Category Archives: Scripture

Integrity in an age of Confusion

One thing we learn from the Bible, maybe a key lesson throughout the text, is that we shouldn’t expect God’s story to take shape the way or the timing we want, but it is ultimately leading in a better direction.

Not just in an eternal (heavenly) sense. The more we walk in God’s story the more we experience the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5)

There are two elements of this patience:

  1. Be patient for God’s justice against the wicked: judgment
  2. Be patient in waiting for God’s provision: intercession

Being patient like a farmer is patient, doing the work, waiting for the work to take shape in light of God’s grace and sustenance.

Hear more on this in my sermon on James 5:1-7

Here’s the complete teaching notes.

Posted in salvation, Scripture, sermon, teaching, theology | Leave a comment

Teachers and Tongues

Love can mean many things. In Christianity, it’s meaning is oriented by the revelation of God that is expressed in the person and mission of Jesus, a mission that continues to be empowered by the Spirit. And yet…

It’s clear that this message of love hasn’t always been the primary expression of the church, becoming a rhetorical decoration for other goals. Some of these have been noble, such as teaching important concepts, some less noble, such as establishing power for its own sake and to personally enrich the leaders.

This isn’t new. We find such trends even in the era of the New Testament, leading the charismatic leaders of the earliest era to write letters.  James wrote one such letter to the churches and in it he emphasizes that Love involves integrity and responsibility, not also for teaching, especially for teachers. And I argue that as we’re all empowered by the Spirit in some way, we’re all teachers in some way, living out lives and sharing our hopes with those around us, many who will never listen to a church sermon let alone take a class on Christian theology and practice.

This responsible love involves living true to the story of God in our lives.  It also involves helping others be true to God’s story in their lives.

I preached more on this at the River Church, but it wasn’t recorded.

Don’t fret!

Here’s my complete teaching notes.

Posted in everyday theology, Scripture, sermon, spirituality, teaching, theology | Leave a comment

A Faith that Practices: Advice for the Good Life

The message in Scripture isn’t just about some isolated religious issues as expressed by an ancient people. It was expressed by an ancient people, but more than a limited cultic set of temple acts, it’s really an expression of how the world is, how life is supposed to be, who we are supposed to be in light of that. It’s a narrative that took place in the past, and takes place even now. Indeed, this story of God is an orientation. We are invited into a way of life that can be expressed in any setting, at any time, as it is about living in light of the way this particular world is supposed to function. It involves our faith, and our faith involves our whole self, our emotions, and our five senses. In the book of James, he highlights the spiritual through emphasizing the sensory, using these together to point to how we can find hope and peace in the midst of a complicated world.

I preached more on this in my sermon on James 1:19-27.

Here’s the complete teaching notes on James 1:19-27.

Posted in salvation, Scripture, sermon, speaking, teaching, theology | Leave a comment

Peace be with you

Peace is a difficult topic. Not because it’s hard to describe, but because it’s hard to realize, and in light of the news, it’s hard to believe.

Yet, peace, shalom as it is called in Hebrew, is a Promise from God, and this promise continues in the New Testament.

We begin to see as God sees, love as God loves, hope with God’s hope, and that transforms how we live in this world in all sorts of ways.
Peace is part of the Spirit’s freedom for us.

Rather than conflict, we have peace. Rather than chaos, we have peace. Rather than frustration or anxiety or domination we have peace. This is not the peace of the world, but a deeper peace, a lasting peace, a thorough peace. It is not just the ceasing of violence and war, it is more, it is an entering into a rhythm with the Creator of all that is, and living in light of this rhythm.

This is truly, thoroughly, good news. This is the Gospel, in which we see not just a message about heaven but a message about all of reality, a re-integration into life with God that transforms our experience of this world.

It is this peace Jesus promises to us. Do we want to live in this peace?

Hear more on the hope of Shalom in my sermon preached at The River Church

And here’s my complete teaching notes.

Posted in salvation, Scripture, sermon, speaking, teaching, theology | Leave a comment

Talk to the Rock

A while back, I wanted to learn what the Bible said about the various types of spiritual expressions we commonly call gifts. And, I didn’t want to use the usual lists of various gifts that Paul talks about. Rather, I wanted to see how gifts were expressed in the Bible. What does it mean to be a prophet? Well, I looked at the prophets. What does it mean to be someone who has discernment? Well, I looked at the men and women who were commended for seeing truth even when there were shadows and mists. What does it mean to be a leader? I looked at the leaders in the Bible.

