Tag: Preaching

Asking for Sign Gifts Is to Doubt in God’s Goodness

In my most recent sermon, I was preaching through Matthew 10:7ff, in which Jesus is giving instructions to the 12 disciples before sending them out to the House of Israel.

At one point, He tells them to: 8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give.

One might ask: how come our preachers do not do this today? It’s a good question.

Matthew Henry answers the question by stating that the sign gifts were given to help authenticate the message being preached in order to lay the foundation of the Kingdom. Now that the canon of Scripture is closed, giving us all we need for faith and practice, there is no longer a need to lay the foundation again.

In fact, Henry says to ask for such signs, is an attempt to re-lay the foundation of the church that is already laid, and worse, tempting God.

We tempt God when we doubt in the provisions He has blessed us with. We are, in effect, saying that the preaching of God’s word is not sufficient when we ask for miracles, or even add to the worship, things not prescribed.

We need to trust in the means of grace that He has given to us: the preaching of His word, the sacraments, and prayer. These are the tools given by the Holy Spirit. Let us use them by faith to extend His Kingdom.

You can listen to the full sermon HERE.

Baptized with the Spirit — The Gospel of Matthew Sermon 15

Sermon – Baptized with Holy Spirit and Fire 

Preached December 29, 2024

Introduction – 

Last week, we left off this monumental verse that quotes John the Baptist calling the Pharisees and Sadducees a brood of vipers. It’s monumental because John is making a theological statement about the leadership, confronting them with their wickedness. They are wicked, because they are in positions of leadership, as shepherds, yet they are not being the shepherds they should be given the blessings of God that have been given to them.

What blessing have they been given?

Well, for one thing, they have the word of God at their disposal. Therefore, they should know the requirements for being in the covenant with God, the blessings and curses that come along with the covenant.

Now, one might hear that and think that it is better to not be in covenant with God at all. But all that means is that the attendant curses of the covenant rest on you continually, while being in the covenant, leads to true blessings.

The Pharisees and Sadducees should have known these things.

But they did not. They have become more a political group than a group that truly shepherds the people.

Yet, when given the sign of the covenant, which they boasted in, they were agreeing to be God’s covenant people. They had in their possession Deuteronomy 27 & 28, which spells out those blessings and curses, and makes it clear that blessings come to those who obey the voice of the LORD our God. The curses come when we reject the covenant, and live in disobedience.

All these things had been given to the Pharisees and Sadducees, but they chose their own way, instead of God’s way.

This is what leads John to saying what he does.

The Voice of One Crying in the Desert: Gospel of Matthew Sermon No. 13

We have come to the portion of Matthew’s gospel where we are introduced to John the Baptist. If you recall from last week, we saw that he was the last Old Covenant prophet, whom God raised up in the wilderness, in order to prepare the people of God for their coming King.

John’s ministry was marked, not only by baptism, but by preaching the Kingdom, which required the need for repentance. Repentance, as we saw, is an outward action that comes about from an inward reality. In other words, the Spirit moves in us to help see that we need to turn away from our sinful lives, and turn toward Christ.

This repentance may be visible in our lives, as it was for the soldiers, who were to no longer to intimidate or accuse falsely; tax collectors, who were to collect no more than was fair, and everyday people, who were to give when they could to those in need. We also saw the outward evidence of repentance in Matthew’s own life. Jesus came to him and said, “Follow me,” which Matthew immediately did.

Listen to the full sermon below…

Baptism for the Dead

Here are some of the things discussed in this sermon:

Just to Be Clear

Since baptism is such a controversial topic…some thoughts on baptism.

First, Doug Wilson writes:

Of course this baptism does not automatically save the one baptized; there is no magical cleansing power in the water. We reject the Roman Catholic notion that saving grace goes in when the water goes on. We deny any ex opere operato efficacy to the waters of baptism. We also deny the modern Protestant reductionism that says that when the water goes on, somebody gets wet.

Let me put it this way: our baptism has meaning. It is used by God in our lives. It is not just an empty ritual that we do because Christ told us to do it. It has a real effect in our lives.

