12.01.2009

Christ....mas

A Christmas Note from last year...

So it’s about time for Christmas…….and hopefully we’re all fairly excited! I know I am. I can’t wait to see my family. I mean, who’s been harassing my sisters the past months? Their husbands? Probably. (I know those are fragmented sentences. It’s for style.)

So I can’t recall if I’ve posted this before (big shocker to those of you who know me) but a few months ago, while I was teaching my students about the life of Jesus. I took some time, a few hours really, to study his birth. There are things that we get wrong with the Christmas story that we do know….Mary is never mentioned riding a donkey, the number of Wise men isn’t know and they weren’t there at the time of his birth, etc. But I found something out that to me was even more startling. So in the words of Kevin in Home Alone, “This is it. Don’t get scared now.”

Firstly, we should realize that the gospels do not say that Mary went into labor immediately or after a short period of time after she and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem. Instead Jesus’ birth occurred simply, “while they were there.”

In Luke 2:7 we read, “and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.” Now, as it turns out the word for inn, kataluma, can be translated guest room, house or inn. Bethlehem was a very small town, and most commercial inns would be found in major towns with major roads. When Luke wants to refer to one of these inns, he uses the proper term for it, pandacheion. When kataluma is used in both Luke and Mark, it clearly refers to a “guest room” (Mk. 14:14; Lk. 22:11).

How could Jesus be born in a manger in a guest room? Well, the answer is the design of Ancient Near Eastern homes. Often times, the manger was located within the house itself. The home consisted of one large room in which the family would sleep on the upper level and the animals would sleep on a lower level. This was done to prevent theft, most likely (Mom, “Hey Jacob, your room looks like a pig’s sty.” Jacob, “It is.”).

So the most accurate portrayal of the Christmas story according to the sources is this. Mary and Joseph go to Bethlehem and stay at a house crowded with friends or family. Sometime after they arrive there, Mary gives birth (with a lot of people around to help) and they lay Jesus in a manger because it is the most convenient place. The guest room is super crowded. And newborn babies as well as new mom’s are tired, cranky, and so forth.

So what’s the point? Well, to me this view of the Christmas story takes out a lot of the drama on the one hand. But on the other hand it doesn’t. It places it solely where it belongs, upon the baby and coming of Jesus.

I was talking to my youth kids at our Christmas party the other night. Since they already knew this aspect of the story of Christ’s birth from our previous discussions, I focused instead on something that I had never quite understood. (If you’re not bored by this point, then feel free to read some more!)

In birth, and in Mary’s birth, women suffer pain and even injury or death because of the stain of sin (Gen.3:16). But at the end of the birth process, joy and new life have come. Often times, this joy is said to overcome the very pain that the woman is feeling at that time.

Fast forward around thirty-something years and now we have Jesus on a cross, going through pain, to produce new life for all. And after his death, there are tombs being shattered and bodies being raised to life (Mt. 27:52).

At Christmas we celebrate Christ, and by his birth we see the gospel. We see the gospel that covered all of his life, and covers it still. And it is the gospel that covers our lives as well, whether in birth, suffering, or death, until we are raised upon his return.

That’s all I’ve got. Merry Christ……..mas.

11.16.2009

Richard Dawkins' Evolutionary Hero and the "Devil's Chaplain": Chapter One

Richard Dawkins who like Darwin calls himself the "devil's chaplain" is at it again. In his last book, "The God Delusion" Dawkins set out to prove once and for all that God does not exist.

Although "The God Delusion" was well received by his fan base, atheist and theistic philosophers and theologians were unimpressed by what was largely nothing more than raving rhetoric. His arguments read more like a temper tantrum for grown-ups.

Having failed to persuade philosophers and theologians of his argumentative prowess, Dawkins is now back to writing in his own field. In "The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution" Dawkins is out to prove that evolution is once and for all true. So, I'm out with an open mind ready to assess the evidence.

