Like with the O.J. Simpson trial, which I also predicted ahead of time that he would be found not guilty, the pundits were once more shocked. I have a very simple explanation of why they react as they do. We live in an age in which emotions trump facts. But to those who examine the evidence provided by the prosecution objectively attempting as best as one is able to separate emotions from facts, there was no evidence presented at all that she was a bad mother, that she was abusive to her child or that fingerprints or DNA pointed to her being guilty of killing her child.

 Let me be as clear as I can. Whether either O.J. or Casey is guilty of the charged crimes, the fact is that the prosecution simply did not meet the burden of evidence necessary for a guilty plea. Some may argue that having been sequestered, the jury was not privy to much of the conversation between the lawyers and the judge as the public was. On the other hand, being sequestered meant that they could focus on their real job as to whether the evidence presented met the burden of proof regardless of their personal feelings.

 I have lost some respect for those who normally I listen to when it come to politics. They also contradicted themselves again and again. For example, after mouthing the political correct statement that the American justice system is the best in the world, they would then proceed to talk about how blind it was today. After stating that they would not want to criticize the jury, they then spoke about how the jury members did not use common sense.

 Now what has all this to do with Law and Gospel? One item comes to mind. The first is that a woman who was thought to be guilty by a majority of those watching the case was found to be not guilty of the major charges of first degree murder, manslaughter and abuse. She probably will be freed this Thursday on the remaining guilty charges due to time already spent in jail awaiting trial. And this in spite of the fact that she did not take the witness stand.

 How different is our court case soon to be upon us either at the moment of our death or, if we are so fortunate, Judgment Day. There we will be found guilty of many sins worthy of temporal and eternal punishment. But because we have taken the witness stand—so-to-speak—by true repentance (contrition plus faith in Jesus), we will hear the Judge Himself invite us into heaven. We enter heaven not because we are “not guilty” but because we are “guilty” yet have trusted in the blood-bought sacrifice of Jesus Christ our Savior to forgive us.

 And what is forgiveness? It is the declaration of God Himself that He will no longer hold any believer in Christ accountable for his sins! Indeed, the criterion one must meet to go to hell is to be a sinner. And the criterion one must meet to go to heaven is to be a sinner. The difference? Those who go to hell are unbelievers rejecting the significance of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Those who go to heaven hold fast to that significance.

 Yes, two court room scenes but very different in both their purpose and outcome. One held on earth judging a mother to be not guilty in the death of her child due to lack of evidence; the other held on Judgment Day judging every human being to be worthy of eternal punishment for our sins but freed from that result because of our LORD and Savior Jesus Christ.

At first reading today’s Christian probably imagines that the people of Malachi’s day should have been destroyed by the LORD for saying and thinking such terrible things such as it is useless to serve God. The task of today’s preacher therefore is obvious. From a L&G perspective, the sermon is not to denounce the people of Malachi’s day but to accuse today’s Christian of saying or thinking the same thing! How so? Behind the thinking of the Israelites is the idea that God appears at times not to be fair because the wicked seem to get all the breaks while the believers seem to get the short end of the stick.

The preacher needs to give examples of how often today’s believer behaves just like those in Malachi’s day. For example, how many times is it not heard from a believer something along the following: “What did I do to….deserve this?” Such an attitude reveals one who lives under the Law imagining that one can discern God’s attiude toward us by examining how our life is going. If it goes badly, God is angry with us; if it goes well, God is pleased with us.

Christians, like unbelievers, are inconsistent with their thoughts about God at times blaming Him when things are not going well. In fact, an atheist can be defined as someone who realizes that if the true God exists, He must be all-powerful and because it appears obvious that He is not using such power to stop evil, one can only conclude that God does not exist. Our old Adam is always living under the Law imagining that our works are better than God declares them to be and that our sins are not near as bad as God declares them to be.

Verse 18 of Malachi 3 hits the nail on the head when God clarifies who truly are the righteous. They are those who serve the Lord in contrast to the wicked who do not serve the Lord. And such serving means that we bow at the decisions of God trusting his promises that He will take care of us better than the birds in the air and the flowers of the field notwithstanding all the evidence apparently against such a reality. We thank God that He is not a god of justice giving us what we deserve but instead He is the God of mercy not giving us what we deserve and the God of grace giving us what we do not deserve; namely, eternal salvation through Jesus Christ, our LORD and Savior.

We probably understand that it’s not a good think for us to be carousing and drunk on the Day of Judgment. But not to have “cares of this life” is impossible. Who is not concerned and at times worried about events of life that leave us apparently helpless and with no power to change the past, present or future? Does that mean that no one–even believers in Jesus–who have cares about this life will be saved?

However, from a L&G point of view, the problem for those on Judgment Day is not simply that they may be carousing, drunk or worried about life. The problem is that because of these things “your hearts be weighed down.” What does that mean? It means that they are not taken to the LORD in prayer. You do not look to Him for help. There is no repentance. In other words, you are in a state of unbelief.

Jesus also was weighed down with those who deserted Him; with those who denied Him; with those who put Him to death. However, even His call from hell, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” revealed a faith in His Father that we would do well to imitate. Yes, we are beset by the world, our flesh and the devil. However, whether that translates into occasions of carousing, drunkenness and even cares of this life, we always have a Friend to whom we can turn in full assurance that our sins are forgiven, that we are dressed in the robe of righteousness and that no care of this life will come upon us to destroy us as we trust in Jesus as LORD and Savior.

Yes,we walk not by sight but by faith in the promises of the Gospel connected to the death and resurrection of Jesus. For those promises are many that He will never leave us nor forsake us; that all things will work to our good; that never will a temptation come upon us beyond God’s control as we turn to Him for help. Indeed on the Day of Judgment every believer will be a sinner deserving nothing but temporal and eternal punishment. But we have a God Who will not give us what we deserve but instead furnish us with His gracious attitude of the forgiveness of sins and robe of righteousness. In Jesus, we are prepared for that Day of Judgment!

Christianity doesn’t sound very user friendly what with blessings provided to the “poor in spirit…those who mourn” and “those who are persecuted.” Once more we meet a God that doesn’t make worldly sense. We fall back on that principle, “If you want to know how God thinks, think common sensically and then reverse it!” Of course, there are those who conclude that the poor in wealth are being meant rather than the poor in spirit. Just what does it mean to be poor in spirit?

From a L&G point of view, God considers all unbelievers as poor in spirit in the sense that they have nothing to give to God to offset His wrath. While that might appear at first hearing to be a negative, in reality it is a positive. For the task of the preacher is to get members of the congregation to begin to think like God rather than their normal ungodly way of thinking on the part of their old Adam. The positive is not just that even believers are poor in spirit but that they recognize and confess their condition before God. It’s called repentance.

