Translate

Friday, September 15, 2017

Spurgeon vs. Moody

On Legalism: Charles Spurgeon vs. D.L. Moody

Allegedly, Charles Spurgeon invited D.L. Moody to speak at an event he hosted.
Moody accepted and preached the entire time about the evils of tobacco, and why the Lord doesn’t want Christians to smoke.
Spurgeon, an avid cigar smoker, was surprised at what seemed to be a cheap shot leveled by Moody, using the pulpit to condemn a fellow minister for violating an issue of personal conscience — Moody’s conscience.
When Moody finished preaching, Spurgeon walked up to the podium and said, “Mr. Moody, I’ll put down my cigars when you put down your fork.”
Moody was overweight.
Be careful the next time you take offense at another believer because you deem what they are doing or saying to be wrong, sinful, and “inappropriate,” when in fact, they are merely violating a personal, subjective standard of yours.
So the one who thinks rock music is “of the devil” and judges all who listen to it as being unspiritual is obsessed with football. And the person who believes that watching football is “of the devil” drinks wine. And the person who believers that drinking wine is sinful is a registered Democrat. And the person who believes that the Democratic party is “of the devil,” kills animals for recreation. And on and on it goes.
It’s time to re-read and practice Romans 14.

@@@

Do Not Pass Judgment on One Another

Ch 14 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master[a] that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; 11 for it is written,
“As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,
    and every tongue shall confess[b] to God.”
12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

a tough paper but a good study on Divorce & Remarriage

Divorce & Remarriage: A Position Paper

Article by
Founder & Teacher, desiringGod.org
Note (added May 5, 1989): Readers of this paper should be sure to consult the official position paper of the Council of Deacons of Bethlehem Baptist Church entitled, A Statement on Divorce and Remarriage in the Life of Bethlehem Baptist Church. That document, dated May 2, 1989, represents the position on divorce and remarriage that will guide the church in matters of membership and discipline. The paper you hold in your hands is NOT the official church position on divorce and remarriage. It is my own understanding of the Scriptures and therefore the guidelines for my own life and teaching and ministerial involvement in weddings. But I intend to respect the official statement (having written the first draft myself) as our guide in matters of membership and discipline. I make this paper available so that the basis for certain statements in the official paper can be readily obtained.

Background and Introduction

All of my adult life, until I was faced with the necessity of dealing with divorce and remarriage in the pastoral context, I held the prevailing Protestant view that remarriage after divorce was Biblically sanctioned in cases where divorce had resulted from desertion or persistent adultery. Only when I was compelled, some years ago, in teaching through the gospel of Luke, to deal with Jesus' absolute statement in Luke 16:18 did I begin to question that inherited position.
I felt an immense burden in having to teach our congregation what the revealed will of God is in this matter of divorce and remarriage. I was not unaware that among my people there were those who had been divorced and remarried, and those who had been divorced and remained unmarried, and those who were in the process of divorce or contemplating it as a possibility. I knew that this was not an academic exercise, but would immediately affect many people very deeply.
I was also aware of the horrendous statistics in our own country, as well as other Western countries, concerning the number of marriages that were ending in divorce, and the numbers of people who were forming second marriages and third marriages. In my study of Ephesians 5 I had become increasingly persuaded that there is a deep and profound significance to the union of husband and wife in "one flesh" as a parable of the relationship between Christ and his church.
All of these things conspired to create a sense of solemnity and seriousness as I weighed the meaning and the implication of the Biblical texts on divorce and remarriage. The upshot of that crucial experience was the discovery of what I believe is a New Testament prohibition of all remarriage except in the case where a spouse has died. I do not claim to have seen or said the last word on this issue, nor am I above correction, should I prove to be wrong. I am aware that men more godly than I have taken different views. Nevertheless, every person and church must teach and live according to the dictates of its own conscience informed by a serious study of Scripture.
Therefore this paper is an attempt to state my own understanding of the issues and their foundation in Scripture. It serves, then, as a Biblical rationale for why I feel constrained to make the decisions I do with regard to whose marriages I will perform and what sort of church discipline seems appropriate in regard to divorce and remarriage.
If I were to give exhaustive expositions of each relevant text the paper would become a very large book. Therefore, what I plan to do is to give brief explanations of each of the crucial texts with some key exegetical arguments. There will be, no doubt, many questions that can be raised and I hope to be able to learn from those questions, and do my best to answer them in the discussion that will surround this paper.
It seems that the most efficient way to approach the issue is to simply give a list of reasons, based on Biblical texts, why I believe that the New Testament prohibits all remarriage except where a spouse has died. So what follows is a list of such arguments.

Eleven Reasons Why I Believe All Remarriage After Divorce Is Prohibited While Both Spouses Are Alive

