This sermon was preached at Asbury United Methodist Church in Livermore, CA on September 6, 2009. The lectionary text I used in the sermon was Mark 7:24-30.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
(You can download the audio in mp3 format here)
“What if we rethink church?”
That’s the question United Methodists around the world are now asking themselves. We saw a promo video last week, maybe you picked up a button to wear or put on your school bag or computer bag? I think it’s a great question – a question we’ve needed to ask for quite awhile. And while I’m sure copyright lawyers would have a field day with this, I wish every denomination would start up a “Rethink Church” marketing campaign. I think every denomination NEEDS to rethink church – because clearly what we’ve always done isn’t quite working anymore.
You merely have to read through some statistics about the church today to see we need to change our ways. As Pastor Kim mentioned last week, mainline denominations are losing members every year. For the most part, young adults just aren’t going to church. And when high school students graduate, almost 80% stop attending church.
We could say: “Well…they just must not be interested anymore – maybe when they’re more mature…?” I mean – isn’t it always easier to pass the buck and not think that it might be our fault? But – perhaps we really do need to ask the questions, “Are we doing something wrong? What if we rethink church?”
I’m very glad we are beginning the process of rethinking church. It’s an incredibly important conversation – and that’s an important piece to keep in mind I think. This whole process is a conversation. Please don’t expect Pastor Kim or Pastor Chuck or me to stand up here and let you know how Asbury is going to rethink church. We may have ideas – but so do you – and we are all called to be in this conversation together. As mentioned before, next week there will be an opportunity to carry on this conversation about rethinking church at our monthly Theology Pub…and this morning, we’re going to rethink church this morning through a little technology. I know… “Surprise, surprise…Adam’s preaching & he’s using technology…”
In a few minutes, I’m going to ask you to turn to your neighbor and discuss a question. However, also during that time, I’m hoping that you’ll get out your cell phones and send me a text message with your response, or jot down a note to give me during or after the service. You can also send me a text message during my sermon – a question or comment – and if I can see it I’ll try to address it. I’ve never done this before, so…I can’t make any promises. If you have a cell phone w/text messaging, take it out now and key in my number or write it down, so you have it: xxx-xxx-xxxx. Since I probably don’t have all your cell #s, if you’d like, please put your name at the bottom of the message so I know who sent it. Now – this is an experiment so we’ll see how this works…
To be honest…I wasn’t going to preach on this text. When I flipped to the lectionary for this week and saw that it was the story of the Syrophoenician woman – I started looking around for others. I wanted a text that would fit in well with the sermon series theme: Re-thinking Church. And the Syrophoenician woman just wasn’t going to do it for me – besides there was all the weird stuff about bread crumbs, and…well…the fact that Jesus called the woman a dog…and I just thought I’d rather not touch that. But then I was encouraged by my wife and some readers of my blog to take a second look at this text.
So I read it again – and it actually seemed like a perfect (although slightly troubling) text for a sermon on “rethinking church.” One thing I love about this story is that we truly see the divinity and humanity of Christ – in short, we see a grumpy, irritable Jesus healing a pagan woman’s daughter.
Mark tell us that Jesus entered a house because he “didn’t want anyone to know he was there.” He’d just had a pretty intense few chapters: he was rejected in his hometown, John the Baptist was murdered, he fed 5,000 people, walked on water…healed people everywhere he went, had to get into an argument with Pharisees about the disciple’s handwashing techniques and, let’s be frank here, he had to deal with the disciples all along – and they basically didn’t get what he was talking about most of the time…
So it’s pretty clear why Jesus may have been needing some “Jesus time” – you know, some self-care, a little alone time.
And then in walks this pagan – this Syrophoenician woman…I can almost imagine Jesus seeing her as soon as she walks in and just (BIG SIGH)… “another person…?”
But she’s desperate…her daughter is demon-possessed and she knows Jesus can help – she’s heard the stories everyone has been telling. He’s the only one. And her request isn’t unreasonable, right? He’s done this before – exorcised demons…healed children when they weren’t present…so she asks. She doesn’t know where else to turn.
And maybe he was having a bad day, we don’t really know, but Jesus replies: “Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.”
There it is. Now there are some who have tried to “tame” it down a bit – to say the type of dogs that Jesus was referring to could have been small house dogs…imagine a cute little Labradoodle puppy…now, that’s not so bad, right?
