Sermon Video: "Everything that does not come from faith is sin." - Romans 14:22-23

Having established the grace we need to give each other in disputable matters, Paul ends the discussion with a warning toward those who might act against their own conscience, and thus do so without faith.

Along the way, we also have the important advice to "not condemn ourselves" by approving of things that we should not, and the clarification that it is not with respect to faith in God or his will that we should hesitate to act on faith if we doubt (in that case we ought to "dare Great things for God") but our own understanding, when we doubt ourselves Paul is telling us to err on the side of caution.

Sermon Video: Putting others above yourself - 1 Corinthians 10:23-33

Following his appeal for unity within the Church and his caution about participating in other religions, Paul then tackles the complicated questions of interacting with unbelievers.  The balancing act in question is between purity of devotion to God and at the same time kindness and courtesy toward non-Christians in order to bear a good witness to them about the Gospel. 
Paul emphasizes the need to seek the good of others above that of ourselves, and in so doing reminds the people of the church at Corinth to see the big picture (vs. 25, everything belongs to God), value courtesy (vs. 27, social interactions with unbelievers are a positive thing), and exercise discretion when necessary (vs. 28, as a representative of Christ, not wanting to damage the conscience of others nor place a stumbling block in their way).
In the end, the need to help others see the value in the Gospel looms large in weighing the various choices faces the Christians in Corinth, that need remains as critical for us today as it was for them.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

To not "look Catholic" is a terrible rationale for a Baptist Church to base decisions upon.

The Red Bank Baptist Church of Lexington, South Carolina, recently voted (in Baptist Churches all members have a vote, and can vote at regular congregational business meetings regarding matters both great and small, i.e. the church budget, the calling/dismissing of a pastor, program and building issues, etc.) to remove a 7 ft. statue of Jesus which had been displayed outside the entrance to the church for the past decade.  According to Pastor Jeff Wright, "This is not a denomination issue, its a church decision.  We are removing it to end some confusion.  Some people have seen it, guests that have been here and have asked, 'Why is this on the front of a Baptist Church?"  In a letter the church sent to the artist, Delbert Baker Jr., Pastor Wright explained that the statue brings into question, "the theology and core values" of the church.

AP story: Baptist church's 'Catholic' Jesus statue to find new home

The Jesus statue at Red Bank Baptist Church that is being removed.

We live in interesting times.  On the one hand we have an ongoing debate that roils people's emotions and has led to protests and bloodshed concerning the removal of statues on public land which were erected to honor those who fought to retain slavery in America, and at the same time, we have a congregation choosing to remove a statue of Jesus from their property because it makes the building appear "too Catholic".

Whether or not a Baptist Church has a statue or painting of Jesus prominently displayed is not the most pressing theological question facing most churches, but the line of reasoning that led to the decision made by the people of Red Bank Baptist Church is of import to all churches, regardless of denomination.  We, as local churches and/or as part of a denomination, ought not to be deciding how we carry out our Biblical mandate to share the Gospel and make disciples on the basis of not doing so "like them".  The "them" in this case is the Catholic Church, but it could just have easily been the Methodists, Lutherans, Pentecostals, or a host of others.  Why we do what we do, and how we do it, are questions far too important to be decided based upon a desire to have a unique "brand" as a church.

What is the proper standard for a church to base its decisions upon?  The bedrock standard is the Word of God itself.  Does the Bible encourage, prohibit, or is it silent on the issue at hand?  If the Bible encourages/commands the behavior/attitude in question, the discussion is over.  Our task is simply to obey.  If the Bible prohibits/condemns the behavior/attitude in question, again, the discussion is over, our task is to obey.  If the Bible is silent on the particular issue, we then look to see if principles contained in God's Word apply, we consider the wisdom of the collective Church's viewpoint on the issue over the ages, and we examine our own God-given reason and consciences as well.  These are the proper channels for discussion and debate among a local church or denomination regarding the choices we face and decisions we must make.  However, being "not Catholic", "not Pentecostal", or "not Presbyterian" is an invalid viewpoint, one that heightens divisions, encourages emotional instead of reasoned decisions, and in the end, leads to faulty theology.  In case you're wondering, making a decision based upon trying to mimic another church is an equally faulty methodology, albeit one that at least has a positive connotation.

Baptists are not alone in falling to this temptation.  Historically speaking many of the Counter-Reformation decisions of the Catholic Church were made on this same basis, to be "not Protestant", with less than helpful results.  Time and time again, churches have made decisions that were not based upon a careful and obedient understanding of God's Word, or upon wisdom received from our ancestors in the faith combined with our own reasons/consciences, but rather upon lesser criteria.  When we make decisions based upon reasoning and motivations that are less than ideal, or even downright foolish, how can we expect the decisions themselves to be God honoring and wise?

