We Are Listening!

How much effort do we put toward listening to God's word? Are there things that keep us from hearing? Do we have bitterness or sin that makes the word go right past us? Are we more interested in listening to the world than in listening to Jesus? Let him who has ears hear what Jesus says to us all.

Did Jesus Come to Bring Peace? Matthew 10:34

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. 

I have not come to bring peace, but a sword." 

Matthew 10:34

"But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed." 

Isaiah 53:5

The Bible is filled with tensions--not contradictions--but tensions. By tensions, I mean they are things that at first glance may seem to be teaching two opposite things; however, these tensions are resolvable--they can be harmonized. I believe this out of my convictions about the nature of Scripture. I believe the Bible is actually God's Word and that God does not lie to us. What he has said is all true. Therefore, I assume a presupposition that the Bible is internally consistent and free from contradictions. 

So, what do we do when we come across these tensions? We must compare Scripture with Scripture. We must study the biblical languages, and we must look at historical backgrounds to seek an explanation for how two things that seem to be at odds can both be true. 

I was reminded of this concept this week as I've been preparing to preach on Matthew 10:34-42. The passage begins, "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth." As I first approached this text, I didn't recognize the difficulty that it was going to present. I had a preconceived notion that I understood what it meant and I went to work on thinking through how I would explain that preconceived notion. However, my preconceived notion was challenged. I attended our Thursday night Bibles study at Woburn Baptist Church and as we studied a passage in John dealing with the crucifixion, we turned to read Isaiah 53. I had been thinking and meditating on Matthew 10:34, so as I read the words of Isaiah 53:5 I was struck with a tension. Isaiah said, "Upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace." I was particularly struck by the verbal parallel--"bring peace." So Isaiah wrote of the Messiah with the expectation that he would "bring peace" through his substitution on behalf of our sin. I realized that Matthew 10:34 was not as simple as I thought it was. I realized there was a tension here. Did Jesus come to bring peace, or didn't he? I don't want to be simplistic, but as I've thought about it, I'm convinced the answer is yes. He did, but he didn't, and the key to understanding what this means is in John 14:27. Jesus said, "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you." This verse resolves the tension. Jesus did come to bring peace, but it was a certain kind of peace. The peace he brings is not what the world thinks of in regard to peace, but it is very different. Isaiah tells us that the Messiah would bring us peace, and it appears that this is peace between God and man. Through Jesus sacrificial atonement, believers receive peace with God. However, Matthew 10:35 expounds upon what Jesus means when he says he brings a sword rather than peace. He said that he came to "set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother." The world often sees peace as the absence of conflict. However, this is not the peace that Jesus brings. Sometimes following Jesus intensifies conflict. Following Jesus requires us to "take up our cross" and be willing to suffer for truth. In the world's eyes, it would be easier and more peaceful just to gloss over differences, to stand up for nothing, to be a theological jellyfish. The world's way of achieving peace is to water down theology until we aren't saying anything definitively so that everything we say is held tentatively because we don't want to offend anyone. This is not the kind of peace that Jesus calls us to. If we have trusted in Christ, we have peace with God, and we have Christian unity based upon a common gospel and a common salvation--but this unity cannot come at the expense of truth. 

In our post-modern culture, no one believes in truth anymore. You have your truth, and I have mine. If we claim, as the Bible does, that Jesus is the only way, then we will be labeled intolerant, and conflict will be unavoidable. 

Then, Jesus follows this teaching with a call to discipleship. He says that the one who does not take up his cross and follow him is not worthy of him. Now, what do these two concepts have to do with each other? What does it mean to take up one's cross? It means to be willing to suffer persecution for the sake of Christ. It would be easy to avoid persecution by theological compromise, but this would be unfaithfulness. Taking up our cross means being willing to stake our claim on Jesus and the Bible and to declare it boldly and without compromise, and to be willing to suffer the consequences knowing that having Jesus is worth it all. 

"Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you." 

John 14:27

Matthew 9:1-13 Sin, Our Fundamental Problem

And behold, some people brought to him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven." (Mat 9:2 ESV)

In Matthew 9:1-13 there are two stories that center around humanity's greatest problem--sin. When Jesus healed the paralytic, his first concern was to forgive sins. The friends, no doubt, brought the man for physical healing, but Jesus saw through to the deeper need. Yet when he stated that the paralytic's sins were forgiven, the scribes were offended--knowing that what Jesus had done was to attribute to himself a quality that belonged only to God. Jesus condescended, so that the people would know that He really did have the authority to forgive sins, he healed the man as well.