1. Luke 16:18 calls all remarriage after divorce adultery.
Luke 16:18: Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.
1.1 This verse shows that Jesus does not recognize divorce as terminating a marriage in God's sight. The reason a second marriage is called adultery is because the first one is considered to still be valid. So Jesus is taking a stand against the Jewish culture in which all divorce was considered to carry with it the right of remarriage.
1.2 The second half of the verse shows that not merely the divorcing man is guilty of adultery when he remarries, but also any man who marries a divorced woman.
1.3 Since there are no exceptions mentioned in the verse, and since Jesus is clearly rejecting the common cultural conception of divorce as including the right of remarriage, the first readers of this gospel would have been hard-put to argue for any exceptions on the basis that Jesus shared the cultural assumption that divorce for unfaithfulness or desertion freed a spouse for remarriage.
2. Mark 10:11-12 call all remarriage after divorce adultery whether it is the husband or the wife who does the divorcing.
Mark 10:11-12: And he said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.'
2.1 This text repeats the first half of Luke 16:18 but goes farther and says that not only the man who divorces, but also a woman who divorces, and then remarries is committing adultery.
2.2 As in Luke 16:18, there are no exceptions mentioned to this rule.
3. Mark 10:2-9 and Matthew 19:3-8 teach that Jesus rejected the Pharisees' justification of divorce from Deuteronomy 24:1 and reasserted the purpose of God in creation that no human being separate what God has joined together.
Mark 10:2-9: And some Pharisees came up to Him, testing Him, and began to question Him whether it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife. 3 And He answered and said to them, 'What did Moses command you?' 4 And they said, 'Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.' 5 But Jesus said to them, 'Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. 7 For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, 8 and the two shall become one flesh; consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.'
Matthew 19:3-9: And some Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?" 4 And He answered and said, "Have you not read, that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, 'For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh'? 6 Consequently they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." 7They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate and divorce her?" 8 He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another commits adultery."
3.1 In both Matthew and Mark the Pharisees come to Jesus and test him by asking him whether it is lawful for a man to divorce his wife. They evidently have in mind the passage in Deuteronomy 24:1 which simply describes divorce as a fact rather than giving any legislation in favor of it. They wonder how Jesus will take a position with regard to this passage.
3.2 Jesus' answer is, "For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives" (Mt. 19:8).
3.3 But then Jesus criticizes the Pharisees' failure to recognize in the books of Moses God's deepest and original intention for marriage. So he quotes two passages from Genesis. "God made them male and female. ...For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh" (Genesis 1:27; 2:24).
3.4 From these passages in Genesis Jesus concludes, "So they are no longer two, but one." And then he makes his climaxing statement, "What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder."
3.5 The implication is that Jesus rejects the Pharisees' use of Deuteronomy 24:1 and raises the standard of marriage for his disciples to God's original intention in creation. He says that none of us should try to undo the "one-flesh" relationship which God has united.
3.6 Before we jump to the conclusion that this absolute statement should be qualified in view of the exception clause ("except for unchastity") mentioned in Matthew 19:9, we should seriously entertain the possibility that the exception clause in Matthew 19:9 should be understood in the light of the absolute statement of Matthew 19:6, ("let no man put asunder") especially since the verses that follow this conversation with the Pharisees in Mark 10 do not contain any exception when they condemn remarriage. More on this below.
4. Matthew 5:32 does not teach that remarriage is lawful in some cases. Rather it reaffirms that marriage after divorce is adultery, even for those who have been divorced innocently, and that a man who divorces his wife is guilty of the adultery of her second marriage unless she had already become an adulteress before the divorce.
Matthew 5:32: But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
4.1 Jesus assumes that in most situations in that culture a wife who has been put away by a husband will be drawn into a second marriage. Nevertheless, in spite of these pressures, he calls this second marriage adultery.
4.2 The remarkable thing about the first half of this verse is that it plainly says that the remarriage of a wife who has been innocently put away is nevertheless adultery: "Everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, makes her (the innocent wife who has not been unchaste) an adulteress." This is a clear statement, it seems to me, that remarriage is wrong not merely when a person is guilty in the process of divorce, but also when a person is innocent. In other words, Jesus' opposition to remarriage seems to be based on the unbreakableness of the marriage bond by anything but death.
4.3 I will save my explanation of the exception clause ("Except on the ground of unchastity") for later in the paper, but for now, it may suffice to say that on the traditional interpretation of the clause, it may simply mean that a man makes his wife an adulteress except in the case where she has made herself one.
4.4 I would assume that since an innocent wife who is divorced commits adultery when she remarries, therefore a guilty wife who remarries after divorce is all the more guilty. If one argues that this guilty woman is free to remarry, while the innocent woman who has been put away is not, just because the guilty woman's adultery has broken the "one flesh" relationship, then one is put in the awkward position of saying to an innocent divorced woman, "If you now commit adultery it will be lawful for you to remarry." This seems wrong for at least two reasons.
4.41 It seems to elevate the physical act of sexual intercourse to be the decisive element in marital union and disunion.
4.42 If sexual union with another breaks the marriage bond and legitimizes remarriage, then to say that an innocently divorced wife can't remarry (as Jesus does say) assumes that her divorcing husband is not divorcing to have sexual relations with another. This is a very unlikely assumption. More likely is that Jesus does assume some of these divorcing husbands will have sexual relations with another woman, but still the wives they have divorced may not remarry. Therefore, adultery does not nullify the "one-flesh" relationship of marriage and both the innocent and guilty spouses are prohibited from remarriage in Matthew 5:32.
5. 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 teaches that divorce is wrong but that if it is inevitable the person who divorces should not remarry.
1 Corinthians 7:10-11: To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband 11 (but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband)—and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
5.1 When Paul says that this charge is not his but the Lord's, I think he means that he is aware of a specific saying from the historical Jesus which addressed this issue. As a matter of fact, these verses look very much like Mark 10:11-12, because both the wife and the husband are addressed. Also, remarriage seems to be excluded by verse ll the same way it is excluded in Mark 10:11-12.
5.2 Paul seems to be aware that separation will be inevitable in certain cases. Perhaps he has in mind a situation of unrepentant adultery, or desertion, or brutality. But in such a case he says that the person who feels constrained to separate should not seek remarriage but remain single. And he reinforces the authority of this statement by saying he has a word from the Lord. Thus Paul's interpretation of Jesus' sayings is that remarriage should not be pursued.
5.3 As in Luke 16:18 and Mark 10:11-12 and Matthew 5:32, this text does not explicitly entertain the possibility of any exceptions to the prohibition of remarriage.
6. 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:1-3 teach that remarriage is legitimate only after the death of a spouse.
1 Corinthians 7:39: A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. If the husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.
Romans 7:1-3, Do you not know, brethren—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only during his life? 2 Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives; but if her husband dies she is discharged from the law concerning her husband. 3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies she is free from that law, if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.
6.1 Both of these passages (1 Corinthians 7:39; Romans 7:2) say explicitly that a woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. No exceptions are explicitly mentioned that would suggest she could be free from her husband to remarry on any other basis.
7. Matthew 19:10-12 teaches that special Christian grace is given by God to Christ's disciples to sustain them in singleness when they renounce remarriage according to the law of Christ.
Matthew 19:10-12: The disciples said to him, 'If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.' 11 But he said to them, 'Not all men can receive this precept, but only those to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it.
7.1 Just preceding this passage in Matthew 19:9 Jesus prohibited all remarriage after divorce. (I will deal with the meaning of "except for immorality" below.) This seemed like an intolerable prohibition to Jesus' disciples: If you close off every possibility of remarriage, then you make marriage so risky that it would be better not to marry, since you might be "trapped" to live as a single person to the rest of your life or you may be "trapped" in a bad marriage.
7.2 Jesus does not deny the tremendous difficulty of his command. Instead, he says in verse ll, that the enablement to fulfill the command not to remarry is a divine gift to his disciples. Verse 12 is an argument that such a life is indeed possible because there are people who for the sake of the kingdom, as well as lower reasons, have dedicated themselves to live a life of singleness.
7.3 Jesus is not saying that some of his disciples have the ability to obey his command not to remarry and some don't. He is saying that the mark of a disciple is that they receive a gift of continence while non-disciples don't. The evidence for this is l) the parallel between Matthew 19:11 and 13:11, 12) the parallel between Matthew 19:12 and 13:9,43; 11:15, and 3) the parallel between Matthew 19:11 and 19:26.
8. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 does not legislate grounds for divorce but teaches that the "one-flesh" relationship established by marriage is not obliterated by divorce or even by remarriage.
Deuteronomy 24:1-4: When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, 2 and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man's wife, 3 and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, 4 then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance.
8.1 The remarkable thing about these four verses is that, while divorce is taken for granted, nevertheless the woman who is divorced becomes "defiled" by her remarriage (verse 4). It may well be that when the Pharisees asked Jesus if divorce was legitimate he based his negative answer not only on God's intention expressed in Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, but also on the implication of Deuteronomy 24:4 that remarriage after divorce defiles a person. In other words, there were ample clues in the Mosaic law that the divorce concession was on the basis of the hardness of man's heart and really did not make divorce and remarriage legitimate.
8.2 The prohibition of a wife returning to her first husband even after her second husband dies (because it is an abomination) suggests very strongly that today no second marriage should be broken up in order to restore a first one (for Heth and Wenham's explanation of this see Jesus and Divorce, page 110).
9. 1 Corinthians 7:15 does not mean that when a Christian is deserted by an unbelieving spouse he or she is free to remarry. It means that the Christian is not bound to fight in order to preserve togetherness. Separation is permissible if the unbelieving partner insists on it.
1 Corinthians 7:15: If the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace.
9.1 There are several reasons why the phrase "is not bound" should not be construed to mean "is free to remarry."
9.11 Marriage is an ordinance of creation binding on all of God's human creatures, irrespective of their faith or lack of faith.
9.12 The word used for "bound" (douloo) in verse 15 is not the same word used in verse 39 where Paul says, "A wife is bound (deo) to her husband as long as he lives." Paul consistently uses deo when speaking of the legal aspect of being bound to one marriage partner (Romans 7:2; l Corinthians 7:39), or to one's betrothed (l Corinthians 7:27). But when he refers to a deserted spouse not being bound in l Corinthians 7:15, he chooses a different word (douloo) which we would expect him to do if he were not giving a deserted spouse the same freedom to remarry that he gives to a spouse whose partner has died (verse 39).
9.13 The last phrase of verse 15 ("God has called us to peace") supports verse 15 best if Paul is saying that a deserted partner is not "bound to make war" on the deserting unbeliever to get him or her to stay. It seems to me that the peace God has called us to is the peace of marital harmony. Therefore, if the unbelieving partner insists on departing, then the believing partner is not bound to live in perpetual conflict with the unbelieving spouse, but is free and innocent in letting him or her go.
9.14 This interpretation also preserves a closer harmony to the intention of verses 10-11, where an inevitable separation does not result in the right of remarriage.
9.15 Verse 16 (“For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?) is an argument that you can’t know, and so should not make the hope of saving them a ground for fighting to make them stay. This supports the understanding of verse 15 as a focus on not being enslaved to stay together, rather than not being enslaved to say single.