Repentance includes not only an awareness of one’s impoverishd sinful condition but also a confession of sin that looks to God and Him alone for salvation. Unlike every other religion in the world, Christianity does not offer any notion of team work between us and God to satisfy His demand that we be perfect in our works, thoughts and words. Instead, God sends His only-begotten to take upon Himself the punishment you and I deserved. It is not just our sin that separates us from God; it is the curse of the Law that reveals in the day we sin, death is the result.

It’s just that the Christian faith reveals that you and I don’t fulfill that curse. Jesus does by becoming sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. As our substitute Jesus takes upon Himself the punishment we deserve and then transfers His righteousness to us in the waters of baptism. Forgiveness is more than we normally think. From God’s point of view it is the Good News that you are no longer held accountable for your sins eternally. The words “It is finished” signal an end to sin being a problem for the whole world. Hell is no longer for sinners but for unbelievers. For if hell were for sinners, then no one would be saved.

And that is the comfort we have on All Saints Day as we remember those of our loved ones who died in the Lord. They are now with Him awaiting that great and wonderful Day of Judgement when their bodies will be restored to their spirits and the whole company of heaven will spend an eternity with God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The primary doctrine of the Christian faith is “justification by grace through faith on account of Jesus Christ.” The second most important teaching of the Christian faith, without which the Bible remains a sealed book, is the distinction between Law and Gospel. This probably is never more true than with our Reformation epistle reading from Romans 3 in which the word “law” occurs nine times and with significant differences in meaning.

While some imagine that the difference between L&G is the difference in their content alone, the true distinctions which are often confused is in regard to their use. The primary use of the Law in the spiritual kingdom is to make you aware of your inability to save yourseslf even with the help of God. Never does God permit a use of the Law by which we get closer to God by our obedience to the Law. Part of this confusion occurs because the word law in both Hebrew and Greek have a number of different meanings that can only be ascertained by the context. It is a primary reason why an English concordance is not that helpful because the same English word can have a multitude of nuances and meanings.

In verse 19 through 28 of Romans, chapter 3 we have the same word “law” used but with these meanings as synonyms. Verse 19: commandments and the idea of salvation through obedience; Verse 20: obedience and God’s will; Verse 21: obedience; 5 books of Moses; Verse 27: Principle of life; Verse 28: obedience to God’s will.

The Reformation clarified that the Law can never be a means of grace; that is, a means God uses to bring you into His family by your obedience to the Law. Rather, true salvation and receiving the righteousness of God Himself, is witnessed by the Old Testament writings but comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all and on all who believer. Therefore, the way of salvation is not by the principle of obedience to the Law but by the princple of trusting in the Gospel promises of Jesus Christ. In other words, the means bywhich we bring another person into a right relationship with the true God is by providing them with the promises of the Gospel.

Of the ridiculous notions found in the Christian faith, one of the most disturbing is that outwardly fine religious leaders may go to hell while the members of the Hell’s motorcyle club may go to heaven. It’s precisely that kind of teaching that got Jesus crucified as He continued to speak against the common sense notions of Judaism in regard to God. This parable from Luke 18 is introduced by Luke as about those who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others. But are we not to know and be assured that we are righteous? For there is no unrighteous person who will enter into the kingdom of God!

The answer to such a dilemma is to look at the context. Jesus’ parable does not speak against our assurance of being righteous. It is a parable that speaks out against such assurance based on our own works, words and thoughts. The Pharisee makes it clear that his assurance for being saved is that he is not an extortioner, unjust, adulterer or a tax collector and, in fact, fasts two times a week plus gives tithes of all that he has. This is called boasting of one’s self-righteousness.

In contrast, the tax collector pleads for mercy because he knows that he does not deserve any salvation at all. Those living under the Law have a just god in mind who supposedly gives you what you deserve while those living under the cross have a merciful God Who does not give you what you deserve and a gracious God Who gives you what you do not deserve, such as the forgiveness of sins, the robe of righteousness, eternal life and so forth.

That such a boastful Pharisee is not praying to the true God is clear from how Jesus describes his prayer, “The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself…” Note the “with himself.” For who is the god of the unbeliever? Bottom line is that the unbeliever worships himself.

The sermon would point out how every member of the congregation tends to think that God loves me more or will bless me more insofar as I am obedient to His will. Our old Adam is nothing but a self-righteous Pharisee. Thanks be to God that rather than getting what we deserve, our merciful and gracious God gives us what we do not deserve all out of his bountiful love towards those of us who are unable to love Him until He first loves us. And how can we be sure that we are righteous in God’s sight. Not by looking at our works but by meditating on the work of God in baptizing us into His family.

The problem this passage presents is that it appears that the primary goal of the Bible is to make us thoroughly equipped for every good work. Yet the primary purpose of the Bible according to John 20 is to believe in Jesus Christ and receive full salvation apart from any works we can do. So how does being fully equipped for good works relate to the purpose of the Bible?

First we look at context. In the previous verse 15 we read that the Holy Scriptures are “able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” Now that coincides with the rest of the Scriptual witness. How then do we fit in the idea of being equipped for good works? It is a L&G distinction known as the difference between justification and sanctification. On the one hand, in regard to your right standing before God, the Scripture is clear that salvation is by grace, through faith. On the other hand, in regard to your response to what God has done for us in Christ, we are eager to have the Holy Spirit do fruit through us.

To be thoroughly equipped for every good work does not mean that we will no longer sin. Rather it points to the fact that from God’s viewpoint, a truly good work; that is, a fruit of the Holy Spirit, takes place in light of one’s motivation. For one’s body to be the temple of the Holy Spirit and to have the New Man within the believer, the outward good works as seen by the observer are also influenced by love of Christ as seen by God Himself.

This well-known pericope about the cleansing of the Ten Lepers does cause a host of questions. What is the specific point? It appears that one point would be the fact that the only cleansed leper that returns to Jeus to give Him thanks is a hated Samaritan from a Jewish point of view. When Jesus said that “your faith has made you well” does He mean that it was His faith that healed him? But if that is true, how were the other nine healed? Did they also have faith when they asked Jesus as Master to have mercy on them? And if they did, why did they not return to give thanks? But if they did not have faith, why would they obey Jesus’ words to go to the priests?

The first point to be made is that even unbelievers can become the recipients of the miracles of Jesus. For example, at the feedings of the 4,000 and 5,000 not just the believers but also those outside the faith received fish and bread. One could also surmise that the 9 ungrateful lepers were cleansed by the power of Jesus alone while the believing Samaritan was also cleansed in light of his faith that Jesus was more than “Master” (verse 13); He was also God Himself (verse 18).

The second point is to examine the word in English translated as “well” or “whole.”  The Greek word is not only used for physical healing but also for spiritual salvation from eternal death, judgment and sin. See Matthew 18:11; Romans 11:14; Titus 3:5; Hebrews 7:25 and 1 Peter 3:21. What Jesus could be saying then is that the faith the cleansed leper has in Jesus as both Master and God Himself “has made you well” or “has saved you.”

