Preaching to Myself

Introduce yourself, get to know others, and commune with one another!
User avatar
Michelle
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by Michelle » Sat Apr 12, 2014 6:58 pm

mattrose wrote:Also of note... I can think of 2 factual mistakes I've made in this current sermon series.

1. I believe I once said (almost certainly in the sermon on shame) that God sewed fig leaves together for Adam & Eve to wear. Of course, it was Adam & Eve who did that. God clothed them with skins.

2. I believe I once said (in the sermon where I dealt with Jonathan Edwards) that Wesley and Edwards were friends who experienced a lot of turmoil in their friendship due to doctrinal differences. Of course, I was mixing up Edwards and George Whitefield.

These mistakes were made quickly and nobody noticed them but me as far as I know. But since I'm putting my sermons and some text out there on this message board, I figured I better make those corrections publicly as well :)
I'm glad you did that so we can rejoice in the truth. :D

User avatar
Michelle
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by Michelle » Sat Apr 12, 2014 7:28 pm

I've been thinking about something because I've recently lost my mother after a decade long descent into dementia/alzheimers. We had been losing her for so long; there was so much I wish that I could have talked with her about: my children's choices for spouses, the common core curriculum, retirement...so much. I hate the disease that took her from me while she still lived! I loved her!

Is that a little like how God loves us, but hates sin, evil, injustice, unrighteousness (however you want to translate it)? Does He hate how sin separates us from Him? Does He loves us enough to care about how sin corrodes and destroys our lives and those around us?

I suppose this is kind of basic except this was posted here last Christmas (and I know I'm wrong to bring it up when the author no longer communicates with us):
So yes I hold that there is general sense of love for all creation and man, but man specifically does something of 'his own' freewill that God hates and that is sin.
Maybe John meant the same kind of love for us / hate for how sin destroys that I'm thinking about. Or maybe (as I initially assumed) he means that God really hates sinners (a la Jonathan Edwards.) The thing that gets to me is that I don't think this is simply a solitary example of a man who doesn't express nuance well. I think this belief is pretty widespread. How sad for those who believe God is annoyed to the point of hatred because we sin.

I'm tempted from time to time to believe that God DOES hate sinners. It causes me to want to hide from Him when I stumble. If, instead, I'm firm in the belief that God loved us enough to die for us while we were sinners, it causes me to be able to understand Him running, dancing, singing when I return instead.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by darinhouston » Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:36 am

These mistakes were made quickly and nobody noticed them but me as far as I know. But since I'm putting my sermons and some text out there on this message board, I figured I better make those corrections publicly as well
It seems like such a simple thing, but I just want to say how much admiration and respect I have for you and your approach, Matt. May God continue to bless your life and service!

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by mattrose » Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:39 am

Thanks Darin & Michelle for continued interaction!

My heart goes out to you, Michelle, over the loss of your mom. That is a terrible way to lose someone from this earth (not that there's a good way, necessarily).

I too find some difficulty with the phrase 'hate the sin, love the sinner.' Certainly the Bible doesn't make a clean distinction b/w these things. But I think it's gotta be generally a correct way of looking at it.

I thought the David/Absalom story was a good example of the tension. It was right to stop Absalom from doing what he was doing. And there probably wasn't a pretty way to stop him from doing what he was doing (in other words, his death was necessary given the context). But David was anything but pleased about Absalom's demise. He grieved and grieved (of course, this was his son). In fact, he grieved so much over this necessary elimination of evil rebellion that his general got bad at him. And David was a man after God's own heart.

BRIEF NOTE: The sermon from this week (which Katie will upload today or tomorrow) was abbreviated. We had an inordinate number of testimonies given before the sermon. I had to make the executive decision to cut out a whole page of my notes (the 3rd potential interpretation of 'God does not rejoice at evil'). So the sermon may feel a bit rushed. In my setting I don't have the luxury to just preach longer b/c I have to leave by 9:50 in order to get to my home church for Sunday School class.