But…there isn’t really a lot of evidence for that interpretation, other than a strong desire not to make it sound like Jesus – loving and grace-filled Jesus – was just being kind of jerky.
Jesus’ response – that the children should be fed first – is in reference to the fact that the Gospel was first for the Jews – but he doesn’t say she’ll “never” get the Gospel, that she’ll never have the chance for salvation: it’s more like “first things first.”
But yet she still challenges him on that – she challenges his mission. Even though Mark tells us that Jesus entered the Gentile territory to be alone – not to engage in mission – it is the woman who pushes back, who engages in a sparring match with Jesus…and wins.
Now whether Jesus initially made his statement because he really was trying to get rid of her — or because it was a roundabout way of teaching the disciples something — we’ll never know. But the woman wins their argument. Her reply back to Jesus points toward the future when the Gentiles – when ALL people – will be included in God’s plan of salvation. And Jesus knows she’s right…
And he knows he was wrong…to be there, whether he was looking for ministry opportunities or not, and to ignore this pagan woman of faith, was wrong. The Syrophoenician woman challenges the assumption that the Gospel was only for the Jews at the beginning…she challenges the assumption that God had favorites or that God would neglect her daughter in a time of great need. The Gospel was for all – no matter the person’s ethnicity, gender or social status…
And so this Syrophoenician pagan woman joins the ranks of those who have challenged God – and won. Abraham and God argued back and forth over how many people it would take for God to spare Sodom. Jacob wrestled with God – and wouldn’t let God go until God blessed him – and God did. Somehow, we have picked up this idea of God that God doesn’t change…and if God does, it’s certainly not because of us. Yet, we have biblical examples of God being changed because of humanity calling God into question.
The Syrophoenician woman challenges not only what Jesus says to her – but the way things have been done. The assumptions about who the Good News was for. She comes as an outsider who has a real, deep insight into the way things SHOULD be.
And so he admits he was wrong. She won the argument. Her daughter was healed. And by challenging Jesus, she was able to point him back on track and help him rethink his ministry…
So. As I was thinking about rethinking church this week…and as I read this story in which it seems that Jesus was wrong…I found myself thinking that if Jesus can be wrong, then certainly I can be wrong. I can be wrong about what I think youth ministry should look like. I can be wrong about the institutional church. I can be wrong about the ways I think God works and doesn’t work in this world.
I found myself thinking that if Jesus can be wrong, then certainly we – as the church, in all our various denominations – can be wrong. We can be wrong about who we say can and can’t be married in our churches and who can and can’t be ordained to serve God. We can be wrong about the way in which we’ve tried to reach out to young adults. We can be wrong about our theologies and our ministries. We can be wrong about how we’ve “done church.”
I want to take just a moment now – and I know that this is always an awkward request…well, it’s easy for me because I get to just stand up here and ask that you do it – but I’d love it if you would just take a minute to think and talk to some people around you about this question:
What is one thing you think we may be wrong about when it comes to church? What is one thing you think we may need to rethink?
Get out a slip of paper, and get out your cell phones and text me your responses as well.
What is one thing you think we may be wrong about when it comes to church? What is one thing you think we may need to rethink?
And while you’re talking, we’ll also be listening to a song by Sheryl Crow: Out of Our Heads. We’ll take just a few minutes for this.
BREAK FOR CONVERSATION: READ SOME RESPONSES
It’s seems pretty clear we need to rethink some things. And clearly, if our savior – Jesus the Christ – can be wrong just once, we can certainly be wrong as well, many times over. I love that Sheryl Crow song because of the chorus:
If we could only get out of our heads
Out of our heads and into our hearts
Children of Abraham lay down your fears
Swallow your tears, and look to your heart.
If we’re really going to rethink church…if we’re going to join in that conversation, we’re going to need to get out of our heads. For in our heads exist the rational voices, the voices that say, “Well…we’ve never done it THAT way before” or “Why change…? Things seem to be fine just the way they are.” But when we can get into our hearts…that is hopefully the space where we are listening for God’s heart and God’s hopes and dreams. Hopefully that is where we can look to find the power and strength to imagine a different church.