Not being privy to the internal discussions that took place at Red Bank Baptist prior to the decision, I don't know why they believe that the "theology and core values" of their church are threatened by an artist's depiction of Jesus, but if the answer contains any of this sentiment, "because it makes us look too Catholic", whether in the end they came to the right decision or not, the reasoning was dangerously faulty.




For some perspective, I write this as the pastor of an American Baptist Church with a rather unique architectural and artistic style among baptist churches that reflects the oil boom heritage of the Franklin area when the church sanctuary as it looks now was completed in 1904.  We have more art than most churches on the walls, including two giant murals of Jesus flanking the pulpit.  It would be a tragedy if a future generation decided to whitewash those murals to avoid looking like other Christians.

The sanctuary of First Baptist Church of Franklin

Sermon Video: Debatable Matters Part 2: Consistency vs. Conscience, 1 Corinthians 8:4-8

As Paul continues to speak to the issue at Corinth of whether or not Christians there should eat meat that had been previously offered as part of idol worship, he next delves into the topic of consistency.  It seems that the Christians at Corinth, like most everyone else, lacked true consistency in their thinking.  They knew that there is only one God, and that therefore idols do not represent anything real, but they still felt guilty about the association with them that eating meat entailed for them.

Inconsistency in our Christian Worldview is a common problem, and at times an exceedingly dangerous one, for all Christians.  While we may know the Truth, we do not always think and act in accordance with it, often resulting in contradictions that deny by our words/actions what we claim to believe.

Is our conscience the solution to an inconsistent worldview?  Unfortunately, as the Christians in Corinth were experiencing, our conscience can become warped or blunted through association with un-Biblical ideas and sinful actions.  The value, then, of our conscience is more along the lines of an early-warning system, something to cause us to be cautious, than an actual decision making tool.  In time, as our minds become more Christ-like through spiritual growth and discipleship, our conscience will follow suit, becoming more effective.

In the end, it is beneficial for Christians to focus upon the common ground that we all share (belief in one God, the Trinity, the Word, salvation by faith in Christ, etc.), those areas which are not debatable, as we recognize that we must agree on these core beliefs, but were not meant to agree on the host of secondary issues.  Within that common ground of belief, we also as Christians share a common purpose, for regardless of our background or perspective as Christians, we all have been called to live by and for God.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Is it right in God's sight? - Acts 4:13-22

After having been detained by the Sanhedrin following the healing of a man born lame, Peter and John as told that they may no longer preach anything about Jesus.  This decision is reached by those in authority despite the obvious miracle of the man standing before them.  In response, Peter asks if it is right to obey men or God.  The disciples cannot stop preach the Gospel, nor will they.  At this point the religious leadership lets them go despite their desire to further punish Peter and John because of the fear they have of the people (who are amazed at the miracle).  How do we know if we should disobey an unjust law or corrupt regime?  In the end, Jesus is our example, in this as in all else.

To watch the video, click on the link below:
Sermon Video

Acts 4:19 "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God."

“Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God.” (Acts 4:19) Those were the words that Peter used to justify his defiance of the Sanhedrin. The Jewish religious leaders had ordered Peter and the apostles to stop preaching about Jesus the Christ, the apostles declined to obey them. As Christians, we have an obligation to obey the laws of the land that we live in, EXCEPT when those laws are clearly in defiance of the clear will of God. Preaching the Gospel in defiance of the law? Not only the right choice, the only choice. Not paying taxes because we don’t like the way the government spends our money? Sorry, can’t go with you on that one, the whole “give unto Caesar” thing. Here in America we don’t have to make hard choices between our conscience and the law very often, but it wasn’t always the case. Example: the Jim Crowe laws in the South. Christians had the right to disobey them, and certainly should never have supported them. The Civil Rights Movement’s use of non-violent protest was both effective and Christ-like.
In other parts of the world the choices faced by believers are much more difficult than in America. Throughout the Islamic world Christians face death if they try to spread the Gospel, they know that their governments support radicalism and even terrorism, and many have no voice in their government. Compared to them, we have easy choices to make. As Americans we can work through the political process, we can protest, we have freedom of speech and the press. With all that freedom the primary danger is complacency, because we live in a “Christian” country it can be easy to go with the flow, to assume that we don’t need to face the tough choices that the Apostles faced when the Church was young. Well, the Church may be middle-aged now, but that doesn’t mean we don’t need to seek what is right in God’s sight.