  • The sacraments do not depend on the godliness of the minister. This refutes the false notion of sacerdotalism, in which it was believed the priest had special powers. The effectual nature of baptism comes from the word of God and the Holy Spirit.
  • The sacraments confirm the Word, though they are ineffective without the Word, but the word cannot have its full effect without the sacraments. The refutes the notion that the sacraments are sacerdotal as well.
  • The sacraments are covenantal and relational.
  • The sacraments are performative acts. They do something. Just like a man saying “I do” in a wedding ceremony. It means something.
  • Baptism admits a person to the covenant community, regardless of faith. Just as a man who says “I do” is still a husband in a marriage, and may be a faithless husband, so too can one be baptized and be a faithless Christian.
  • Sacraments bring both blessings and curses, just as they did in the old covenant. Blessing come to those who come to the sacraments in true faith, and curses to those who don’t believe.
  • The non-elect do not receive what the sacraments signify for blessings.
  • We deny that the sacraments automatically save. We deny ex opera operato.
  • We deny Protestant reductionism… that it simply means someone gets wet. Far more than that.
  • Baptism accomplishes something. “I do.”

The first part of the sermon deals with what was probably meant by being baptized for the dead.

 

 

The Ascension According to John, Part 2

All of heaven waited patiently for the arrival of the Son of Man. The angels in heaven watched over Him for 33 years after making the announcement of His incarnation. They sang above the manger and tended to Him in the wilderness after His first victory over Satan. They witnessed His death and burial, announced His resurrection, and finally watched and waited with the rest of the host of heaven for His arrival.

The Son of Man was returning to the Father. Heaven waited.

Before He arrived, John was called up into heaven to witness the arrival. As we saw last week, John saw the Ancient of Days, sitting on His throne. He saw the four living creatures, all worshipping the Ancient of Days. He saw the 24 elders on their thrones, then falling down before the Ancient of Days and casting their crowns at His feet.

He was witnessing worship in the true Temple.

But there was One who was missing.

Did John realize what He was witnessing? Did he understand he was seeing the flip side of the ascension? Did he remember what Daniel had written about the arrival of the Son of Man before the Ancient of Days, and the bestowal of power, glory, and dominion, along with an everlasting kingdom?

Probably so.

Therefore, John continued to look for one like the Son of Man, as Daniel had seen. He saw that the Ancient of Days held a written scroll in His right hand, a scroll with writing on both the front and the back, and the scroll was sealed.

Against Puffery — A Sermon on 1 Corinthians 4:1-5

This sermon was preached August 7, 2022, at Waco Reformed Church. Waco Reformed Church is an independent church plant that is seeking to become a member of the CREC or the CPC after its formation.

This sermon focuses on the self-sufficiency that many have in the body of Christ and helps show the foolishness of such an attitude.

Wednesday Word: Preaching the Text, Without Preaching the Text

I heard another sermon on Ephesians 5:21-33 this past weekend. Once again, the pastor preaching the sermon did a wonderful job of avoiding the text wholeheartedly. Like many others, he started with a passage about biblical marriage, and talked about all kinds of things that make a good marriage, that are not found in the text itself.

He talked about unity, saying that in a good marriage, there must be unity. This is true. But the text says nothing about unity. Ephesians 4:1-6 deals with unity. Preach that text if you want to preach about unity.

He also talked about humility. Humility is necessary for a great marriage. This is also true. But the passage isn’t dealing with humility. Philippians 2:1-11 deals with humility. Preach that text if you want to preach about humility.

He also preached about pride. The text isn’t dealing with pride. Camp out in Proverbs if you want to preach on pride.

I admit that all three of these things are necessary for a good marriage, and are worth mentioning in a sermon about marriage. But again, by preaching about these things, the pastor avoided what the text actually says. What is really sad is that no one, as far as I could tell, noticed.

My goal in this post is that my readers will understand how easy it is to not preach the Bible, and to understand what to look for in a good sermon. Let’s look at the key verse to understanding the entire passage it applies to: Ephesians 5:21.

“Submitting (subjecting) to one another in the fear of God.”

This is the verse that sets the tone for 5:21 through 6:9. It is dealing with the hierarchy God has given us in the household, and how we are to submit to one another within that hierarchy. So far, I’ve mentioned two words that the pastor above didn’t mention. First, he used the word “subject” because that is what the NIV translators used, thereby avoiding the more accurate translation: “submit.” The translators assume that no one likes the word “submit.” They think it sounds too overbearing.

