Can we be sure of eternal life?
Sermon preached at St Paul's Church, Oadby
Sunday 28 May 2006
Hugh James
There is no audio recording of this sermon, but the text is shown below.
The bible readings used in this sermon are 1 John 5.9-13 and John 16.29-end
.
All over the world there are people trying to break the code – the da Vinci Code - to understand the mysteries of Dan Brown's book. Somehow, they seem to think that this is of some eternal importance. Why?
In another of Dan Brown's book, "Angels and demons” one of the chief characters seizes a bomb that’s about to go off, jumps into a helicopter and climbs into the night sky. He then returns to earth, using a parachute he’s concealed. When he "miraculously” arrives back in Rome unharmed, it is acclaimed a miracle and he is acclaimed Pope by general acclamation! Apparently, in theory, that’s still possible - without the conclave in the Sistine Chapel - and the white smoke.
To say that the story line is far fetched would be a major understatement. So why is one of his other books, the da Vinci code treated so seriously?
Don't get me wrong, if you’re on holiday with a few hours to spare, the novel is a fast romp across most of Europe, with an intriguing, if bloodthirsty, plot. I've read the book, but if the film’s as bad as the critics say, I’m not sure whether I'll be going to see it.
But just being a novel with an exciting plot, doesn't explain why the book has been so popular. I think that it's because it raises the question - in a rather negative way - of "who is Jesus.” Dan Brown is not the first person to have won fame - and money - from suggesting that the Christians’ belief in Jesus is based on a false understanding.
Despite winning the court case that the authors brought, Dan Brown would not deny that many of his ideas were drawn from the book: "Holy Blood, Holy Grail “ by Michael Baigent, Richard Leighn and Henry Lincoln. Their joint idea was that Jesus was just a man – with a family – and descendants today.
Similarly, a previous Bishop of Durham - David Jenkins achieved fame by writing a book questioning Christ’s physical resurrection.
That same question: "who is Jesus,” is central to both our readings this morning.
This is the last of our six-week series in 1 John. And the last verse of our readings today encapsulates John's purpose in writing the letter. He writes: "I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.”
Note that he was writing these things: "to you who believe in the name of the Son of God.” We might have expected that he would have been writing to outsiders, so that they might come to eternal life - or perhaps to sympathetic "God fearers” - people who had begun to realise that their own religion - the Greek gods - could offer nothing, and who needed teaching. But he wasn't. He was writing to Christians.
And he was writing to them so that they: "might know that they have eternal life.” That suggests that John's readers had doubts about their eternal life. Does that ring bells? Do you ever get doubts? It's easy to feel that you couldn't admit to it. What would everyone else say? Isn't it encouraging to find that John is not appalled at their lack of faith. He's expecting it.
We've previously talked about the Gnostic heresy that seems to have been around at the time of the epistle - a heresy that stressed the need for special knowledge. Gnostic comes from Gnosis – G N O S I S – meaning knowledge.
It was a heresy that played upon the same sort of feelings that people had then as those living now, who're chasing the secrets of the da Vinci code. It was a heresy that claimed that a simple belief in the crucified and risen Christ - and in his Spirit - was not enough.
In verse 9 John points out that we are very willing to listen to what humans have to say. We are. We all know how quickly so-called "Urban myths” develop. It's only two months back that half of Birmingham knew – for sure - that an Asian girl had been raped by Black youths. It was believed so strongly - and so widely - and caused such anger - that an innocent black lad, Isiah Young-Sam, was murdered.
That murder would have been tragic in itself - even if he'd been responsible for the rape. It would have been doubly tragic as he had no connection with the rape – which he hadn’t. But in fact, it was many times more tragic, as there seems no evidence at all that any rape took place.
But yes, we're all, all too ready to listen to gossip - to human tittle-tattle. But when God Almighty entrusts his truth to his son, Jesus - come in human form - and talking of the Father. We are very slow to listen.
What do you think John means when he says: "the Father has testified to his son."? I think he's referring to the actions in history – Jesus’ birth, life, teaching, death and resurrection. But there were also several very special occasions, which the disciples would remember particularly well.
There was Jesus’ baptism, when just as Jesus came up from the water, it says:
“suddenly the heavens were opened to him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, `This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.'
