Sermon Video: Wolves in Sheep's clothing - 2 John 7-13

Having established the need for the Christian community to be united by love in the truth of the Gospel (in vs. 1-6), the Apostle John concludes his short letter with a serious warning about the danger of heretics/apostates who have abandoned that truth and who now expound a different, lesser, version of Jesus Christ.  In the first century, that lesser version was typically a denial of the humanity of Jesus (Docetism, a manifestation of Greek Gnosticism), only different in its choice of what to reject from the account of the Apostles in the Scriptures than the post-modern materialistic denial of the deity of Jesus (often as part of an overall denial of the spiritual realm in its entirety).  However it comes about, such a rejection of the Gospel, for rejection it is indeed when the foundation of who Jesus is has been abandoned, cannot be tolerated in the Church.  John goes so far as to insist that these false teachers be denied even a shared meal, lest their teachings infect others and lead them astray.  Without opening ourselves up to the over-reaction of judgmental legalism (ostracism and denying fellowship over non-foundation matters), we must then follow suit and likewise protect the purity of the Gospel for the next generation, just as those Christians to whom John wrote protected it for their children, and on and on until it came to us.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Why would we celebrate the death of the wicked?

When word spread that Adolf Hitler had taken his own life on April 30th, of 1945, most of the world rejoiced, for a great evil had been removed from the world, and perhaps peace might not be far off, at least in Europe.  The war in Europe officially ended on V-E Day, May 8th, with Germany's unconditional surrender, with WWII continuing until V-J Day, on August 15th, after the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by atomic bombs.  Millions had died, and more would die in the refugee crisis that followed, but citizens in the Allied countries rejoiced at the cessation of war, as well they should.  As Christians, it is incumbent upon us to adopt a Christian Worldview, a way of thinking and feeling that reflects the teachings of Holy Scripture, and in particular, the life of Jesus Christ.  The ending of a war can certainly be a moment worthy of celebratory feelings, but should we feel the same way about the death of the wicked, however it comes about?  Two recent events have brought this question to the forefront: the killing by a church member of an armed intruder after he had taken the lives of two people during a church service in Texas {‘I Feel Like I Killed Evil’: Jack Wilson Praised For Killing White Settlement Church Shooting Suspect}, which was a split second reaction to a gunman, and the calculated decision by the government of the United States to kill Maj.Gen. Qassim Suleimani, an Iranian national, in a foreign country, with a missile fired from a drone. {What to Know About the Death of Iranian General Suleimani by Karen Zraick of the NY Times}  These two incidents had one primary thing in common: the person killed had been responsible for the death of innocent people prior to being killed.  Beyond that, the circumstances vary greatly, as does the debate about the legal and moral justification for responding to violence with lethal force, but there remains one more thing that both have in common and share with many other incidents when criminals, terrorists, and/or those accused of being involved in evil behavior are killed, whether in the moment or after judicial proceedings, whether by private citizens acting in self-defense or governmental authorities: the tendency to rejoice at the death of the wicked.  And while the call to celebrate the death of the Texas church shooter was muted (but still noticeable), the request to celebrate the death of Suleimani was instantly amplified and muddled by American politics {GOP lawmakers celebrate Soleimani’s death: ‘He was an evil bastard who murdered Americans’ by Mike Murphy of MarketWatch}.  The question, then, that we must ask ourselves, as Christians seeking to live by a Christian worldview, is this: Does God celebrate the death of the wicked, even when it is necessary to save lives?  The short answer is: No.

Ezekiel 18:23 (NIV)  Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?

