Sermons, Articles, and Other Things

Accounts of the lives of our ancestors tell us that they looked forward to letters from family who had emigrated to other lands. In those letters they read descriptions of what life was like in their relatives’ new situations. Many of those letters were written before there were photographs, so they had to use illustrative words to convey where they were, what they were doing, and what life was like for them. The recipients would not have full understanding of the new life of their relatives, but they would have a true understanding of it, and that knowledge would give them a sense of peace and gladness about it all.   In a sense, that is how  statements about heaven or the eternal state function in the Book of Revelation. They tell us what the place is like and what the inhabitants are doing. There are many examples we could think about, in addition to the verses we will consider. Still, a great deal is said in Revelation 22:3-5: ‘No longer will there be anything accursed, but the thr

We are all familiar with the idea of a substitute whether it is a player being replaced in a football match or in a member of the Cabinet standing in for the Prime Minister when he is away. Such are only utilised when the original choice cannot fulfil the role, and their contribution is temporary. Often, no one remembers what they did or said. Jesus is not a substitute in that sense. He took our place indeed, but he was not inferior to us, merely helping us in a small way, because we had become tired or because we were given a temporary role. There are other words that can be used instead of substitute. We can use the words agent or representative if we wish. When did he become our substitute? It is no doubt the case that a footballer can be informed when he is going to be introduced as a substitute and a member of the Cabinet will be told beforehand when he will be on duty. With regard to Jesus as our substitute, the first indication of his role is given in Genesis 3 with the announ

Three introductory matters are worth noting before we consider some details from this passage describing what went on in the Upper Room on the evening of Jesus’ arrest. This passage certainly describes an unusual event.   First, as far as we know, Jesus only attended one occasion of the Lord’s Supper, this one which was the first one ever held on that Passover evening. It is possible that it was held in the period between his resurrection and ascension, but if it was, it is not mentioned in the accounts we have of him meeting with his disciples after he rose from the dead.  In any case, the event we know about was a special occasion for him, because Luke records that Jesus told the disciples that he had anticipated being there with strong desire – ‘I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer’ (Luke 22:15). Therefore, we should think about the intensity of Jesus’ desire with regard to the event.   The second introductory point is to note the silence of Jo

As we noticed previously, Paul divides the pieces of armour into two types – those described as ‘having on’ and those described as ‘taking up’. The three described as ‘having on’ – the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness and the sandals of peace – illustrate three blessings that come at conversion: the truth of the gospel, justification and reconciliation. Paul then mentions three pieces of armour that a soldier on duty would have beside him, ready for use should an enemy attack – the helmet, the shield and the sword. Those weapons are different from the breastplate and the shoes in that they became essential when the enemy attacks with his weapons. A likely weapon that would be used by the enemy would be darts or arrows which would be fired in large numbers, although they would also have weapons for close conflict. The three pieces of armour are pictures of three spiritual weapons that a believer has to use in conflict with the enemy – faith, vision and the word of God. Wh

This statement by Jesus seems to point to something debatable in experience, indeed two debatable experiences, or at least what seem to be unlikely for disciples to have at first glance. The first is that sinful individuals can be pure in heart and the second is   that they will be able in some way(s) to see the God who is described elsewhere in the Bible as invisible. Yet we know that Jesus did not makes guesses about what was possible for his disciples or false promises that could not be fulfilled. Having thought about that, perhaps we now wonder why Jesus is so confident that both will come true. Is it because he will bring them about in the experience of his disciples? As we commence our sermon, I would quote a statement I read in an article by Andrew Miller. He said, ‘‘The purer the heart is, the more clearly it will see God, and the more clearly it sees God, the purer it must become.’ C. H. Spurgeon said something similar in his commentary on Matthew: ‘It is a great reward to be

Paul makes a distinction regarding the pieces of armour that he mentions. Three of them he describes as having been put on by the soldier and the other three are to be picked up by the soldier when needed, when an attack comes. Paul does not mean that the second trio only get picked up occasionally. But his distinction is important and can be explained in this way. The ones described as ‘having put on’ are those that believers receive immediately when they believe in Jesus for the first time, as hopefully we will see. These three pieces remain important for the rest of the Christian life and always accompany the use of the other three weapons. Indeed, the impression is that we cannot use the second three unless we are wearing the first three. The evil day In verse 12 Paul repeats the necessity of a believer standing against the wiles of the devil but he also adds when this is needed. The specific time is described as ‘the evil day’. What does Paul have in mind by the use of ‘day’ here?