Next, Jesus called Matthew, a tax collector, and then went to eat at his house which was filled with other tax collectors and sinners. The Pharisees were offended again because of this. Yet Jesus responded that this was at the heart of his mission. Jesus came to call sinners, not the righteous. If we do not come to Jesus like the paralytic--helpless and needy--then we cannot come to Jesus at all. We are all sinners in need of forgiveness, and may we never forget that to deny this is to deny that we need a savior.

Listen here to the sermon preached on this text on Sunday, March 6, 2016:

Don't Rip Off the Young People in Your Church!

(This post first appeared on one of my personal blogs, happyingrace.blogspot.com, in December 2014)

I once heard the testimony of a man who had grown up in a church that was very contemporary in its music style. After graduating and gowing away to college he visited a church that sang more of the old hymns. It angered him, but he wasn't angry that the music was old. He was angry because until then he had no idea that the Church had such a rich tradition of hymns. He felt that his home church had ripped him off because all they ever sang were the new choruses. 

I'm NOT arguing that we ought to sing only hymns, nor am I arguing that we should sing hymns in the same style as in the 1950's. What I'm saying is that we shouldn't cut ourselves off from the past as if somehow we finally learned how to worship when Matt Redman or Hillsong started writing music. We have an ancient tradition of hymns that goes back for literally millennia! The richness of these songs connects the ages of the Church. We can sing the old songs and know we are a part of something that goes back long before we were born.  Something that will still be around long after we're gone. The most important thing about our time of worship is not what makes a church unique, but what makes faithful churches the same across ages of time and diverse cultures. 

What I'm advocating is singing the old songs in a new way. There are many today who endeavor to do this very thing. I'm not able to list them all here, but I will share one of my favorites--Indellible Grace. http://www.igracemusic.com 

In the 90's there seemed to be much more talk about "worship wars" where people divides over the labels of traditional and contemporary. I don't think "either or" is a healthy way to think about the issue. The music of the church MUST always be contemporary. It must be music that connects with the congregation. The music of the church MUST also be traditional--not in style, but in substance. Christianity is a faith that is defined by the passing on of a body of doctrine from one generation to the next. We are fools if we think we can divorce ourselves from the ancient hymns and not be missing out. The worship wheel does not have to be reinvented in every generation. In fact, to think it does is a recipe for idolatry. 

I urge you, if you are reading this, to take the time to connect with the old hymns of church history. Don't sing them in a dry and boring manner. Sing them in your own style and in the language of your own culture.

Why I'm Committed to Expository Preaching

"I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching." 

(2 Timothy 4:1-2 ESV)

In short, there are two reasons why I'm committed to expository preaching. First, because I don't think there's any other kind of preaching that's truly Christian. Second, because I'm a sinner and I easily stray if I don't stay anchored to a solid rock.

What is Expository Preaching?
I've been to college and three seminaries, so I can easily forget that not everyone knows what I'm talking about when I say "expository preaching." I was visiting a member this week, and when I used this term, she stopped me and asked me what it meant. I was surprised, but it helped me to realize that before I can explain why I believe in it, first I need to define what I mean!

Various definitions have been proposed for expository preaching, and many of them are helpful. I think the simplest definition may be that "expository preaching is preaching where the point of the text is the same as the point of the sermon. I think this is true, and it's helpful for someone who has no familiarity with what I'm talking about, but we will go deeper.

John A. Broadus, in his text book, On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, says that "An expository sermon is one which is occupied mainly with the exposition of Scripture. . . . The expository sermon may be defined as a sermon that draws its divisions from the text. In actual practice, the main points and the subdivisions of the sermon often come from the text. In other words, the entire thought content comes from Scripture" (58). The two things I see that are important here are that expository preaching is preaching that is mainly explaining the Bible; Scripture isn't just a launchpad to say whatever it is the preacher wants to say, but most of it's content is merely explaining scripture. Also, Broadus says that "the entire thought content comes form Scripture." The preacher isn't free to mix his own thoughts with those from Scripture, rather the sermon, in its whole, is devoted to making clear what the thoughts of Scripture are.