And we ARE going to have to lay down our fears…and OUR ideas of what church has always been…and be open to the Spirit’s nudgings…be open to where our imagination might take us. We are going to have to look to Jesus as our example, and realize there may have been ways we’ve thought about church and ways we’ve been a part of church that are just wrong…and we have to acknowledge that and be open to new ways, no matter WHO is challenging us, even if it’s one of the dogs…
What if we rethink church?
AMEN
Related posts:
- Rethink Church: A Collaborative Sermon
- Grabbing Jesus…
- Jesus, the Bible and Homosexuality: A Review
- Jesus, the Bible & Homosexuality, by Jack Rogers: Chapter 4
Share This Post:
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
Nice sermon. I’d love to know what the most common responses were.
I haven’t returned since your post asking for ideas for this sermon.
Overall, a good job. Yes, we need to re-think church … always. Lathrop and Wengert, in their wonderful book about Lutheran ecclesiology (Christian Assembly: Marks of the Church in a Pluralistic Age), say, “”For [Luther], church was less an institution and more an event. It occurred precisely where God’s word and faith collided” (page 102). When we understand church as an event, as a “happening” rather than simply as an institution, it changes how we approach the church’s ministry and calling.
On the other hand, I want to challenge you that Jesus was “wrong” in this text. Nowhere in the text does he say, “You’re right, I’m wrong,” or does he retract what he said. In the (admittedly harsh) words of Jesus we hear a promise that the Good News will extend to the woman and to Gentiles, but just not yet. If anything, the shift Jesus makes in regards to the Syrophoenician woman is simply one of time.
Jesus came first and foremost to the Jews. The ministry to the Gentiles (“the dogs,” or whatever word you use for them) will come later. The promise was always going to extend from the Jews to the Gentiles, and in the fullness of the Kingdom all would be made well, filled with good things, and welcomed to the Lord’s table. Yet in a remarkable response to her remarkable faith, Jesus here gives the Syrophoenician woman an “advance,” so to speak. Jesus gives her what is already coming to her … just slightly ahead of her time. Why? Because she shows faith ahead of her time. The Good News hadn’t been proclaimed to the Gentiles yet, but nonetheless she has come to believe.
I think this is a significant, because the change the Syrophoenician woman prompted in Jesus was one simply of timing, not one of substance. Jesus didn’t radically change the course of his Kingdom because of her words. Rather, as with the thief who hung on the cross alongside him, he offers his promise today rather than in the promised future. It’s a matter of timing, not substance.
And just to go a little further … if Jesus was “wrong” to go to the children first, ie, the Jews, what does that mean for our understanding of the covenant God makes to the Jews in the Old Testament, and for our understanding of who Jesus was and is as the King of the Jews and the fulfillment of Jewish prophesy?
Well, more to say about this, but I children are calling me to play with Little People … I look forward to the conversation.
Peace.
Ok,
First off, fantastic sermon. I thought it was well handled and evenly presented. Not many people get up in front of others and say “it could be _____, or it could be this other ____…we don’t really know.” I think that in itself should be lauded because it is true.
From my own perspective, kinda going off what is said in the sermon and what Chris says above. This is something that I’ve held about this passage for almost 7 or 8 years now. Looking back at the surrounding context as mentioned in the sermon, this was a huge time for Christ. I honestly think that this is a turning point in his ministry. He is in much need of time to regroup and think; to pray and listen. I can’t imagine what all was going through Jesus’ mind at this point, but from a human standpoint, he was prob. more than a little bogged down from the constant events.
And then comes this Syrophoenician woman and her request followed by this (honestly) rather awkward and difficult exchange. To me, something significant, even if we can’t quite put our interpretive fingers on what it is, happens in this passage! However after this exchange, Jesus finally gets that time alone to pray. We have no record of what happens there, only the events surrounding this. I can’t help but wonder, with this being one of the most awkward moments in Jesus’ ministry, that he didn’t have this also on his mind (along with all of the other events mentioned in the sermon’s contextual section) as he approached God alone.
But then Jesus comes back from his time with God and for the FIRST TIME tells the disciples the specifics of what is going to happen to him in Jerusalem. It is as if Jesus realized something during that time alone. Perhaps something about himself, his calling, and his true path. My personal belief (although I am open to any interp. because as stated above, we truly don’t know) is that Jesus’ path on his journey was foggy up until this point. This is the point that he realized that he had a choice and his calling was for something bigger, not just the Jews and not just healing, proclaiming, teaching, etc… It is almost as if he approached God and all of these events, esp. the pagan woman, helped prepare Christ for what God was leading him to on the final leg of his journey!
