Sermons

What is preaching? St. Paul writes in Romans: “Whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Romans 10:14-15)

Therefore our Lutheran Confessions state: “It is also taught among us that one holy Christian church will be and remain forever. This is the assembly of all believers among whom the Gospel is preached in its purity and the holy sacraments are administered according to the Gospel.” (Augsburg Confession VII:1-3)

There are 257 posts filed in Sermons (this is page 16 of 86).

Common Misconceptions about the Advent Narratives

Steadfast Lutherans » Common Misconceptions about the Advent Narratives.

There are several good reasons to expose and correct the apocryphal, Hallmark-card understanding of Jesus’ birth (which I will hereafter dub the mythical view): 

1. When people come to realize that the details of the Christmas story as taught by the church are factually incorrect, it threatens the credibility of the church’s teaching on other matters.

2. As we will see, the details of the birth accounts found in the gospels are not arbitrarily selected. They are chosen to communicate a particular understanding of the birth and person of Christ. The mythical view obstructs these significant points that the gospel writers are communicating.

3. The mythical view props up the non-Christian accusation that Christians don’t really know what the Bible teaches. Though they claim to believe it, they, in fact, are quite ignorant of its teaching and its events (I think this is a fair accusation for a large number of people who go by the name “Christian”).

4. The events surrounding Christ’s birth were orchestrated by God and consequently his action within his creation. When we consistently change these details we are, either wittingly or unwittingly, attempting to alter the freedom of God to act as he chooses.

Nativity PictureOf course, I am not the first to correct the mythical view, and I won’t be the last. Nevertheless, I hope to be another source of correct information for those who are misguided and a source of encouragement to others to correct these misunderstandings as well.

How do you know if you are operating with a mythical view of Christ’s birth? Here’s a short quiz to help you determine…

1. How many wise men were there?

2. Did the wise men visit Christ in the manger?

3. Were the wise men kings?

4. Were the wise men from the Orient (Eastern Asia)?

5. What was the bright star that appeared above the Christ child?

6. Was Christ born in December?

7. Did it snow when Christ was born?

8. What animals attended the birth of Christ?

9. Did the innkeeper turn Mary and Joseph away?

10. Was Gabriel the angel that stood above the stable that night?

11. Did Mary deliver Jesus with only Joseph’s help?

If you answered “yes” to any questions which required a yes/no answer then you have a misunderstanding of the biblical account of the events surrounding the birth of Christ. I’ll take each question one by one and explain.

1. How many wise men were there?
It is common for people to believe that there were three magi. This conclusion is drawn from the fact that the magi presented three gifts to Christ. This, however, is no indication that there were only three of them. Past knowing that there was plurality of magi, we should have no certainty on how many there were. However, since magi in a king’s court were not a loose collection of individuals but an advisory council to a king, it is perhaps likely that they traveled as the entire council and that there were more than three of them. But we simply don’t know.

2. Did the wise men visit Jesus in the manger?
The magi did not visit Christ in the manger. Matthew 2:11 tells us that by the time they reach the holy family in Bethlehem they find them in a house not a stable or cave. Incidentally, I don’t think we can determine very much about the timing of the magi’s visit from pairing Herod’s inquiry into the timing of the star’s appearance and his decision to have killed all the male children two years and under born in Bethlehem. If we are inclined to think that the reference to two years is a book end on the length of time that passed since Christ was born, then the fact that he killed all those under two as well has to be the other book end. So we really have no way of knowing within two years of Christ’s birth when the magi visited. In any case, the visit was not the night that Christ was born.

3. Were the wise men kings?
No. They were a king’s advisors. The best picture we have from Scripture of what the relationship of magi is to an eastern king is found in the book of Daniel. Here, they are employed by the king to make predictions and discern the future of the kingdom in order for the king to rule well. They were not a ruling council themselves.

4. Were the wise men from the Orient (Eastern Asia)?
Matthew tells us that the magi were from the East. Commonly, European geographical divisions are imposed upon the location of the East. Most likely the magi come from Persia not the Orient. The best explanation for their knowledge of a coming Jewish messiah is that they learned of it from Jews living in exile following the conquest in 587 BCE. This makes strike three for the song line “We three kings of Orient are…”

5. The Star
There are two major options for what the magi saw: a natural phenomenon in the sky and a supernatural light which God made manifest to the magi.