The point of the sermon would be that not our works, not our thoughts, not our words and not even our gratitude saves us. For none of these can even occur until we are fully saved. How so? That by the power of the Holy Spirit we are given the gift of faith; that is, believing in the gracious promises of Jesus Christ being fulfilled in our lives notwithstanding all the evidence that appears to contradict such promises. The poster boy for such faith would be the impoverished beggar Lazarus destitute and poor during his entire life while here on earth but fully restored to the original creation after death.

There are only 2 religions in the world:  Christianity and everything else! And everything else reflects a “living under the Law” perspective in that what you do, say or think makes the difference as to whether you go to heaven or hell. In contrast, the Christian faith is unique in that it’s foundation is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This means that salvation is not by works but by grace through faith in the promises connected to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. And these promises are unconditional.

It is true that there are many individual passages which reveal the true nature of the Christian faith. But it is rare when in one chapter there are found 12 specific instances of unique Christian thought. The first chapter of Second Timothy is one such passage. What follows is a listing of the 12 unique statements of the Christian faith that can be individually expanded in a sermon or as a total package during a Bible study.

1) by the will of God; 2) the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus; 3) Grace; 4) Mercy; 5) Peace; 6) the genuine faith that is in you; 7) the gift of God which is in you; 8) not according to our works; 9) who has abolished death; 10) through the gospel; 11) to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day and 12) keep by the Holy Spirit who dwells in us.

Now it is clear that there are certain concepts listed that are used by other religions such as grace, mercy and peace. For example, ”grace” is regarded as some kind of power source with which we humans cooperate in order to be saved. But God’s view of “grace” points to His gracious attitude toward sinners in giving to us what we do not deserve. Therefore, all other religions do not define or use these concepts according to the Will of God. Instead, they have a human dimension in them and do not realize the gracious and Christ-centered facet of each of these phrases. Each of the 12 are truly a fine example of the distinctions between Law and Gospel.

Normally, the primary theme in this parable is that miraculous signs and wonders have no effect on bringing someone to faith. Instead, the means God uses to do so is Moses and the prophets. In other words, the means of grace is God’s Word with specific attention to the Gospel promises of Jesus Christ connected to His death on the cross and His resurrection from the grave. 

However, for this sermon we will focus on the attitude of the rich man; named Dives from the Latin Vulgate as Jerome translated the word for “rich”. First, it appears that Dives has not changed his attitude toward Lazarus as a beggar with the task of serving the rich. He tells Abraham to order Lazarus to bring a tip of his finger with water to him. Then, he orders Abraham to send Lazarus to the five brothers of Dives so that they will not come to this place of torment. Finally, he argues with Abraham that the Word of God is not sufficient to save but what is needed is that someone, like Lazarus, should rise from the dead.

Dives’ attitude of unbelief even in hell results in no repentance for the way that he had treated Lazarus. Instead, the universe still revolves around Dives as he attempts to order Lazarus around and seeks comfort and help only for those of his own household. It is true that nowhere in the Bible is there an indication that those in hell will repent of their sins. In fact, will they not be like Satan who prefers hell to worshipping the true God?

The attitude and predicament of Dives is in strong contrast to that of Lazarus who is said to be in the bosom of Abraham. That is significant as we remember how John was also in that position at the Last Supper. That beggar and impoverished Lazarus would be near Abraham after death while Dives is in another dimension of existence apart from Abraham would be a shock to the hearers of Jesus’ day. For they imagined that riches were a result of God’s blessings while poverty was a result of His curses. How different is the Christian faith from that not only of Judaism but from every other law-centered religion of the world!

The so-called parable of the Unjust Steward is one of the most difficult portions of the Bible to preach on because of the multitude of different interpretations that are provided. At last count there were at least 16 different understandings. The main questions are whether either or both of the master and steward are ethical or unethical, why the steward was commended if what he did was unethical, what exactly was the reduction of the bill and how is it that the way we handle money here on earth makes a difference as to whether or not we go to heaven.

In my opinion, there are two primary possibilities. On the one hand is to assume this is a parable and on the other hand that it is not a parable. The passage itself does not mention it is a parable nor are the normal attributes of a parable present. If a parable specifically reveals how the kingdom of God on earth actually works, it is difficult to find Jesus. The best one can do is to conclude that Jesus is the steward Who is only considered unjust by the people and religious leaders of His day. He reduces the debt of sin in a way that is not normal (death on a cross) and the Father forsakes Him because of the sin He placed on Himself.

On the other hand, if it is not an actual parable, it certainly appears to have an emphasis on the proper stewardship. I prefer the parabolic nature of the passage although if anyone insists on a specific interpretation for this text, I would be most happy to hear it. As indicated earlier, it is one of the most difficult passages to both interpret and apply.

One would think that the interpretation of this parable is somewhat obvious. Jesus is the Shepherd; we are the lost sheep; the 99 are the Pharisee and scribes. But not according to so-called “scholars” with their unique interpretations. One suggests that this parable is about you and me finding the kingdom of God and rejoicing when we take it back home and tell all our friends about it. Another suggests that the 99 refer to the angels because they don’t need repentance.

Of the various interpretations, they all fall into 2 camps–the Law camp and the Gospel camp. The Law camp suggests that this is a parable telling us what to do in either finding the kingdom of God ourselves or finding those outside of the kingdom and bringing them home. The problem with such an interpretation is that humans are the real actors of the parable in obedience to the commands of God. The Gospel camp understands that God is the actor in not only in finding the Lost Sheep–which are the sinners referred to in verse 2–but also in giving us a definition of repentance.

When Jesus concludes that “there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents” He is providing how God understands what repentance is. We often think of the results of repentance which are sorrow and contrition over sin. But repentance is actually the work of God in coming to us as unbelievers and saving us without any cooperation or contribution on our part

In fact, verse 10, while specifically referring to the women and the lost coins is synonymous with verse 7 about repentance. It is even more obvious in regard to the lost coin than the lost sheep that the coin does nothing in either becoming found or being returned to its rightful place as a possession of the woman. Law and Gospel are indeed the critical marks of distinction that are so needed in regard to proper interpretation and application.

Here we go again with one of those Biblical passages that appears to contradict the message of Scripture that we are to love everyone. How is that possible if at the same time you are to hate your father and mother? Many young people are leaving the organized church not because of passages like this but because of the interpretation and application of passages like this. Unless one keeps the distinctions between Law and Gospel, verses like this one will appear not only to contradict other parts of the Bible but also result in a rejection of such a god who would want us to hate our parents. So how do we understand this properly?

First, the word translated as “hate” does mean “hate” so that one cannot wiggle out of Jesus’ words by sleight of hand of translation. Once more the key to proper interpretation of the Scripture is not your pastor, the denomination leaders, the pope or church councils. Instead, Scripture interprets Scripture. That means both the immediate and wider context. Now it is clear that we are to love one another as Jesus loved us. However, is there something within the narrow context that might help us more fully understand what Jesus is saying?