Does this mean Christ was wrong? No, I think that he was not privy to his full journey from the beginning. I know that many people will shun this because they believe he knew his whole purpose before exiting the womb, or that the whole journey was bestowed on him through God at the baptism. Perhaps it was. But maybe the human part of Jesus needed to experience the journey like all humans do. We don’t always know the full details of the path in front of us. Sometimes all we know is a direction. Sometimes we keep doing what we are called to do and then comes this critical moment where we realize that God is now leading us in a different (or perhaps just more enhanced?)direction.
To me this doesn’t destroy the divinity of Christ, but the whole “fully human, fully divine” is a mystery we will never understand. However, one doesn’t have to be “wrong” to realize there is a need for change. I think that this is prevalent in the sermon above, although more passive because of the title and play on the passage. But I can’t shake the feeling that this was a crucial turning point for Christ and his path. Perhaps it is after this event, when finally alone that he realized that God’s intent was to reclaim all of creation, and perhaps that now, after this experience with this woman, that meant something different….something bigger…. something sacrificial. Maybe this is when it all “clicked” together and Jesus was allowed/able to see the full puzzle laid out in front of him. IDK. I guess no one does.
However, I think the message above is still preserved. We all, personally and corporately, reach pivotal moments on our journey. It is what we choose at that point that is most important. Christ chose to embrace the journey to Jerusalem, knowing full well now what it held. But he deemed the price (sacrifice for all, not just Jews) worthy. Churches are, and have been at that same point in this place in history. The question is are we willing to embrace WHATEVER it is God is calling us to? Or is what we “have always thought/done” the way we are going to keep it? What if Jesus had made that same decision…not to divert from his perceived path?
A great sermon, great application! Thanks for sharing this!
peace
j
AWC:
You say, “Now whether Jesus initially made his statement because he really was trying to get rid of her — or because it was a roundabout way of teaching the disciples something — we’ll never know.” But what about a third option? Could it be that Jesus’ encounter with this woman was not an “argument” at all, but a theological “conversation” exploring the eschatological nature of God’s unfolding plan to redeem all of creation, a plan which from its beginning was to be executed through God’s chosen people, Israel?
To say Jesus was “wrong,” I believe, is overstating the case, even if it serves your rhetorical purposes of challenging the congregation to “Rethink Church.” Rather, in thinking this passage has a great deal to do with the eschatological purposes of God to bring about the redemption of all creation, perhaps it may challenge us to constantly examine our character as God’s people in light of that ultimate goal.
Just a thought.
Is there an mp3 version so I can listen on my iPhone?
I’ve got be honest here – this sounds like a lot of eisegesis on your part. There are many other possible interpretations that don’t require Jesus to be “wrong” and therefore do not support being open to the kinds of changes you want to see in your church. This seems like a pretty big reach in order to support causes you are obviously quite passionate about.
I’m quite curious to know that the response of the congregation was during the sermon and what it has been since.
Adam, in your talk you said something along the lines of “Somehow we got the idea that God doesn’t change.” The unchanging nature of God comes from the Word that He established:
Numbers 23:19 – “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should change His mind.”
Hebrews 13:8 – “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”
James 1:17 – “Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.”
1 Samuel 15:29 – “He who is the glory of Israel does not lie or change His mind; for He is not a man, that He should change His mind.”
Malachi 3:6 – “‘I the Lord do not change…’”
If you want to call those into question or offer an interpretation that both agrees with the whole of Scripture and also supports your view of a God who changes, that’s one thing. But to just assert that such an idea is not there and read your own viewpoint into several biblical passages is another. It’s just plain lazy, among other things.
For a good exegetical sermon on this passage, find an MP3 of a sermon by Jeff Noblitt entitled Dogs, Crumbs, and Faith to Emulate.
Its amazing what one will do to “make” church what THEY want it to be. You have taken this scripture and made it apply to something that’s not even in the same ball park. I mean, it really still doesn’t apply.
Jesus was wrong? Did I just hear a pastor say this? The text doesn’t point to this at all. Simply put, if Jesus can be wrong, then we’re all screwed! Man, I only wish I could’ve been there to listen to this first hand! I dont understand why no one stood up and called you out on this complete eisegesis of the scripture.