In chapter one, Dawkins uses the old illustration of domestic dog breeding to show us that changes can occur within the gene pool of a species. O.k., so changes do occur within a species. We breed cows for more beef or milk. We breed dogs to be fighters or small and annoying barkers.

One is left to wonder however, when have we ever made a dog into a rabbit? Or when did a dinosaur become a bird? Changes occur within species, but do new species of animals come out of a species? Dawkins promises to show the answer is, "Yes." We'll see Richard, we'll see.

11.13.2009

A Sermon Preached on November 1, 2009

“The State of the Union”

1 Cor. 6:12-20

If you would, please turn with me to Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians. Our attention today will be upon the words found in chapter six, verses twelve to twenty. The subject I would like to address is, “The State of the Union.” Again, the subject is “The State of The Union.” Would you please stand for the reading of God’s Word?

1 Corinthians 6:12-20
NIV 1 Corinthians 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me"-- but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"-- but I will not be mastered by anything. 13 "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"-- but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14 By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16 Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh." {16 Gen. 2:24} 17 But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit. 18 Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. 19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.


Tonight I am going to discuss with you what the Bible has to say about the nature of sexual immorality. This is a hard discussion. The abuse and misuse of sexuality has affected us all in some way. But to ignore a disease or a wound will never lead to healing. Sometimes, the hard task of scrubbing out the infection must be done. And it must be done by Christ through his Word. We all feel the pain in ourselves and each other. I feel yours as well as my own. But we must allow the salve of the Word of God to do its work.

The point of the passage and therefore the point of tonight’s message is not simply to say that sexual immorality is bad or sin. Although we need this reminder, this is not all that the Word of God is saying here. In the first letter to the Corinthians, God tells us through his apostle Paul why sexual immorality is sin. In other words, Paul does not merely write to the Corinthians in order to “call a spade a spade” but to show them why it is a spade in the first place.

As we look around at the state of sexuality in America, we find ourselves overwhelmed immediately with the magnitude of the situation. Just last week a fifteen year old girl attending her homecoming in Virginia was raped by at least ten young boys, (I say boys because these are NOT men, a man is only a man if God says that he is, and this has nothing to do with one’s gender but their character) with ten more boys standing idly by as spectators.

Nobody knew that this happened until she was discovered several hours later in critical condition. Her body was under the bleachers. Although she survived, it is certain that some part of that precious daughter of God died. And I hope those responsible are found and judged. They will be in the next life, if not in this life.

Also this week, the discussion of “gay rights” continued to progress as the Byrd-Sheppard measure, which was attached to the Pentagon’s budget was passed by the Senate. This measure officially makes “sexual orientation” a hate crime and discrimination against homosexuals prosecuted as a federal offense. From bills to the never-ending saga of John and Kate, sex and sexuality is in the news. And the reason is clear.

Ravi Zacharias has said, “The Biblical perspective is that all mean are equal, but that all truths are not. We have this reversed. Today all truths are equal and man is given ultimate priority.”
This reversal of truths has and will have many implications for our society.

But perhaps the fundamental outworking of this elevation of mankind can be seen in no area as clearly as that of sexuality. After all, what could be more self-centered than sex?

While we would all not mind spending the night lashing out at our culture, our leaders and other influences in the discussion of sexuality, God will not allow his people to do so. This is not only because the church is supposed to be an offensive cause of change, but because we who claim to be the people of God are no better than those we ridicule.

90% of men in America look at online pornography on a semi-regular basis. The percentage among men in the church is the same. Around one third of women are now addicted to pornography and that number is rising. Those who are not addicted to pornography are often times readers of “Romance novels”. These are merely, “pornographic novels” for women which create unreal expectations for themselves and for the men in their lives. The rate of abuse of these materials among Christians and non-believers is the same.

Sexual activity among Evangelical teenagers is the same IF NOT HIGHER than their supposedly “secular” counterparts. This year at Super Summer many of our students were surprised to learn in an anonymous poll taken of those in attendance, that one in five female Super Summer attendees had “experimented” at some point in time with other females. Super Summer is supposed to be a camp for our future Christian leaders.