BRIEF NOTE #2: The series will be on 'hold' for 1 week as I focus on Resurrection Sunday :)

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by mattrose » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:31 pm

Michelle wrote:So, Matthew, I've been wondering...you have daughters, don't you? Have you seen Frozen yet? If so, I'm really curious to know what gospel parallels you draw from it. If not, your girls will love it. You might enjoy it as well.
I watched Frozen the other day. I thought it was good (good music, interesting story, funny, etc.).

I don't think I watched it too deeply (i won't try to over-analyze, or even analyze it). It seemed to me the main gospel parallel was the sacrificial nature of love. The three main characters (the 2 sisters and the 1 nice guy) each loved sacrificially. The older sister's sacrificial love, however, wasn't really for the best. She sacrificed secretly, which just made her little sister mad. Then she sacrificed by running away, but didn't realize she left everyone frozen behind. Perhaps those are not the best modes of self-sacrifice. The nice guy sacrificed pretty consistently throughout the movie, only gradually realizing it was because he was in love (Maybe there's a lesson there). The younger sister had the 'hero' moment, choosing to sacrifice her 'romantic moment' to save her sister. She was rewarded (unfrozen by true love).

I liked it. It was about sacrificial love in its various forms. And I don't know a phrase that better describes life of Jesus than sacrificial love.

How bout you?

User avatar
Michelle
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by Michelle » Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:14 am

I tend to over-analyze most things and this is no exception. :oops: Here's my take:

Elsa had a problem, she was cursed with the frightening ability to freeze things. She tried to deal with her curse in two opposite and extreme ways; first hiding "don’t let them in, don’t let them see, be the good girl you always have to be, conceal, don’t feel, don’t let them know," and then, well, letting it go. We, all of us -- however it is that we inherit it –- we all sin. We parallel Elsa's mechanisms by either being extremely moralistic or horribly rebellious. Neither works. When Elsa was in her hiding phase, it was impossible to love and relate to anyone else. When we try to earn our salvation by moralism, we cannot truly love God nor our neighbor. When Elsa "let it go" she devastated her world, just as unchecked sin has horrible consequences.

With Elsa holed up in her ice palace, Princess Anna was now the rightful ruler of her world. She could have done as she pleased (married the nut...okay the analogies only go so far; she was amazingly naive, but, hey, so was I. This is Disney, after all, and he had the appearance of an angel of light.) But Anna left her privilege and sought for her sister in Elsa's world. Anna strove to reconcile with her sister against the better judgement of all. Even though she suffered rejection after rejection, Anna still made the choice to sacrifice her life to free her sister from the blow that, perhaps justly (she did plummet the world into eternal winter) would be her end. Christ left heaven to suffer and die for us, who, as sinners, justly deserve to die.

That wasn't the end, however. Anna froze to death, but was alive again. The curse was broken and the ice receded. The resurrection of our Lord Jesus reversed the curse of sin and death for us. He is alive and we will rise as well.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by mattrose » Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:52 pm

I like your take on Elsa, especially this line: "When Elsa was in her hiding phase, it was impossible to love and relate to anyone else." I wouldn't have naturally interpreted her 'let it go' phase as rebellion, though. But now that you mention it I could see that. The "cold never bothered me anyways" line is almost defiant.

And I could see interpreting Anna as a Christ-figure (though it seems a bit more of a stretch, to me).

After posting my thoughts I got curious and googled 'Gospel parallels in Frozen.' I found some very strong and very strange opinions about the movie (to both extremes!). Some Christians were claiming it is a better allegory than Narnia. Others were claiming it was blasphemous for a myriad of reasons. Some were claiming Elsa was gay. Others that it was part of a radical feminist agenda.

Christians are often weird.

User avatar
Michelle
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by Michelle » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:07 am

Christians are often weird.
Ain't that the truth!

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by mattrose » Sat Apr 26, 2014 12:27 pm

Notes for this week: God puts up with an awful lot and keeps on loving

GOD PUTS UP WITH AN AWFUL LOT AND KEEPS ON LOVING

Last week we put a pause on our “God is love” series to focus on and celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

And now, in this series, we’re on the homestretch. We’ve been considering the phrase “God is love” from 1 John 4:8 & 16 alongside the famous “Love chapter” in 1 Corinthians 13.