When translators do such things, they are letting their fear of man dictate their translation instead of the text. The dirty little secret is, those of us who are true believers want the text translated as closely to the full meaning of the Greek and Hebrew as possible. We want the truth, as hard as it may be, as confrontational as it is with our culture, and more importantly, with our sinful flesh. We don’t want it watered down, or softened for our delicate sensibilities because we know that the most loving thing that can happen in the life of a believer, and the church, is to hear the full counsel of God. It is God’s way of feeding us spiritually, correcting us, rebuking us, and loving us.

But men… fearing men… shy away from the truth, which is the reason for this post. I’m trying to show what it looks like when men who occupy Christ’s pulpits fear men more than they fear Him.

Second, the pastor avoided using the word “hierarchy,” even though the moment he used the word “subject,” instead of “submit,” he still implied hierarchy. You can’t remove either concept from the text. Submission, which is what the Greek word means in the original, implies that there is a hierarchy being dealt with, and within that hierarchy, one person has to align themselves under the headship of another. The term is actually a military term and was used for those entering into the ranks, who had to “submit” or align themselves under those of higher rank. Those of higher rank were their “heads.”

When the Apostle Paul, by the power and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, uses the term, he doesn’t leave it alone in verse 21. He explains what he means within the hierarchy of the household and tells us how we are to submit to “one another” in that hierarchy.

And THIS is what this pastor, and thousands like him, don’t want to touch, preach, mention or imply. They will use jokes, half-thought out illustrations, moral imperatives  and weak analogies to avoid speaking about what the text is actually saying because they believe that the women in their congregations don’t want to hear what it means to “submit to your own husbands, as to the LORD.” 

The sad truth is that there are plenty of godly women who want to hear what it means. They want to be affirmed in their understanding of the text. They want the reminder of knowing that when they are submitting to their husbands, they are doing so, “as to the LORD,” the LORD whom they love and want to faithfully serve every day.

By God’s grace, there are pastors who faithfully preach the text, but not many. Those who do, do so because they love the LORD and fear Him above all else. They also love what God’s word actually says. And, not least of all, they love their flock, and want to feed them on the truth so that they become conformed more to the image of Christ, and less like the world.

Back to Sunday’s sermon.

Most pastors like the one I heard this past weekend, if they say anything at all about submission, will say something like this: “the text says to submit to one another, so men, you should be submitting to your wives as well.”

No, it doesn’t. Paul is very clear about what he means. “Wives submit to your husband, as to the LORD (5:22). Children, obey your parents in the LORD, for this is right (6:1). Bondservants (slaves), be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ (6:5).”

Notice what Paul doesn’t say: husbands, submit to your wives. Parents, submit to your children. Masters, submit to your slaves. It’s remarkable that when you put verse 21 in context with the rest of what Paul is saying about submitting to one another, how absurd it is to assume husbands are to submit to their wives. Paul eliminates this possibility when he gives the reason wives are to submit to their husbands: for the husband is the head of the wife, as also Christ is the head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.

The head doesn’t submit to the body. The body submits to the head. Paul backs his argument by using Christ as an example. Christ is the head of the church. We submit to Christ. Christ doesn’t, hasn’t and will not submit to the church. That is not His place. His place is leading, shepherding, saving, and sanctifying the church while He submits to the Father’s will in all things.

I know that there are some who say that Christ submitted to the church when He was placed on trial and died on the cross. This is not true. He submitted to the authorities, rulers, powers and principalities of darkness, of which members of the church may have belonged to at the time. But He didn’t submit to the body. He died for His body, in order to redeemed His bride. But He doesn’t submit to her.

Christ being the head of the body (see Colossians), and the husband being the head of the wife, is called headship. See also 1 Corinthians 11:1-12, Numbers 30.

All of what I’m saying here are things the pastor should have been dealing with. He should have dealt with submission, and what it means for us and our marriages. He should have spent time expanding on this so that women would have understood what their duties are in marriage.

Please note: I’m purposefully not using the word “roles” for men and women in marriage. We have duties given to us by God in the Garden of Eden and expanded upon throughout the rest of Scripture. A role is something someone can step into or out of. A duty is something placed upon us that remains until the One who placed it there, removes that duty from us. (Heads up: He doesn’t remove it from us).