The support for a natural phenomenon is as follows. Typically translators translate the Greek word aster as “star,” but the Greek word is not precise enough to distinguish a star from a planet or a planetary eclipse. We don’t know what exactly they saw, but the most likely explanation is that they saw a relationship of heavenly bodies not a single star. Many scientists have worked in conjunction with ANE archeologists to determine what the magi saw. Some conclude that they saw a lunar eclipse of Jupiter. For a brief explanation of this evidence and an introduction to a recent book on the subject click here. Astronomist Hugh Ross claims that the only plausible explanation is “a phenomenon called a recurring nova.  An easily visible nova (a star that suddenly increases in brightness and then within a few months or years grows dim) occurs about once every decade.  Novae are sufficiently uncommon to catch the attention of observers as alert and well trained as the magi must have been.  However, many novae are also sufficiently unspectacular as to escape the attention of others. Most novae experience only a single explosion.  But a tiny fraction have the capacity to undergo multiple explosions separated by months or years.  This repeat occurrence seems necessary, for the Matthew text indicates that the star appeared, disappeared, and then reappeared and disappeared sometime later.” This theory has something going for it but the same can be said for other theories too.

A strong case can be made, however, that this is simply not a natural event of any kind, but something like Yahweh’s Shekinah glory in the Old Testament. There’s quite a rich biblical motif of God revealing an event through a bright light. To name a few: The burning bush, the pillar of fire and glory cloud that led Israel in the wilderness, Mt. Sinai when Moses’ face shone, the Tabernacle and Temple was filled with such glory that the priests couldn’t enter, the light that Balaam’s donkey saw, Ezekiel’s vision, the mount of Transfiguration, and the conversion of Saul. The language of Matthew is strikingly similar to the language used in Exodus to speak of the glory cloud/pillar of fire that led the Israelites

 the star “went before them” (Matthew 2:9)
“the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of cloud” (Exodus 13:21)

the star “rested over the place where the child was” (Matthew 2:9)
“And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud rested on it” (Exodus 40:35)

I’ve presented the evidence, I leave it to you, discerning reader, to decide which option has the best support.

How they concluded that an astrological anomily would lead them to the Jewish messiah is difficult to make sense of as well. Did they make the conclusion on the basis of something found in Scripture? Was it perhaps Jewish apocolyptic literature? Was it through some discernment of their astrological studies? Or was it some combination of some or all of these? A common explanation is that they knew the Hebrew Scriptures and came across this phrase: ”A star shall come out of Jacob…” (Num 24:17). I am doubtful of this explanation because they weren’t looking for a star that came out of Jacob they were looking for one in the sky. It’s perhaps as likely as any other explanation. Or perhaps they knew to look for it from reading Isaiah: “…nations shall come to your light,and kings to the brightness of your rising” (Isaiah 60:3). Perhaps, but perhaps not.

6. The timing of Christ’s birth
The likelihood of Christ being born in December is not good. There is only one source that I’ve ever seen to argue with conviction for this conclusion. It is argued by John Stormer, a former fiction writer, who is not a biblical scholar and it is published by an institution with dubious academic credibility. Nevertheless, these ad hominems aside, the author builds his argument on the timing of Zechariah’s temple duties, but the dates are not certain enough to draw the hard and fast conclusions that he does. Gene Veith has argued convincingly that the church did not choose December 25 as the date of Christmas in an attempt to hijack the winter festival of Roman pagans, but he doesn’t argue that we can be certain that December is when Christ was born. At least he didn’t when he wrote his article for World Magazine in 2005. But by 2006 he seems convinced by Stormer’s argument. He seems unaware that Stormer’s dating is not as certain as he finds it to be.

Note that the question of when Christ was born is a different question than the one which Pr. Joseph Abrahamson recently addressed regarding how the church came to select December 25th as the date for celebrating Christ’s birth.

7. Did it snow when Christ was born?
Snow in Palestine is about as common as snow in Los Angeles. It’s possible but extremely unlikely. The Bible certainly doesn’t give us any indication that it did. No, snow is added to the story by some for romantic and seasonal effect.

8. What animals attended the birth of Christ?
We don’t know exactly. Recently, Pope Benedict XVI released a book in which he claims with an unwarranted degree of certainty that there were no animals in the stable with Mary and Joseph. Apparently, his sole basis for his conclusion is that Matthew and Luke do not mention any animals in their accounts. To which I ask, when did the fact that something isn’t written in the Bible ever stop a pope from claiming something to be true? Furthermore, as the saying goes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Consider that Mary and Joseph were in a stable where they had just traveled to Jerusalem by donkey and where there relatives also traveled by animal. Where else would one keep these animals besides a stable? Furthermore, shepherds visited that night, so it’s quite likely that there were domesticated animals in the stable/cave.