Luke 6:27-28 (NIV)  “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

2 Peter 3:9 (NIV)  The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

The above texts are simply a sampling, and while the Bible certainly contains repeated examples of the wrath of God in action, and calls for God's intervention against the enemies of the righteous (see David's Psalms in particular), it at the same time makes it very clear that God takes NO pleasure in the death of the wicked, even when his own judgment brings their lives to a close.  Why not?  Every life of a human being that ends with that person remaining in a state of rebellion against God results in a person created in God's image who will be separated from God for eternity.  Whatever opportunity for repentance that existed is now over.  While it may be a common question to ask seminary students to grapple with the notion of God's mercy in Christ Jesus being sufficient to forgive even the worst humans in history, like Adolf Hitler, had he repented in his bunker after having the blood of millions upon his hands {which to our knowledge he showed no signs of repentance, although other mass murders have done so}, it is not merely a hypothetical question.  Why not?  Because the vilest of human beings can be saved by the grace of God, the worst among us can receive forgiveness, IF they repent and receive God's salvation in Jesus Christ.  Thus the killing of anyone, even those most deserving of death because of their extreme evil deeds, is still a spiritual tragedy, for it is a soul lost from the Kingdom of God, one less person to celebrate at the Wedding Supper of the Lamb and glorify the name of God.  Even when there is no choice, as in the case of the Texas church shooting {aside from the view of total pacifists who would deny that any killing is justified}, there is no room in a Christian worldview for celebration. 

Some additional related thoughts...

1. Not all our enemies are God's enemies.  The people of God have at times condemned the righteous, or at least the innocent, alongside (or instead of) the wicked.  See for example: The Thirty Years War, the Inquisition.  What if the 'evil' we eliminate turns out to be closer to the martyr Jan Hus burned at the stake rather than Jack the Ripper?  We dare not pretend that our designation of human beings as an 'enemy of God' is anything but a folly.  FYI, and this may sting a bit: The enemies of America (or Israel) are not synonymous with the enemies of God (that distinction works on the personal level too, those people who are your 'enemies' may be just that, your enemies).

2. God will judge the wicked, but in his time, and according to his righteousness and mercy.
Romans 12:19 (NIV)  Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord.  The related warped thought of those who hope for the destruction of Muslims in general, {in response to terrorism, or in reaction against the calls for a worldwide Caliphate...In the past this, "kill 'em all, let God sort them out" sentiment was expressed toward Native Americans, with the vile, 'the only good Indian is a dead Indian'.} rather than their acceptance of the Gospel, thus showing an emphasis on physical/temporal issues above the spiritual cause of the Kingdom of God.  Is the Gospel not capable of overcoming the resistance of any religious/ideological group?  The Vikings were an existential threat to the Christian communities of Medieval Europe, and then missionaries (some of whom were martyred in the process) brought the Gospel to them, and the threat evaporated as God's grace transformed their culture.

3. Governmental authorities do have a mandate to protect the innocent and punish the evildoer, but it is not limitless.  For example: The firebombing of German and Japanese cities during WWII, and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while part of a cold calculation about potential lives lost without those actions, killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. (see below about the 'lesser of two evils')  Or more recently, the now almost ubiquitous use of a drone missile to blow up a house containing a terrorist(s) but also potentially innocent bystanders, and of course the numerous Death Row inmates who have been exonerated after their innocence was proven.

4. Choosing the lesser of two evils, is still choosing evil.  IF the choice must be made, it ought not be celebrated.
Romans 12:21 (NIV)  Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.  Throughout Church history, God's people have been tempted to embrace 'the lesser evil', but is this not a lack of faith, and/or a lack of living as citizens of Heaven whose kingdom is not of this world?  The Civil Rights Movement demonstrated the power of overcoming evil with good, but as a tactic/strategy it has been utilized rarely, often only when desperation (i.e. a lack of power) eliminates other, more conventional, choices.  It is folly to think that good came come from doing evil, but is it not also dangerous to believe that a 'greater' evil can be prevented by doing a 'lesser' evil?

In the end, it has been the general consensus of Christian thinkers throughout the centuries that there is a legitimate role for the civil and military use of force {See the Apostle Paul's thoughts in Romans 13 and Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas' thoughts on Just War Theory}, but we must not allow ourselves to celebrate the destruction of the wicked, even when it is justified, even when there seems to be no other choice, for in the words of the Christian martyr John Bradford, as he watched a criminal being led away for execution, "there but for the grace of God, go I."