Verse 26 itself reveals that this hating of relatives takes place when one “comes to Jesus.” Verse 27 includes the concept of “bearing one’s cross.” and verse 33 clarifies this by saying that one cannot become the disciple of Jesus unless he forsakes all that he has. What we are dealing with here is the fact that when one becomes a disciple of Jesus, crosses will appear by which one will have to make a decision whether we forsake the world or Jesus.

Let’s use the phrase in verse 26 to make the point which says that we need to hate our own life also. What does that mean? Well, what kind of life does a person have prior to faith in Jesus Christ? He has a life of sin. Jesus’ point is clear. When you become His disciple, you will still be tempted not to follow Jesus. That temptation will come from your own selfish life of desires, perhaps from members of your family, certainly because of your possessions. To choose Jesus in situations when there is a choice is the cross we bear.

The following is an example of how some choose parents over Jesus. How many times does a pastor face a couple from different denominations that wants to get married. Even when both agree that the Lutheran faith is the correct summary of holy Scripture, it is not unusual that the non-Lutheran still will not change because he or she does not want to upset parents. That places love of parents above love for Jesus. Jesus Himself faced that decision when Mary, his brothers and sisters were tempting Him to stop His “silly” preaching about Himself being the Messiah. Jesus replied that those who are truly His family are the ones who believe His Word.

Now none of us are capable of following the will of Jesus perfectly. That’s why He, as our substitute, so hated the world, sin and the devil that He became our substitute in taking upon Himself the punishment that should have been ours. He died so that we will never really die but be raised from the deadness of our mortal life to be with Him and the heavenly host eternally. It’s a message worth sharing with others who remain in the darkness of unbelief.

Why would Jesus ask such a question? In the new religion of Judaism–which is not the Old Testament Israeli religion–there were over 600 rules about how to keep the Sabbath properly. For example, it would be work to carry a pitcher of water on the Sabbath unless you could carry it with your teeth because then it would not be that heavy and not considered as work. A man with the disease of dropsy was present and the Pharisees were watching Jesus closely. For this was a Sabbath and a physician was not to work on it unless it was a matter of life or death.

Jesus, of course, heals the man and then asks whether those present would rescue a donkey or an ox that had fallen  into a pit on the Sabbath. The point is made for the people of that day but we find many Christians today confused about the Sabbath commandment. Some wonder whether it still is in place because many Christians no longer worship on a Saturday and was that not the essence of Sabbath worship? The answer is no. For the word Sabbath does not mean “Saturday” or “seventh” but refers to “rest.” But are we not to “rest” on the Sabbath which is Saturday?

This is where Law and Gospel distinctions are most helpful. For not only do we distinguish between L&G but also distinguish the different kinds of Law. There were three kinds of Law that God wills us to follow. They are civil, ceremonial and moral. It is interesting to note that each of the commandments have a civil, ceremonial and moral aspect. For example, the fifth commandment to not kill had a civil aspect in that there were cities of refuge to which one who had accidentally killed someone could flee. Also there was a ceremonial need to sacrifice an offering. And, of course, there was a moral aspect of not taking someone’s life without permission from God to do so such as in self-defense, war or capital punishment.

So also with the third commandment. The moral part was that children of God need to set aside a time of rest or worship each week. The civil part took place, for example, when God provided manna to His people but they were not to pick up any of it on Saturday. The ceremonial part was that the main day for worship after Mt. Sinai was on Saturday.

We Christians living in the New Testament era are no longer bound to two of the Old Testament kinds of law; namely, the civil and the ceremonial. While we are bound to the civil laws of the land in which we live, the ceremonial laws have been completely abrogated because their purpose was to remind the Old Testament people of the need for the coming of the Messiah so that people would not have to be sacrificing for their sins daily.

The moral part of the Sabbath commandment remains in place that we children of God are to set aside a time for rest as God leads us in worship giving to us the gifts of the forgiveness of sins, the robe of righteousness and the many other gracious promises resulting from the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. For us, the Sabbath is no longer a burden but a privilege not only to worship the holy Trinity but also to receive from God the salvation won for us by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Ask Christians if they can remember an occasion when Jesus did not show love. If they have one it is the incident of Jesus whipping the people in the temple so that they would not make it a den of robbers. The only problem with that–or any other incident for that matter–is that because God is a God of love, every action He does is loving. We may have a terrible task in trying to figure out how such actions are loving but all that God does or permits is from a attitude of love.

Perhaps the analogy the writer to the Hebrews uses about a father chastising a child makes more sense–at least if you are the father. But even the temple whipping makes loving sense when the only other option for Jesus was to leave those in the temple attempting to buy their way into heaven, or, steal their way into heaven by means of sacrifical purchases. Any p;arent that would permit the child to immerse onesself into the world of sin without consequence would be a most unloving father indeed.

Of course, none of our sufferings of chastising can even come close to the death on a cross of the Innocent One. For He took upon Himself the punishment that should have been yours and mine. We were the ones who benefited from His death and suffering which we so deserved because of our sin. We, who justly deserved temporal and eternal punishment, now have received grace upon grace because God so loved you that He gave His only begotten Son.

“Have faith” appears to be a favorite phrase of many. But just what is meant by it? The Law and Gospel distinctions of “Living under the Law” and “Living under the Gospel” provide clarity. “Living under the Law” would mean that the faith I am to have is faith in myself to do what may even appear to be the impossible as long as I have the help of God. “Living under the Gospel” has quite a different object of faith than my own faith. Let’s examine the background of Abraham’s faith to understand the difference.

Abraham had been told by God that he would have a son that would result in all the nations of the earth being blessed. Issac is born. Then God tells Abraham to put Issac to death by means of a sacrifice on an altar. This is no simple knifing that would occur but also a burning up of the body. How could Abraham proceed to put to death the one from whom all the nations of the earth would be blessed? He did so through faith. But what exactly does that mean? How at the same time could Abraham believe that Issac was the promised seed while at the same time believe that God wanted him to die?

The answer is found in verse 19. Abraham’s faith was such that it trusted the promise of God that even were Issac to be put to death and his body burnt up, yet God would then proceed to raise Issac from the dead! In a sense was that not the way that Issac had been conceived from the apparently dead womb of a woman who was 90 years old, and therefore quite past child bearing age. But Abraham did not take into account his surroundings or experience. Rather, he trusted in a promise even though he had no evidence to back up God’s Word.

That is the faith of the Christian. For the object of faith are the benefits that come to those who believe whose sins are forgiven, who wear the robe of righteousness, who will live forever and ever and so on. The promises of God are sure because the holy Trinity never lies. Though there is little if any evidence for what God promises, our faith which is a gift of the Holy Spirit is the evidence of things not seen. Therefore we do not have faith in us but have faith in Him Who died so that we will never really die and Who lives so that we live eternally.