9.16 Paul did not see the single life as a life of slavery and so would not have called the necessity of staying single a state of being enslaved. 
10. 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 does not teach the right of divorced persons to remarry. It teaches that betrothed virgins should seriously consider the life of singleness, but do not sin if they marry.
1 Corinthians 7:27-28: Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. 28 But if you marry, you do not sin, and if a virgin marries, she does not sin.
10.1 Recently some people have argued that this passage deals with divorced people because in verse 27 Paul asks, "Are you free (literally: loosed) from a wife?" Some have assumed that he means, "Are you divorced?" Thus he would be saying in verse 28 that it is not sin when divorced people remarry. There are several reasons why this interpretation is most unlikely.
10.11 Verse 25 signals that Paul is beginning a new section and dealing with a new issue. He says, "Now concerning the virgins (ton parthenon) I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy." He has already dealt with the problem of divorced people in verses 10-16. Now he takes up a new issue about those who are not yet married, and he signals this by saying, "Now concerning the virgins." Therefore, it is very unlikely that the people referred to in verses 27 and 28 are divorced.
10.12 A flat statement that it is not sin for divorced people to be remarried (verse 28) would contradict verse ll, where he said that a woman who has separated from her husband should remain single.
10.13 Verse 36 is surely describing the same situation in view in verses 27 and 28, but clearly refers to a couple that is not yet married. "If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his virgin, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry—it is no sin." This is the same as verse 28 where Paul says, "But if you marry, you do not sin."
10.14 The reference in verse 27 to being bound to a "wife" may be misleading because it may suggest that the man is already married. But in Greek the word for wife is simply "woman" and may refer to a man's betrothed as well as his spouse. The context dictates that the reference is to a man's betrothed virgin, not to his spouse. So "being bound" and "being loosed" have reference to whether a person is betrothed or not.
10.15 It is significant that the verb Paul uses for "loosed" (luo) or "free" is not a word that he uses for divorce. Paul's words for divorce are chorizo (verses 10,11,15; cf. Matthew 19:6) and aphienai (verses 11,12,13).
11. The exception clause of Matthew 19:9 need not imply that divorce on account of adultery frees a person to be remarried. All the weight of the New Testament evidence given in the preceding ten points is against this view, and there are several ways to make good sense out of this verse so that it does not conflict with the broad teaching of the New Testament that remarriage after divorce is prohibited.
Matthew 19:9: And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.
11.1 Several years ago I taught our congregation in two evening services concerning my understanding of this verse and argued that "except for immorality" did not refer to adultery but to premarital sexual fornication which a man or a woman discovers in the betrothed partner. Since that time I have discovered other people who hold this view and who have given it a much more scholarly exposition than I did. I have also discovered numerous other ways of understanding this verse which also exclude the legitimacy of remarriage. Several of these are summed up in William Heth and Gordon J. Wenham, Jesus and Divorce (Nelson: 1984).
11.2 Here I will simply give a brief summary of my own view of Matthew 19:9 and how I came to it.
I began, first of all, by being troubled that the absolute form of Jesus' denunciation of divorce and remarriage in Mark 10:11,12 and Luke 16:18 is not preserved by Matthew, if in fact his exception clause is a loophole for divorce and remarriage. I was bothered by the simple assumption that so many writers make that Matthew is simply making explicit something that would have been implicitly understood by the hearers of Jesus or the readers of Mark 10 and Luke 16.
Would they really have assumed that the absolute statements included exceptions? I have very strong doubts, and therefore my inclination is to inquire whether or not in fact Matthew's exception clause conforms to the absoluteness of Mark and Luke.
The second thing that began to disturb me was the question, Why does Matthew use the word porneia ("except for immorality") instead of the word moicheia which means adultery? Almost all commentators seem to make the simple assumption again that porneia means adultery in this context. The question nags at me why Matthew would not use the word for adultery, if that is in fact what he meant.
Then I noticed something very interesting. The only other place besides Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 where Matthew uses the word porneiais in 15:19 where it is used alongside of moicheia. Therefore, the primary contextual evidence for Matthew's usage is that he conceives of porneia as something different than adultery. Could this mean, then, that Matthew conceives of porneia in its normal sense of fornication or incest (l Corinthians 5:1) rather than adultery?
A. Isaksson agrees with this view of porneia and sums up his research much like this on pages 134-5 of Marriage and Ministry:
Thus we cannot get away from the fact that the distinction between what was to be regarded as porneia and what was to be regarded as moicheia was very strictly maintained in pre-Christian Jewish literature and in the N.T. Porneia may, of course, denote different forms of forbidden sexual relations, but we can find no unequivocal examples of the use of this word to denote a wife's adultery. Under these circumstances we can hardly assume that this word means adultery in the clauses in Matthew. The logia on divorce are worded as a paragraph of the law, intended to be obeyed by the members of the Church. Under these circumstances it is inconceivable that in a text of this nature the writer would not have maintained a clear distinction between what was unchastity and what was adultery: moicheia and not porneia was used to describe the wife's adultery. From the philological point of view there are accordingly very strong arguments against this interpretation of the clauses as permitting divorce in the case in which the wife was guilty of adultery.
The next clue in my search for an explanation came when I stumbled upon the use of porneia in John 8:41 where Jewish leaders indirectly accuse Jesus of being born of porneia. In other words, since they don't accept the virgin birth, they assume that Mary had committed fornication and Jesus was the result of this act. On the basis of that clue I went back to study Matthew's record of Jesus' birth in Matthew 1:18-20. This was extremely enlightening.
In these verses Joseph and Mary are referred to as husband (aner) and wife (gunaika). Yet they are described as only being betrothed to each other. This is probably owing to the fact that the words for husband and wife are simply man and woman and to the fact that betrothal was a much more significant commitment then than engagement is today. In verse 19 Joseph resolves "to divorce" Mary. The word for divorce is the same as the word in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. But most important of all, Matthew says that Joseph was "just" in making the decision to divorce Mary, presumably on account of her porneia, fornication.
Therefore, as Matthew proceeded to construct the narrative of his gospel, he finds himself in chapter 5 and then later in chapter 19 needing to prohibit all remarriage after divorce (as taught by Jesus) and yet to allow for "divorces" like the one Joseph contemplated toward his betrothed whom he thought guilty of fornication (porneia). Therefore, Matthew includes the exception clause in particular to exonerate Joseph, but also in general to show that the kind of "divorce" that one might pursue during a betrothal on account of fornication is not included in Jesus' absolute prohibition.
A common objection to this interpretation is that both in Matthew 19:3-8 and in Matthew 5:31-32 the issue Jesus is responding to is marriage not betrothal. The point is pressed that "except for fornication" is irrelevant to the context of marriage.
My answer is that this irrelevancy is just the point Matthew wants to make. We may take it for granted that the breakup of an engaged couple over fornication is not an evil "divorce" and does not prohibit remarriage. But we cannot assume that Matthew's readers would take this for granted.
Even in Matthew 5:32, where it seems pointless for us to exclude "the case of fornication" (since we can't see how a betrothed virgin could be "made an adulteress" in any case), it may not be pointless for Matthew's readers. For that matter, it may not be pointless for any readers: if Jesus had said, "Every man who divorces his woman makes her an adulteress," a reader could legitimately ask: "Then was Joseph about to make Mary an adulteress?" We may say this question is not reasonable since we think you can't make unmarried women adulteresses. But it certainly is not meaningless or, perhaps for some readers, pointless, for Matthew to make explicit the obvious exclusion of the case of fornication during betrothal.
This interpretation of the exception clause has several advantages:
  1. It does not force Matthew to contradict the plain, absolute meaning of Mark and Luke and the whole range of New Testament teaching set forth above in sections 1-10, including Matthew's own absolute teaching in 19:3-8
  2. It provides an explanation for why the word porneia is used in Matthew's exception clause instead of moicheia
  3. It squares with Matthew's own use of porneia for fornication in Matthew 15:19
  4. It fits the demands of Matthew's wider context concerning Joseph's contemplated divorce.
Since I first wrote this exposition of Matthew 19:9 I have discovered a chapter on this view in Heth and Wenham, Jesus and Divorce and a scholarly defense of it by A. Isaksson, Marriage and Ministry in the New Temple (1965).