Dr. Stephen Olford, in his book Anointed Expository Preaching defines it this way: "Expository preaching is the Spirit-empowered explanation and proclamation of the text of God's Word with due regard to the historical, contextual, grammatical, and doctrinal significance of the given passage, with the specific object of invoking a Christ-transforming response" (69). A few things are of note here. Olford stresses that preaching is Spirit-empowered. A man cannot do this in his own power and expect lasting results. If a preacher merely trusts in his own gifts and does not rely on the Spirit it is all for naught. Preaching is also an "explanation and proclamation of the text." That's what it is. If a sermon is not explaining and proclaiming a biblical text, if it has any other methodology, it is not expository preaching. Olford also states that expository preaching must give "due regard to the historical, contextual, grammatical, and doctrinal significance of the given passage." Expository preaching must preach the text in context. Faithful expository preaching is not free to take a biblical text and make it say something that is relevant to today's audiences that would be unrecognizable to the author or the original audience. It must be faithful to actually convey what the original author intended. Finally, Olford contends that true preaching's object is to invoke a response. The preacher doesn't stand and give a lecture to fill people's heads, he pleads with people to change through the power of Christ. This response may be through physically and tangibly doing something, or it may be a response of the heart. It may change our thinking or cause us to value something more deeply as well.

Finally, Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, in his book He is Not Silent, says that "According to the Bible, exposition is preaching. And preaching is exposition." Further he states, "Much of what happens in pulpits across America today is not preaching, even though the preacher--and probably his congregation along with him--would claim that it is. Preaching is not the task of saying something interesting about God, nor is it delivering a religious discourse or narrating a story" (50). Rather, Mohler contends, "The heart and soul of expository preaching--of any true Christian preaching--is reading the Word of God and then explaining it to the people so they understand it" (52).

I affirm what Mohler states. I am convinced that all true Christian preaching is expository preaching, and that preaching that is not expository is something less than Christian preaching.

Why Am I Committed To It?
I've kind of answered this already. First, for reasons stated above, I don't think that any other kind of preaching is really preaching at all, but my second reason is quite practical. I am committed to expository preaching because I am a frail sinner.

How can a pastor know that he is preaching God's word? All preachers would make the claim, but how can we really know that's what we're doing? Jeremiah stated, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?" (Jeremiah 17:9 ESV) I don't trust my heart, and I am not a mystic. However, I do trust God's Word--the Bible. If I just decided what I was going to preach on week by week by "whatever I felt the Spirit was telling me?" I would be liable to follow my deceitful heart and be deceived into thinking it was the Spirit of God. Expository preaching, for many, has another component. Not all expository preachers follow this, but many do. I believe the best expository preachers will systematically go through the Bible to be sure that they are not following their own agenda and temperament, but they are following the leadership of the Holy Spirit who inspired every word of the sacred text.

I do believe that the Spirit speaks to us, but I am convinced that the primary way he does this is through the Bible. If this is true, then we can go happily to the Bible week in and week out. Systematically going verse by verse or chapter by chapter and know that no mater where we open the Bible we find something that was breathed out by God.

I'm also convinced that it is unwise and unhelpful to expect an extraordinary work of God every week. The Spirit of God moves where he wishes and we cannot contrive that. We can only experience it at His will. My contention is that if a preacher is committed to systematically preaching through the Bible, and making the point of each sermon the same as the point that is made in the text, then the Church will be built up. If it is a week that God chooses to bless in a supernatural way--wonderful! We can give him all the glory for that and thank him. However, what if it isn't one of those week? We can still say, "God has spoken to us through his word." Not because we emotionally felt something, but because of our confidence that God has truly spoken in history and our faithful hearing of it in eager expectation from His hand.

I am committed to expository preaching because I'm a sinner, and because I am ultimately confident in God's Word and his Spirit above anything else. I am committed to expository preaching because that method is the only way that I can objectively know that when I stand before God's people I am being faithful to preach the Word.

Caveat
I must give one caveat. I titled this article, "Why I'm Committed to Expository Preaching" for a reason. I didn't call it, "Why I'm an Expository Preacher." Like I said, I am a sinner, and I'm relatively new in my preaching career. I am committed to the method, but I cannot make any claim to be very good at it! I have a lot of room for growth. I'm far from perfect. Just because anyone adopts what I'm arguing for doesn't make them a great preacher. My level of spiritual empowerment ebbs and flows. I have good weeks where I feel him with me, and I have other weeks where I'm spiritually dry--and I'm not afraid to get up and preach anyway because I know the power isn't in me--it's in the word. I need to grow significantly in my ability to illustrate, because to paraphrase Spurgeon, illustrations are windows through which the congregation looks to see the meaning of the text. In spite of my admitted weakness, I believe that a commitment to the expository method safeguards me so that when I do error, I don't fall too far away because I have an anchor that tethers me to the Word. 