Christian adults are now single well into their late twenties and the discussion among them has begun to focus on “technical virginity.” For the focus of many single adults the point is not about sexual purity, but about doing every other act but not having sex.

Marriage has been devalued. The term “trial marriage” has become popular among young adults. This phrase is used to describe the view that marriage is really more like dating than a life-long commitment. People enter into marriages not in order to stay “til’ death do us part”, but until “you don’t or can’t fulfill my heart.” In other words, I’ll love you until I’m tired of you. The divorce rate among married Christians is again, the same as those who are not Christians. The reasons for divorce are the same among Christians and non-Christians.

Now, let us return to the Corinthian church. For all of the vices, fear, and rapid decline of sexuality in our society, we are not yet as bad as those in Greco-Roman society. The Greek author Demosthenes wrote, “Mistresses we keep for our sake of pleasure, concubines for the daily care of the body, but wives to bear us legitimate children.” Paul’s own converts were first generation Christians.

They had no sense of prior Christian morals in the world in which they existed. Rather as we find in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, some of these converts were former homosexual prostitutes, homosexuals, and fornicators. Before Paul came preaching the Word of God, they were all involved in all sorts of immorality. After all, prostitution was common not only in social life, but in their temple worship.

The problem is that Paul writes, “Such were” some of them. So after hearing the gospel, how could these Corinthians continue to justify their immorality? We find their excuses in verses 12-13. Their first excuse is “all things are lawful for me.” These believers have taken the gospel to mean forgiveness of all sins, even the ones they were to commit. They could commit themselves to condemnable acts because they were condemned no longer. Paul’s response is two fold.

In his first response Paul writes, “but not all things are profitable.” Some interpreters translate the word “profitable” as “beneficial.” This response by Paul serves to notify the Corinthians of two things. First, freedom to do all things can result in harm to the individual or to a group of persons. Imagine a society without a law, what would that society be like? Undoubtedly, it would be a society in that which is “good” or “beneficial” is merely left up to an individual’s desire.

In an interview conducted in the year 2000, Peter Singer, professor of Philosophy at Princeton University carries this view of “good” to the extreme.

Reason: Would you require the death of a defective infant because other hypothetical babies would not be born who might lead more fulfilled lives?

Singer: No. My position is that the parents ought to be able to choose this. [Requiring the death of a defective infant] probably wouldn't increase overall happiness, if the parents wanted their child to stay alive. Parents have a very strong desire for their children, so it's hard to imagine.

Reason: But maybe they're wrong. They've misjudged.

Singer: Well, they may be wrong, but if they're going to suffer acutely for a long time over it, it's unlikely I think that the suffering of the child is going to be so great and so impossible to relieve that it will outweigh that. So that's why I would not require it. I could not imagine a society that would function well if it did require that, if it did take that decision from parents. I can imagine some very bizarre cases-if this child really had some condition [such that it] was just going to suffer excruciatingly and the parents nevertheless wanted it kept alive due to religious ideology. I would hope that the doctor would do something so the child didn't live and maybe say to the parents, "Unfortunately it died." But I wouldn't want to make that a matter of general social policy.

If all things are lawful, then freedom ends up in harm. There must be authority for “good” to exist.

Paul’s second response to the Corinthians statement that “all things are lawful” turns their slogan upon their head. Paul tells them that he will “not be enslaved by anything.” In short, not only does freedom to do all things result in evil, but it results in slavery. The one who desires no morality is in fact slave to his own self. Or he will become a slave to the consequences of his sin.

Freedom MUST BE GIVEN. One can not claim to have a part in the kingdom of God, and have nothing to do with the king. This one is really a slave to Satan, only he does not recognize his slavery, which makes it much worse.

Not only do the Corinthians participate in immoral behavior because of their problem with authority, but because of a wrong view of the body’s role in salvation. Their second saying is found in 6:13 “Food is for the stomach and the stomach for food, but God will do away with one and the other.” (Your quotations might be different, but that is because original Greek manuscripts did not have punctuation, it is my belief that this whole saying belongs to the Corinthians.)