The pastor should have dealt with headship, and worked to show us that it is biblical, and men are to take on the duty they have been given by God, and lead their wives and families. He should have answered the hard questions of what it means to be submissive. But he didn’t. He gave a sappy sermon on love and romance instead.

I’m sure he would say that he was preaching the “application” of the text. This excuse is often used to avoid the text. Another dirty little secret: if you preach the text faithfully, there is immediate application. You don’t have to manipulate the text to make it applicable. It’s God’s word. By preaching the text faithfully, and getting out of the way, God uses it immediately, although imperceptibly, in the lives of those who hear it. That is how God’s word works. We don’t have to jump through hoops to make it applicable for today’s society. God’s word is always applicable.

I hope you can see the real point here: far too many are preaching subjects that can be derived from the text, but not preach the text itself. Hopefully, your pastor doesn’t do the same.

Coming on the Clouds: Eye-Opening Moment

 

Heidi and I were listening to a sermon by Paul Viggiano of Branch of Hope OPC out in California when he led us to one of those ah-ha moments in Scripture. He has been preaching through The Revelation and we have been having quite a few of those moments. Me, more so, than Heidi, since Heidi sat under his ministry for 10 years before she and I met.

It has, in fact, taken a while for me to come to the optimistic eschatology that Pastor Viggiano and Heidi share. It really happened during the first Covid lockdown when I read through Kenneth Gentry’s book, He Shall Have Dominion.

The optimistic view of eschatology is based on Psalm 110:1, and other passages, (see Genesis 12:3, Psalms 22:27, 27:8, 67:7, Isaiah 11:9, John 3:17, John 12:32, Romans 4:13, and Galatians 3:8 for a few more).

The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”

This is the most quoted verse in the New Testament, and rightly so. It is speaking of Christ’s rule and reign over all things. Verse 1, when quoted in the New Testament, is actually a synecdoche (a part for the whole) that the writers in the New Testament would do in order to reference the entirety of a text. In other words, the writers expect their readers to know the context of the verse being quoted. This is why knowing the Old Testament is so important. It was the Bible for the writers of the New Testament.

The point of quoting Psalm 110 is showing Christ’s present reign on earth, and in heaven (why He tells us to pray the LORD’s prayer...)

Christ will continue to reign until the Father has made Christ’s enemies His footstool. The footstool is a metaphor for being defeated. In other words, His enemies will be defeated before He returns.

Examples of Psalm 110:1

When Peter used Psalm 110:1 in his sermon on the day of Pentecost, it led the Jews who heard, to repent. They knew, and didn’t have to have it explained to them, that Psalm 110:1 was about the Messiah and His reign over all things. They experienced a mass ah-ha moment as they realized that they were directly responsible for the death of their Messiah (as we all are spiritually speaking.) I can’t help but think there were some there on the Day of Pentecost who were shouting “Crucify Him! Crucify Him!, some 53 days prior.

Paul refers to it in describing the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, showing that Jesus is reigning now, and will not return until the Father has put all His enemies under His feet. Paul tells us this.

Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.

Verse 24 tells us the end must come, and verst 25 stresses that Christ is reigning now, and indicates that He won’t come until He has put all enemies under His feet. Then Paul follows that with: The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

It’s with this understanding that optimists build their eschatology, and it is based on the natural reading of Scripture. Of the four main views of eschatology, this view does the least amount of damage to the text, and seeks to take the natural reading in context.

In this view, Jesus doesn’t come back to put His enemies under His feet, finally get to rule for 1,000 years, and then have to put His enemies under His feet all over again. He is ruling now with all authority in heaven and on earth, just as He said He was (Matthew 28:18-20). When He returns, His enemies will already be placed under His feet.

And His Kingdom is growing, just as He said it was, like a mustard tree, growing slowly until it covers the earth. Just like the leaven in the bread, slowly working, undetected, thoroughly and completely, until the job is done.

Before I go any further, two things have to be understood: first that there are many “comings of Christ” and second, when we hear Jesus say that He is coming on the clouds He means that He is coming to judge one nation using another nation. His hearers were familiar with this type of language, known as de-creation language, and understood His meaning from the Old Testament texts that used the same imagery.