Matthew 3:16
Then there was the time when Jesus went up onto the mountain with his closest disciples - and Moses and Elijah appeared, and then a voice came from the cloud and said,
`This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!'
Matthew 17:5
And then there were the miracles. And above all there was the resurrection. All of these are God the father's testimony to his son.
That's why the creeds are important. In them, we're saying: "this is how we believe that God has revealed himself to us.” There are many who can't accept them - many in the first century - and many in the 21st. In the da Vinci Code Dan Brown mentions the efforts that the early Christians made to express what they believed be true. Eventually those efforts resulted in the words of what we call: "the Apostles Creed” and the "Nicene Creed.”
Dan Brown makes much of the early Christians’ disagreement. And it's true that at times, it wasn't certain which form of words would be used. But that doesn’t amount to some major conspiracy. As a Christian, I also believe that the Holy Spirit was working and overruling the decisions that were made.
Verse 10 in our passage continues: “Those who believe in the Son of God have the testimony in their hearts.” Some weeks back, we had a series of sermons on: "things that Jesus didn't say” and Steve Carter preached one on: "let Jesus come into your heart.” I wasn't there, but I believe that he was stressing that commitment to Christ was not just an individual thing but had results in one's whole life - changed attitudes and changed actions.
Jesus may not have said: "let me come into your heart '' but what God the Father has promised was that when Jesus came he, the Father, would write his laws in the hearts of the believers. In Jeremiah 31:33 it says: “the Lord says: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.”
That’s what John is echoing: “Those who believe in the Son of God have the testimony in their hearts.”
Once again, those verses emphasise how much it is God that changes us, rather than that we have changed ourselves. Sometimes, people get worried about that idea. They start to debate the rather sterile argument of whether it’s God’s decision – or my choice - predestination or free will. What's important here is that if God has written his law in our hearts, we will be being changed.
We should be able to recognise that difference – recognise that eternal life that starts now. And other people should be able to recognise it too. Much of this letter has been about the difference that a new heart should bring. It has talked about the love that flows from a new heart - a love for God and for others - love that expresses itself in loving actions towards those around.
So, as we look at how we behave, we should be asking: "Have I always been like that?” and: "Would I be like that naturally?” or "Is the spirit of God changing me?” And I hope that the answer for each of us is "yes, I am being changed.”
And if that’s true, it's testifying to two things. It's testifying that you and I are children of God. But it's also testifying that God is God - testifying that his Spirit has the power to change people.
I’m a little bit hesitant in saying what I've just said. I'm hesitant because often it's the wrong people who take it to heart. Those with the most sensitive consciences - people whom everybody around recognise as reflecting the love of Jesus – they are often the same people who’re already conscious of their own inadequacy. And there is a risk that they may be driven into spiritual despondency. I don't want to do that.
But equally, it's often those who least show forth Jesus in their lives, who are least aware of the discrepancy between what they proclaim and what they are. It's for those of us like that, that John has set up the magnificent standard of love in this epistle.
The remaining verses in our passage are even more sombre. They say that to fail to believe in Christ - the Son of God, is to make God a liar. It’s strong language. In our culture - in an age that likes to say: "all routes lead to God” - it will not be popular. The next phrase is equally strong: "whoever does not have the son of God does not have life.”
It's another example where the epistle of John picks up the teaching of the Gospel of John. It reflects John 14:6: “Jesus said to him, `I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’” These are truths that we cannot escape.
I believe in tolerance. I believe it's important to say: "I will stand up for your right to believe what you do.” - to say: "I believe in your right to express your beliefs - and to worship as you wish.” But that is not the same as saying: "all belief has equal value.”
But there are some who claim that tolerance is not just saying what I did - it's saying: "You are right to do as you do,” whether that be in belief or in lifestyle. To refuse to say that may make us unpopular.
John's epistle was written to Christians who were living in a similar pluralistic world to ourselves- living among a multitude of different religions and philosophies - all of whom claimed the truth. Those Christians must sometimes have had their own doubts. But John concludes:
" I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life."
May that be true for us, today
Let us pray
Living Lord,
Thank you for your gift of eternal life,
That you won for us at such cost.
Give us the openings to share it with others,
To your glory. Amen
Sunday 28 May 2006
Hugh James
There is no audio recording of this sermon, but the text is shown below.