Matthew 8:1-17 Jesus' Healing Ministry and the Kingdom of Christ

"Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly." 

And he said to him, "I will come and heal him." 

(Matthew 8:6-7 ESV)

Matthew 8:1-17 tells us of three healing miracles that Jesus performed after coming down from preaching the Sermon on the Mount. First Jesus heals a leper. This man had been ostracized. He was ceremonial unclean, and had probably not been touched for a long time. Yet he came to Jesus, and in faith, he stated that he knew Jesus was able to heal him. His only question is whether Jesus was willing to heal him. Jesus answered the leper by affirming his willingness and a command. Just as he spoke "let there be light," Jesus spoke, and a leper was made clean.

Next a centurion came to Jesus about his parallelized servant. The centurion must have cared a lot about this servant. He didn't simply cast him aside and get a new servant, but he came and asked Jesus for healing. This centurion was a Roman soldier, and he understood something insightful about Jesus' authority. He said, "I am a man under authority, and I say to one "Go" and he goes." What does this mean? The centurion was under the authority of Caesar, and this authority was invested in him. So when the centurion commanded someone to do something, he was doing so with the same authority as Caesar. Likewise, the centurion recognized that when Jesus spoke, he spoke with the authority of God. Jesus commended the centurion for his faith, and healed the servant from a distance.

Finally, Jesus went to the home of Peter to rest, and in the home he found that Peter's mother-in-law was suffering from a fever. Jesus touched her, and immediately she was healed as well, and she didn't have to have time to recover--she immediately got up and served.

These three healing miracles were followed by a summary of more healings, and then Matthew states that all of this took place to fulfill what Isaiah said in Isaiah 53:4. "He took our illnesses and bore our diseases." What does this mean? When Jesus came the first time, his healing ministry announced the inbreaking of the kingdom of God. In the cross, Jesus was doing more than just providing forgiveness, but he took on all our pain and our sorrows. He took on our diseases and experienced pain and death so that we could be healed. In his second coming, there will no longer be any sickness or pain because he has taken it all.

Matthew 4:12-25 Jesus' Message, Method, and Ministry

 "While walking by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon (who is called Peter) and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. And he said to them, 'Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.'" (Mat 4:18-19 ESV)

Following Jesus' temptation in the wilderness, he began preaching a message of repentance, calling disciples, and healing the sick. While each of these aspects of Jesus ministry have differences as they are carried out in the life of the church today, they are all essential to biblical faithfulness.

His Message: Preaching Repentance
Matthew 4:12-17 tells of the beginning of Jesus' ministry. It begins with the "decrease" that John the Baptist had predicted about himself. John was put in prison, and Jesus returned to his home in Galilee. However, he left Nazareth, the town where he had grown up and went to Capernaum. Matthew tells us that this was to fulfill a prophesy of Isaiah that a light would dawn on the Gentiles. The area where Jesus went was a region populated by Gentiles. The context of this prophecy is that of Isaiah 9 and the promise of a king who would sit on David's throne forever. Matthew had already been pointing to Jesus' kingship by the genealogy that he started his Gospel with, and now this prophetic fulfillment links Jesus again to this kingly role.

Finally, in verse 17, Matthew tells us that Jesus began to preach the same message that John the Baptist had preached--"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." A definition of "repent" must be given. John had preached this message, and his baptism was characterized by repentance. People came to him confessing their sins, and John told them to bear fruit which accords with repentance. It is only natural that Jesus' meaning was the same as that of John the Baptist. Repentance meant to turn away from sins, to confess them openly, and to declare publicly a renunciation of those things, and then to live a life that is consistent with that public testimony.

Today we are often soft about the message of repentance. We want to explain the gospel in winsome ways, and we want to make it palatable for people so that they will accept it. We tell children that Jesus can be their "forever friend." We tell adults to come and "make a decision." We emphasize belief in Christ, and salvation by faith, and somehow we are fearful of speaking about repentance because it sounds like it must be some sort of work. In actuality, repentance is the fruit of true faith. Repentance is a gift of God. If we truly believe on Christ, we will naturally repent. What does that look like? We will have a change of mind and heart about who Jesus is and his authority over us. We will bow to his lordship, and we will be marked with genuine sorrow for our sins. These are all things that happen in the heart that cannot be manufactured or manipulated. True repentance only comes when God grants it.