Conclusions and Applications

In the New Testament the question about remarriage after divorce is not determined by:
  1. The guilt or innocence of either spouse,
  2. Nor by whether either spouse is a believer or not,
  3. Nor by whether the divorce happened before or after either spouse's conversion,
  4. Nor by the ease or difficulty of living as a single parent for the rest of life on earth,
  5. Nor by whether there is adultery or desertion involved,
  6. Nor by the on-going reality of the hardness of the human heart,
  7. Nor by the cultural permissiveness of the surrounding society.
Rather it is determined by the fact that:
  1. Marriage is a "one-flesh" relationship of divine establishment and extraordinary significance in the eyes of God (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5; Mark 10:8),
  2. Only God, not man, can end this one-flesh relationship (Matthew 19:6; Mark 10:9—this is why remarriage is called adultery by Jesus: he assumes that the first marriage is still binding, Matthew 5:32; Luke 16:18; Mark 10:11),
  3. God ends the one-flesh relationship of marriage only through the death of one of the spouses (Romans 7:1-3; 1 Corinthians 7:39),
  4. The grace and power of God are promised and sufficient to enable a trusting, divorced Christian to be single all this earthly life if necessary (Matthew 19:10-12,26; 1 Corinthians 10:13),
  5. Temporal frustrations and disadvantages are much to be preferred over the disobedience of remarriage, and will yield deep and lasting joy both in this life and the life to come (Matthew 5:29-30).
Those who are already remarried:
  1. Should acknowledge that the choice to remarry and the act of entering a second marriage was sin, and confess it as such and seek forgiveness
  2. Should not attempt to return to the first partner after entering a second union (see 8.2 above)
  3. Should not separate and live as single people thinking that this would result in less sin because all their sexual relations are acts of adultery. The Bible does not give prescriptions for this particular case, but it does treat second marriages as having significant standing in God's eyes. That is, there were promises made and there has been a union formed. It should not have been formed, but it was. It is not to be taken lightly. Promises are to be kept, and the union is to be sanctified to God. While not the ideal state, staying in a second marriage is God's will for a couple and their ongoing relations should not be looked on as adulterous.