...these verses emphasise how much it is God that changes us, rather than that we have changed ourselves. Sometimes, people get worried about that idea. They start to debate the rather sterile argument of whether it’s God’s decision – or my choice - predestination or free will. What's important here is that if God has written his law in our hearts, we will be being changed.
The bible readings used in this sermon are 1 John 5.9-13 and John 16.29-end
.
All over the world there are people trying to break the code – the da Vinci Code - to understand the mysteries of Dan Brown's book. Somehow, they seem to think that this is of some eternal importance. Why?
In another of Dan Brown's book, "Angels and demons” one of the chief characters seizes a bomb that’s about to go off, jumps into a helicopter and climbs into the night sky. He then returns to earth, using a parachute he’s concealed. When he "miraculously” arrives back in Rome unharmed, it is acclaimed a miracle and he is acclaimed Pope by general acclamation! Apparently, in theory, that’s still possible - without the conclave in the Sistine Chapel - and the white smoke.
To say that the story line is far fetched would be a major understatement. So why is one of his other books, the da Vinci code treated so seriously?
Don't get me wrong, if you’re on holiday with a few hours to spare, the novel is a fast romp across most of Europe, with an intriguing, if bloodthirsty, plot. I've read the book, but if the film’s as bad as the critics say, I’m not sure whether I'll be going to see it.
But just being a novel with an exciting plot, doesn't explain why the book has been so popular. I think that it's because it raises the question - in a rather negative way - of "who is Jesus.” Dan Brown is not the first person to have won fame - and money - from suggesting that the Christians’ belief in Jesus is based on a false understanding.
Despite winning the court case that the authors brought, Dan Brown would not deny that many of his ideas were drawn from the book: "Holy Blood, Holy Grail “ by Michael Baigent, Richard Leighn and Henry Lincoln. Their joint idea was that Jesus was just a man – with a family – and descendants today.
Similarly, a previous Bishop of Durham - David Jenkins achieved fame by writing a book questioning Christ’s physical resurrection.
That same question: "who is Jesus,” is central to both our readings this morning.
This is the last of our six-week series in 1 John. And the last verse of our readings today encapsulates John's purpose in writing the letter. He writes: "I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.”
Note that he was writing these things: "to you who believe in the name of the Son of God.” We might have expected that he would have been writing to outsiders, so that they might come to eternal life - or perhaps to sympathetic "God fearers” - people who had begun to realise that their own religion - the Greek gods - could offer nothing, and who needed teaching. But he wasn't. He was writing to Christians.
And he was writing to them so that they: "might know that they have eternal life.” That suggests that John's readers had doubts about their eternal life. Does that ring bells? Do you ever get doubts? It's easy to feel that you couldn't admit to it. What would everyone else say? Isn't it encouraging to find that John is not appalled at their lack of faith. He's expecting it.
We've previously talked about the Gnostic heresy that seems to have been around at the time of the epistle - a heresy that stressed the need for special knowledge. Gnostic comes from Gnosis – G N O S I S – meaning knowledge.
It was a heresy that played upon the same sort of feelings that people had then as those living now, who're chasing the secrets of the da Vinci code. It was a heresy that claimed that a simple belief in the crucified and risen Christ - and in his Spirit - was not enough.
In verse 9 John points out that we are very willing to listen to what humans have to say. We are. We all know how quickly so-called "Urban myths” develop. It's only two months back that half of Birmingham knew – for sure - that an Asian girl had been raped by Black youths. It was believed so strongly - and so widely - and caused such anger - that an innocent black lad, Isiah Young-Sam, was murdered.
That murder would have been tragic in itself - even if he'd been responsible for the rape. It would have been doubly tragic as he had no connection with the rape – which he hadn’t. But in fact, it was many times more tragic, as there seems no evidence at all that any rape took place.
But yes, we're all, all too ready to listen to gossip - to human tittle-tattle. But when God Almighty entrusts his truth to his son, Jesus - come in human form - and talking of the Father. We are very slow to listen.
What do you think John means when he says: "the Father has testified to his son."? I think he's referring to the actions in history – Jesus’ birth, life, teaching, death and resurrection. But there were also several very special occasions, which the disciples would remember particularly well.
There was Jesus’ baptism, when just as Jesus came up from the water, it says:
“suddenly the heavens were opened to him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, `This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.'