Oh, and Cheryl Crow….what the what!
Oh and “We need to get out of our heads and into our hearts”? Doesn’t God’s word say that all kinds of awful things comes from within our hearts? Lets just dig into our evil hearts and find a new way to do church! That sounds like a great idea! (sarcasm)
Youre a creative guy. You can twist scripture with the best of them.
Jesus never was and never will be wrong. He wasn’t arguing, He wasn’t trying to get rid of her. Planned or not, He taught the disciples a lesson and healed the woman’s daughter because of her great faith. Gentiles were capable of believing too!
To even remotely suggest that Jesus was “having a bad day” or was being “jerky” or that He was wrong I find amazing. If Jesus was ever wrong then we have no hope. To suggest that Jesus was trying to turn this woman away means that He sinned and if Jesus sinned then He is no longer the Lamb without blemish, the only sacrifice capable for the forgiveness of sin. If that’s true, then we have no salvation and consequently no hope. Quit trying to humanize the Savior and understand scripture in relation to God. We know that God is perfect and cannot make a mistake. We know that Jesus is God come in the flesh and is also perfect. That being established (it shouldn’t have to be), this scripture CAN NOT be interpreted in the manner that you have chosen to.
If Jesus was wrong, Jesus sinned. If Jesus sinned, he is no longer valid to be a sacrifice for sinners. Salvation has failed.
This is a very, very, very, very, very big mistake. If Jesus can’t save me from my sins, I’m DONE. I don’t have any hope. The world doesn’t have any hope. Church is pointless, whether rethunk or not.
Jesus was not wrong. She was a dog. So are you. So am I. Jesus is the God of dogs.
Adam – First let me say that I loved your sermon. I chuckled when I first read it because I knew it would upset a whole group of people that would get caught up in you saying that Jesus was wrong and/or that he changed his mind. Is it frustrating to you that so many are completely missing the message/point of your sermon? It reminds me of Pete Rollins talking about how much time and effort we waste trying to explain and harmonize the contradictions we find in scripture when we should be looking deeper into the text (which you did) – developing a higher view of the text – not ignoring the contradictions but engaging them honestly and without fear.
I love that you incorporated the song lyrics of “Out Of Our Heads” because that is exactly what helped me see a lot of things more clearly – getting out of my head and into my heart where the spirit of God was working. It seems that a lot of Christian teaching encourages us to think more with our heads than with our hearts and I think that is a big mistake. For instance, some people think that my vision has been clouded about marriage equality because my son is gay, but I think my vision was clouded regarding SSM until my heart got involved in the issue.
John and Ben – I don’t think that Jesus being wrong about something would necessarily mean that he sinned.
Justin – I enjoyed the thoughts you shared. I also don’t think that Jesus being wrong about something destroys the divinity of Christ.
The woman agreed with Jesus that she was a dog. She did not prove Jesus wrong. Jesus never retracted his statements.
Jesus was sent to the Jews, and God’s purpose was always for Jesus to be for the most part rejected by his own people, the Jews (John 1), and a light to the gentiles (Matthew 4). Yet Jesus was sent to the Jews so that he could be rejected.
thanks Liz, I was starting to feel quite lonely up in this space! I agree in us focusing on Jesus “being wrong” is missing Adam’s message completely… we get so hung up on soooo many things that we forget to see the bigger picture. Not just in a sermon/message/teaching like Adam’s post, but I think also we do the same with the Bible itself.
We get so caught up in a passage or teaching being about ______ doctrine that we, a lot of times, miss the bigger picture. For instance, when we focus on each passage being about Eternal salvation, then we truly miss the breadth and depth of what else Christ addresses. Comments about Jesus not saving me from sin means I have no hope at all as above, grieve me because I think that, although this may be a keystone doctrine for many people, there is a lot more hope given in the Bible than just that of eternal security. Christ brought hope in more than just escaping death, but hope that allows us to actually experience living to its fullest!!
Adam, I’m sorry if I also helped reduce your message to this single topic. I did not mean to do so, I just found it interesting to hear someone else say something different on the passage, and as Liz states, works within the complexities of the text without trying to make it fit into our already-shaped-out doctrines.
“Is it frustrating to you that so many are completely missing the message/point of your sermon?”