Our premise has been that if “God is love,” we can replace the word “Love” in 1st Corinthians 13 with “God” and get an accurate portrayal of what God is really like.

So far we’ve talked about how:
God is patient
God is kind
God is not jealous
God does not boast and is not arrogant
God is not shaming and is not stubborn
God does not lash out or keep a record of wrongs
God does not rejoice at evil, but with the truth

And now we’re in the homestretch for this series. All that is left in this famous section of the love chapter for us to consider is v. 7 and the first 3 words of v. 8.

It says (NKJV)
[Love] bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails.
It says (NIV)
[Love] always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.

So far, in this series, I’ve taken the statements about love in order. I’ve not skipped around. But today, for the 1st time, I want to break that mold and take the 1st and 4th statement together. Let me quickly explain why:

One thing we have not discussed much in this sermon series in the poetic nature of 1 Corinthians 13. There’s a reason why it is read so often at weddings. It’s not just that the content is superb, but it also sounds beautiful.

It’s a poetic sounding chapter. Poetry is a kind of language or literature that uses things like repetition, rhyme, meter, alliteration, assonance, hyperbole, etc.

The 1st paragraph is marked by the recurring phrases “If I” and “But have not love” and the word “Nothing.” READ

The 2nd paragraph repeats phrases like “Love is” and “Does not” and “Is not” and “always”
READ

The 3rd paragraph repeats phrases like “Where there are” and words like “Child” and “Now.”
READ

It’s a very beautiful passage.
But I don’t just point that out for the fun of it. When we recognize elements of poetry in literature, it should affect our interpretation of the words.

For instance, how many of you have written a really sappy love letter? How many of you have listened to the lyrics of a really sappy love song?

Lots of lines about swimming across oceans
Walking across countries
And not even remembering past love interests

In other words, exaggerations. Poetry uses exaggeration. It’s not lying. It’s over-stating to express the point. It’s called hyperbole. And ancient Jewish people used it a lot

And, personally, I think it’s pretty clear that Paul is using hyperbole in v. 7.

Does love really bear all things? Does it always protect?
Does it believe everything? Trust everyone?
Does it hope that it’ll rain and be sunny? After the fact?
Are there no exceptions?

I want to suggest that it’d actually be dangerous to interpret this verse in an overly literal sense. This verse could be misused to persuade women to stay in dangerously abusive relationships. Doesn’t love bear ALL THINGS and endure ALL THINGS? Doesn’t love ALWAYS trust and hope that the guy will change for the better?

I don’t think that’s what the verse it saying at all.
The verse is poetic. I think it’s the most poetic verse in the entire chapter. The “all things” (NKJV) or the “always” (NIV) are not meant absolutely. They convey a passionate commitment of the lover for the beloved.

There are exceptions to the basic rule

To “Bear all things” doesn’t mean continuing to take unrepentant abuse forever and ever.

Or, to go with the NIV translation, what do we call a parent who literally “always protects” their children?

We call them “over-protective”

There comes a time, as a parent, where we have to let our children enter the world. We take a risk that they can survive with a babysitter, outside, at school, at college, on their own.

The fact that the next 2 lines in v. 7 are about believing, hoping, trusting confirms this. We have to believe and hope and trust because we’re not micro-managing everything.

So the “all things” and the “always,” here, are, I think, hyperbole. They are not absolute. The passage is saying that love puts up with an awful lot. That’s it is willing to trust more than we might expect. That it remains hopeful longer than most. That it keeps loving even when most people would expect it to give up.

So I’m taking the 1st and 4th phrases from v. 7 together because I think they are very similar. Love “bears all things” I’m rendering as “God puts up with an awful lot”. And “endures all things,” I’m rendering “keeps on loving.”

So “God puts up with an awful lot and keeps on loving”

Next week we’ll look at the 2nd and 3rd phrases because they seemingly fit together too. They’re about believing and trusting and hoping.

And then in the final week of the series we’ll look at the final phrase: Love never fails.