The word for “stomach” is kolia. This refers to the entire digestive system, not merely the stomach. Another way of putting the Corinthians slogan would be, “Food is for the digestive system, and the digestive system is for food, and just as food is destroyed by being tuned into waste, so will our bodies be destroyed.”

Paul’s response to this is simple, that the body for the believer has a purpose. You can not separate the soul from the body in terms of behavior.

The Christian hope is not some dis-embodied state where we float around as “spirits” but that our bodies will someday be raised when Christ returns (6:14)! You can not commit sexual immorality on the view that what you do with your body does not matter! What you do with the body is all that matters! After all, are not the actions of the body a result of what you believe in your “soul”? Did not Christ call us to take up our cross and follow Him? Did He not call us to “death”? Is it the "sou"l of a person that is supposed to die, or the entire person?

“The body is meant for the Lord and the Lord for the body” (1 Cor. 6:13b).
After responding to the two Corinthian sayings, Paul then offers up his own argument for abstaining from sexual immorality. He does this by asking three questions beginning with the words, “Do you not know that”.

His first question occurs in v. 15, “Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?” Translators have struggled with the word “members.” This word seems to have a focus here on the individual. And in America, we like to think about our own “individual walk with Christ.” But the Biblical perspective is that all of us who “walk with Christ” do so as a group. We are HIS BODY!

Instead, some translators have translated the verse as follows, “Do you not know that your bodies are limbs and parts of Christ? Shall I then take the limbs and parts of Christ and join them with a prostitute?” This can never be the case! It is an unholy union. That somebody would take Christ and have him be part in sexual immorality is an absurdity!

Now, some Bible commentators disagree as to what type of immorality is going on here. Is it that the Corinthians are visiting social prostitutes or temple prostitutes? But I believe that asking a question to which there may be no answer only serves to miss the point. Prostitution is not the ONLY case in which this principle applies.

I am sure that many of you have heard the story about the young woman who was sitting on a plane. She was riding in first class. The gentleman beside her was good-looking, he had been very kind, and you could tell from his shoes to his haircut that he had money. When the plane landed, the man leaned over to the young woman and asked, “Would you sleep with me for one-million dollars?”

At first the woman was shocked, and slapped the man. Then she began to think it over. It was just a one-time act. She had a sick mother and as a single mother, needed to take care of her kids. Finally, after several minutes the woman looked at the man and replied, “Yes.” The man looked backed at her and asked, “Would you be willing to sleep with me for free?” “No, replied the woman, what sort of person do you take me for.” The man smiled and replied, “We’ve already established what type of woman you are, now we’re just talking price.” The specific situation is not the issue, but her character.

I understand the need for grace, but we must also understand the seriousness of sexual immorality. Recently, a young man who was being questioned about his sexually immoral behavior said, “I don’t feel guilty about it. Jesus wouldn’t want me to feel guilty, maybe sad, but not guilty!” What a selfish view of sin and grace this poor young man has! Immorality is not about its affect upon the individual primarily, but about its effect upon Christ!

Paul reflects this idea by his words “by no mean”! This is not only a crying out by Paul at his very core, but a cry of a prayer! Paul’s own heart is stricken by the thought. Sexual purity is not about abstinence for the sake of not getting an STD or becoming pregnant. For the believer, sexual purity is about reflecting the purity of Christ.

Paul’s second question is found in verse 16 when he asks, “Do you not know that he who joins himself with a prostitute is one body with her?” To support this question he quotes Genesis 2:24 which states, “the two shall become one flesh.” In our modern minds with our referenced Bibles I believe we have missed out on what Paul is saying. It was common practice for a Pharisee to quote a phrase from the Old Testament in order to allude to the context as a whole. In other words, when Paul quotes “the two shall become one flesh” he is not merely using a euphemism for sex, but is referring to the entire context around that verse.