Whenever you hear of the mountains melting, stars falling, moon turning blood red, the sun being darkened, this is de-creation language. It does not mean the end of the space/time continuum, but judgment upon a specific nation by the YHWH/Christ. (See Isaiah 13:10, Isaiah 34, Joel 2:28-32, Amos 8:9, and Ezekiel 32:7-8 for a sampling.)

The Comings of Christ

It is important to understand that Christ comes in many different ways, not just in the Second Coming. Once you can see this, you will not make the mistake of labeling every coming of Christ seen in Scripture as the Second Coming.

First, He comes spiritually to every believer in the Holy Spirit.

And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another [a]Helper, that He may abide with you forever—17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you (John 14:16-18).

He comes to us when we believe. We are now united with Him through the Spirit’s work in salvation. For those who believe, Christ has come to us.

Secondly, Christ comes spiritually to the believer in fellowship.

Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me (Revelation 3:20).

This is in the context of Christ rebuking the church, the people of God. It is not an evangelistic passage, but meant for believers who are off track and in need of repentance. Notice what He says is conditional. If any hears His voice—to hear His voice we need to be obedient to His word, and by doing so, He comes in to us, and dines with us. I take this meal to be that of communion and in corporate worship (which is one of the many reasons why corporate worship is essential). We are with Him spiritually, and He is feeding us by faith through the preaching of God’s word, prayer, and the sacraments of Baptism and the LORD’s Supper.

Third, His metaphorical comings. This is His coming providentially in history bringing judgment at different periods of time. We see this in Isaiah 19:1.

The burden against Egypt.

Behold, the Lord rides on a swift cloud,
And will come into Egypt;
The idols of Egypt will totter at His presence,
And the heart of Egypt will melt in its midst (Isaiah 19:1).

We also see this in Psalm 18:10-12, where He is surrounded in clouds, which passed with hailstones and coals of fire, indicating judgment. Also Psalm 104:3…He makes the clouds His chariot, also indicating judgment. And the more well-known passage Matthew 26:64

Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

Most will agree, that when this language is used, it is used in judgment. The passages with Christ (YHWH) in the clouds always indicate God’s judgment on one nation, by using another nation to bring it about.

This is no less true for Christ’s words in Matthew 26:64.

Now we are getting into hotly debated territory, which is over the timing of this prophecy.

In the verse above, Jesus is being questioned by the high priest Caiaphas, who asks Him if He is the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus answers in the affirmative, and declares to Caiaphas that he will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power (Psalm 110:1), and coming on the clouds of heaven.

We like to debate what this “coming on the clouds of heaven” means. But there was no debating with Caiaphas. He knew exactly what Jesus was saying, which was two things.

First, Jesus was telling Caiaphas that He was the Messiah, and equating Himself with God.

Secondly, that Jesus, as the Messiah, would bring judgment on Caiaphas and the Jewish nation, just as He did on Egypt, Assyria, and other nations during the Old Covenant period. This too points to His deity, because only God can bring judgment.

We know Jesus was clear in what He was saying by Caiaphas’ reaction:

“He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy!”

The point is that Jesus would come on the clouds before Caiaphas and the rest of the Jews died, in that generation, since this is the very generation He said would experience God’s judgment.

Which Generation?

What I’ve just alluded to is that Jesus would come on the clouds to Caiaphas and the rest of the Jewish nation, which means He will bring judgment upon them. But we don’t have to infer this. He says so directly in the Olivet Discourse found in Matthew 24.  In telling His disciples of the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven (bringing judgment), and warning them to look for the signs, Jesus tells them generally when those things will occur.

Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place (Matthew 24:34).

Jesus is telling the disciples it will happen in their lifetime. He is being specific, using the near demonstrative this to make the point. Had He wanted to indicate any other generation, He could have used the far demonstrative, that. A natural reading cannot lead us to any other conclusion about which generation He is speaking about.

When Jesus tells Caiaphas, the high priest, of His coming on the clouds, He is speaking directly to the representative head of that generation. He is telling Caiaphas He is going to bring judgment by one nation, the Romans, over and against the Jews for their covenantal unfaithfulness.

This coming on the clouds in judgment was accomplished in 70 A.D. and is not the Second Coming.