His Method: Calling Disciples
In verses 18-22, Jesus calls his disciples, Peter, Andrew, James, and John. These men are called in pairs. First, Jesus was walking by the sea of Galilee and saw the brothers, Simon and Andrew, fishing. What happens is striking. Jesus simply says, "Follow me." There is no discussion or questions. There is no arguments for why. Simon and Andrew immediately left their nets and followed him. They obeyed without question. Then, Jesus saw two more brothers--James and John. They were in the process of fixing their nets, and their father was with them. They were a small family business. In this text, we aren't given Jesus words to James and John; it simply says "he called them," and they responded just as Simon and Andrew. Immediately, they obeyed; they left their nets, they left their father, and they followed Jesus.

Now certainly, we don't have the same kind of authority that Jesus had. Jesus is the Lord of Creation. He has all authority in Heaven and Earth. He commands the wind and the waves, and he is the LORD who turns the heart of kings whichever way he wishes. However, there is an analogy between Jesus' method of calling his disciples and the way we preach the gospel.

When we preach the gospel, we preach a command. Jesus commands that all men everywhere must repent and believe the gospel. We can be tempted to have a different posture when we proclaim the good news. It could be tempting to mound up persuasive arguments about why following Jesus will give people a happier, more fulfilling life. However, that isn't the posture we see here. When we preach the gospel, we must remember that we are proclaiming the objective news of the life, death, burial, and resurrection, and we are telling people what they must do because of that reality. We are pleading with men to be reconciled to God, but in doing so, we must not forget that repentance and faith is the duty of all. It isn't just something that you can add to your life to be more fulfilled. True conversion to Christ isn't just adding Jesus to "your life"; it's renouncing your former life to follow him.

His Ministry: Compassion on the Multitudes
The next section, verses 23-25, is a summary statement that describes Jesus' ministry. Jesus was an itinerant preacher. He preached the "good news" of the kingdom, and he healed every disease. As he went around preaching, he would heal as he went, but then word got out. He became famous. So then people started bringing him all those who had diseases. He even healed those who were demon possessed, those who had seizures, and those who were paralyzed. He healed all manner of diseases, and crowds followed him everywhere he went.

People have various opinions about the continuation of miraculous gifts. I would put myself in the cessationist camp. I believe that the gifts of healing were given specifically for the time of the apostles to mark a unique period in salvation history. However, I think there is an example of ministry that believers today should follow today. I don't mean a healing ministry, but a ministry of compassion. These verses are very similar to what Matthew writes in 9:35-38. There Matthew records, "When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd." A ministry that follows Jesus' pattern will be a ministry of compassion. We may not be able to say to people, "arise, take up your bed, and walk," but we can model compassion in action.

Believers can show compassion today in serving the poor, in caring for the sick, and helping counsel addicts as well as many other ways. Those things aren't meant to replace Gospel preaching. This passage tells us that Jesus did both. He preached and he healed. The compassionate ministry of mercy that we, believers, engage in will be the authenticating mark of having a heart like Jesus. We can be doctrinally sound and have cold hearts and tight fists. Jesus calls us to combine the message of good news with a ministry of compassion.

Results
What results should we expect from a ministry following this patter. What should we expect when we preach the message of repentance, when we call people to bow and submit themselves to a King, and when we minister in the compassion of Christ? He will receive the glory. It isn't about us. It isn't about accumulating crowds for us. It's about bringing fame to Jesus, not about making ourselves a name. 

"So his fame spread throughout all Syria, and they brought him all the sick, those afflicted with various diseases and pains, those oppressed by demons, epileptics, and paralytics, and he healed them." (Mat 4:24 ESV)

Matthew 4:1-11 The Temptation of Jesus

"Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil." (Matthew 4:1)