9. Did the innkeeper turn Mary and Joseph away?
It seems that the Charlie Brown Christmas Special got it wrong. But it gets it wrong because most translations get it wrong. The ESV, NASB, KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV all translate the word kataluma inLuke 2:7 as “inn.” This conveys the idea that the family went to a public hotel and were turned away by an innkeeper because there was no vacancy. But the word kataluma simply means lodging place. It may refer to an inn, but Luke knew a better word in Greek for a place of public lodging than kataluma. Luke uses the word pandocheion in 10:34 to refer to the place that the Good Samaritan took the wounded Jewish man.

Mary and Joseph were returning to Bethlehem, the city of Joseph’s family origin. Certainly Joseph had family here. The lodging place in which they were unable to stay was most likely the home of a relative. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that Mary and Joseph could have afforded a place of public lodging given their economic class. It seems then that Mary and Joseph were unable to lodge with the family because other family members were already lodging there.

The only Bible versions I’ve seen that translates Luke 2:7 correctly is The Complete Jewish Bible and the TNIV. The CJB renders kataluma as “living-quarters” while the TNIV renders it a little more vaguely as “guest room.” Incidentally, both versions also properly translate pandocheion as “inn” in 10:34.

So it’s unlikely that an innkeeper turned away Mary and Joseph because it’s unlikely that Mary and Joseph sought lodging at an inn in the first place.

10. Was Gabriel the name of the angel that stood above the stable that night?
This is a bit of trick question. There was no angel above the stable that night. Luke 2:15 tells us that the angels went back into heaven after reporting the news to the shepherds. But that doesn’t stop Christians from fixing an angel above the stable.

11. Did Mary deliver Jesus with only Joseph’s help?
Perhaps, but I think it is more likely that the women of Joseph’s family helped her deliver. Of course they may not have helped her if they believed that Joseph and Mary engaged in sexual intercourse during the betrothal period. Again we simply don’t know.

On many of these questions we have to suspend judgment or hold our views loosely. Unfortunately, our nativity scenes have taken precidence over the teaching of Scripture. I don’t deny that many of the representations of Christ’s birth reflect events that are possible. However, these possibilities have become entrenched in the minds of many people as the facts of Christ’s birth. Add to this that most nativity scenes include wholesale inaccuracies and we have a compelling reason to take the time to return to Scripture and remind ourselves of what it actually says.

Advent 2 2012 – Malachi 4:1-6 [3:19-25]

09. December 2012
Advent 2
Malachi 4:1-6 [3:19-25]

“I have loved you,” says the LORD. But you say, “How have you loved us?” Thus the prophet Malachi begins the final prophecy before four and half centuries of silence. “I have loved you,” says the LORD. What was true in Malachi’s day is true now. Our LORD has devastated all enemies. They are dust and ashes. The sin slate is wiped clean. Death is swallowed up in victory. The devil is whipped to roam this decaying world like a dying animal. You are Jacob whom God has loved. Even when your enemies rebuild their ruinous shelters, He tears them down with a mere Word: it is finished.

This eternal truth is easy to forget: through neglect, through ignorance, through avoidance, or even through good intentions. Thus it was in the days after Malachi. In the four hundred and thirty years until the last prophet comes, the people of God were marked by complacency. Under Persian emperor Cyrus, they had a cushy religious life. This pagan emperor helped rebuild all Jerusalem including the temple. Then the land was conquered again from the Greek Alexander the Great. Again, the government allowed the people to live religiously as they had while also being introduced to Greek culture. When Alexander died, his successor Ptolemy continued the tolerance policy.

During this time of relative ease, it was business as usual for the temple and synagogue. Even after the Seleucid’s took over—beginning an era of oppression, outlawing of circumcision, erecting of a statue of Zeus in the temple, and offering pagan sacrifices on the altar of the temple—it only lasted a few generations and Mattathias and his son Judas Maccabeus led a revolt to rid Jerusalem of these idolators and then the Roman conquest just 66 years before Christ’s birth.