Is it possible that Paul is referring to marriage? Does sex itself constitute a marriage bond? But what is marriage?

According to Stanley J. Grenz in his book, Sexual Ethics: An Evangelical Perspective most Christians do not think past the fact that marriage is not marriage simply because the State deems it to be so. Marriage is not about the signing of the marriage license, when God placed Adam and Eve together in the garden. Neither is marriage about having a ceremony with a pastor exchanging vows in public. In the beginning marriage was based upon two things: commitment and the intimacy of a sexual union.
So is Paul stating that sexual union can result in marriage? I believe here, the answer is no. But I also do believe that Paul is stating that a bond is created. And that if one engages in sexual immorality with commitment in mind, that person is married whether or not he or she has had an official “wedding.” He uses the metaphor of our bond with Christ to parallel the bond formed during sexual intercourse.

This must be taught to our people today. The fleeting affair and the one-night stand are not “one and done” events. I believe that is why Paul states that “every other sin a man commits is outside of his body.” In other words, every other sin when stopped can be let go of and many of the consequences undone. But the bond of a sexual union is permanent and lasting, and while God forgives those caught up in such sin the effect remains.

Finally, Paul gives his third and final argument in 6:19 when he asks, “Do you all not know that the body of you all is the temple of Holy Spirit which is in you all….”. Notice that the address here to the community as a whole and not to the individual only. While the individual must abstain from sexual immorality, it is my belief that here Paul is saying that the effects of sin is not felt only by the believer, but by the entire community of believers.

Again, we are Americans and we want to “Just do it” or “Have it our way”. We have been taught individual responsibility and reward. But in scripture groups of people were often punished for the sin of an individual. In 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chr. 21, David decides to take a census, but is only David punished? No, the whole nation is made to suffer. Also, for the sin of Korah in Number 16, God not only killed Korah, but consumed his entire house for his wrong doing. The effect of sin is not only individual but communal.

Sexual immorality not only profanes Christ, hurts the individual, and creates a permanent bond, but it affects the entire body of believers. There is no room for unrepentant, continual sexual immorality for the people of God.

So what is to be done? How are the Corinthians instructed and encouraged to stop this behavior? In 6:20 Paul as a faithful shepherd of Christ’s flock reminds them, “You are not your own, you were bought with a price.” This first thing that all of us must do is to remember the price paid for our freedom.

The Corinthians had an issue with authority, and that issue of authority is the root cause of sin in all of scripture. When we forget the character of the God we serve, we go and chase after other things. When we forget His supreme value we desire the valueless “stuff” of this life. But when we stop to consider the price how could we rebel against such love?

The Corinthian church had a better understanding about this than we do. In their time they saw slaves bought and sold. Some slaves had cruel and hard masters. They could be killed at any moment for any cause. How happy then was that slave who was bought and paid for by a loving and good master?

People are either under the slavery to Satan or Christ. They are either slave to their own passions or to His Passion. When we teach people to rebuke sin by simply changing the way they think we are setting them up for failure. We came to Christ because we could NOT overcome the chains of sin on our own.

Instead we should teach and encourage each other to overcome sin by knowing the goodness of our Lord. By setting Him at the front lines of our lives the battle for holiness can slowly begin to be won.

When we do this, then are we able to “glorify God in” our bodies. When we speak of the gory of God we speak of his unimaginable character which manifests itself in pure light. And when we glorify God in our personal lives we reflect that light into the darkness of a dying world. This is what we who are “created in His image” are made to do. It is our purpose. And only the subject who is fulfilling the desires of His King can be truly happy.

Brothers I do not know where you are in your walk with Christ. I do not know what effects sexual immorality has had upon your lives or in your congregations. But I do know that “such were some” of these Corinthians.

Finally I would like to end this sermon by going to 1 Cor. 1:4-9 where Paul began.

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank my God always concerning you, for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus, 5 that in everything you were enriched in Him, in all speech and all knowledge, even as the testimony concerning Christ was confirmed in you, so that you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.