It seems strange that immediately after Jesus Baptism, the Spirit who attested him as the Son of God led him into the wilderness to be tempted. We are often so familiar with the stories that we don't let it really have the impact it should have. So imagine what it must have been like. What we've already learned of Jesus in the book of Matthew is that he was descended from Abraham through the Davidic line. He was born of a virgin and an angel told Joseph that Jesus would save his people from his sins. Hostile people tried unsuccessfully to kill him when he was only a toddler, and God saved him by warning Joseph to flee to Egypt. Then the story skips all the intervening years and brings us up to the time Jesus began his ministry. The very first thing that Jesus does in his ministry is to be baptized. As I mentioned in the previous post, by submitting to this rite (which was supposed to be for repentant sinners) Jesus identified with his people. He humbled himself and took on the identity of sinners--foreshadowing that great exchange where his righteousness is imputed to us. Then, after being baptized the Holy Spirit leads him out to be tempted in the wilderness. Let this sink in. Let's think of the who, the where, the when, and the why to help this sink in. First, this wasn't Satan seeking an opportunity to to tempt Jesus; it was God, as a part of his eternal plan, leading Jesus out to be tempted.  Next, it happened right after the baptism and before he publicly started his ministry. So, it was necessary that he go through a testing before he began his ministry. This was a part of the path that he must take to accomplish the goal of God. Then, Jesus went into the wilderness. This is significant. It points to one of the ways that Jesus is the fulfillment of Israel. Just as Israel spent 40 years in the wilderness, Jesus spent 40 days in the same place. Maybe not exactly the same geographical location, but the same term is used. Finally, the purpose of all this is to be tempted. Now this is puzzling. How can God be tempted? Could Jesus have really sinned? Was it even possible for him to fail this test? I don't think that's the point. Again, just like Jesus' baptism, this tempting was another way Jesus identified with sinners. Jesus temptation was a necessary part of God's plan because it was through his temptation that we know that our savior can sympathize with us. The author of Hebrews make this point. Jesus is our high priest and he can sympathize with weak sinners because he was tempted at all points just as we are. This gives us at least two reasons to celebrate. First, When we face temptation, we can look at Jesus experience of temptation and see how we are to respond. We are to resist the devil as he did and as James tells us to. We are to delight in the law of the Lord as he did and as Psalm 1 tells us to. Also, it gives us confidence that Jesus loves us. We can be discouraged when we are tempted and we fail. Yet, because Jesus was tempted we know that we have a high priest who sympathizes with our weakness. He was tempted and he knows what it is like. He knows and has felt the very things we feel, and he went through it all without sin. We know that this one who sympathizes with us is our advocate, pleading our case before the Father. When we fail, this great high priest stands before the Father and tells him, "This one is mine, I identified with him and took his sin. His punishment is paid."

 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.
 16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
 (Heb 4:15-16 ESV)

Matthew 3:13-17 What the Baptism of Jesus Means for Us

"Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him." (Matthew 3:13)

One of the most puzzling things about the life of Jesus is his baptism. John baptized people for repentance who confessed their sins, yet Jesus was absolutely sinless and he came to John to be baptized. You can understand why John would balk at the idea. Why would someone who was sinless submit to a rite that is intended for repentant sinners? Jesus answer--it was to "fulfill all righteousness." However, this seems ambiguous to us. What does it mean to fulfill all righteousness? Here Matthew uses the same word, to fulfill, as the fulfillment formulas which speak of the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies; however, this text does not follow that formula, and and there does not seem to be any Old Testament prophecy of a baptism for the Messiah. "Fulfilling all righteousness" must mean something else. Absolute certainty is not possible given the ambiguity of the statement, but it seems that there is consensus on a few things. First, Jesus was putting his stamp of approval on the ministry of John. By submitting to John's baptism, he demonstrates that John's ministry is a legitimate predecessor to his own. Second, Jesus is obeying the Father's will. This is evident in God's words from heaven immediately after the baptism. Third, Jesus baptism points forward to his death. The fact that Jesus was submersed under the water and then rose out of the water has the same symbolic significance as Christian baptism. In Christian baptism the immersion of the believer symbolizes Christ's death and burial and as the believer rises out of the water we symbolically see how believers have risen with Christ to live a new life. Jesus baptism presents this same picture. The one who would bring baptism with the Holy Spirit and fire began his ministry by being baptized--pointing to his own death, burial, and resurrection. Finally, in his baptism, Jesus identified with his people. As it was said, John's baptism was a baptism of repentance for those who confessed sin, and Jesus had no sin to confess. In his baptism, Jesus oneness with his people and his substitutionary atonement is foreshadowed. The one who took our punishment and who took our sin upon himself to bear God's wrath, submitted to the same rite of baptism that he commands all of his people to participate in. As believers are baptized, we announce to the world that we are united to Christ in his death, burial and resurrection. When Jesus was baptized, he announced to the world that he is united to repentant sinners. We can be thankful for Jesus baptism because it reminds us of the great exchange. He took our sin and we have received his imputed righteousness. In our union with him we we truly live, and our old selves have died with him.