Part of the problem for the natural man is to understand the Bible because of the lack of analogies that fit. For example, whoever heard of three persons but one essence or body and blood being in, with and under the forms of bread and wine? In fact, the very essence of the Christian faith has no analogy or comparable experience in the world to use as a comparison. And what is that essence? That by trusting a promise, one’s status is changed eternally.

I don’t receive a birthday card with money from my mother when expected. So I phone her and she informs me that she sent the gift but sent it to another address of a home I own. Now I believe her but I still don’t have the money. So I go to the house and find the letter in the mailbox with a check inside but I still don’t have the money. So I go to the bank and only after cashing the check do I have the money. That means that even though I trusted the word of my mother, it didn’t make any difference until I went and got the check, etc.

How different is the Christian faith from any other religion. No other religion provides sure salvation because of believing a promise. And exactly what is the promise? It is the promise that  not at my conversion, not at my baptism, not at my inviting Christ into my heart but rather at the cross of Christ my sins were entirely forgiven and God pronounced an absolution upon sinful me–even though I was not even born!

For you see, the trust or faith that saves is a confidence that what God has said about my sins actually took place before I came to faith! It occurred on a wind-swept hill called Calvary outside of Jerusalem by the garbage dump. The fact that Jesus was forsaken by His Father–another mystery beyond full comprehension–means that I will never be forsaken. The objective reality of my sin being forgiven and therefore not being held accountable for the punishment of that sin, took place at the cross and was made certain by the resurrection.

We therefore do not say to unbelievers, “If you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ your sins WILL BE forgiven.” No, instead, we proclaim that “Your sins HAVE BEEN forgiven. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.” The difference is the difference between living under the Law assuming that what I do, think, say or believe is the foundation for my salvation and living under the Gospel concluding that what Jesus did for me is the reason for my salvation. We are saved the same way as was Abraham who believed the unbelievable by the power of the Holy Spirit at which occasion God declared him righteous in His sight!

Part of the problem with using the word “vanity” is that in today’s culture it has the meaning of being prideful. Solomon is not referring to man’s pride but rather he is pointing out how at times everything appears to be so meaningless. The word actually refers to “vapour” or “breath” as in verse 14 life is described as a process like grasping for wind. This is a wonderful metaphor because every member of the congregation has experienced the futility of what is being done. You buy new tires for your car and the transmission goes out three days after the warranty expires. The list of examples is endless.

Law and Gospel has one purpose which is to point to Christ as the only hope both here on this earth and for all eternity. Frankly, the book of Ecclesiastes is a very comforting message from God. How so? It provides an insight into life so that we are not surprised or, at the worse, take offense at how God is handling life on earth. To understand the futility of life because the earth is the abode of Satan (“on earth is not his equal”) moves us to respond to life’s twists and turns with, “Well, what else did you expect?”

The ending of the book of Ecclesiastes (12:13) invites us to hear (in the sense of “obey”) the concluding understanding of the true meaning of why we are here on earth which is to “Fear God, and keep his commandments because this applies to every person.” (NAS) To follow in Christ’s footsteps means that while the disciples thought that on a certain Friday His life had come to a futile end, the Church recognizes such a day as “Good.”

It reminds us of a Chinese parable about a farmer whose horse ran away. His friends were grieved but the farmer replied, “Why do you conclude that was bad?” Two days later the horse returns bringing with him a herd of wild horses. The friends rejoice but the farmer replies, “Why do you conclude that is good?” Two days later his son falls off of one of the wild horses and breaks his leg. His friends grieve but the farmer says, “Why do you conclude that was bad?” Two days later the army comes through the village to take young men to war but the son can’t go because of his broken leg. The friends rejoice but the farmer says, “Why do  you conclude that was good?” And the story ends.

It is a story that is our story as we often get bad and good mixed up. We reverse the equal signs handing our good works to God for merit and God says, “Why do you think that is good?” Or, we suffer with a broken transmission and God says, “Why do you think that is bad?” The Christian is to have the hope that the message of Ecclesiastes is comforting to realize that we should expect futility and failure in this world because of its fallen nature. But in Christ we have been renewed as new creations and become the Christian nation on earth. We can interpret reality as God does knowing that confessing we are poor, miserable sinners is not bad and that the cross was indeed good for us!

After reading a number of commentaries and listening to sermons of this passage, the title unfortunately appears to be “Persistence Pays Off.” This is not really a parable but an illustration story to make a point. Jesus tells of going to a friend of yours and asking for three loaves of bread but your friend says that the door is shut, he and his children are in bed and he can’t give him the loaves. However, if you are persistent, he will rise and give you as much as you need. Now what possibly could be the meaning of this story?

It appears that there are many who imagine that by their much praying and if in particular they have a crew of praying people, that there will be a greater chance that God will hear and respond to such prayers favorably. Yes, there are many examples of apparently miraculous answers to prayers but is it because there were many people with much prayer or because the prayer of the righteous availeth much?

Unlike a parable which speaks of how things do operate in the kingdom of God on earth; that is, the holy Christian Church, this story is an example of how God is far better than the unwilling friend. God instead says, “Ask” and it’s given; “Seek” and it’s found; “Open” and it’s opened. The key is verse 13 which reveals that if even a friend who at first is evil toward your request will finally provide what you need because of your insistence, you can only imagine how your loving God will provide what you really need instantly.

One way to begin such a sermon is to ask the congregation if they remember a prayer God did not answer. If anyone does remember such a prayer, either they are an unbeliever or they do not understand Christian prayer. God’s answer is immediate, always to your good, always according to His will and always in keeping with His promises. He never promises you a rose garden but does promise to help you get through the thorns of life and cope with whatever the devil, the world and your flesh can throw your way.

We do not have a god of the Law who will answer because of your much work at praying. We have instead the God of the Gospel Who answers immediately and, at times, before we even ask, because of the work His Son did for you on the cross. Once through faith you have become His child, He will never give you a stone when you ask for bread or a serpent when you request fish or a scorpion when you desire an egg. He is the God of grace in giving you what you do not deserve beginning with the forgiveness of sins, the robe of righteousness and eternal life.

Some passages are more difficult than others to preach about by first getting the laity confused. This is a no brainer in accomplishing that goal. Those of you who have been following this blog for some years now may have figured out the style we employ in most sermons. We attempt to find the “contradiction” in the text which then leads to confusing the laity which confusion is ovecome only through the use of Law and Gospel. One of the best ways to begin the confusion is by means of a question to the old Adam. So here goes.

“When you come home from work (shopping, school, etc.) what do you think God would prefer you to do? Read the newspaper or read the Bible?” Such a question places the hearer in a real dilemma. He expects that the correct answer is “to read the Bible” but the hesitation comes about because he knows he prefers to read the paper or look at the news on TV. Which then leads to the text and in this case the event of Jesus’ visit to the home ofMartha and Mary.