Adam made a point, an argument, based on a specific reading of a specific passage. If we disagree with his reading of the passage then we necessarily disagree with the larger point. We’re not “missing” anything; we’re disagreeing and pointing out the obvious flaws and inherent dangers of his claims. I personally find it frustrating that people claim disagreements are based on fear and not logic or personal conviction. Its condescending and rude.
“…works within the complexities of the text without trying to make it fit into our already-shaped-out doctrines…”
Like thinking that centuries of Christian tradition and moral teaching are outdated or just plain wrong? This knife cuts both ways I’m afraid and the argument that Adam is trying to make this passage fit his preconceived commitments and ideas is a pretty easy one.
The whole point of the sermon hinges on Jesus being wrong. His whole point is that if Jesus was wrong, we can be wrong too, therefore we should rethink church.
It’s no accident that the title of this blog is “If Jesus can be wrong…”
Jesus wasn’t wrong, yes this is the point of the sermon, and yes this is a big deal.
The suggestion that Christ was wrong orin a bad mood can only come from the apostate thinking of a man who does not know the Scriptures, nor the power of God. People are LEAVING the Old Line denominations because most of them are totally aposate, or if they are clinging to some truth still, they are dead. The power of God and the power of Pentecost is not in their midst. The glory cloud has moved on to other groups within broader Evanglicalism who are ON FIRE FOR GOD, believe His every Word, and obey it. By the way, all these new versions have also produced this unrenewed, effeminate Christianity we see in Evanmgelicalism. A return to the Authorized Version would help cure this. It thunders the truth and majesty of God, most new versions DO NOT.
The Emergent Movement and all those associated with them are heretical and going further into apostasy. Heresy is a moral problem every bit as evil as adultery and witchcraft-Gal 5:19-21. Those who peddle heresy will be damned, BE SURE OF IT. Scripture CANNOT BE BROKEN.
“Like thinking that centuries of Christian tradition and moral teaching are outdated or just plain wrong? ”
Again, the necessity to change does not mean that what is and has been is “wrong”. “Most Effective” and “right” are not synonyms. Not trying to argue, just clarifying. I think that was what I was trying to say in my first post. I can’t speak for Adam on this.
“This knife cuts both ways”…
I agree and am willing to accept that. I don’t propose that my version or interpretation is better than any others. I am willing to admit that I could be wrong. I am well aware of the sharpness of the knife on my end. I try to approach passages without my boxed-in theologies in order to best allow the Holy Spirit to lead me (I think this is what Adam means with his head/heart thing). I see this sermon as a specific way in which the Holy Spirit was leading Adam and connecting to his life. Who the heck are we to say that something that might be from the Holy Spirit (and we can prove neither for nor against) is wrong. Do we know God that well that we can predict His guidance and leading to an individual? If we answer yes, then we are pretty egotistical people who are far from the “character of Christ” presented in the Gospels and Epistles.
Adam was gracious enough to share his sermon with us and the way people treat each other under the banner of Christ brings tears to my eyes. I don’t mean that towards anyone in particular on this post, and am not lashing out. I say this with a calm voice of despair that this is what our religion seems to come down to: the self-appointed sheriffs of who is right and who is not.
Again not directed at anyone in particular, I just felt this would be a safer place to sigh my frustration at the greater dilemma so prevalent in comments sections like this. I hope I have not offended anyone, and if so, I apologize.
Justin, not to be overly harsh here, but you just defined certainty as egotism.
What if certainty is humility? When God speaks, the humble thing to do is to believe it, not to question it. That is the essence of faith: taking him at his word. Jesus certainly behaved this way.
The head/heart dichotomy is false. Emotions without knowledge are fake. Knowledge without emotions demonstrate spiritual deadness. All true theology leads to doxology.
God does not want to be entirely mysterious. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have given us the Bible. God wants to be known, and loved accordingly. God is not honored when we don’t understand him but say we love him. That wouldn’t work between a husband and wife. God is honored when we love him because we understand him.
Take the dedication of the gospel of Luke. Luke’s goal: that you may have certainty concerning the things you [Theophilus] have heard.
Hi Adam!
I am a little surprised by the amount of backlash (maybe that’s too harsh…let’s say pushback) in the comments. I thought the sermon was quite well-argued. But I’m no professional!
Regardless, I’m curious about the responses you received from the congregation. Did people text you? What were the things that people wanted to rethink about?
If you have time, I’d love to know more.
Rachel