Christ’s Exaltation Coming

At this point, what I’m trying to make clear is that Jesus has many types of comings, the most famous is the Second Coming. But there is one more “coming” that we have not discussed. And this is where my ah-ha, eye-opening moment came. It actually revolves around His ascension as recorded by Luke in Acts  1:9

Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.

Now this is where we have a use of the term “cloud” that is not referring to judgment.

Here is the key exaltation passage which comes in the Old Testament through the prophet Daniel:

“I was watching in the night visions,
And behold, One like the Son of Man,
Coming with the clouds of heaven!
He came to the Ancient of Days,
And they brought Him near before Him.
14 Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom,
That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
Which shall not pass away,
And His kingdom the one
Which shall not be destroyed (Daniel 7:13-14). 

Immediately, the futurist will say that this passage is pointing to the Second Coming. But it isn’t. The natural reading is that He is coming to the Ancient of Days. He is not departing the Ancient of Days. He is coming to the Ancient of Days to receive power, honor, glory, and dominion over all the earth.

Ephesians 1:20-21 shows us that He has power now.

…which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all principality[a] and [b]power and [c]might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age (the Old Covenant and the New Covenant) but also in that which is to come…

If the futurist were correct, Jesus would be leaving the Ancient of Days, descending to earth for the final judgment, and the destruction of death.

According to 1 Corinthians 15:24, see above, when He comes the last time, in the Second Coming, He gives it all back to the Father. So it doesn’t make sense that Daniel is speaking of the Second Coming since it shows Him going to the Father, receiving the power, and ruling from heaven.

Now for the moment that caught me by surprise. Pastor Viggiano humbly made it clear, that what we are seeing in Daniel 7:13-14 is the the opposite side of the clouds from what the disciples were seeing in Acts 1:9.

The two passages are recording the same event from two different perspectives. The view from Acts is man’s view of the ascension, the view in Daniel 7 is God’s perspective of Christ’s ascension and exaltation. It is the same event.  I had never seen that before because my previous eschatological position was still imposing the Second Coming motif on Daniel 7:13-14, instead of allowing the passage to say what it was saying. With the new understanding of Scripture, taking the natural reading, I could see it. Ah-ha!

Once I saw it, I can’t unsee it.

As for my ah-ha moment, I’ve had quite a few of these since becoming an optimist in my my eschatology. For instance, while working on a recent sermon in 1 Corinthians 2:6-9, I kept seeing the phrase “this age.” Suddenly, that made sense. I realized the “this age” Paul is speaking of, is the end of the Old Covenant age that comes to a conclusion in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem, particularly the temple. This is because God is bringing the Old Covenant, the worship, the priesthood, the sacrifice, to an end and removing it from mankind. He replaces it with a better Sacrifice, Christ, a better temple, the church, a better priesthood, the royal priesthood.

Paul, even in the Ephesian passage above points to this reality when he writes not only this age, but the age which is to come. He is assuring all his readers of what they know already because of Christ’s words in the Olivet Discourse, Jerusalem and the temple will be destroyed. That will be the end of “this age” and beginning of the the age which is to come. 

This is why those Christians in Corinth, and throughout the First Century church, needed to know that age was coming to an end. In fact, the entire book of Hebrews was written to those who were being tempted to go back to the Old Covenant worship. The writer is making it clear that there will be nothing to go back to.

But you get the idea. The flow of Scripture is much more cohesive with an optimist view. With this new understanding, I do have hope for Christ’s Kingdom. It will grow, until every knee bows, and every tongue confesses, that Jesus is LORD. …let God be true but every man a liar (Romans 3:4).

Unlike the pessimistic eschatologies, that let the doom and gloom of current events inform their hermeneutics and their eschatology, the eschatology of hope trusts in what Christ has said: “…I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18).

Indeed He will. Indeed He is. So let us fix our eyes upon Jesus, who is not only the author and finisher of our faith, but the King supreme ruling on earth now. Is the world in chaos? Yes, that is Christ’s judgment being poured out on the wickedness of the nations (see Isaiah 34, and all of Psalm 110).  Please note that there is always salvation accompanying His judgment. Since this is true, we are to continue faithfully proclaiming the kingdom, being obedient to His Word, and making disciples in the spheres of influence He has given us.

Leave the rest to our sovereign King.

This post, and the photos, are copyright © Timothy J. Hammons 2021.