Because the old Adam interprets the Bible through the prism of trying to find principles of life in order to keep score of how righteous we are, it is quite sensible that most people find a principle of life in this Martha and Mary visit. It is that when we have a choice between listening to Jesus and doing something else, we should listen to Jesus. So the conclusion that we ought to read the Bible rather than the paper when we come home from work.

However, from a Law and Gospel perspective, when God criticizes someone it is never just for a sin committed. It is also for the unbelief behind that sin. It is not that Martha is angry with Mary for not helping out. Martha is troubled with the attitude of Jesus. Listen to her words with special emphasis provided: “Lord, do you NOT CARE that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore TELL HER to help me.”

Here is a creature telling off the Creator! This is not a simple temper tantrum from one sister to another. It is an assault against Jesus as being true God. We would venture to say that had Martha continued to do the work of serving while listening with one ear to the words of Jesus without any rancor against Mary, then there woud have been no criticism from Jesus. One of the wonderful rediscoveries about the Reformation is that a fruit of the Holy Spirit is not necessarily only a spiritual work. It also can be a temporal work such as the changing of the baby’s diaper or making a dinner.

No, it’s not a sin to read the paper rather than the Bible when you arrive home. It is not just a matter of priorities but an understanding of doing all things from a Christ-centered motivation. And when we sin, we can flee to the cross and hear the words addressed to each of us, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

It’s known as the Parable of the Good Samaritan which makes it wrong on two counts. First, it is NOT a parable. Parables are about what happens in the kingdom of God with Jesus as the primary person of the parable. Now there have been those who attempt to make Jesus the Jewish person who was attacked, the Samaritan who helped him, the animal upon whom the Samaritan placed the Jew and so forth. Furthermore, the real point is not about loving Samaritans or Jews but it is an answer to the question of the deceptive lawyer. How so?

The lawyer asks what he is to do to inherit eternal life. Think about that for a moment. If someone were to ask you about what they needed to DO to get to heaven, would you not tell them, “Nothing?” Would you not point them to Jesus as Savior Who died to take away the punishment of sin and Who rose to affirm that His mission was successfully accomplished? Look what Jesus says!  “What is written in the Law?” Jesus points to the Law as the way of salvation? Why did He do so?

Being the top theologian of His day, Jesus knew well the distinctions between Law and Gospel With the lawyer Jesus realizes that the man imagines that he can be good enough to merit salvation. So Jesus not only points him to the law but when the lawyer correctly quotes Deuteronomy 6 as part of the Jewish Shema, Jesus responds, “Do this and you will live.” “Do this and you will live!!!!” Has Jesus forgotten that a man is saved by grace through faith and not byworks of the Law? Or, is there something else going on here?

Of course there is. Jesus knows that when you are speaking with someone who imagines that they can merit their way to heaven, you demonstrate to them where they fall short. So the reason for a story about an enemy being a good person in helping out someone in need. The point is clear. Jesus is simply telling the lawyer one area of his life where he falls short of the glory of God. There really is NO GOSPEL in the entire passage. It is all Law. Because as Jesus said, it is wrong to give pearls to the swine. That is, it is bad theology to proclaim the Gospel to someone who imagines that they are not as sinful as God regards them.

To show that this is NOT a parable, simply go to a parallel conversation in Mark 10 with the rich man. The SAME QUESTION is asked but this time the problem is love of money which Jesus points out. When the disciples ask Jesus who can be saved, He answers that it is IMPOSSIBLE  with man but not with God for with God all things are possible. Jesus is making the point that even with the help of God it is impossible for a man to contribute to his salvation. No, as an unbeliever, he is dead in sin and therefore cannot possibly respond. The response comes only when the Holy Spirit creates faith and good works follow after a person is totally saved.

In both Mark 10 and Luke 10 conversations with the lawyer/rich man, Jesus speaks no Gospel for each of them needs to hear the Law in all its severity. While both passages give no indication whether either of the men ever came to faith, we know that because of Jesus’ Law and Gospel preaching some Pharisees, like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, did come to faith trusting in the promises of the Gospel connected to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

If you look up the word “Karma” on the Internet, you will find that some sites find the teaching of Karma not only in Buddhism and Hinduism but also in Christianity! In fact, they use this verse from Galatains 6 as evidence that Christians also believe in Karma. Karma can be summarized by the notion that “what goes around, comes around.” It is the idea that in the long run, people get what they deserve. In Buddhism and other such religions, Karma is tied to the teaching of Reincarnation which is the belief that human beings today have had past lives and actions that have an effect on what kind of life they have today.

If they were evil in a past life, then they are reincarnated into a body–not necessarily human–in which they make up for their past sins. Karma then becomes a teaching that attempts to resolve why bad things happen to good people. One can break out of a cycle of being reincarnated into an inferior being by being more ethical in the present life so that in the next body one is elevated to a higher level.

The worse effect of Karma is that because people need to go through purification in the present life, there is not much motivation to help the needy, the poor, the sick and so forth because then you get in the way of the purification process.  As an aside, this is one of the reasons why the unbelieving Pharisees were angry with Jesus for healing lepers and the demon possessed. He was in essence removing the deserved consequences of their sin attributed to them by God. Jesus was therefore getting in the way of God’s justice.

And that is the primary reason why Christianity does not believe in Karma as taught by false religions. For the Christian God is not a God of justice in giving everyone what he or she deserves. Rather the holy Trinity is a merciful God in not giving people what they deserve and a gracious God in giving people what they do not deserve; namely, the forgiveness of sins, the robe of righteousnses and eternal salvation.

What Galatians 6:7 does not mean by “whatever a man sows, that he will also reap” is some unbreakable principle of karma. Instead, it refers to God’s plan that those who are believers reap the free gift of salvation while those who are unbelievers reap what they hope for; namely, an eternity without the true God. The Christian faith does not permit, therefore, the commonly held notion that when something bad happens to us and we can complian, ”What did I do to deserve this?” We believe, teach and confess instead that what we truly deserve is nothing but temporal and eternal punishment. Anything short of that is a gracious gift from a loving God Who became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God through Jesus Christ.

Two of the primary understandings of the Christian faith in the United States are Evangelicals land Reformation thinkers. The main difference is that Evangelicals–and in this case we would include Roman Catholics–beleive in a decision theology of sorts. In other words, Evangelicals believe that the natural man is not so fallen that he cannot cooperate in some way with God’s grace either to take the first steps in his salvation or to invite Christ into his heart. Reformation Christians, on the other hand, teach that there is nothing an unbeliever can do, say or think in order to become saved. To put it bluntly, God is not able to teach an unbeliever what to do, say or think in order to become saved. Instead, salvation is a gracious gift from God given to those who do NOT deserve it!