Matthew 3:16
Then there was the time when Jesus went up onto the mountain with his closest disciples - and Moses and Elijah appeared, and then a voice came from the cloud and said,
`This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!'
Matthew 17:5
And then there were the miracles. And above all there was the resurrection. All of these are God the father's testimony to his son.
That's why the creeds are important. In them, we're saying: "this is how we believe that God has revealed himself to us.” There are many who can't accept them - many in the first century - and many in the 21st. In the da Vinci Code Dan Brown mentions the efforts that the early Christians made to express what they believed be true. Eventually those efforts resulted in the words of what we call: "the Apostles Creed” and the "Nicene Creed.”
Dan Brown makes much of the early Christians’ disagreement. And it's true that at times, it wasn't certain which form of words would be used. But that doesn’t amount to some major conspiracy. As a Christian, I also believe that the Holy Spirit was working and overruling the decisions that were made.
Verse 10 in our passage continues: “Those who believe in the Son of God have the testimony in their hearts.” Some weeks back, we had a series of sermons on: "things that Jesus didn't say” and Steve Carter preached one on: "let Jesus come into your heart.” I wasn't there, but I believe that he was stressing that commitment to Christ was not just an individual thing but had results in one's whole life - changed attitudes and changed actions.
Jesus may not have said: "let me come into your heart '' but what God the Father has promised was that when Jesus came he, the Father, would write his laws in the hearts of the believers. In Jeremiah 31:33 it says: “the Lord says: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.”
That’s what John is echoing: “Those who believe in the Son of God have the testimony in their hearts.”
Once again, those verses emphasise how much it is God that changes us, rather than that we have changed ourselves. Sometimes, people get worried about that idea. They start to debate the rather sterile argument of whether it’s God’s decision – or my choice - predestination or free will. What's important here is that if God has written his law in our hearts, we will be being changed.
We should be able to recognise that difference – recognise that eternal life that starts now. And other people should be able to recognise it too. Much of this letter has been about the difference that a new heart should bring. It has talked about the love that flows from a new heart - a love for God and for others - love that expresses itself in loving actions towards those around.
So, as we look at how we behave, we should be asking: "Have I always been like that?” and: "Would I be like that naturally?” or "Is the spirit of God changing me?” And I hope that the answer for each of us is "yes, I am being changed.”
And if that’s true, it's testifying to two things. It's testifying that you and I are children of God. But it's also testifying that God is God - testifying that his Spirit has the power to change people.
I’m a little bit hesitant in saying what I've just said. I'm hesitant because often it's the wrong people who take it to heart. Those with the most sensitive consciences - people whom everybody around recognise as reflecting the love of Jesus – they are often the same people who’re already conscious of their own inadequacy. And there is a risk that they may be driven into spiritual despondency. I don't want to do that.
But equally, it's often those who least show forth Jesus in their lives, who are least aware of the discrepancy between what they proclaim and what they are. It's for those of us like that, that John has set up the magnificent standard of love in this epistle.
The remaining verses in our passage are even more sombre. They say that to fail to believe in Christ - the Son of God, is to make God a liar. It’s strong language. In our culture - in an age that likes to say: "all routes lead to God” - it will not be popular. The next phrase is equally strong: "whoever does not have the son of God does not have life.”
It's another example where the epistle of John picks up the teaching of the Gospel of John. It reflects John 14:6: “Jesus said to him, `I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’” These are truths that we cannot escape.
I believe in tolerance. I believe it's important to say: "I will stand up for your right to believe what you do.” - to say: "I believe in your right to express your beliefs - and to worship as you wish.” But that is not the same as saying: "all belief has equal value.”
But there are some who claim that tolerance is not just saying what I did - it's saying: "You are right to do as you do,” whether that be in belief or in lifestyle. To refuse to say that may make us unpopular.
John's epistle was written to Christians who were living in a similar pluralistic world to ourselves- living among a multitude of different religions and philosophies - all of whom claimed the truth. Those Christians must sometimes have had their own doubts. But John concludes:
" I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life."
May that be true for us, today
Let us pray
Living Lord,
Thank you for your gift of eternal life,
That you won for us at such cost.
Give us the openings to share it with others,
To your glory. Amen
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home