This latter study was more than a little bit disconcerting. There are a lot of leaders in the Bible, be it kings or priests or judges or generals.

Leaders of all kinds abound in the stories. The trouble is that the percentage of leaders leading the people to God is pretty small. Most of the leaders in the Bible did not serve God. The other trouble is that their negative example does not mean they were bad leaders.

For instance, we have someone like King Omri of Israel. First Kings 16:25 has this to say about him: “Omri did evil in the eyes of the LORD and sinned more than all those before him.” On the other hand, archaeologists and others who study the history say that as a leader, he was pretty good! He orchestrated a lot of building projects and otherwise secured enough wealth and support to pass the kingdom on to his son, Ahab.

How about an example from the New Testament? Paul had to confront Peter when he learned that Peter stopped eating with Gentiles (Galatians 2:11ff). Peter influenced Barnabas and others, and had to be corrected, because they, as Paul puts it, “were not following the truth of the Good News” (Gal. 2:14). The practice of Peter was not reflecting the call of God in or for the church.

With this in mind, I now turn to the topic of worship. It’s not uncommon for me to be singing along during a service and realize I’ve just sung something I didn’t, or shouldn’t, believe. This isn’t limited to singing, either. For the most part, many of the approaches, use of space, wording, and other aspects of our gathering together are more like Peter’s faults than Paul’s goal. They might be engaging, or they might be traditional, or they might be functional, or whatever reason under the sun, but they are not when examined more closely, “following the truth of the Good News.”

Now more formally, this “truth of the Good News” could be gathered together under the theme of theology. That’s what I think theology is and should be about, at least. It is the reflection on the actions of God and his declarations that point to a more cohesive expression of God’s work and being. It can be expressed using four syllable words or it can be expressed in a dance, or in a liturgy, story, or song. But, in being expressed in some ways it is saying that it is reflecting the God who is. Theology, then, should be a pretty important issue in discussions of worship.

God does not, we learn from Scripture, like to be misrepresented in word or deed.

This is probably most clearly expressed in the story of Moses. In Numbers 20 we read a very disturbing story. The people were complaining, again, about having no water (the nerve of them!). They rebelled, Moses prayed at the Tabernacle, and God told him what to do.

Moses gathered the people, stood before them, shouted at them for their rebellious ways, and then hit the rock twice. Water gushed out.

But God was not happy. “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel,” he said to Moses, “you will not lead them into the land I am giving them.”

Moses, you see, was supposed to command the rock to bring forth water. He wasn’t supposed to hit it. God was not just interested in the result. His holiness is about the method, the act, the approach, the whole context. God’s revelation is holistic and he calls those who would lead his people to reflect this holiness in ways that match how he has chosen to reveal himself.

We can’t just hit the rock and say that’s God’s work, even if water comes out. Because the method is as much part of the message as the result. He’s telling a different story in the midst of this world and that means leading people to live in particular ways, ways that might not immediately make sense. But it makes a difference in the long run. Just as the method of the cross makes a difference not only in salvation but also in how we respond to the systems of this world.

We have to listen to God, reflect on his ways, and then we have to talk to the rock.

Posted in everyday theology, liberation, politics, Scripture, spirituality, theology | Leave a comment

Looking at the story of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5 for my writing project. A very Old Testament sort of narrative. Tell a lie, die. The Holy Spirit doesn’t mess around. We always hear people saying they want more of the Holy Spirit. I’m not sure they’ve factored in all the Biblical stories…

Posted in Scripture | 2 Comments

the liberative path of the cross

A little taste of what I’m writing these days:

The cross is a definitive call to reject the patterns of identity formation offered by the various systems in an environment. This is rightly understood as a way of death, rejecting the systems entails a rejection by the systems who seek to preserve and replicate their fundamental place in a society. The resurrection is the promise that rejecting such patterns will result in an even fuller life. Liberation of the oppressor comes through the way of the cross but promises a new story in light of the resurrection. Which brings us back to Moltmann’s admonition not to dwell on what people lose but what people gain. We let go patterns and systems of death and dissolution because we do not need their promises of identity or security. We are freed from such anonymizing demands. Radical trust in God leads to radical realignment with the systems, embedded in them with a cohesive narrative of the Spirit’s transformative power.