These two views of Christian theology have different understandings on many doctrines. Galatians 5 speaks of the difference between walking in the Spirit and walking in the flesh. For Evangelicals walking in the Spirit means to keep from sinning. The indication that a person is walking in the Spirit is that he has changed his life, he is more at peace, he feels God’s presence, he is blessed more and more. This is in stark contrast to the Reformation view that walking in the Spirit is what a believing sinner does in that he lives a life of repentance, not sinlessness. For the Reformation believer, walking in the flesh is not simply committing sin but enjoying it, practicing it and refusing to repent of it.

These differences are made clearer by what each means by not being “under the law” as verse 18 reveals. Reformation theology teaches that being under the Law means that a person imagines he can contribute to or cooperate with God to become saved. Such living under the Law results in living under the curse of the Law which God promised would lead to death. Living under the Law is living according to the thinking of Satan while living under the cross is living according to the thinking of the Triune God.

It is not surprising to find congregational members concluding that by going to church, praying a lot, helping out the neighbor and so forth that they are making sure that they go to heaven. But the Reformation revealed that if Christian’s motivation to do good works is for the purpose of staying saved, that is sin. God would prefer a dish of dirt rather than your works as a way of meriting your salvation. The Reformation Christian will do fruit of the Holy Spirit but not with the purpose of sealing salvation. God does not need or appreciate works done with such a motivation because it takes away the glory of Jesus and replaces it with our own. To some degree then, Evangelical thinking today stems from a theology of self-glory in contrast to Reformation theology which stands squarely on the theology of the cross.

The interpretation and application of this verse all depends on how one understands the Greek word for “tutor” which is also our English “pedagogue.” Different translations use “guardian,” “pedagogue,” “tutor” and the King James has “schoolmaster.” Unfortunately, most of these have the concept of the office of a teacher as though the Law was teaching us how to get to the real teacher, Jesus Christ. However, of the options provided the closest to come to the real sense is “guardian.” For this individual was a trustworthy slave of either a wealthy Greek or Roman family. His task was not to teach the young boy but to guard and supervise his morals. In fact, the boy was not even permitted to step out of the house without this guardian until he reached manhood.

Not only was the Law a guardian in that is made us aware of sin (Romans 3:20) but it also had a curbing use to keep us from doing sin. For most young men this guardian was not so much a friend as a jailer keeping in check the behavior of the boys. By means of the motivation of either fear of punishment or hope of reward, the Law worked on the basis of the self-interest of the individual to keep him in check. The guardian was not so much a friend of the boy as a watcher and judge over all that he did.

The Law as a teaching tutor therefore is a total misunderstanding if one has the sense that it teaches us how to be saved. For no teaching is possible–even by God Himself–to help the natural man become saved. The Gospel of Christianity is NOT a set of teachings as to what you are to do in order to become saved. There are no steps to salvation that anyone can follow; there is no possibility for an unbeliever to make a right choice or provide an invitation to God to come into his life.

The bottom line is that the Law cannot teach anyone how to be saved because its purpose is to make natural man aware of his total inability to do, say or think anything that will help him to be saved. And the Gospel is also not a teaching of how one is saved. Instead, the Gospel is the announcement that your sins have been forgiven at the cross of Christ and that effort on the part of Jesus was absolutely successful in light of His resurrection from the dead. 

It is NOT that Christianity doesn’t teach. It’s just that the Christian faith doesn’t teach anyone how to be saved. Rather, the faith reveals how you have been saved. Only after you are totally saved does the faith begin to teach you. It teaches you how God and God alone became a human being to save you; it teaches about the mercy and grace of God; it teaches all the gracious promises of God for the believer in Christ and it teaches about the celestial heaven after the Day of Judgment. Yes, Christianity teaches. It just doesn’t teach an unbeliever how to be saved. God is not capable of providing you with a 4-step plan as to what you are to do in order to be saved.

Indeed, salvation come by grace through faith on account of Jesus Christ. And that came about for many because the Law made them aware of the impossibility of being able to do anything to get saved. Instead, salvation is a gift from God that comes not through hearing instructions as to how to be saved but through hearing the revelation from God Himself as to how God saves you without any contribution or cooperation on your part.

Some passages of Scripture really hit the nail on the head in regard to the essential teaching of the Christian faith. This is one such passage. For while there are passages which appear at first reading to contradict Christianity when works are said to be what gets one into heaven, this passage from Galatians 3 reveals the true purpose of the cross of Christ. The sermon may begin by asking the hearers what they consider to be the true purpose of the cross. For some, the cross is an example we are to follow in setting aside our desires for the needs of another person. Others may speak of the cross as the event when my sins were taken away.

It has been my experience that even the answer of the forgiveness of sins as a benefit of the cross is not properly understood. For example, I recently heard a theologian speak of the idea that because of the cross, we are now innocent. That can be confusing. For it leads to the following analogy in a court room. The jury comes back and indicates that the evidence has not been sufficient to find a person guilty and therefore makes the judgment of “not guilty.” But that is not the message of Christianity. There is more than sufficient evidence to find each of us guilty as poor, miserable sinners deserving nothing but temporal and eternal punishment.

Then what is a more appropriate court room analogy? You are arrested for going over the speed limit. The judge declares you guilty and the sentence is either a $100.00 fine or ten days in jail. Now you have no money at all. However, your brother is in court and offers to pay the $100.00 fine. Will the judge accept the payment from someone other than  you? In such a case, he would. Having had the fine paid, you are free to go but are you innocent of the crime? The answer is no. You are still guilty; it’s just that the penalty was fulfilled by someone other than you.

The Christian faith reveals that from our conception, every human being is under the sentence or condemnation of eternal death because of our sins. At the cross, Jesus did NOT take away  your sins as though you no longer sin. What He did was pay the penalty of the curse of the Law. How did He then buy or redeem us from eternal death? The verse is clear, “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree).’”

The concept of forgiveness does not mean that our sins disappear nor does it mean that suddenly we are now innocent. Insead, forgiveness can be be defined as God declaring that we are no longer held accountable for our sin! And the reason God does this is in light of Jesus Christ becoming your substitute and being held accountable for your sin. He was forsaken by God the Father at the cross so that the believer in Jesus will never be forsaken!

Just as God declared what seemed impossible to be true about Jesus; namely, that He became the worst sinner on earth because He carried every sin to the cross, so also God now declares what seems tobe impossible about you; namely, that you are no longer held accountable for any sin and therefore are regarded by God as a sinless saint. Thus, the paradoxical nature of the Christian faith is as follows:  From the point of view of the Law you are a 100% sinner deserving eternal death. From the point of view of the Gospel, you are a 100% saint receiving not only the full forgiveness of sins but also the robe of Christ’s righteousness in the sacramental waters of holy baptism.

