S.M. Lockridge - God Came From Nowhere!

That's My King!

Gospel vs. Moralism in Preaching

Preaching Morality vs Preaching Grace – Bryan Chapell

“Be” messages full only of moral instruction imply that we are able to change our fallen condition in our own strength. Such sermons communicate (although usually unintentionally) that we clear the path to grace and that our works earn and/or secure our acceptance with God. However well intended, these sermons present a faith indistinguishable from that of morally conscientious Unitarians, Buddhists, or Hindus. . . .

The fundamental biblical truth that differentiates the gospel from a morality lesson is the assertion that our works always remain tainted by our humanity. Of themselves our actions can never earn God’s blessing or secure his favor (Isa. 64:6; Luke 17:10). Although there are blessed consequences to heeding divine commands designed for our good, mere conformity to biblical commands offers no heavenly merit. If we had to earn grace prior to, or after, our salvation it would not be grace that we gained.

There are many “be” messages in Scripture, but they always reside in a redemptive context. Since we cannot be anything that God would approve apart from his sanctifying power, the source of that grace must permeate any exhortation for biblical behavior. “Be” messages are not wrong in themselves; they are wrong messages by themselves. People cannot do or be what God requires without the work of Christ in, for, and through them. Simply railing at error and hammering at piety may convince others of their inadequacy or callous them into self-sufficiency, but these messages also keep true godliness remote. Thus, instruction in biblical behavior barren of redemptive truth only wounds, and though it is offered as an antidote to sin such preaching either promotes pharisaism or prompts despair. Christ-centered preachers accept neither alternative. . . . The holy standards that pierce the heart whenever people recognize the depth of their divine obligations become salve to their souls when we preach their fulfillment in Christ and their enablement by His Spirit. . . .

When we exhort congregations to stand for God against the assaults of Satan we must never forget the balance of the Pauline imperative: “Finally, brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might” (Eph 6:10, KJV). Amidst his most strident “be” message, the apostle remained Christ-focused. Today’s preacher has no lesser task.

Faithful expository preaching unfolds every text in the context of its redemptive import. The success of this endeavor can be assessed by a bottom-line question every preacher should ask at the end of each sermon: When my listeners walk out the doors of this sanctuary to perform God’s will, with whom do they walk? If they march to battle the world, the flesh, and the devil with only me, myself, and I, then each parades to despair. However, if the sermon has led all persons within sight of the Savior and they now walk into their world with his aid firmly in their grasp, then hope and victory brighten the horizon. Whether people depart alone or in the Savior’s hand will mark the difference between futility and faith, legalism and true obedience, do-goodism and real godliness.

Bryan Chapell, Christ-Centered Preaching: Redeeming the Expository Sermon, Baker, 1994, p. 284-286.

Love vs. Legalism

In Crazy Love, Francis Chan writes:

Most Christians have been taught in church or by their parents to set aside a daily time for prayer and Scripture reading. It’s what we are supposed to do, and so for a long time it’s what I valiantly attempted. When I didn’t, I felt guilty.

Over time I gradually realized that when we love God, we naturally run to Him—frequently and zealously. Jesus didn’t command that we have a regular quiet time with Him each day. Rather, He tells us to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” He called this the “first and greatest commandment” (Matt. 22:37-38). The results are intimate prayer and study of His Word. Our motivation changes from guilt to love.

This is how God longs for us to respond to His extravagant, unending love: not with a cursory “quiet time” plagued by guilt, but with true love expressed through our lives.

What Francis Chan says about a "quiet time" can also be said just as accurately about tithing, church attendance, evangelism, or any number of other activities against which we have learned to judge one another and ourselves.

Atheism Saves!

God to Gervais: No, Really – Thank You!

British Comedian Ricky Gervais ended his reputedly raucous evening of hosting The Golden Globes ceremony Sunday night with the mildly witty remark, “Thank God for making me an atheist.” I can’t help but reflect that God might well respond, “No, really, Ricky, thank you.” The atheism of someone like Gervais – a man who radiates unhappiness and self-hatred – has to be the best thing to happen to religion since the atheism of Bill Maher – a man who radiates unhappiness and self-hatred. Every time someone like this declares himself an atheist, twenty people must fall to their knees, crying, “Jesus Christ, don’t let me become like THAT guy!”

Evangelical Legalism

Reclaiming the Doctrine of Justification

Here's what ails us...

This, however, did not bring him assurance, but only doubts. For his assurance depended, not so much on God's promise to the ungodly as ungodly (Rom.4:5), but on his ability to see growth and improvement in his Christian walk."
[...]
A few years ago Will Herberg and other commentators noted that a predominant aspect of North American religion was that we have faith in faith. One American evangelist, in fact, wrote a booklet, "How To Have Faith In Your Faith."
[...]
Some of the preaching in evangelicalism--certainly some of the Sunday school material, some of the primary addresses by retreat speakers and Christian leaders--all taken together as the basic spiritual diet, tend to reinforce that old intuition that good people are the ones who are saved and that those who are not so good are the ones who are lost.

Here's the cure...

The motif in the New Testament, and in the Reformation is that Christ's death was outside of me and for me. It is not primarily something that changes us. After one has been declared righteous by grace through faith, this grace will begin to change us (sanctification); nevertheless its changing us is certainly not what justifies us. In Roman Catholicism, and in John Wesley's work, what makes us acceptable to God is his internal work of renovation within our hearts and lives.
[...]
[T]he Reformation tradition acknowledges that there are biblical texts that speak of sanctification as complete already. This is not a perfection which is empirical or observable, but a definitive declaration that because we are "in Christ," we are set apart and holy by his sacrifice (1 Cor.1:30; Heb.10, etc.). Anybody who is in Christ is sanctified because his holiness is imputed to the Christian believer, just as Jesus says in John chapter seventeen, "For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified." God sees the believer as holy. That means that Wesley should not have terrified Christian brethren with texts such as, "Without holiness, no one will see the Lord." The Christian is holy--it's all imputed. And then there are texts that say, "Be holy as I am holy." What would the reformers do with that? They would say we are called to be holy. But why should we be holy if we are already perfect in Christ? Because we are saved unto good works, not unto licentiousness, according to Romans chapter six; the question has been asked before.
[...]
In other words, even a Christian can be saved.