When Is A Sermon Not A Sermon?

/ W. Keith Brenton / 13 Comments

I am not normally this combative. In fact, I’ve taken a bit of a sabbatical from blogging because the combative nature of the comments section has become increasingly repulsive and seductive to me. I can’t explain the contradiction; it’s just there.

But yesterday I managed to get myself in up to my neck on the microblogging platform Facebook. There, a simple question from Wade Hodges turned into a bit of a go-round.

Wade just asked:

True or False: Cutting 5 minutes of content from most sermons would improve them greatly.

And I answered:

I think if the objective is a better sermon, then the greatest improvement to most sermons would be to draw them to a close on the subject of Jesus, the Christ. I don’t really care if there’s an altar call/invitation or not – if the message doesn’t have some pertinent connection to Christ, it’s not a sermon; it’s just another lecture. And the speaker has wasted his/her own time and that of the audience.

Another reader responded:

There is more to preaching than just Christ…. as silly as that sounds. What about teaching? What if a sermon was on the 3rd person of the Godhead? Do you conclude talking about Christ? Some things can be taught separate from Christ to give perspective on the matter. Other things, (Adam/Eve, Grace, Life, and redemption) cannot be explain completely without Christ. But to explain sin and the ramification of sin, I wouldn’t have to talk about Christ.

I answered,

Respectfully, H—–, I disagree. If you talk about sin, you must talk about grace and redemption, and you can’t really talk about grace and redemption without talking about Jesus. If you talk about the Godhead, you can’t avoid talking about Jesus. If you talk about the first Adam, there’s no good reason you should leave out the last Adam. If the purpose of preaching is to bring others closer to God through Christ, you cannot leave out Christ.

He returned with:

W. Keith Brenton- I could preach a 2 hour sermon on the origins of sin, without any fluff whatsoever, and never say a word about Christ. Moses knew a LOT abo…ut sin, but knew nothing of the Christ (very little that was foretold, but nothing specific- just the promises) So I am confident in saying that I you do not always have to go back to Christ.

I posed this question:

Again, respectfully, H—–: How would that be different from ant lecture that a Jewish history professor might deliver at Hebrew University?

Another reader, K——- added:

You make some good points Howard but I’ve got to agree with W Keith here. Any sermon without Christ is just a lecture, better suited for a class you can take if you’re interested in the subject. As his disciples we are to imitate him and …make new disciples “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (somehow we tend to neglect this second part of Jesus’ command and see conversion/baptism as the end of the process–different conversation) The church is to be about making new disciples and you can’t do that if you don’t talk about him often and with obvious love for him and passion for his glory so we come to love what he loves. This should be expressed from the pulpit. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or rulers or authorities–all things were created through him and for him. And he is above all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross” How can you not preach him, sing him, talk about him, think about him!

Still another, B—, had this to say:

Jesus’ sermons rarely talked about Jesus.

I responded:

Well, if I were Jesus, I could teach with authority and wouldn’t need to quote him. In fact, I could do miracles and would live sinlessly. I would talk about God and, oh, I’d say things like “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day” and “Whoever lives and believes in me will never die.” I’m sorry; what was the point you were making, B—?

Wade tried to defuse my antagonism:

Wow. I guess sermons aren’t the only things that sometimes go a bit longer than necessary. 🙂

B— responded:

Keith, my point, though I love to preach about Jesus, is that you are overstating your case. I think we get your point, but not all sermons have to be about Jesus to be connected to Him or to point people to Him. It’s all connected to Him because it’s from Him. But according to your statements here, the sermon on the mount was a waste of time for Jesus and His hearers.

Unfortunately, I could not let that pass unanswered:

Forgive me, Wade, for chewing up more pixels, but Brad’s charges demand a response. I never said every sermon has to be about Jesus to point people to Him. But you can’t make His name known among those listening who may not know it by failing to even mention it. Virtually all of scripture points to Him. The evangelist’s challenge is to uncover how for his/her listeners; go a little deeper. Second, no twist of logic can make what I’ve said mean that the sermon on the mount was a waste of time. It was all about Jesus: who He was and what He did and how we can be like Him. I guess what’s really shocking to me is that folks are defending the right to preach a Jesus-free sermon. What’s the blinkin’ point of that, except to leave the audience blinkin’ and wonderin’ why they came to listen to it? I confess I am frankly jealous of people who have more opportunities to speak. I’m on the ministry support staff of a good-sized church (about 2,000). I’ve been asked to speak twice in the last five years. Every chance I get, I’m going to preach Christ and Him crucified – either directly or indirectly – because people who don’t know Him need to and people who know Him should never tire of hearing more about Him. The length of that message will depend entirely on what needs to be communicated about Him. I’m not going to squander any opportunity. People I listen to who have a burning in their bones about Him — I don’t tire of listening to them. That, I think, was what I was originally trying to say in response to Wade’s question.

