Grace OPC Sewickley PA

Sermon Series: Considering the Church

Paul’s Last Words

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, May 1, 1994.

About this sermon

Biblical writers’ last words mark a transition, and 2 Timothy holds Paul’s, summing up a ministry the church is about to lose. Paul consciously follows the pattern of Christ’s death without claiming equality with it. The church loses much in losing Paul, and Scripture weighs that loss honestly.

More sermons from 2 Timothy · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

Rather than 2 Corinthians this morning, as you find in the bulletin, we are in 2 Timothy. This morning, 2 Timothy chapter 4, and we are reading the first 18 verses. Let’s give our attention to the reading of God’s word. 2 Timothy 4, verse 1. I charge thee, therefore, before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom, preach the word, be instant in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall they keep to themselves teachers having itching ears. And they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.

For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day, and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearance.

Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me, for Danus hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica, Cretans to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee, for he is profitable to me for the ministry. Antiochus have I sent to Ephesus. the cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments.

Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil, the Lord reward him according to his works, of whom be thou rare also, for he hath greatly withstood our words. At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me. I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge. Notwithstanding, the Lord stood with me and strengthened me, that by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear, and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion. And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom, to whom be glory forever and ever.

Krishnamurti. Our God, stir up our interest in your word, thereby confirming in us our interest in you. As we have a zeal for your word, may it be known that we have a zeal for you. Father, encourage your children. And may those who are young, as well as those who are older, benefit as best they might from your word and its proclamation, here and also throughout the extent of Christ’s church. We glory in him, the one who is the word incarnate. Amen.

Paul’s second letter to Timothy is generally regarded to be his last letter. Now, it may not appear that way, since as you look at the ordering of things in the New You notice that there are two remaining letters still, the letters of Titus and Philemon. But we keep in mind the fact that the books of the New Testament are not chronologically ordered. They do not appear in the order in which they were written. may be good and proper reasons why, in the providence of God, Titus and Philemon appear after 2 Timothy, but taking up that matter is a concern that would interest us at another time. 2 Timothy, then, is generally recognized as the last of Paul’s letters. Although not positioned last in the canon, it is in fact the last one that he pens.

Now, something of a confirmation of this appears for us in what we read this morning, if you will note that sixth verse of the fourth chapter, where Paul says, I am already being poured out as a drink offering and the time of my departure is at hand.” So it is that before his departure, before the end comes for him in his earthly sojourn, that end being administered by the Roman authorities, we believe at the hands of the Emperor Nero in the mid-AD 60s, Paul then writes this letter to Timothy, one whom he has described elsewhere as his beloved son in the faith.

Timothy is presently at work in the church at Ephesus, a church that has a prominent place in the development of the Church throughout Asia Minor and even beyond into Europe. So Paul here is writing to this one who is especially dear to him, and he is writing to him facing the end, and also addressing the situation which Timothy faces a situation in which Timothy is not doing all that well. The words of this epistle then are meant as encouragement to Timothy.

They are meant also as a means for redirection for this young pastor. They are meant as a gentle and kind, compassionate rebuke, even. Adding weight to all of these dimensions in this letter is the fact that Paul now seems to be penning something of his last will and testament. This gives what he has to say added weight and an increased degree of urgency. Now, it’s not as if these words written here are any more inspired than the words that we find in Paul’s other letters.

At the same time, let it sink in to you, these are his last canonical words, these are the last recorded, inspired words from this monumental figure in New Testament history. This means, then, that they are not merely the last things that Paul has to say to Timothy, per se, but they serve as something of a summing up of his entire life and ministry. If you want to get to the heart of Paul’s narrative, if you want to see into the soul read 2 Timothy with all the concentration that your mind and soul can muster. There is here, then, not then merely a concluding word to Timothy, but a summing up of this man’s life and ministry.

We can say, then, that these words are of inestimable value in assessing and interpreting what Paul has done with himself throughout the course of his service to Christ, and we can say that these words are of inestimable value in assessing and interpreting what he has said previously.

What is last spoken is best spoken. What is last written is best written. But adding weight, further weight, to Paul’s communication to Timothy in this fashion is the deliberate character, the deliberate character of the way in which Paul has framed this communication, and particularly the last chapter of this epistle. For you see, The way in which Paul approaches this, his last will and testament, fits so perfectly the pattern that we observe elsewhere in Scripture.

You know, you and I may utter some poignantly phrased, even quotable parting words as we leave this world. It’s even conceivable that something that we say might find its way into one of those books of quotations. We may even write something down, as many have, leaving behind a powerful statement with respect to our life, with respect to those things that we hold dear as we depart from this world. We take note of words from dignitaries, important individuals, as they depart from this world.

But as memorable as these words may be, they cannot rival those words spoken or written by the strategic figures whom God has raised up within the history of salvation. Our last words, or the last words of some dignitary, may be interesting and even inspiring, given by God’s servants within the context of the history of salvation are essential and inspired by him. Important because of the place they have within the flow of salvation history. Unique because of the role they play within God’s plan. Think of Jacob, one who gave, in fact, some famous last words. Or think of Moses. Think also, especially, of our Saviour, Jesus Christ.