I’m about 25 pages into a look at various Scripture passages to see how they develop a theme of liberation of the oppressor. I’m arguing there’s a cohesive narrative and theme throughout Scripture on this, one that primarily is about letting go other forms of definition and finding our idenity in God, which brings freedom because by being free in God we become truly free to be who we are made to be in community with others who are free to who God has made them to be.   I hear a lot of critiques about theology texts, that they don’t engage Scripture.  I find engaging Scripture to be a key element to what I’m trying to do.

Posted in liberation, Scripture | 6 Comments

After growing up reading the Bible, it’s always a great pleasure to come across some tidbit or insight that I never noticed before that fundamentally changes how I read a passage.  For a book project, among a number of other passages, I’m going over the story of the rich young man as found in Matthew 19.

We’re familiar with the story. The guy has done everything right, above and beyond, faithful in his zeal and disciplined in his actions. He asks Jesus what it will take to find eternal life. Fulfill the commandments, Jesus says. I’ve done that, he responds. There’s only one more thing, Jesus adds, sell everything and give it to the poor.

Now, in reading this and hearing about it my whole life, the story is that the guy couldn’t do it, left Jesus behind. He loved his riches more than anything else.  Harder for a camel to go through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom, Jesus says.

Only the thing is, the Bible never says the guy didn’t do it, that he didn’t sell everything. It only says he walked away sad about it.

Which means, really, the story is open-ended.  Maybe he goes off to revel more in his wealth and miss eternal life. Maybe he sells everything and finds his way deeper in God.  Either way there is loss and there is gain.  Either way there’s something to be sad about. Which does he do?

We aren’t told. We’re just told that it’s impossible without God. Why do it otherwise? Why give up what we think we need?  Why let go our sense of identity and value?  Only if there is something better, a way of life now that leads to a fullness of life in eternity. Not a pie in sky for later but a sharing of the pie we’ve been given in the present.

Scripture tells us the guy walked away sad, not what he did about his wealth. We read into it, adding our own conclusion and making it part of Scripture.

I think we do that a lot.

Posted in musings, Scripture | 18 Comments

Obedience is better than Sacrifice

Spoke on the atonement this morning. Flew up to Nampa, Idaho to join in with the Wesleyan Theological Society. Good time. Good people.

I’ve never really been all that interested in doctrines of the atonement. I was raised in a Christian family and so never had a dramatic conversion. And the other popular interest in atonement theories almost always are about drawing divisions in Christianity, using the cross as a bludgeon to attack people who don’t measure up to a perceived, generally parochial, orthodoxy. The conference theme was on atonement so I started thinking about it last Summer, and once that started, I got very interested in where my studies were taking me. So, over the last 2.5 weeks I wrote a 25 page paper as a beginning exploration of what I think is a somewhat novel approach. Well, novel in theology, it’s entirely throughout Scripture. That’s my argument and evidence at least. Got it down to 10.5 pages to present this morning. Seemed to go well.

Anyhow, here’s my intro:

Over the last half-century, there has been a shift in how we think about God’s eternal nature and work in this world. This relational turn in theology emphasizes a social model of the Trinity and with this a sociality of God’s kingdom rather than a political or hierarchical model. This is not, to be sure, a new conception.

The terminology of perichoresis—God’s eternal dance—has, for instance, been a key model especially in the Christian East for many centuries, dating back to the early church. In what follows, I will propose a model of the atonement that derives from this emphasis on God’s relationality. This is a preliminary exploration for what is a much larger project certainly in need of further refining and development. For the moment, I will propose themes and lay the groundwork for this approach that can be honed in future works.

A theology of the atonement involves two extremely important underlying questions. The first asks what is sin? Is it a violation of God’s honor as Lord? Is it corruption that leads to death? The tendency to establish a scapegoat? The devil’s capture of us in enslavement?

These questions point to the second key question. What is God’s primary pattern of interaction with this world? In the late twentieth century there was a shift of understanding of the human condition away from a strict legal construction and towards understanding sin as more of a disoriented identity that results in relational violations.

Such a view on the human situation is key in the theology of many contemporary theologians such as Wolfhart Pannenberg and Jürgen Moltmann. They both assert that attempts to establish our identity in a person, cause, activity, or goal other than God results in dis-integration—with God and with others—as nothing other than God can sustain identities into eternity. Such dis-integration requires re-integration.

However, models of the atonement have not derived, for the most part, from the starting point that Pannenberg and Moltmann, and others, suggest. This gap highlights the need for a new model, one that better incorporates contemporary understanding of the Trinity and anthropology.

