Sermon Video: Who will enter the Kingdom of God? - 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Writing to a church struggling with maintaining Christian morality, Paul reminds the people of the church at Corinth that, "the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God".  Morality, that is obedience to the Law of God, is not optional for the people of God.  Morality is also not negotiable, for God has defined it according to his own attributes.  To imitate God is righteousness, to rebel against God is wickedness.  To illustrate this, Paul lists 10 examples of immorality that are not acceptable among the people of God.  As with any of Paul's lists of virtues or vices, the list is not exhaustive, but all those things listed do indeed belong on the list.
Paul begins the list of vices by saying, "Do not be deceived", which indeed seems a fitting warning as several of the things on the list are no longer considered to be immoral by segments of the Christian community in America.  How is it that we think we can overrule the Word of God?  All ten things listed by Paul are immoral, whether we like it or not, for God has declared them to be so through his inspired Word, and we have no right to challenge it.
Humanity is indeed wicked, fallen and lost, thankfully God has provided the solution, by washing, sanctifying, and justifying those who have faith in the Son of God, Jesus Christ.  The wicked will not inherit the kingdom, thanks be to the grace of God, which by faith has declared his people to be no longer wicked, but instead righteous, in the name of Jesus.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: We must settle our own disputes - 1 Corinthians 6:1-8

How can you tell if a church has significant problems?  One sure example of trouble would be the presence of lawsuits between members.  Paul addresses this issue within the church at Corinth where evidently multiple lawsuits had been filed between those who were a part of the church.  These lawsuits upset Paul in multiple ways, for they were both a poor witness to non-believers and evidence of an absence of love and humility (and conversely the presence of animosity, pride, greed, etc.).
What should the response of a Christian be to a brother or sister in Christ who has wronged him/her?  In the realm of non-violent wrongs, our goal should be forgiveness and reconciliation, something others in the church who are not directly involved can help facilitate.  What if that process fails?  As a Christian, I must decide that my rights are of less consequence to me than a fellow human being for whom Christ also died.  A selfless perspective will put aside pride, thoughts of vengeance, and will seek to end disputes, not escalate them.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Jochebed: A Mother's Courage and Sacrifice - Exodus 2:1-10

In honor of Mother's Day, consider one of the Bible's courageous mothers: Jochebed.  Her name may not be overly familiar to most, but the accomplishments of her son are known far and wide, a son whose very survival depended upon Jochebed's courage and willingness to sacrifice.  The son of Jochebed was Moses, and he would lead his people to freedom, but only because his mother did everything she could to keep him alive as a baby.
Jochebed's desperate plan, putting her 3 month old boy in a basket in the Nile, is well known, but less well understood is that Jochebed fully intended that an Egyptian woman would find the child, leaving Miriam behind with instructions to encourage whoever found the baby to keep and care for him.  In the end, Pharaoh's daughter, Jewish tradition calls her Bithia, did find the baby, and she did have compassion on him, which combined with Miriam's not-very-subtle suggestion that she knew a woman that would nurse him, resulted in the saving of the life of the boy whom Bithia would call Moses.  One last note: In order to save his life, Jochebed had to allow her son to be raised by, and call another woman, "mom"; a gut wrenching sacrifice indeed.
To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Don't call yourself a Christian if... 1 Corinthians 5:9-13

Bringing the discussion regarding sexual immorality to a close, the Apostle Paul reminds the church at Corinth that his previous instructions to avoid sexually immoral people was not meant as a restriction on those outside the church, but only on those inside who claim to be a Christian but who continue to live in immorality.  Paul also broadens the application of this principle beyond sexual immorality to include any other type of immorality to which a professing "Christian" might be enslaved.  In the end, the people of God must be holy, a righteous people (by the grace of God), who cannot tolerate ongoing immorality in their midst.  In closing out the topic, Paul reminds the church that it is not their job to judge those outside the church (for God will do that), but those inside.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

A brutally poor use of the Bible

I recently read a blog post made by an ordained minister (to keep your mind on topic, I'm not going to mention the name/gender/denomination of the minister) which cited the Biblical reference of Galatians 5:22-23 in a way that was one of the most ridiculously eisegetical misuses of Scripture I have ever read.  The Word of God cannot mean whatever we want it to mean, it cannot be divorced from its original settings, the intent of the author (in this case Paul and God), nor the understanding of the Church as a whole concerning the text throughout history.  If all of these safeguards are ignored, if proper exegesis is not done, you get the type of nonsense I read online.  Let me share the text of Galatians 5:22-23 and then explain what this minister said about it.

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.  Against such things there is no law."

I'm also not going to share what particular issue this verse was cited in connection with, because it would also change most people's focus from the text itself to that hot-button issue.  In a nutshell, the minister cited this verse and then declared that something that the Bible in a variety of places calls a sin can no longer be considered a sin because some of those who commit this sin also (in the minister's opinion) display the fruit of the Spirit.  In other words, if the virtues listed by Paul are present in a person's life, whatever behavior that person is also doing, no matter what the Bible says specifically about such behavior, can no longer be judged as sinful and must therefore not only be accepted as legitimate but championed as good, beautiful, and pure.

Do you think that Paul wrote those words in order to destroy the Law of Moses?  Did Paul intend to eliminate the very idea that there are behavior which God has forbidden to not only humanity in general but his people in particular?  How could anyone possibly read these verses, in their context, and come up with such a conclusion?  To abuse Galatians 5:22-23 in this way is a crime against the Word of God, it is having a particular conclusion in mind and searching for a passage of Scripture to back up what you already want to believe.

The very words written by Paul both before and after vs. 22-23 utterly refute the contention that 5:22-23 negate the idea of behavior being sinful, In verse 19-21 Paul wrote, "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity, and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like.  I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God."  Following vs. 22-23, Paul continued, "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires." (vs. 24) The essence of the fruit of the Spirit is not only the presence of virtue, but the absence of vice.  We cannot possibly be living according to the Spirit of God, walking in his will, if we at the same time are indulging in sinful behavior.  And yes, the behavior that this minister was declaring to be good and pure, instead of immoral, is part of the list in vs. 19-21.  Nowhere in the Bible is this idea taught, nowhere does God give man the authority to define right and wrong.

If a thief displays the fruit of the Spirit, should we ignore the fact that he continues to steal?  If a liar displays the fruit of the Spirit, should we ignore the fact that she continues to bear false witness?  If adulterers display the fruit of the Spirit, should we ignore the fact that they are dishonoring their marriage?  The presence of virtue does not negate the presence of vice.  The implications of such an awful interpretation of Scripture are laughably absurd, yet this is the type of thing that people are willing to do to Scripture, bending and twisting, pulling and shoving, to try to make it fit what they want to believe.

Every lay person in the Church should know better, an ordained minister should be ashamed of such behavior.  The Bible is not a tool to suit or fancy, it is the Word of God, it deserves far more respect than that.