Saturday, September 2, 2017

I had a dream last night....

Warning: this post may piss some people off....if so sorry.
If this is the case I would recommend reading more Luther, who is well know to drop rather blunt (in your face) phrasing as well to wake up a slumbering audience.

I don't mean to specifically refer to people in my church, or even people in your specific church however I do mean to speak to a problem among the vague post-Christian, post-Evangelical people in American churches in general.

I had a dream last night....


In it 2 headless men were passing on the street. One day the 2 fine upstanding, moral and polite gents stopped & struck up a conversation. The 1st headless man went on & on in depth about the 2nd headless man's haircut and how it moved him, inspired him and filled him with joy & meaning. The 2nd man was not dumb and a small part of his soul whispered to him, you have no head & no hair this man is lying to you. But the louder part of the 2nd man's heart, the place where pride reigns as sovereign shouted to drown out the voice of the soul. He cried, "This man is encouragement! This man is love! This man is positivism! This man is encouragement! This man is love! This man is acceptance! It matters less what this man says than how he says it, with love & passion & pleasantries."

Many people in the Church today love to hear nice news regardless of if its the actually the "good news."

The Church in America will too readily put up with lies told pleasantly than truth that is told that tells us we are wrong.

Do not head to Church tomorrow without your head, listen with your Bible open & your thinking cap on not with you head in a bag near your feet & merely your heart open!   

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Book Reco: Legacy of Luther - by R.C. Sproul & Stephen J. Nichols

Legacy of Luther - Click here!
He was the most influential man of his day. The movement that began with his posting of the Ninety–Five Theses reshaped Europe, redirected Christian history, and recovered the truth of God's word. Five hundred years later, what is Luther's legacy? In this volume, R.C. Sproul, Stephen J. Nichols, and thirteen other scholars and pastors examine his life, teaching and enduring influence. Meet Martin Luther, the mercurial Reformer who, out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, set the world ablaze.

Book Reco: Learning to Love the Psalms by W. Robert Godfrey

The Psalms are undeniably beautiful. They are also difficult, and readers often come away convinced that tremendous riches remain just beyond their grasp. In this book, Dr. W. Robert Godfrey invites us to journey with him towards a greater understanding and love for these sacred verses. The timeless elegance of the Psalms, their depth of expression, and testimony to the greatness of God have enchanted and edified God's people for centuries. Learning to Love the Psalms is intended to help today's Christians share in that delight.

Learning to love the Psalms - click here!


Sunday, August 13, 2017

Acts 26 Sunday School


In our text today we hear about Herod Agrippa II.
Agrippa was educated at the court of the Roman Emperor Claudius, and at the time of his father's death he was only seventeen years old.
Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, repeats the gossip that Agrippa was in an incestuous relationship with his own sister, Berenice.
It was before him and his sister Berenice that, according to the New Testament, Paul the Apostle pleaded his case at Caesarea Maritima, possibly in 59AD.
Agrippa is famous for expending large sums of money beautifying Jerusalem and other cities.
He had a great intimacy with the historian Josephus, having supplied him with information for his history, Antiquities of the Jews. Josephus preserved two of the letters he received from Agrippa.
According to Photius, Agrippa died, childless, during the reign of Emporer Trajan, around 94 years old.
He was the last prince of the house of Herod.
@@@

When Martin Luther tacked up his 95 theses in Wittenburg, Germany (This is the 500th anniversary this year btw) & word got back to Rome Luther was called a heretic & all he wanted was an opportunity to defend himself biblically but no one wanted to hear him, like Paul here.

After finally receiving an opportunity to plead his case before King Agrippa, Paul instead chooses to share the story of his miraculous conversion to Christianity. Why would he do that? It seems that Jesus is the hero of Paul’s story. His life focuses on the message of the cross, offensive to some and unbelievable to others. Through it all, Paul focuses on Jesus and the eternity He offers rather than the temporary consequences of this life. It is all about Jesus!

Think back over your conversations and stories the past few weeks. Who is the focus of your attention and hero of your stories? When you’ve been accused falsely of something you didn’t do, how do you react? With anger, blame, frustration?

This chapter tells us of Agrippa the almost convert! – Sometimes in a golf tournament, basketball game or the Superbowl the game can be lost by just a point or two, this small difference between winning & losing & how that could change your life forever as a winner or loser, it can be this close & you could still miss it. This is the closest Agrippa would be to the Gospel, having been told of Salvation by Paul himself & he passes on it…..

@@@

Paul explained to Agrippa according to the strictest sect of Judaism he was a Pharisee, upset by the decadence of the current generation. He wanted revival & re-dedication & yet this zeal fell into legalism & persecution of others.   

In today’s reading, while Paul was giving his testimony to King Agrippa, the preacher give us more detail of how he persecuted Christians before he was saved, and how he was an enemy of God’s people. **Read vs 9-12 again & tell me some of the things Paul did against Christ & his people.

Paul recalls that:
-        He did many things to oppose Jesus Christ & His testimony 9
-        He had Christians locked up for their beliefs 10
-        He had them killed for their beliefs 10
-        He testified against them in legal proceedings 10
-        He punished them 11
-        He caused some to blaspheme against God 11
-        He was very angry at them & what they were teaching 11
-        He traveled to different cities to make their lives miserable & to persecute them 11-12

What an evil man Paul was before he was saved! How violently he opposed Jesus & those that trusted him as their Savior & then even this Paul was saved! He was a new, changed man after his Salvation.

To those that think “I have done wicked things. There is no hope for God to forgive me.” There is hope! Know that you are a sinner. Confess your sin honestly to the Lord, & trust that Jesus died for your sin. Ask him to save you & he will. God forgave wicked Paul & used him to spread the Gospel & to even write part of the Bible! If God forgave Paul, He can forgive, save & use you.
  