We might be tempted to look back at this history and assume that the truth and faithful practice were maintained because they were tolerated. Since no one was bothering them, we might think they remained faithful. Especially when the temple was recovered by the Hasmoneans, surely right sacrifices and right believing was re-established? Yet, the people of God did not take such a critical view of their religious life. Rather than consider their practices according to God’s Word, they instead took what they received and added to it as they saw fit.

Being a proper Jew was thought to be about Jerusalem, the temple, regular sacrifices, and daily prayers. These were all good things if done in faith and not out of obligation. Where did they get such an idea that being faithful is about doing the right things? The religious types, say Malachi. It wasn’t always this way. Remember the priest Levi? God gave him a covenant of love and peace. Levi feared the Lord’s Word. In reverent awe, he spoke as the LORD gave him to say. The lips of a true priest holds onto knowledge and the people seek instruction from his mouth (Malachi 2:7).

But Levi’s sons turned aside from the way. They spoke in error, led the people to stumble. They corrupted the Word. They added laws where God had not spoken. They made promises where God had not. They picked and chose what Word fit their wants and ignored the Word that struck their hearts. Thus lost the promise of the covenant all the while looking perfectly religious.

The blame falls not just on the priests. They are at fault for teaching us in error, to be sure. But Malachi would have us remember Judah, our spiritual father. Our fathers inherited the covenant of love and peace. Then, over the generations they also abandoned it. They are considered by God faithlessness. They assimilated the ways of their world into their faith through the mixture of truth and error. Malachi foresaw the lawmaker Pharisaical cult of Jesus’ day. He saw the foresaw the lawyer Sadduccees who sought to put Christ to the test. He foresaw all those who said faithfulness was about religiosity.

What was true in Malachi’s day is also true today. Both pastors and fathers have become negligent. We’ve been led to think that being a faithful Christian is about being religious: doing the right things, knowing the right maxims, having the right attitude, or giving the right token of obedience. As with our fathers do we do these things out of tradition, obligation, or getting along? Or do we do them out of faith for faith?

He also foresaw the empty religiosity of American Christianity. Consider our own family and friends: once they were baptized. Once they communed with the LORD in love and peace. Once they were married to Christ as the holy bride, now they have divorced Him and take instead another wife. They walked from the faith of their baptism and took a new bride. They sought as wives instead the daughters of the gods of patriotism—loving their country about their LORD—or tradition—loving the the ways of man more than the ways of God—or wealth—hoarding money as if it were theirs to keep.

Our congregations have stopped listening to the Word, failed to take it to heart, and do not give honor to God’s holy name. We’ve listened selectively, mixing the Word of God with sour grapes, polluting the sweet wine of our Lord’s favor. We give the second hand of our last fruits. Our sacrifices are lame and blind, suitable for a beggar not an offering to God. Our practices are a reflection of what we think God wants and not a reflection of what God has said and made us. We continue with false and empty piety—going through the motions—because we think that in them we have life. But that’s what Pastor-so-in-so said! That’s what my parents’ did! That’s what I had to go through!

Don’t hear me wrong. Practices can be edifying if done in faith and for faith. Our religion (how we act out our faith) can also be distracting. Take Holy Baptism, for example, an institution of Jesus himself. Even weak Christians often uphold this gift and seek baptism for their child or grandchild. How long do they wait? Often its about getting all the family here, mom is suitably through her post-partum recovery, lining up what’s needed for the party, even waiting until the kid fits in the baptismal “dress.” That’s weird. If Baptism is what Jesus says it is—a saving flood—why would we wait for our child to receive salvation? Foolish. Our traditions and practices have gotten in the way of the truth.

Baptism and confirmation make a pair. The man-made tradition of Confirmation can be both edifying and useful. In Confirmation, each of you confirmed the faith given in Holy Baptism. Public confession of faith is helpful. In confirmation you announced to the congregation that you have remained in the faith granted at your baptism. It is a suitable rite of passage from childhood into adulthood in the congregation. In my case, my baptismal sponsors rightly declared their duty to watch over my faith done.

This tradition of man has also accrued error. Some parents think that confirmation is the end of their spiritual duties for their child. Wrong. You are your child’s spiritual guardian until you or they die. Some confirmands think this is graduation from the church, the end of their obligation to attend to God’s Word regularly. Wrong again. Our attentiveness to the Word of God continues until Christ comes to judge the living and the dead.