"For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin." (Romans 6:5-6)

Matthew 3:1-12 A Confrontational Preacher

"In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, 'Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.'" (Matthew 3:1-2)

Before Jesus began his earthly ministry, he was preceded by a prophetic forerunner--John the Baptist. Luke tells us of the circumstances of John's birth and that he was filled with the Spirit from birth. Then each of the gospel accounts preface the ministry of Jesus with the ministry of John. He was the one who came to preach and prepare the way for the Messiah. Though he denied being the returned embodiment of Elijah, Jesus acknowledged that John was the fulfillment of Malachi's prophecy that the LORD would send Elijah before his great and awesome day arrived. 

John came as a strange figure. His father was a priest, but this preacher wouldn't follow in his father's ministry methods. Rather than being a participant in the sacrificial system, John went out into the wilderness and proclaimed a message. Why would he go to the wilderness? This is not where you would expect someone to go find a crowd. If you want a hearing, go where the people are, right? Go to the cities--the population centers of bustling activity. No, John would not have that. He went to the wilderness, to the forsaken places, and there he proclaimed a message of repentance. 

In spite of his unlikely place to perform his ministry, John gathered a following. People saw this strange man who dressed in camel's hair and a leather belt, who ate locusts and wild honey, and they left their cities and went to the barren places to hear his preaching. Lesson 1: You don't have to make things easy on people to get them to come, if what you are preaching is worth hearing, they will come. 

John's message was no easier than his lifestyle. He preached repentance and he baptized his followers. It's uncertain where John got this from. There were ritual washings for purification within Judaism at the time, and proselytes were sometimes baptized, but John's baptism was different. If there was a link to proselyte baptism, it communicates something radical. John was telling Jews that if they wanted to be be right with God they had to repent and convert. 

Lots and lots of people came out to see John. Maybe some wanted to see the spectacle, but many came to be baptized and they were confessing their sins. Among those who came out to see John were the religious leaders. The Pharisees and Sadducees were not two groups you would expect to be together. The Pharisees were conservatives. They were radically devoted to the study of God's word. They accepted all of it. They believed the Torah (the first five books of Moses) and all the prophets. They heard the message of the prophets and the warning they gave because of the sins of the people, and they responded with a legalistic devotion to living out the law--and not just the law but all the traditions associated with it as well. The Sadducees were liberals. They didn't believe in an afterlife. They only believed in the Torah and they were mainly among elites and the rich. The two groups would not usually be together on anything, but here we see they were both curious to see what this prophet was doing out in the wilderness, so they too came out to see.

John didn't do what you might expect when he saw these religious leaders. You might expect that he would say, "I'm so glad you are here. Come and join us." But no. That isn't John's response. Rather, he calls them names. He doesn't just call them any names, he calls them a brood of vipers. Now, not everyone accepts the validity of this, but considering the conflict that is set up in Genesis 3 between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, I think it's likely John was telling them they were the seed of the serpent. They were the enemies of God's people. They were children of the devil. Not exactly a warm welcome. Then, as if to anticipate their objection, John says, "don't presume on saying we are Abraham's seed." John tells them that the fact that they had the right religious pedigree didn't help them a bit. What matters is fruit. The fruit in the lives of these religious leaders revealed who's children they really were. John told them that if they wanted to escape the coming wrath they only way they would do so would be to truly repent and turn from their former way of life. They had to have fruit that corresponded with repentance. If their repentance is real, they will humble themselves and they would become as children.

John warned them that the time was coming when someone greater than himself was coming. He wouldn't just preach repentance and baptize with water. He would baptize with Holy Spirit fire. The image is that figuratively, fire comes down on the one who is being immersed in the Holy Spirit and burns away the chaff. He will do this among groups. The sheep will be with Christ in paradise, and the goats will be thrown into eternal fire. And he would do it with individuals. When a person is born again, they are baptized in the Holy Spirit, the old man dies and is burned away, and the new man, the product of the new birth, the fruit of repentance is all that remains. 

John's message is still a hard message. It tells us not to presume on the faith of our family heritage. If we will be accepted by God we will personally and individually bear the fruit of repentance. It tells us that being religious is dangerous. The religious leaders were who John called children of the devil! Just because someone is a preacher, a deacon, a Sunday School teacher, or because they walked an aisle doesn't mean they are right with God. Only the one who responds in repentance and faith in Christ will survive the oncoming fire of baptism. 