Saturday, August 5, 2017

Hospitality in a Hostile world - full sermon


Hospitality in a Hostile world

                  So I’ve confessed a few of my loves to you before. I love old Star Wars movies. I love Comic Book movies…Well today’s confession is Caitlyn (my eldest girl) & I are huge Anglophiles – lovers of all things English. Like Sci-fi? They have Doctor Who. Like Downtown Abby? They did class warfare 1st in a show called Upstairs/Downstairs. Like the comedy the Office? They made the original called, the Office. You know Americans are getting lazy when they ripoff British shows for an American audience & can’t be bothered to even think of their own title, right? Like podcasts, like me? Try Rexfactor (REX) Rexfactor for a humorous history & ranking of all the English & Scottish kings & queens. My mom will say, if you like Law & Order & NCIS try a Father Brown’s mystery or a Midsummer Murders. Heck most of the popular actors in American movies are all British now thanks to movie series’ like James Bond, Star Trek & Harry Potter. And as much as I love sporting events here in KC if someone gave me British Premier League tickets (you know, actual Futball) I’d happily give away all my Royals & Chiefs stuff & head straight up to KCI with my Chelsea jersey on to see the best soccer players on the planet.

                  As an Anglophile and a history lover, I was thinking about our topic of Hospitality in relationship to British soldiers and I remembered two particular stories. The 1st story is a bit sad & the 2nd is a bit more hopeful, then we’ll get into it. A British historian (so someone right up my alley); a British historian named Graham who wrote a book, I believe called When Jim Crow met John Bull & it was about black GI’s in WWII in Britain and it notes how awkward it was for the US military to begin going over to support Britain & have the British military be so hospitable to our black US servicemen. For those of you who don’t know despite the Civil War being over for nearly 100 years the US military at the time was still as nearly segregated as the Deep South and this book goes on to say how shocked the Brits were to see the reality of US racism still so integrated in the military. The startling comment of this book was the concern the US military had that the British hospitality & treatment of black GI’s as equals was going to make “postwar segregation even more difficult”. (Pause) And it was. The US Civil Rights movement started right on the tail of WWII as newly integrated soldiers came home to an often un-integrated homeland.

                  So that was the sad story that it basically took British hospitality to awaken the Civil Rights Reformation in the US almost 100 years after the Civil War ended.

                  The 2nd story is a bit nicer so we’ll end with that as we move into our texts today.  Again regarding British soldiers, but this time instead of allies the US & Britain are opposed in the War of 1812.  
                  At the conclusion of the war in around 1814, 300 British sailors, who had been kept as prisoners, were assembled on the coast of Britanny, France ready to head back to England. The soldiers had been severally billeted on the inhabitants of Britanny for some days and where ready to leave. (Billeted is like the government forcing use of your personal home for military use. Basically this was where the French were lodging the British soldiers before returning them home.) Before they left one of these British soldiers requested permission to see the local superintendent, a Misure Kearnie, which was granted & the British soldier told him: "Please your honor, I don't come to trouble you with any bother about ourselves: we are all as well treated as any Christians can be; but there is one thing that makes my food sit heavy in my stomach, and that of my two mates." "What is it?" the superintendent replied. "Does the family on whom you are quartered begrudge you the food?" "No, your honor; quite the opposite—if they did, that would not surprise us." "What, then, do you complain of?" "Only this, your honor—that the poor folk of France cheerfully lay their scant allowances before us for our food, and we have just found out that they have hardly touched a mouthful themselves, or for their six babes, for the last two days; and this generosity we take to be a greater hardship than any we found in your French prisons." At this Misure Kearnie told them that this hardship would be relieved. He instantly ordered the billets to be withdrawn, and repaid all parties for their kindness, so compassionately interchanged with the soldiers. These generous French families in a time of war would rather feed their enemies than feed themselves & their young children. There may not be a clearer real world picture of the self-sacrifice of the Bread of Life himself, than that.  
                  So see Beloved in both of these stories how hospitality changed not merely the situation (cause any force or military might is able to change a situation), but hospitality is able to change the heart of the matter, it changes the people themselves in the midst of their circumstances.  And that is what makes this a worthy topic for our reflection today – my sermon is called Hospitality in Hostile world.
@@@
(Pause)
                  So what is hospitality? It’s based upon being hospitable. That’s it! The Apostle Paul says that we should “contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality” (Rom 12) which means we should “not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unaware” (Heb 13), but we should also “show hospitality to one another without grumbling” in the church (1st Pet 4), otherwise it’s not really hospitality. Even church-supported widows are to have “a reputation for good works: if she has brought up children, has shown hospitality, has washed the feet of the saints, has cared for the afflicted, and has devoted herself to every good work” (1st Tim 5), shouldn’t a woman like this (let’s call her Jackie, for instance) be honored? So being hospitable is not only a good thing to do, a good work, it is commanded, especially for those who would be elders in the church as Paul writes to Timothy that pastors and elders should be, hospitable, lovers of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined” (Titus 1).

Thankfully men, for us, practicing Christian hospitality isn't about Martha Stewart’s glamorous table settings or platters of picture-perfect food; it's about practicing Biblical servanthood – much like Jesus exemplied: the perfect servant, the Suffering Servant. It isn’t about mere bread but about exemplifying the Bread of Life. More importantly than lace doilies and matching china, it's about the action of loving others through Christ and making people feel welcome.

(Pause)

Biblical hospitality is something that a Christ-like servant provides cheerfully from the heart. It begins with a good attitude and is given to all without respect of persons (rich or poor, powerful or insignificant; black or white). We are called to be hospitable to all people, including the stranger, alien, missionaries and the poor and needy. My hope for you today is that you ask the Lord to show you how to infuse your life with more hospitality & to use your hospitality in a way that is pleasing to Him.