Sermon Video: Start at the beginning - Love one another, 2 John 1-6

Abbreviating themes he developed further in 1 John, the Apostle writes to another church he founded of the need to "love in the truth", as he links the truth about Jesus Christ with the command from God that we "love one another".  How do we know that we're living in love?  We obey the commands of God.  This, in a nutshell, is John's message of the foundation of the Church, its core and functionality.  The linking of truth and love is no mere happenstance, but a deliberate emphasis.  Truth without love is sterile and dead, love without truth is purposeless; the people of the Church very much need both.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Immanuel, "God with us" - Matthew 1:22-23

The entrance of the Christ child into God's redemptive story is an amazing true story. The Son of God, the rightful king, born in a humble setting. Jesus' story begins, purposefully, with humility. And yet, within the humble setting lies an awesome truth, the child of the Virgin is the very Son of God, literally he is Immanuel, "God with us". Why? Simple, only God himself could save us. The entrance into the human story by God is incredible, but God is just getting warmed up, stay tuned until Easter to see how God temporarily left the stage, only to return in triumph. Christmas is sublime, but Easter is a sequel that surpasses it.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

I'm not willing to ignore Antisemitism on Christmas Eve (or ever).

Unless the name of Jesus is entirely unknown to you, you probably know that Jesus was a Jew.  He was born of Mary, and raised by Joseph as his earthly father, both of whom were of the tribe of Judah, one of Jacob's sons, who was himself Abraham's grandson.  He was raised in an observant household, circumcised on the eighth day, and went with his family every year to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover.  It is for this reason, among others, that Antisemitism by Christians is a slap in the face of God, it is a stain upon the Bride of Christ, and the greatest shame of the people called by God to form the New Covenant.  That being said, it is particularly galling to hear of antisemitism, and from an extremely famous and well connected American, at Christmas.  In this case, the person wallowing in the old racist trope that Jews control the world, is the former mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani.  The target?  The favorite punching bag of white nationalists and neo-nazis: Jewish billionaire George Soros.  I have no interest in engaging in a debate about the politics of George Soros.  It is well documented that he funds causes that he believes in, much like millions of people all over the globe.  It is his right to support and fund these causes, and it is the right of others to oppose those same causes.  One can disagree with the politics of George Soros, and express that disagreement, without painting him as a nefarious puppet master, and without denigrating his Jewish heritage.  Rudy Giuliani has chosen, and not for the first time, to engage in the latter.  In an interview with New York magazine {A Conversation With Rudy Giuliani Over Bloody Marys at the Mark Hotel By Olivia Nuzzi}{Rudy Giuliani says he's "more of a Jew" than Holocaust survivor George Soros BY SOPHIE LEWIS} he said the following,

“Don’t tell me I’m anti-Semitic if I oppose him,” he said. “Soros is hardly a Jew. I’m more of a Jew than Soros is. I probably know more about — he doesn’t go to church, he doesn’t go to religion — synagogue. He doesn’t belong to a synagogue, he doesn’t support Israel, he’s an enemy of Israel. He’s elected eight anarchist DA’s in the United States. He’s a horrible human being.”

It is perfectly possible to oppose the politics of George Soros without being anti-Semitic, just as it is possible to oppose the politics of Benjamin Netanyahu without being anti-Israel.  What is not possible, is to declare a HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR to be a non-Jew, or to declare yourself (as for example, a person of Italian descent raised as a Roman Catholic) as 'more of a Jew' than any person of Jewish descent, no matter their politics, or lack thereof.  When the Nazis murdered more than 6 million Jews, they didn't ask them what their politics were, and they didn't spare those families who had served the Reich faithfully during WWI, nor even those who were not practicing the faith of Abraham.  Jewish blood, even if only two grandparents were Jewish, was enough for a death sentence (and sometimes not even that, suspicion alone could prove fatal).  {The Nuremberg Laws: Holocaust and Human Behavior}

The family of George Soros faced extermination during the Nazi reign of terror, that of Rudy Giuliani did not.  How did Soros' family in Hungary survive?  By faking documents and pretending to be Christians until the war ended.  It doesn't matter to me, at all, what political party Rudy Giuliani supports, or if he wasn't involved in politics at all.  Antisemitism is a cancer, a despicable stain on the human condition, and an example par excellence of fallen human nature.  It must be condemned, it must be opposed, or in future generations they will wonder how anyone could have forgotten the Holocaust and let it happen again.