I guess it’s just not negotiable with me. A sermon isn’t a sermon if it doesn’t come around to the subject of Jesus Christ. I may well be guilty of overstatement. I don’t think so. I don’t think that Paul, or Peter, or Stephen would think so. But I have no way of knowing that for certain.

So I ask you:

When is a sermon not a sermon?

Granny-Driving

/ W. Keith Brenton / 9 Comments

Okay, I admit it. I have become a shameless granny-driver.

I blame it on The Egg, my Prius hybrid.

Toyota put a heads-up readout on the dashboard that you can set to display your estimated MPG as you drive. It’s like a challenge, and it’s a challenge that I am not too wimpy to back down from.

When I drive, I try to make that readout go as high as I can.

Sometimes, that means some granny-driving. You know: 35 m.p.h. in a 35 m.p.h. zone (because the battery-powered EM mode can get you going that fast). Full stops at stop signs (so the gas motor will cut off). Coasting down hills willy-nilly and braking at speed bumps (it charges the battery array). Slow acceleration to speed rather than jackrabbit starts and anticipating stop signs and red lights by backing off the accelerator immediately (which will improve gas mileage in any car, hybrid or not).

I generally granny-drive on my way to work and on my way home. I take a little-used route through a pleasant housing development with low m.p.h. signage anyway. My route features a nicely-landscaped country club golf course, lots of private gardens, lovely homes, friendly joggers and walkers. I enjoy the drive. I don’t rush. I leave in plenty of time, and I don’t need to rush.

I don’t granny-drive all the time. I don’t granny-drive when there’s traffic pushing from behind. (Oh, all right, maybe the odd Jaguar or Hummer.) And I don’t granny-drive to be obnoxious. (Usually. Hey, there are two lanes, and no center lines!)

I granny-drive to get good mileage. And I succeed!

Coming back to work from lunch today, the readout was 63.5 MPG.

20110727-092831.jpg
Your results may vary.

Reality Bites

/ W. Keith Brenton / 3 Comments

I don’t mean to be flippant with this title, but there are moments in life when reality hits you between the eyes — sometimes between the lips — and those moments often impact me during communion.

When that morsel of bread contacts the tongue, yields to being pierced and broken and crushed, the reality of what it represents can be almost too much to bear.

Then it goes inside and becomes a part of us, giving energy and life … it’s bread, the staff of life, you know … and it gives us life to remind us that Jesus wants to live within us and give us life. Not just stingy morsels of life, but abundant life; eternal life. Life to be fully lived, by turning it over to Him.

He serves us this bread, which is Himself. He reminds us that to live life fully, abundantly, you serve others and you serve them yourself.

Then He pours out His blood for us, and we remember it in small measure through the cup. It courses through us and becomes a part of us. It gives us that life, just as it gave Him life when it coursed through His veins, in a way we’ll perhaps never fully understand in this life. But the measure is enough for us to understand that in serving others and serving them ourselves, a small measure may be all we can give but it is never enough; to be like Him, it must be all or nothing at all.

All the body must be given over to service to others; all the blood in the heart; all the will of the mind; all the devotion of the soul. And when we have fed even the least of these, we have fed Him.

It is a reality that bites and gnaws and yearns for us wholly in the tiny morsels of bread and sips from the cup.

But it is His reality.

And it outlasts, outloves and outlives any other.

Almighty God, Traffic Cop

/ W. Keith Brenton / 8 Comments

Yesterday, I read an essay defending the proposition that all who have not heard the gospel are automatically lost and condemned to hell. Its main “Aha!” was the metaphor that God is merely a traffic cop enforcing law, and ignorance of the law is no excuse.

How insulting to the divine nature of the omnipotent, omniscient, loving God, who gave law for the benefit of His creation, then supplanted it with the grace of Christ when we proved ourselves unworthy and incapable of obeying it and treating each other well!

The Argument

/ W. Keith Brenton / 8 Comments

There’s quite an argument going on in the comments of one of my previous posts.

I can’t tell you that I have been carefully monitoring it, eager to jump in with just the right “AHA!” that will prove how gloriously intelligent and inspired and above-all-else RIGHT I am.