Few would disagree with Paul’s point that his knowledge of Christianity did not come from or through human beings but through a special revelation given to him during his three years in Arabia. The point of the sermon is not simply to help the hearer understand the text (Scripture interprets Scripture) but also to apply the text (distinctions between Law and Gospel). The L&G handle would be the key difference between Judaism and true Christianity. Paul considered himself a top notch follower of Judaiam but a persecutor of the Church of God. What is the difference between the two?

It is a difference that Christians still make today as they turn the religion of grace into a religion of obedience. Judaism appeared on the scene around the time of the Babylonian captivity when the temple was replaced with synagogues; priests with rabbis and sacrifices with reading of the Law. As with Judaism today at your neighborhood synagogue, there is a great emphasis on one’s works becoming worthy of salvation. The Pharisee’s prayer of Luke 18 thanked God for not being like the sinner. How sad.

The old Adam within each Christian attempts to make us eat of the forbidden fruit of works righteousness and to regard Jesus as only Example rather than Savior. Some do so by imagining that their frequent attendance in worship, taking the Lord’s Supper and hefty offerings are what pleases God to save us. Of course, all such works are said to be motivated by the Holy Spirit thinking thereby that the charge of doing works out of self-interest would be bypassed. But no such luck.

For Paul, proper preaching of the Law consists of three parts:  God’s demand; it must be perfect and no one can fulfill it. However the Gospel may be in its specificity, it always comes down to this point–What man could not do by the law because we are weak in the flesh, God did and then transferred all the benefits of the cross and empty tomb to the undeserving who receive them by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.

The Law is so subtle in its temptation that even the notion that I am well considered in God’s eyes because I know I am a sinner and give all the credit to Jesus becomes a form of legalism. That is why the life of the Christian is not one of increasing goodness but a sense of the need for an increase in repentance. The danger is that we become boastful of our humility and our better understanding of doctrine than other Christians have.

The text is a wonderful opportunity to remind each of us that our conversion was exactly like that of St. Paul’s. A conversion against our sinful will as God transplanted a new heart and a right will on our road to Damascus. A conversion not by man but through the power of the Holy Spirit Himself as He sanctifies us through the Word and keeps us in the one true faith forever and ever.

+ Paul an apostle not by or though man but by revelation

+  New religion called “Judaism”

+  True meaning of the word “grace”

+ Hymn:  “When In The Hour Of Deepest Need”

+  Series 5 on Law and Gospel Distinctions

+  Thesis 5:  The first manner of confounding Law and Gospel

+  Turn Gospel into a doctrine of meritorious works

+  Thesis 6:  The second confusion is no stern Law; no sweet Gospel

+ James call: Matthew 5:21-22
+ What is righteous anger
+ Difference between judgment, council and hellfire
+ Stewardship and Megachurches

There is no doubt that Christians regard Jesus as the fulfillment of the promised Messiah (in Hebrew) or Christ (in Greek). They would also agree that He is the Son of Man promised in Daniel 7 to be sent by the Ancient of Days (the Father) to save sinners from eternal damnation. They also refer to Him as Savior. But on this holy Sunday there is another dimension to the personhood of Jesus that needs attention. Jesus is God!

For Christians today there is not much difference in referring to Him as the Messiah, the Christ, the Son of Man, the Redeemer, the Savior and God. However, the teaching that Jesus of Nazareth is God Himself was most hard to accept. No, it was impossible to accept by the unbelieving Jews. The text has them accusing Him of being a Samaritan and having a demon because of what they considered to be His blasphemy.

They must have torn their hair out–if not tear their robes–when in verse 58 Jesus used the name of God for Himself. It is not that easy to recognize the name of God being used in the English translation of “before Abraham was, I AM.” In this translation, at least the I AM is capatalized. For in Greek, the personal pronoun is part of the verb form. However, Jesus in reality says, “Before Abraham was, I, I AM.” The double “I” is a reference back to Exodus 3 when God reveals to Moses His name, “Yahweh” which is literally “I AM WHO I AM.”

The closest we have in our literature to what this means is in the comic strip, Popeye, the Sailor Man. He and Bluto are arguing over who is going to take out Olive Oyle. Bluto says, “Who’s going to stop me from taking her out?” and Popeye replies, “I am who I am” puffing a few times on his pipe as he speaks. The best way I have found to understanding that is to say, “I fulfill what I promise.” In other words, I have made a promise and I will make sure it is kept!

While there are references in the Old Testament to the Messiah being God Himself, almost 70 passages make it clear that the Angel of the LORD is the second person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ Himself. For more info on this, examine the book “The Angel of Angels” written by Pastor Peter Kurowski available from www.lawgospel.com. That the man Jesus is also true God means that His promises are always sure and never failing. We can be assured of our salvation as we recall the blessed promises given to us through the waters of baptism. It is indeed a washing of regeneraion resulting in an eternal salvation beginning right here and now.

Have you ever wondered why the feast of Pentecost has as its Old Testament reading the Tower or Babel? The usual answer is that both the Tower of Babel incident as well as the event of Pentecost involve foreign languages. Whereas the Babel event led to a confusion among people with the creation of foreign languages, the Pentecost event has the disciples speaking in other known foreign languages so that those from other countries can understand the message of the Gospel. It’s a neat shift from confusion to unity because of Christ. However, the parallel breaks down somewhat in that while Babel involved going from one language to many languages, Pentecost involved speaking in the different languages.

Examining the text, though, from a Law and Gospel point of view, something else begs our attention. The confusion of Law and Gospel normally takes place when the Law is said to have a use that God does not permit. In fact, it is a use that the Law was never given. Yet every other religion of the world, except for Christianity, makes great use of this nonuse of the Law. And that is the Law becoming a step ladder to heaven.

Now while it is true that the heaven which the Tower of Babel folks wanted to reach was not the heavenly place of God but perhaps only the sky with the clouds beneath their planned tower, special attention to verse 4 reveals their true intenion. They wanted to “make a name for ourselves.” This is pure idolatry of self and a breaking of the first commandment not to have anyone above God Himself.

With that in mind, we now see a most interesting distinction between Babel and Pentecost. I call it the ascending vs. descending motif. In every false religion of the world, mankind assumes that his task is to appease or placate an angry god. That is done by some kind of word, thought or work which is then rewarded by the god first liking you, then loving you and perhaps, saving you. Using our chosen analogy, every religion in the world attempts some method of ascending to God.

In start contrast to that, we find Pentecost doing the very opposite. No, we don’t descend to God but God descends to us. The great miracle of the Incarnation led to the death of a perfect human being for all sinful human beings. Pentecost is another part of God’s plan in having God Himself–that is, the Holy Spirit–not simply descending upon the people but entering into their hearts and making their bodies His holy temple. What a great difference is Babel from Pentecost. It’s the difference between salvation by the Law in constrast to salvation by the cross and resurrection; that is, the Gospel.