged by his failure, that passage ends with Jesus sharing with Peter a command filled with both love and service, "Follow me!".  Peter didn't fail his Lord in the future, he served the church faithfully for about thirty years, eventually affirming his faith in Jesus during Nero's anti-Christian purge, and in the end, dying for the Savior he had once denied.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Are good people in Heaven?

Short answer: No

Heaven doesn't contain "good" people, it contains forgiven people.

God is holy, God is perfect, and only those who likewise are holy and perfect can enter into his presence.

Humanity is not holy, humanity is not perfect, all of us are flawed, all are sinners.

If God had not intervened with the Incarnation, if the Son of God had not died for our sins and if he had not been raised to life for our justification, the gulf that exists between God, who is holy, and humanity, which is not, would have remained separating us from God forever.

Heaven isn't for "good" people; good isn't good enough, only perfection will work, and since the only way for a human being to be perfect is for God to forgive us, and give us his righteousness (through Christ), the only people who will join God in heaven are those who by faith have been forgiven.

Sermon Video: King Manasseh - Wickedness and Repentance - 2 Chronicles 33

King Manasseh was a wicked man, he lived the majority of his life steeped in idolatry, blasphemy, and he even committed child sacrifice, offering up his own son in a pagan ritual.  As a king of Judah, the covenant people descended of Abraham, Manasseh bears a greater responsibility for his sin than someone who does not know who the LORD is.  By his actions, Manasseh was guaranteeing that both he and his nation would soon face the wrath of God in righteous judgment.  The only question is, can that future judgment be avoided, can such a wicked man repent and be saved?
In a stunning turn of event, Manasseh does indeed repent when brought low by the LORD, and to top it off, God accepts his contrition and forgives him, allowing Manasseh to spend what time remained in his life trying to make amends for his past.
To counter-balance this message of hope for even the vilest of sinners, if that person repents, the remainder of chapter 33 of 2 Chronicles tells briefly of the life of Manasseh's son, Amon, who only reigned as king for two years before he was assassinated.  In those two years, Amon followed the example of the earlier part of his father's life by engaging in much wickedness, but unlike his father, he refused to repent and died in his sins.
All have sinned, all must repent and seek the LORD's forgiveness, but not all are given the multiple chances that were afforded to Manasseh, for Amon only lived till his 24th year, at which point he had to account for his life before God.  Today is the day of repentance, for no one is guaranteed tomorrow.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

True Repentance comes at a cost - Psalm 6

There has been much discussion of late about the "apology" of various politicians for the immoral things which they had done which have become public.  Whether or not the voters "forgive" a politician or not has absolutely nothing to do with the forgiveness that is needed from God, for this form of political "repentance" has little or nothing to do with the real thing.
To actually repent of one's sins requires a broken and contrite heart.  If one brags of sin in private, treating it as a laughing matter, and makes excuses for that same sin in public, blaming it on someone else or trying to minimize it, how can this possibly reflect a heart that is broken before a holy God?
David, as a man of God, was also a man who committed heinous sins.  In his most egregious sin, David was brought to repentance through God's grace in the sending of the prophet Nathan to warn David that his sin could not be ignored.
In Psalm 6, David writes about the foes that oppress him which he realizes are a sign of the judgment of God against his sin.  In response he writes of the anguish caused by his guilt, "I am worn out from groaning; all night long I flood my bed with weeping and drench my couch with tears.  My eyes grown weak with sorrow; they fail because of all my foes." (Psalm 6:6-7)  It is the attitude of genuine horror and revulsion at our offenses, committed against God, that is the hallmark of true repentance.  Do not be deceived, those who "repent" for public consumption will in no way fool Almighty God.  It is only by throwing ourselves upon the mercy of God and trusting in the cleansing power of the Blood of the Lamb that we can find forgiveness, cleansing, healing, and finally salvation.