If you believe that my salvation or yours hangs on being a perfect and omniscient blog moderator on all matters biblical and spiritual, then I am sorry to disappoint you, but certain I am not the first (nor will I be the last) to do so.

Hey, the argument isn’t even about what I posted.

But it does an en exceptionally good job of illustrating the point I had hoped to make.

Both of my beloved arguing brothers is utterly convinced that his interpretation of a number of scriptures supporting his point of view is so inarguably RIGHT and so self-evidently clear and so vitally crucial to the salvation of everyone on this planet that no one who disagrees with it can share in the fellowship of Christ.

The two points of view are different, so they cannot possibly agree and therefore one of them must be wrong and the other must be RIGHT.

The problem with that is that they can be different and still agree; and both could be right (at least to a degree) and both could be totally wrong (by being wrong in part).

And of course, since the nature of God is at issue, the probability of error is extremely high when one point of view is deemed to be wrong because with God nothing is impossible.

If we stuck to scripture without interpreting it, we would all agree that it says Jesus is the Christ and Son of God, who rewards those who diligently seek him, and the things that scripture says about Him are sufficient to lead anyone into a closer relationship with Him and into a life that reflects His glory and story.

But we all interpret. What happens when we start to believe that our interpretations are just as important as scripture – or perhaps even ARE scripture – is the fallacy of self above God, opinion above truth, creed above scripture, arrogance above humility, self-righteousness above grauce, RIGHTness above righteousness, winning above loving.

That is when we fall into the seductive snare of the argument.

And you rarely if ever see anyone emerge victorious by winning a soul over to God’s side … though perhaps you might sometimes see someone who has cowed his adversary over to his own side.

Because we hardly ever argue about what God actually says, but over what we think we know that He meant.

Can good come of an argument?

Sure. When it’s pursued in love, humility and a recognition of the difference between truth and perception; God’s word and man’s doctrine. I think God knows we’re all different and perceive things differently — He did create us this way, after all — and He expects us to disagree and even argue.

I think He expects us to argue like believers, though — and not like those to whom His love is a foreign concept.

Healthy, respectful argument helps bring the Word alive in our minds and hearts, challenging us to dig deep, read, listen and respond in love.

Jesus, John says, came to us full of grace AND truth. Not one or the other, but both, and in perfect balance. He argued — and sometimes strongly, harshly — but He was and is the Son of God. We are not, save through His blood and His righteousness.

And the folks with whom He argued most reprovingly were the ones who were absolutely convinced of their own infallible RIGHTness.

The Wicked Wretch is Dead

/ W. Keith Brenton / 1 Comment

I am glad Osama bin Laden is dead and I am not sorry to say so.

I am sorry he did not repent, but his actions would lead one to believe that he was among those people whose consciences are seared; who call good “evil” and evil “good.” I fear that it is almost impossible for someone to repent who cannot distinguish good from evil. And he recruited thousands to swear their allegiance to his inability to discern good from evil and murder thousands more at his command, believing that to be right and good.

That, as I’ve blogged before, is what (I believe) comprises the sin which cannot be forgiven – the sin of calling good “evil” and evil “good.” (See The Sin That Cannot Be Forgiven.)

I completely trust God to judge Osama bin Laden justly and mercifully, and I completely trust Him to do the same for me.

But Osama is not around anymore to do his part in leading others toward the sin of intentional mis-discernment and on to mayhem and mass murder and suicide – which any right-thinking individual in any culture should recognize as selfish, immoral, unlawful, wrong, evil, and wicked.

And I cannot be sorry about that. I can be reminded to be careful what I call “good” and “evil” by the way I live. Mistaking them for each other begins so easily when self comes first.

So ring the bell if you must.

Ding. Dong.

But ring it quietly for Osama.

Remember that the judgment bell tolls for thee and me – and not just he.

Uniformity – (i) – (form) = Unity

/ W. Keith Brenton / 82 Comments

Uniformity - (i) - (form) = UnityI am an unabashedly simple-minded person, and I will will keep this simple so that I will be able to understand it later.

Christians for centuries have mistakenly believed that the way to achieve the unity Jesus prayed for (John 17) is through uniformity.

Wrong. Pretty sure about that. Here’s why I think so:

First of all, unity isn’t ours to achieve, but to maintain (Ephesians 4:3).

Secondly, there has always been room for diversity in the body of Christ, including political opinion. A quick review of the apostles’ views will confirm that; they ranged from tax collector/collaborator to zealot. We are all different members of the body, with differing gifts (1 Corinthians 12-14).