"His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire." (Matthew 3:12)

Isaiah 6: A Vision of a Holy God

"And one called to another and said: 'Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; 

the whole earth is full of his glory!'" Isaiah 6:3

For the last two weeks at WBC, we've been looking at Isaiah 6. In this chapter, Isaiah sees a vision of a holy God, he is blown over by his own sinfulness in the presence of this God, and he is cleansed at the initiative of God by the coals of a sacrificial atonement. Then Isaiah is called and commissioned to preach to God's people who would be stubborn and refuse to listen to his message. God tells Isaiah that he is to continue to preach this message until His destructive judgement is utterly poured out on the land. Yet even then, God gives hope that there would be salvation that would come through the Seed of the Woman--the Son of David.

Listen here and join us in the worship of this Holy God. 

Matthew 2 The Magi and the King

"Now After Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem saying, 'Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.'" (Matthew 2:1-2)

Every Christmas we get cards and we see nativity scenes depicting three kings bringing their gifts to Jesus in the stable the night he was born. However, this conflates texts that happen at different times. When the magi visited Jesus it was some time after his birth. Jesus would have been a young toddler, and judging from Herod's plot to murder him, he may have been up to 2 years old when they finally arrived. The magi didn't come to see him in a manger, they came to a house and found him with his mother. They were not kings, but they were wise men. 

These wise men were probably similar to the wise men that we read of in the book of Daniel. King Nebuchadnezzar had many wise men whom he sought counsel from when he wanted to have his dreams interpreted. It was probably customary in Babylon for the rulers to have courts of these wise men, but how would they have known to look for a child born king of the Jews? They were probably not in the dark. The Jews had been exiled to Babylon in 586 BC and continued to have a Jewish population even after they were allowed to return to their homeland. These wise men could have learned about the expectation of a Jewish Messiah from the Scriptures used in the synagogues of Babylon. 

So, some time when Jesus was a toddler he was visited by these magi. They were foreigners--Gentiles--astrologers--and they came looking for this child who was born king. When they came, they didn't come straight to Bethlehem. They came to Jerusalem. They probably expected that a king would be found in the capital city, in a palace, but when they got there, no one seemed to know anything about this child king. Herod was the king, and he was paranoid. He killed his own wife, and he killed two of his sons because of his paranoia. One of the ancient historians said that it was better to be Herod's dog than his son. When the magi mention that a king was born, Herod's paranoia kicked into gear. He was already scheming to kill anyone who would challenge his rule. So he asked these magi to report back to him what they found. Herod called on the chief priests and the scribes to find out what these magi were talking about. These religious leaders had the right academic answers. They could quote the Old Testament and tell the magi to go to Bethlehem to find the new king. Yet one wonders, why were these religious leaders to apathetic. Why didn't they come along to worship Jesus too? They knew the prophetic expectation, but they didn't seem to care much that these gentiles came along saying that the Messiah had been born. 

So the magi made their way toward Bethlehem, and when they came to the house where the child was they worshiped Jesus and they gave him gifts. There's more that can be said here, but I want to draw attention to the contrast. These Gentile astrologers came and worshiped this new born king. The reigning king of the Jews who was appointed by Caesar wanted to kill him, and the religious leaders could care less. People still respond to Jesus in the same way today. Probably most people are in the place of the religious leaders. If you ask them what they think of Jesus, they may be able to spout an academically accurate answer. He's the Son of God. He's the Savior. But if you look at their lives there is no evidence that they really care about that. They are apathetic, and aren't moved to worship Jesus. Then others are in the place of Herod. They are hostile, and they are vocal. They want nothing to do with Jesus or God. They don't want anyone else to talk to them about Jesus. These may be relatively few, but in actuality, all of us, apart from God's grace are in this position. We all stand with our fists shaking at God and demand that he give us our way. We are rebels at heart, and we would rather kill God than worship him--unless He first does a work in us that calls us to worship him. Then there are the magi. These are the ones who would be far off and distant from God. They were not the Jews who had access to the Scriptures. They were pagans, yet they were drawn to Jesus, and they fell on their faces and worshiped him. These magi are the picture of all true Christians. Believers are those who are drawn into the worship of Jesus. We fall on our faces before him and are in awe. We give him our all as an act of worship--not because we are great people, like a king--and not because we are religious intellectuals with all the right Bible answers--like the scribes--but because we saw his star--we hear his voice calling to us--and we cannot help but bow down and worship the God who took on flesh.