Now, the Greek word involved in our 1st phrase comes from the word for a roof. But it’s the verb form. It’s the word for what a roof does. It’s designed to be able to put up with a lot (rain, snow, wind). A good roof lasts a long time, through many kinds of storms.

God is willing to put up with a lot in his relationship with us. Like a good roof deals with rain, God deals with our tears. Like a good roof deals with snow, God puts up with our coldness, even coldness toward him. Like a good roof deals with wind, God sticks with us when we’re tossed to and fro, carried about with every wind of doctrine.

God puts up with us, even when we are the problem. He’s willing to put up with an AWE-ful lot.

Our other phrase is usually translated as “Endures all things” (NKJV) or “always perseveres” (NIV). The Greek word is a very common one. It means to remain, to hold fast, to bravely bear, to preserve, to linger, to stick, to stay… especially through trying times. You can tell it has a lot in common with our 1st phrase. Love keeps going… and going… and going (like the energizer bunny?).

But this phrase does add something to what we’ve talked about so far. If we only knew that God puts up with an awful lot, we wouldn’t be sure about God’s attitude toward us through the process.

Human beings sometimes put up with a lot from another human being. They stay in relationship despite all the annoying habits of that person, all the idiosyncrasies, all the rudeness, even outright rebellion… but often their attitude toward the person changes. They stay in relationship, but they are bitter. They hold a grudge.

The passage says that love perseveres. It perseveres as love. It doesn’t devolve into anger or bitterness. It remains love.

Despite our pasts, our presents, and our futures…
Despite our weakness, our sin, our rebellion…

God’s love for us doesn’t turn into something less than love. God’s love perseveres. It endures. It keeps going and going and going. It might take a tough form, but whatever form it takes it’s always flowing from love.

I want to wrap up this message by focusing on 1 particular passage of Scripture that I think illustrates these 2 principles about God’s character of love incredibly well.

It’s the story of Hosea, found in Hosea 1-3.

Hosea was a prophet of God. The way a lot of prophecy happens in Scripture is that God would speak TO the prophet and the prophet would speak TO the people. But Hosea’s case is a little different in chapters 1-3.

It says in Hosea 1:2 that the LORD began to speak through Hosea. It wasn’t going to be Hosea’s words that conveyed God’s message. It was going to be his very life.

God told Hosea to do something strange. He told him to marry a woman named Gomer who would cheat on him repeatedly.

Hosea obeyed. He married Gomer. Things may have started out alright, but before too long she was repeatedly cheating on him. She had 3 children. Hosea had the right to name the children, but they were not his kids. Hosea 2:4-5 says they were children of adultery.

Hosea put up with a lot for many years. But eventually, Gomer wasn’t just sneaking around. She moved out. She gave herself completely to another.

And Hosea filed for divorce.

But what God wouldn’t let Hosea do…
is give up on Gomer… to stop loving her.

In fact, later on, God told Hosea to show his love to her again… in spite of all her sin… In spite of all her unfaithfulness… Hosea was to keep loving Gomer.

Now why would God put his prophet through all of that?

Why would God tell Hosea to marry an unfaithful wife?

Why would God tell Hosea to put up with years of cheating?

Why would God let Hosea experience the pain and hurt of divorce?

And why would God command Hosea to subject himself all over to the pain of his past by marrying her again?

The point of this whole story is to illustrate the kind of love that God has for His people. God sees His people as His bride. He’s bent toward them, even though He knows they’re bent toward sin. He is faithful to them, even though He knows they aren’t always going to be faithful to Him. He loves them, even though they don’t always love him.

He puts up with an awful lot and keeps on loving. He bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. His love never fails.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Preaching to Myself

Post by mattrose » Thu May 01, 2014 10:36 am

Struggling a bit this week, not so much on CONTENT, but on HOW TO SAY IT.

[love] always trusts, always hopes (NIV)
[love] believes all things, hopes all things (NKJV)

So...

God always trusts, always hopes
God believes all things, hopes all things

Obviously there are major schools of theology that are totally opposed to the idea of God having to 'trust' and/or 'hope'

And other theologies that are totally good with that

But I don't want my sermon to be a theology class either :)

Post Reply

Return to “The Courtyard”