Finally, while there are core beliefs to which every Christian pledges his/her soul, there are other beliefs that are interpretation, which is a churchy way to say “opinion.” There are things that man says and things that Christ says. They don’t always overlap. We’re not always going to agree on opinions; and a short review of Romans 14 will verify that, as well as advise us on how to deal with it.

The real barrier to unity has been our opinions, hasn’t it?

Things like:

  • I know what form of worship should be used.
  • I know what form of atonement was in operation at the cross and the tomb.
  • I know what form the Holy Spirit takes regarding beleivers.
  • I know what form of millennium will shape the future.
  • I know what form of day God meant when describing the span of His creation.

And so on and on and on. No others need apply.

Wow. It really sounds as arrogant as it truly is when I phrase it that way. Yet we’re convinced that we have to – and do – know all the answers in order to have a relationship with God.

Bull-puckey.

This whole walk with Christ is a matter of faith, not knowledge (2 Corinthians 5:7). We have enough knowledge to know who God is, that He loves us, that His Son died for us and lived again so that we could too and that He wants us to live as He lived: humbly, lovingly, self-sacrificingly.

If there’s anything that Job learned from his encounter with the-God-who-showed-up, it’s that you don’t have to know all the answers in order to have a relationship with God (Job 40-42).

So, I’m thinking we don’t have to leave all of our opinions at the church door.

There’s room enough inside for folks who want to believe that God wants to save everyone and will; and for those who want to believe that God wants to save everyone yet won’t.

There’s room enough inside for believers who want to believe we should rejoice that justice was done at the death of Osama Bin Laden and for those who want to mourn yet another soul who did not accept Jesus Christ as Lord.

There’s room enough inside for people who think they know all about God and for those who are just beginning to realize they don’t know much about God at all, but sure want to.

What there isn’t room for is putting up an opinion-poll table next to a crossing gate at the church door and only admitting the folks whose opinions line up with our own.

You see, that violates the very Spirit of the prayer Jesus prayed in the presence of those very diverse disciples on the night He was betrayed by one of them:

“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

For too many centuries, we believers have clung to the opinion that we’ve all got to be and believe exactly the same thing, down to the last opinion … we’ve been wrong. We’ve divided over opinions. We’ve decided that our right opinions were worth our effectiveness as ambassadors of the one kingdom of the one God through His one Christ.

Being brought to complete unity lies in accepting the simple glory of the simple Christ, a radiance that the simple of heart can see in those who love each other and give themselves up for each other the same way that their Lord did.

(This post is part of the synchroblog inspired by Rachel Held Evans’ “Rally to Restore Unity.” Be sure to look her up and all of the other synchrobloggers who are hoping to remove a few bricks from a few walls dividing believers. And while you’re at it, send a few bucks to Charity: Water, the beneficiary of this little online experiment. Right now, my region – Central Arkansas – is aflood and our own water safety could be at risk within hours. Find out what Charity: Water does to improve water quality in developing nations.)

Leaven

/ W. Keith Brenton / 3 Comments

This evening at sundown begins Passover, the fifteenth of the month of Nisan. By that time, all leaven / yeast is to be removed from the house of the Jewish families which will celebrate the week of the feast.

For believers in Christ, it’s as good a time as any to remember the warning of Jesus about certain kinds of leaven, the leaven of the Pharisees, Sadducees and of Herod.

It is the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees that is proscribed in Matthew 16, right after He fed four thousand and both parties conspired to test Him by asking Him to show them a sign from heaven. (Were they not paying attention? He had just fed thousands of people!)

Mark 8 recalls the same incident, but remembers only the Pharisees present and the warning Jesus gave as about the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod, and it’s likely that Mark recounts what Peter told him.

In both accounts, the disciples to whom Jesus spoke were confused, thinking that He was scolding them because they forgot to bring bread across the lake on the boat after that sumptuous dinner the night before. Jesus reminds them that He had fed 5,000 and 4,000 men (plus women and children) – and they seem to understand that the nourishment came in settings of teaching – deducing that “yeast” in His metaphor meant the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Matthew 16:12).

So, what was the teaching of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herod?

For simplicity’s sake, I tend to think of it in three words:

Hypocrisy

This would be the Pharisees’ particular brand of leaven. Luke 12 reports Jesus revealing that after pronouncing woe after woe on them in the previous chapter. They had made the law so detailed by their doctrines that it was no longer possible to follow. They bound these heavy burdens of legalism on others, unwilling to lift a finger to help them – but were unwilling to bear their own burden; to practice what they preached.