Most think that the man-made rite of Confirmation is examination to receive the Lord’s Supper. Wrong. Confirmation is about affirming your Baptism. Admission to the Lord’s Supper is both a matter of confession of common faith according to the Small Catechism and also pastoral examination. People today think that confirmation is a free ticket to the Lord’s Supper. Wrong. How many of you can say the Ten Commandments? How many of you know the chief texts of Holy Baptism, Holy Communion, and Holy Absolution? Go look at the memory board in the narthex and tell me if you can confess those things from memory?

You see what has happened. We act as if the traditions are justified in themselves and have ignored the truth behind them. We took God’s Word seriously for a time and now hide behind a confirmation years ago. There are no good reasons to continue in falsehood. The Christian church is not traditional. She is faithful. She does as her LORD would have her do. She hears His voice and lives according to His promise. Even when false teachers or errant practices arise in our midst, we do well to consider them carefully and never assume they have authority of themselves.

Malachi saw the empty religion of the coming generations and now even ours. Today it seems everything opposes us. It seems all is well for the wicked. False religious types speak faithless words. Even our family who should know better would have us believe a different Gospel, to forsake the truth of the Word, and look to idols for comfort and peace. They forsake the means of the Holy Spirit for other comforts. Ironically those idols seem to give exactly what their wearied souls need but their comfort only lasts for a short time. For now we must live in hope, suffering while it is night until this day comes.

Our religion is not about traditions and practices but faithfulness to God. Because we hold to faith for hope, it seems Christians are to be pitied most above all men. To those without faith God’s work here is seen as oppression, hatred, and unjust anger. We are being killed all the day long, regarded as lambs to the slaughter. We are persecuted, mocked, sorrowful, and grieving. We see the darkness with eyes of faith. We call a thing what it is. Sin—sin. Suffering—suffering. Pain—pain. Grief—grief. There’s no covering up reality for Christians. We know what it is, cross bearing all. The faithful life is life under the cross.

The cross is a purifying fire that devastates all. No sinful flesh is left but all are dust and ashes. We weep over sin, suffer all the day, know pain, and grieve with tears. We don’t make pretense to avoid the reality. We embrace the truth exposed. It is the light of the Gospel that devastates the old religion of works and man-made righteousness. That light exposes how rotten and corrupt the world truly is. In face of the Light, the old synagogue of the Law is burned to the root. The temple has no stone left standing. All the empty religion is chaff, separated and consumed.

But “Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come into his temple.” (Malachi 3:1) The prophet sees the day of the Lord. On that day the tables are turned. The LORD will accomplish a great reversal. The day is coming when we will no longer need to live by trust in God’s word but will see this reversal come to pass. The wicked will be brought to an end and the just raised to life immortal. This day will come with fire that burns. Consuming fire. Fire that burns the dross, the chaff. The old will be destroyed and life and immortality brought to light.

This day comes with fire that heals: Christ, the sun of righteousness. His rays make men justified, cast out the works of darkness. His voice is the Word of the Gospel, seen only by the eyes of faith. The time of the Gospel is the day. All the rest is night and darkness. You see, Christ Himself is the Sun. He is faithful and in him is faithful religion. The traditions of men are laid aside for the Word of God.

All empty rites that keep the faithful busy will finally cease. “For His merciful kindness is great toward us, And the truth of the Lord endures forever. Praise the Lord!” (Psalm 117:2) The fire of Christ will in the end reduce all the wicked to ashes. All error will be brought to and end. All sorrow will end. Vacant religious practices exposed. The day is coming. The Sun of Righteousness is shining. To those who believe, who fear the name of the Lord, this Day is one to look forward to and rejoice in: “. . . straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near” (Luke 21:28).

Christ our Redeemer is coming; the Sun of Righteousness will bring healing in His wings. Blood and water from His pierced side washes you clean. He feeds you with holy food. He comforts you with His abiding presence in the midst of horrible things. These are no empty religious rites. They are the gifts of the Spirit acting through means of spoken Word, holy washing, and heavenly food. Faithful because they are not of men, of tradition, or even of good intentions. Faithful because they are of Christ and give Christ. Cast aside all false piety and hold to the faith once received. Fathers speak this to your children. Children listen to your fathers. Behold, the LORD is coming and indeed has come—Christ Jesus.

In Name of the Father, + Son, and Holy Spirit. Amen.

Rev. Christopher R. Gillespie
Grace Lutheran Church
Dyer, Indiana