Sermons
|
|
Sermons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sermon preached by John Cooper at Christ Church on 14/7/02. It was on the topic of 'Divisions now and then' and was given at the evening service. The day's Bible reading was from chapter twelve of the gospel of Matthew and reading from verses 22 to 45.
|
Reading:
Main
themes: The story is told, which is probably apocryphal, of how a mentally ill person believed he was dead. The doctor asked him, 'Do dead people bleed?'. When the patient said no he stabbed his finger with a needle. When the patient saw his blood oozing out of his finger all he said was 'That just proves dead people do bleed'. This passage is concerned with how we get evidence for accepting what Jesus had to say about Himself. It is very important for when we talk to people about our faith as I hope we all do from time to time. Since Jesus leads the battle against the forces of evil, those who wish to see good triumph must follow Him. If they do not, then they are effectively on the enemy's side. You are either for or against Jesus. Jesus Himself says this in verse 30. It is not possible to sit on the fence! Some of the Pharisees and teachers wanted Jesus to perform a miracle in verse 38. But what kind of miracle would have convinced them that Jesus was who He said He was? Such evidence might be necessary for a heathen Pharaoh but should not be for experts on the Old Testament. They should have been able to decide for themselves whether Jesus' teaching was in line with the Scriptures. Even if He had publicly thrown Himself off the pinnacle of the Temple in Jerusalem, and suffered no harm, this would not have thrown any light on His teaching being true or not. And what about the miracles He did actually perform? Why were they not sufficient to convince His questioners? Indeed one Pharisee is reported as saying to Jesus, 'Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him' (John 3:2). In verse 24 we have some Pharisees claiming that Jesus did His miracles not by the power of God but by the power of the Devil. People will go to any lengths to convince themselves that Jesus is not the Son of God. If the healing of body and mind could be dismissed as a work of Satan, no number of healing miracles would have convinced them that Jesus was who He said He was. I think that there is a message here for us. We often tend to think that seeing a spectacular gift of the Spirit occurring in public will convince non-Christians. Sometimes it will. However I think Paul wrote his first letter to the church at Corinth to tell them that spiritual gifts have to go along with changed lifestyles. Jesus said at His last supper: 'By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another.' (John.13:35). In other words non-believers will be much more responsive to Jesus' message of love and forgiveness if they can see it being worked out amongst His followers. While the miracles did serve as evidence of the Kingdom of God to those who had eyes to see, they did not compel belief in those who were prejudiced against Jesus. Indeed it is impossible to compel genuine belief in anyone. Although the miracles served as signs (in other words evidence), they were not performed in order to be signs. They were as much part and parcel of Jesus' ministry as was His preaching. Jesus healed people not to prove anything but merely because He loved the people He helped. But what is this about the 'sign of Jonah' mentioned in verse 39? Jonah went to the men of Nineveh, capital of the blood-thirsty Assyrian Empire, and told them that God said they had to repent. All the evidence they had was Jonah's one-sentence message of judgment; but it was sufficient to move them to belief and repentance. But as Jonah's message in Nineveh was proof enough to the Assyrians, so Jesus' ministry in Palestine should have been proof enough to the Jews. No further sign would be given. Jonah's experience of being swallowed by the 'whale', or huge fish, was not a sign to the people of Nineveh, any more than Jesus' resurrection on Easter Day was a public spectacle. Both these events occurred in private out of sight of doubting on-lookers. Finally let us consider the unforgivable sin (v28-9). In real life there are few more distressing conditions than that of people who believe they have committed this sin. When they are offered the scriptural assurance of forgiveness for every sin, when they are reminded that 'the blood of Jesus ... purifies us from all sin' (1 John 1:7), they have a ready answer: there is one sin that is an exception to this rule, the unforgivable sin. Did not Jesus Himself say so? And they tend to become impatient when it is pointed out to them (quite correctly) that the very fact that they are concerned that they have committed it proves that they are no longer committing it. But what actually is the unforgivable sin, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (v32 onwards)? The Pharisees were ascribing the healing miracle that they had just seen to the work of the Devil (v24). They were resolutely refusing to accept that Jesus was the Son of God. Thus the sin against the Holy Spirit involves deliberately shutting one's eyes to God and consequently calling good evil. But can this sin not be forgiven? By its very nature to ask for forgiveness of it means that one stops committing it and thus one is no longer guilty of it. Salvation is there for those who will accept it, but if some refuse, where else can they hope to receive forgiveness? There is only one sin which cannot be forgiven. It is the refusal to accept forgiveness. And the mental gymnastics that people will indulge in so that they do not have to face the issue is astounding. But ultimately there is no escaping that you are either for or against Jesus. ref: 02/4
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Web page last updated 04 Jul 2009 |