Hyper-rationality

The Sadducees’ leaven was their own vaulted intellect; they had reasoned out the impossibility of miracles and angels and spiritual beings and life beyond death. Like deists of a couple centuries past, they had de-spiritualized the word of God – completely failing to understand what Jesus told a woman at a well in Samaria: that God is Spirit, and must be worshiped in spirit and truth.

Hubris

I’d have to say that Herod’s leaven was taught not so much verbally as by example. He was the king and he could do whatever he wanted, and that was the law because God had seen fit for him to be anointed. Never mind how he had actually come to the throne or how he kept it; he could do as he pleased. He’d just execute anyone who was inconveniently standing against his royal privilege. Whatever he said and believed was what God wanted him to say and believe.

There’s good leaven: the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 13:33; Luke 13:21). And there’s bad leaven (1 Corinthians 5:6; Galatians 5:9).

As we prepare for the week recognizing the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, it’d be a great time to snoop around and root out these kinds that start with “H.”

There should be no place for them in our houses.

What Is Submission?

/ W. Keith Brenton / 5 Comments

Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her ….

~ Ephesians 5:21-25

All sorts of folks quote these verses. Some quote them to prove that women must obey their husbands in everything (but “obey” and “submit” are not quite synonyms).

I don’t know very many people who go on to define what “submission” means by continuing through the next few verses, but that’s what Paul does:

… to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— for we are members of his body. “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

~ Ephesians 5:26-33

Jesus Christ submitted to the needs of His bride, the church, by humbling himself and taking the form of a servant and bathing – not only her feet – but her whole body … because he loves and cherishes it, feeds and cares for it … to the point that He left His Father in heaven and submitted to death on a cross to win her and wash her and feed her and be united with her.

That, good people, is what “submission” means.

And we must never, ever forget that it is not just how wives should relate to husbands, but also husbands to wives and believers to believers. Because right before verse 22 is verse 21, and there is no ignoring it, getting around it or explaining it away.

Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

Okay, end of sermon.

Why This Church and Not That Church?

/ W. Keith Brenton / 13 Comments

Why do we draw our patterns for “what-church-should-be-like” from Paul’s correctives to the chaos in 1 Corinthians 12-14 rather than the exuberant harmony of Acts 2:42-47?

There are fewer verses in the latter — so it has an advantage there already!

But more than that – even though the Corinthian letter bears principles of great value – the greatest value is for churches which are in crisis; suffering from behavioral problems even during their times of gathered worship.

Are we accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative (as the old song goes) — or the reverse?

Does your church have a problem with severe jealousy over the gifts provided by the Holy Spirit intended for the blessing and encouragement of the body of Christ?

Is your church uncontaminated by genuine love for each other that shows in patience, kindness, humility, protection, trust, hope, endurance?

Does your church have women interrupting the speaker to say: “What? I don’t understand. Somebody explain that to me. That doesn’t make any sense”?

Does your church have people generally interrupting the speaker to say: “Oooh! Oooh! I just had a revelation from heaven! Shhh. Shhh. Let me share it!”?

Does your church have people interrupting the speaker, wailing and warbling in languages no one can understand, with no one around who can interpret?

Does your church gather with everyone having their own idea of what the (dis)order of worship should be – and demonstrating their willingness to make theirs happen right now?

All while visitors are sitting there, wondering what in tarnation is going on?

Well, Corinth apparently did. So Paul wrote them to encourage them to calm things down, do things in a decent order, show courtesy, take turns, keep things intelligible, and above all glorify God.

My guess is that people pretty much do that in your church as they do in mine, even if grudgingly sometimes.

So back to the original question.

Do our churches devote ourselves to the apostles’ teaching, prayers, breaking of bread?

Are visitors awed with signs and wonders of near-miraculous changes in the lives of people touched?

Do we stick together and share everything we have?

Do we sell our property and possessions and give the proceeds to any among us who has need?

Do we meet every day at our church building campuses, putting them to some use more than just on Sunday?

Do we have each other over to the house frequently to dine, break bread, express gladness with sincere hearts?

Do we praise God constantly?

Do we consistently enjoy the favor of people around us?

Is the Lord adding to our number daily those who are being saved?

Have we got all of that part down yet — done the really difficult, challenging, character-building part of living like Christ in front of others — before we go on to the stage where rules must restrict behavior that isn’t even present?

Dang.

I think I just answered my own question.