(Pause)
The Body of my sermon will discuss: Why Hospitality is still important today; the Hospitality of God exemplified to us; Examples of Biblical hospitality to others & Tips for furthering your own hospitality.
                  Pt 1 - Why Hospitality is still important today?
1 – Hospitality is an important opportunity to curb cultural error. Google Hospitality today & aside from general definitions & Wiki articles you’ll find instead of reading about the need for a revitalization of the Ethic of Christian Hospitality you’ll find about a 100 articles on the Hospitality Industry. The problem with this is the Hospitality Industry is entirely concerned with making money. How do you get patrons to stay at your hotel or diners to visit your restaurant – click here to find out?! Christian Hospitality on the other hand should not be about making money; rather it should be as a French philosopher said, the Virtue of a great soul that cares for its fellow Humanity. In the NT the Greek word translated “hospitality” literally means “love of strangers.” In the OT, God reminds Israel they were once strangers in a strange land themselves – “When an alien (i.e. a stranger…not ET by the way). When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat them. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were once aliens in Egypt.” (Lev 19).  
2 – Hospitality is an opportunity to practice love in action. Don’t tell me you love me; show me you love me. Any whose known a party to an abusive marriage will tell you its nice to be told your loved; but action speaks louder than words. Generosity is the foundation of both hospitable and generous churches & generous churches tend to be healthier churches. I want Calvary to be a generous, hospitable & health church.   
3 – Hospitality is an opportunity for practicality. A fact that needs no official study or Christianity Today article is new members are more quickly assimilated into “body” life though excellent hospitality. Wanna move from visitor to member, let us host you in new member’s classes. Want to know more about theology or understand the framework of the Bible better, show up for a SS class. Our teachers will serve you, for FREE! Want fellowship, then join a Community Group. Community Groups often give members both an opportunity to serve & to be served by other members of the group; #get-involved.
4 – Selfishly; Hospitality is also an opportunity to make yourselves feel good. Often people who are able to use their gifts of hospitality feel more valued & validated, in the service of others. Don’t believe me? Try it! Join a community group, serve in a soup kitchen, volunteer at a community event – take your kids!  Exemplify for them that service & sacrifice are important acts of maturity, especially for Christians! Don’t just sit there like mere bumps on logs: join in service, help, love one another, give and share with one another. This is why Hospitality is still important today.  
@@@
                  Pt 2 - Why should I? Examples of God’s hospitality to us.
While many unbelievers merely think hospitality is about inviting others over for dinner, as if you were dating your neighbors & the world thinks hospitality is merely a business industry involving hotels & resorts; neither of these ideas is true. Hospitality is about welcoming people into our lives, meeting their needs, and reaching out: even to strangers, and even to hostile people. According to Scripture even God’s enemies are subdued by hospitality, which is evident for us in God’s work of redemption of us through the Lord Jesus Christ. (Pause)
The heart of the Gospel is entirely rooted in hospitality. From birth Scripture says, we are at enmity with God because of sin. We have no resource for saving ourselves. Yet God sent Jesus to pay our debt, and He redeems those who believe in Him, making a place for us with Him in His kingdom. His hospitality restores our relationship with Him. As I studied this topic, I continued to see these themes evidenced throughout Scripture.
                  1 – God reached out to me when I was helpless and has invited me into a relationship with Him. 1 Timothy 1 says, this saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. While we are not the actors in Salvation (God acts) we receive the bounty of His hospitality.
            2 – God sent Christ to save me and to offer me life, turning me from rebellion and welcoming me into His family as an adopted son. Romans 8 says, For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
            3 – When I come to God in prayer; He will always listens, receiving me into His presence as His child. Matthew 6 says, but when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. Calvary, I’ll tell you I’ve never had an unanswered prayer! That very thought seems like blasphemy to me. What people mean when they say that is God didn’t give me what I want, when I wanted it. But friends we must remember “No & Later;” are still answers to prayer. When my kids daily ask for treats, it’s often my job to say sorry “sugar-addicts” today you need a day off. Don’t blaspheme Him for an answer you didn’t like.
                  4 – Jesus said that He is preparing an eternal place for us with Him. John 14 says, in my Father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? Quiet literally, God himself will host us in His home, give us a room, in His home, prepare a banquet for us with Him, called the Marriage Supper of the Lamb in the age to come – when finally the Lord & his assembled Church are once again reunited as one.  
                  See friends at every step of the Christian life God is the one who extends Himself, gifts faith, grants repentance, humbles sinners, lowers himself to atone for His enemies. Lead, guides, loves, saves…. His hospitality gives us life & life with Him eternal! That is why we are called to be hospitable. We are a poor dim reflection of our Lord but just as the moon is a poor reflection of the light of the sun, we’re still called on to light up the darkness around us.   
@@@
                  Pt 3 - Examples of Hospitality in the Bible
Here are 4 examples of hospitality in the Bible: The Jailer; Abraham; The Seller of Purple; Gaius of Corinth
                  A prison guard may seem like an odd example of hospitality, but it is in Acts 16. Here is why I think he’s a great example. When Paul cast a demon out from a fortune-telling woman, who’d made her owners a lot of money they were outraged. “Her owners saw that their hope of gain was gone, so they seized Paul & Silas & dragged them into the marketplace (Acts 16).” At this, “the crowd joined in attacking them, and the magistrates tore off Paul & Silas’ clothes & gave orders to beat them with rods. And after inflicting many blows, they threw them in prison, ordered the jailer to keep them & they put them deep in the prison, fastening their feet in stocks (Acts 19).” Instead of complaining about this, Paul & Silas prayed to God & sang hymns & the prisoners were listening to them, and an earthquake freed them from their bonds & instead of fleeing they stayed put, so the jailer (who was responsible for them) cried out. “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you & your HH, and then the jailer “took them that same hour of the night and he washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family.” This jailer shows great hospitality to those who were formerly his own prisoners.
                  **change— In the Book of Genesis we read of Abraham’s humble & generous display of hospitality to three strangers.  Wealthy and aged, Abraham could have called on one of his many servants to tend to the three unannounced visitors. Yet the hospitable & righteous Abraham generously gave them the best he had. And, as it turned out, he had entertained the Lord and two angels. 
                  Another example is the infamous Seller of Purple. In the same chapter where we read about the jailer who showed hospitality to Paul and Silas we find another great example of hospitality in Lydia. It says “on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together” (Acts 16), and “One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul,” so after this, “she was baptized, and her household as well, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.” And she prevailed upon us.” So Paul, Silas, and apparently Luke who wrote the Book of Acts, and why he often refers to the group as “we,” stayed at Lydia’s for some time. She gave them room and board and so Paul, Silas, and Luke probably stayed in Lydia’s home for several days, weeks, or more.
                  Our final example is Gaius of Corinth. Gaius was probably someone Paul had met at Corinth or who he had met in Rome while a prisoner there, and apparently, Paul was under house arrest, meaning that he had certain freedom to preach the gospel but could not leave Rome, so Paul ends up in the home of Gaius of Corinth, who Paul himself baptized (1st Cor 1:14), and near the end of his third missionary trip, Paul stayed with Gaius of Corinth. Paul says that “Gaius, who is host to me and to the whole church, greets you” (Rom 16:23), so perhaps Gaius not only offered his home for Paul to stay at but “open his home to a whole church” to meet as well, so Gaius was another great example of hospitality, but not just for Paul but for “the whole church.” And He did this probably at great risk to himself, ( despite any threat of persecution – both social & political) but that’s nothing new for those who follow Christ and are willing to pay any price to follow Him.
These and a 1000 other examples are given for us to show how we too should be hospitable to both the saints of God & to those “sinners” like Zacchaeus, who don’t yet know Christ.