This may also become a model that can include other models within its scope as it suggests the underlying priority, expressed through different themes, of God’s work throughout the Biblical narrative.

My initial conception is this: The relational trust between God and humanity that allowed for relational intimacy was broken through sin. God’s initiating movements then created contexts of obedience or disobedience as particular people chose where they would put their trust.

The expressions of obedience were insufficient both as a sustaining and as a fulfilling expression. The judgment of God expresses a relational displeasure, a response to betrayal and falsehood in attempts to instantiate ourselves through alternative means.

The cross becomes the ultimate expression of obedience and thus trust, denying false forms of identity and embracing the fullness of God’s promise. This act of obedience becomes the avenue of trust for humanity and the avenue of trust for God, who trusts those who trust the Son.

Such trust is first an ontological restoration as it orients a person within God’s field of force, his perichoretic substantiation that we call justification. This then re-initiates those who trust in the cross into a new transformative path of obedience, a new birth that re-constitutes the human identity and leads it to a path of identity reformation, which we call sanctification.

I’m not posting the whole thing because I’m considering what I want to do with it. It’s at least a book project, maybe my summer project now, but I may work on submitting the initial version as an article.

Posted in academia, education, Scripture, speaking, theology | Leave a comment

Letter to Thyatira

We are very “just the facts” sort of people, we want facts, and figures, and statements that give us intellectual content. That’s how we have been taught to approach religion.  We have worship, sure, that part that is supposed to get to our heart.  But then we get to the head stuff.

The head stuff is separated from the heart stuff.  We’re not supposed to think about worship and we are supposed to think about the content of Scripture.  How can we bullet point each passage?  How can we make it clear the right things to believe and the wrong things to believe.

Revelation isn’t like that.  It’s not about what to believe, sorting it out like a puzzle. It’s meant to provoke an emotional response that affects our commitments and actions. Are we with God or are we against God?

Do you know  Modern Art?  It’s infuriating because it’s not about anything, not portraying anything, but that was the point. It wasn’t about making a copy of something in the real world, it was intended to bypass that intellectual part of ourselves, to hit our emotions.

That’s what movies do? Right?  If you boil a movie down to its essence, just the bare plot, you often are left with a much weaker impression.

Or, if you spend so much time on details, you likewise can lose the point, trying to figure out the symbolism of everything.  Then arguments develop as people disagree, and people who aren’t interested in such detailed examination move on.

That’s why most of us don’t like movie critics.  There’s symbolism in movies and it helps to know some details, but if we get caught up in the details we lose the sense of the emotion.

CS Lewis once noted a similar thing about love. What is love?  Well, it’s a complex chemical interaction in our brain that evokes a sensory response when around particular people or things.  We can get into the scientific or philosophical nature of love.  Go on for hours.  But who would stay for that? No, love is an experience that in the experience defies analysis.

I suggest that’s how we should approach Revelation.  There weren’t movies or television shows in these centuries. What they were was story tellers and they were masters of the craft. We have letters and we have histories, which are useful, but the goal of apocalyptic literature was something different, it was using the context of the time to evoke an emotional response, and in that response get us to go beyond mere intellectual analysis, which often leaves us agreeing but not really changing.

Revelation is intended to lead us towards transformation, to take hold of our mind, but also our heart and soul, to get a holistic response from us that actually leads us to become more in tune with what God is doing and what God will do.  It’s like what we see with Nathan and King David: 2 Samuel 12:1-6

We’re meant to get the message but get the message with an emotional response that is driven by the imagery and allusions, the references to other parts of Scripture and contextual connections the readers would know.

So, our goal should be to get to know the allusions and the context, but not get so caught up in the details we lose the message. We should be emotional about this, God is trying to stir up some kind of passion, a passion that would lead the audience to turn from their ways and turn towards God.

READ PASSAGE:  Revelation 2:18-29

“And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: These are the words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze:

The core issue in Revelation, like with Genesis, is who is in charge?   Now in Genesis we had images of Creation, as nature was the way people saw who was in charge.>thyatira-clean

Here, the nations and empires had created cults, the gods were expressed through statues, the guilds in this city were themselves centers of both craft and idolatry.  Caesar was often worshiped in other cities, but here we have Apollo, who was often represented on coins and statues.  Thyatira was known for its metal working artisans who were initially supported for their ability to make weapons and armor, then broadened their appeal.

Christ is depicted as being in charge, and using the imagery that put Christ in the place of Apollo, that reflected elements of metal working—furnaces and products, images those in the city would see this in both an emotional and contextual way.  Jesus, the real God, is in charge of all the materials, he is the one who has the ability to judge and condemn.

“I know your works—your love, faith, service, and patient endurance. I know that your last works are greater than the first.

They’re on the right track. They seem to have the right priorities for the most part. Love, faith, patient endurance (which suggests hope).  Faith, hope and love.  1 COR 13:13.  These are the things that matter, the things that will last forever.  And they’re putting it into practice with service.  They’re getting a lot right.  And they’re getting better.

But I have this against you: you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice fornication and to eat food sacrificed to idols.

I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her fornication.

1 Kings 16:29-31

Jezebel was famous for leading astray because of religious syncretism. Religious justification for the wrong direction and wrong identity. Who is in charge?  Who decides what is right and what is wrong? Syncretism mixes the messages, saying God is in charge of some things, other gods are in charge of other things, and we’re able to decide who is in charge and what we get to do.

That’s the core issue in Genesis too.  Remember the temptation, the serpent told Eve that God was trying to keep something from them, that if she ate the fruit, Adam and Eve would have complete knowledge, complete insight, they could do what they wanted, they didn’t need a relationship with God, and in fact God was keeping them from their fullness.

That continues to be a religious argument. It’s not justifying based on giving into our worst selves, its appealing to our pride, to our sense of supposed religious maturity.

We think we can get away with more because we’re better.  And we end up following people who lead us astray, who mimic spiritual maturity but in fact are false prophets.

But what about eating food sacrificed to idols?

1 Corinthians 10:14-23

Not all things are permissible

In Thyatira, we learn about religious justification for going astray. A prophetess was teaching the people that, apparently, God didn’t mind their behaviors.

Missing the mark can involve going too short or too far.

Too much devotion can lead us astray. If we’re devoted to wrong gods, wrong prophets, wrong ministers. We can put our stock in someone’s seeming spiritual or earthly authority and be led far away from who God is calling us to be in every area of our life.

Too little respect for the limits God has set, saying that one part of our life can be left out of this religious stuff.

Putting stock in the wrong person, letting our identity be shaped by prophets instead of by the Spirit.

What’s the sin here in Thyatira?  Well, the audience knew, no doubt, who and what John was talking about, but we don’t.  Maybe sexual immorality—and there certainly was a lot of that in both the culture and the religions of the day.  We also, however, have echoes of Old Testament prophets.  When the people of Israel worshiped false gods they weren’t just choosing a different way to worship, they were committing adultery with them, they were having an affair.

That’s the imagery here too.  The Christians were being led into behaviors and practices that were adulterous.  They were excusing it based on some kind of prophetic ideal.

This means that we can become fornicators with anything that leads us away from finding our identity in Christ.  Life matters, every part of life matters, that’s what John is saying here, there’s no getting away from Christ, there’s no compartments in which life and religion are separate.ThyatiraMap2

For some, it means sexual activity, excusing immorality because the culture does it, it’s not a big deal, it’s just the body.  For others, there are other ways of fornication, and we continue to hear false prophets leading good Christians astray.  Money, food, power, relationships, things that are good in their place but can easily dominate our attention and lead us away from seeing Christ as lord. The trouble with idolatry is it puts up a false lord for us to worship.

Like with our society, work was tied very closely to identity for the Thyatrians.  What we do is who we are?

We can find our identity and excuses in work, or relationships, or money, or cars, or education, or music, or so many other things. Which isn’t to say those are bad but they become bad when we make them lords of our life.

But Christ demands that all parts of our lives are put under his lordship.

We’re to find our meaning and identity in and through Christ, and when we do that this lordship is involved in all parts of our life.

Our bodies matter and what we do with them.  Our time matters and what we do with it.  Our actions matter and what we do with them.  What we eat, drink, value.  These things matter and we can’t excuse our actions saying they don’t affect our faith. They do!  Even if we don’t want to admit it, they do.

Beware, I am throwing her on a bed, and those who commit adultery with her I am throwing into great distress, unless they repent of her doings; and I will strike her children dead.