@@@
                  Pt 4 -Tips for continuing hospitality

                                    Keep a Good Attitude

Use hospitality one to another without grumbling. (1 Peter 4)

One of the most important characteristics of a good host is the attitude. Peter reminds us that we must use hospitality without grumbling. The way to do this is to always remember the reason why you are doing what you are doing. You are serving because you love the Lord. When you forget your motivation, you will no longer be a servant, instead you will be a slave. Remember the two greatest commandments: Love the Lord God first and love your neighbor. If you are doing it for any other reason you are not properly motivated and your attitude will usually reflect it.

                                    Invite the Sinners

And after these things [Jesus] went forth, and saw a publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me.  And he left all, rose up, and followed him.  And Levi made him a great feast in his own house for Jesus: and there was a great company of publicans and of others that sat down with them. (Luke 5)

Jesus never forgot the sinner. And praise Him for that because had he forgotten them we would all still be lost! Better yet, Levi was hospitable to Jesus along with the other publicans (tax collectors) who were thought to be “undesirables” in Biblical times. So many times we have church fellowship dinners and community groups & yet forget that this is a great time to invite  unbelievers. Next time you have a fellowship gathering remember to invite an unbelieving friend.

                                    Provide for Missionaries

For the Laborer is worthy of his wages. (Luke 10)

Being a missionary can be a very exhausting job. When they are not on the field they are usually traveling from town to town and church-to-church to gain support for their mission. Sometimes a missionary family needs a place to stay that is free. One of the greatest blessings to these brothers and sisters in Christ is for you to offer them your home even for a night or two. And with family travels Sandra & I know this feeling of having been greatly blessed when other family members offer us a free place to stay during our travels. And after all if we take seriously the relational significance of being “brothers & sisters in Christ” - What are a few nights rest & a few meals shared in face of Eternity together? Who are mother & brother or sister & father if not our fellow believers?
Consider as well inviting them to dinner in your home or even treating them to a meal out. No matter what it is you can do, offer this to your fellow laborers for Christ, I promise you that this type of hospitality will be a huge blessing and will ensure that your missionaries will not become weary in well doing.

                                    Serve the Poor & Needy

But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” (Luke 14)

We should serve the poor and the needy willingly without expecting anything in return. When we do this we give so much more than food and shelter; we actually show the love and grace of our Heavenly Father! It is a way to share the blessings that we have received with those that are less blessed. Volunteer, serve, or work at a thrift shop or in a soup kitchen. Share some canned goods with your local food pantry. Find a rescue mission or a local Christian based pregnancy center; they always need your donations and help.
@@@
                  One last story as we begin to close…
Many years ago a Scottish explorer Mungo Park once toured West Africa. He was seeking approval to meet the King of Niger & when the King heard a white man wanted to meet him, he sent a messenger to tell him hew would need to know why he came & he wasn’t allowed entrance into the King’s land without approval. The King told him to wait in a small village for approval & when Park got there he found all doors in the town close to him. Waiting several hours, a lady that had been working in the fields came asked him why he was so down & offered him dinner & lodging with her for the night. Having been given a lamp, broiled fish & a mat to sleep on Park rested as the lady & her friends spun yarn & sang through the night. If the song was pre-existing or made up on the spot Park didn’t know but the ladies sang…."The winds roared, and the rain fell. The poor white man, faint and weary, came and sat under our tree. He has no mother to bring him milk, no wife to grind him corn. The Chorus went:
Let us pity the white man: no mother has he to bring him milk, no wife to grind his corn."
Mongo Park was looking for to understand what made Niger, Niger & so he went looking for the king & the king put him off to the people of His kingdom to show him what Niger was all about. As a people of the King of Kings Himself, let us no longer be any less gracious & hospitable than this lady was to Mungo Park.
@@@
You may say Bennett, why does this ethic spur you on soo much when it seems like such a plain & ordinary thing? Why do you waste our hour in telling us basically…to be nice to people? Beloved, if you have to ask; then that is precisely why I have to preach this message to you. Like children you who should know when to brush your teeth & clean your rooms forget the simple things you should remember & I the parent calling to mind what you should already know. I attempt today to provoke you to consider anew the teachings of Jesus Christ – to love your God, to love your neighbor, to love your God in loving your fellow man. Let Calvary be known in the Community; for love, for warmth, for service, let it be known for faithfulness & for hospitality.

As we close let me leave you with the words of this new Hymn I learned….

                  Receive Them With Hospitality - Jehovah shows sincere hospitality. He cares for all without partiality. He gives both rain and sun, withholding these from none; He fills our hearts with food and good cheer. Whenever we show favor to lowly ones, we imitate our God as beloved sons. Our Father will repay the goodness we display, our kindness that is truly sincere.

We never know the good that may come about; when we see those in need and we help them out. Though strangers they may be, in hospitality, we lend a hand to care for their needs. Like Lydia of old (or Disney’s Beauty & the Beast), we say: ‘Be our guest.’ When they come to our home, they find peace and rest. Our Father is aware of all those ev’rywhere, who imitate his merciful deeds.
Let’s pray –
Father in heaven, we’ve been reminded today of the Generosity & Hospitality of your people from Abraham in the Old to the Lydia in the New, from British soldiers to French captors, from Scottish explorers to African weavers.
Today we ask that you give our eyes wisdom to see the needs of other people. Give us hearts full of love for our neighbors as well as for the strangers we meet. Help us to understand what it means to love others as much as we love ourselves. Teach us to care in a way that strengthens those who are sick. Fill us with generosity so we feed the hungry, clothe the naked and give drink to the thirsty. Let our lives be a healing balm to those who are weak and lonely and weary by offering our kindness to them. May we remember to listen, to smile, to offer a helping hand each time the opportunity presents itself. Give us hearts of courage that we will be brave enough to risk loving our enemy. Inspire us to go out of our way to include those in the margins. Help us to be welcoming and inviting to all who come to our door. Let us be God’s hospitality in the world. Amen.