This teaching seems to suggest it was appealing to people’s religious pride.  That there were deeper teachings that the “enlightened” people knew and so they justified their behavior from a false sense of spiritual maturity.  We see this a lot even today.  People indulge their passions for wealth, or sex, or power, or whatever and justify it by saying its part of God’s plan, a result of some faith.

But John argues that this is missing the point and leading people not only into error but real adultery with these things. Adultery. We’re having an affair with wealth, power, sin.  And we’re betraying God.

And God is letting it happen for a while, and seeing who betrays him.  There is still a chance for repentance, so there’s hope, hope for all of us, but the time is coming in which God is going to assert his power. That Son of God with bronze boots and eyes blazing fire is watching.

And all the churches will know that I am the one who searches minds and hearts, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve.

Psalm 7:9

God is in charge.  God cares not only about our thoughts, what we believe, but also our actions and motives and everything about us. We make religion into intellectual consent, we can get lost. God makes the lordship of Christ about everything, like in Genesis, so too here.  Adam and Eve had an opportunity and they had a temptation. Were they going to find paradise with God, or were they going to give into the deceit and try to indulge what they wanted, thinking they could determine for themselves right and wrong. They ate the fruit.  This prophetess in Thyatira was eating the fruit.  Others in the church were eating the fruit.

Do we eat the fruit?  That is the challenge for us even still.

But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call ‘the deep things of Satan,’ to you I say, I do not lay on you any other burden; only hold fast to what you have until I come.

The warning here is pretty clear. The people who have stayed out of this problem, need to keep doing what they are doing. Hold on, keep at it, John is saying. The temptation is to make the issue a crusade or to over-compensate.

Church history is filled with this, someone doing something wrong, so everyone focusing their attention on it, and forgetting to do what they were called to do. Or someone doing something wrong, so everyone reacts by making their own behavior more severe.thyratira

The holiness movement had this response, over-compensating in so many cases and losing the emphasis that Wesley put on a holistic participation in this world. The worry, for instance, about how early Liberals were both rejecting the resurrection and emphasizing social works, caused people to reject social works and service thinking that it was some kind of package.

We tend to see movements or leaders as packages, either entirely right in every case or entirely wrong.

So, a prophetess has something good to say, and folks follow her wholesale even into the fornication. Then, people might see this error and dismiss everything, even the good. But that’s wrong too.  We need to see through the lens of Christ and Spirit, what is good and bad, fruitful and destructive, not package people as entirely right or wrong.

The issue of “no other burden” comes up in Acts 15:23-29.

To everyone who conquers and continues to do my works to the end,

I will give authority over the nations;

to rule them with an iron rod,

as when clay pots are shattered—

even as I also received authority from my Father.

Jeremiah 18:1-11

Psalm 2:8-9

Clay pots are shattered when they are not made right or they have been polluted.  Christ here shows who is in charge of determining this.  Christ is in charge, and those who hold onto his identity, his calling, are going to be saved, and not only saved, they are going to be the ones who are given authority to know true right and wrong as well, through God, not apart like Adam and Eve, Ahab and Jezebel, and us today.

To the one who conquers I will also give the morning star. Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.

The one who conquer the trials and temptations on earth will be given heaven.  Phil 3:12-4:1

It matters what we do.  We are called to live our whole lives in light of Christ’s lordship, not look for secret knowledge, or excuse our behavior or influences as not mattering.

There are those who will tempt us through our weaknesses, showing what the world offers.

There are others that will use our own religious devotion, leading us astray by making us feel like we’re part of the in-crowd, not limited, and able to use our freedom for sin.

Christ is Lord of all. Every part of our life.  He is calling us to live lives of love, faith, hope, expressed in our practices, not giving into being swayed by people who are tempting us away from who we are called to be in Christ. Some of those people tempt us through the world, some tempt us through spiritual sounding words and encouragement.

We are called to be conquerors with Christ, holding on to who he calls us to be in every part of our life, patiently enduring the trials and temptations, not veering to the right or to the left.  In the power of the Spirit, we can indeed find this way expressed in our lives.  Let us not listen to false spirits, false gods, false prophets, or anyone that tries to steer us away from God.  Let us hold firm to the fullness of truth in heart and mind and soul.  In this is the way of peace and true victory.

I was invited to preach at the PazNaz Saturday evening service last evening. These were my sermon notes.  I write things out first because I think better through writing, but then I use these notes more as cues, not reading it through just giving me a framework along the way. 

Posted in holiness, Jesus, Scripture, speaking, spirituality, theology | Leave a comment