For each of these, the Scripture records a closing, as it were, soliloquy. in Genesis chapter 49. Jacob forecasts the destinies of his twelve sons. Remember how the book of Genesis closes? But now take stock of the intention within God’s plan, within the history of salvation, with respect to this speech, this parting speech, which Jacob honors. You see, it’s not just the close of the book of Genesis that is in view, it is the close of one era and the beginning of another in the history of the development of God’s plan. Jacob’s speech, then, not only forecasts the destiny of his twelve boys, but it also forecasts and declares even a monumental change and shift in the life and in the history of the people of God. Jacob’s last words signal the passing of the age of the patriarchs and the commencement of the times of Israel as a nation. Not simply then twelve born, but twelve tribes and a nation even.

Think of Moses. Moses takes an entire book of the Bible to deliver his last will and testament. It is the book of Deuteronomy. Again, in view, we have forecasts, we have admonition, we have them in detail. But of greatest importance, you see, is the fact that that last will and testament signals the end of one age and the beginning of another. Deuteronomy is not, then, a book that simply signals the close of the Pentateuch. It is a book that signals the close of an era. Closing are the times of tent dwelling. and wilderness wanderings and wayfaring, beginning our times of blessedness in an inheritance promised by the Lord to the fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”

Then, of course, we have those all-important last words of Jesus Christ himself. these words marking the greatest transition in the history of redemption and in the history of the people of God. In mind, particularly here, are the latter chapters in John’s Gospel. You remember the extended comments Jesus makes at the close of that Gospel. I have in mind particularly chapters 13 through 17. In these chapters, there is the especially fine focusing of the significance of that grandest transition of all.

Jesus speaking then for the faithful, whom he loves and loves to the end. He, with his words, trained the eye of the faithful so that they might look above so that they might look beyond the provincial dynasties that have even characterized the kingdom and the people of Israel, so that they might look beyond even a territorial inheritance in this world to the regions that are transcendent, where there is a throne enshrined in heavenly glory. that they might look to an inheritance in the eternal regions of life. Jesus says that he is going away, and that he is going even into this place which he has described. But the purpose of Jesus’ departure is not so that he might enjoy something by himself, but that all who in faith are united to him might in fact come to enjoy the very region into which he has gone. We believe in God. Believe also in me. In my Father’s house there are many mansions. I go to prepare a place for you, and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you unto myself, that where I am, there ye may be also.” We have then, with Jesus’ last will and testimony, these words. that signal for the people of God the great transition.

As one era closes and another opens up, this present age, as it were, extends itself, and the age to come makes its appearance. But although our Savior has brought about this great and final transition for the people of God, this determinative transition for the people of God in the history of salvation, there remains yet another important subordinate shift that is brought into view in the remainder of what we are given in the New Testament and its testimony. This is not to upstage what Jesus Christ has done. It is not to suggest that there is anything imperfect in what Christ has accomplished, that the transition that is effected in him is anything less than determinative and final and full. Yet at the same time, there arises for the people of God, in the plan of God, that situation that demands yet one more shift, transition, subordinate, though it be. And in this transition, as you move, as it were, from one age to another, the figure who stands centrally to it is the one whose words we’ve read this morning, the Apostle Paul, thus underscoring his importance in the history of salvation.

You dare not minimize the importance of this man. Who else writes as many epistles? Thirteen, they are told. And you would judge that the ministry of Paul is the crown, is it not, of the book of the Acts? From the ninth chapter on, we are concerned with this individual whom God has called in such a dramatic way, and set for the ministry so that the Gentiles might hear the gospel and be gathered in.

We are dealing here with a monumental figure in the history of salvation. So when we come to this minor shift of which we have been speaking, it is not strange then that we find at the center of it the figure of the Apostle Paul. Just how significant is he? When we see him in this expansive light and in this circumstance and situation, as we look at him now, as he is preparing to depart from this life, it is as if we are witnessing in his departure departure of more than just a solitary individual, or even a very important figure in the New Testament.

Paul, you see, according to God’s design, becomes representative, and his departure becomes representative. It is as if we are able to see all of the apostles in Paul, in this particular man, so that there is that sense in which, with Paul’s passing, you are witnessing the passing of the times of the apostles.

And you are moving from the apostolic to the post-apostolic era. It may not register on you with the weight that it registered upon the Church of the first century. As the Church comes into form and shape through the events of the day of Pentecost, There had not been a time heretofore when there was not, in the midst of the Church, a living, breathing, teaching, preaching apostle. And now the apostles are dying.

It is very easy for us, then, to underestimate the extreme distress that the Christians of the first century felt as they were face-to-face with the departure of the apostles. The distress that Timothy must have felt himself as he was face-to-face with such a radical loss. These Christians were not immune to fear and to inner doubt. How about yourselves? All of us here have lost someone quite dear. We might even say that with the departure of this loved one, this one so dear, there has been a loss of direction for us. Even a loss of a sense of security. maybe even a loss with regard to a sense of authority.

If you can then sense, through your own experience, something of what these Christians were feeling, given just how important these apostles were, to the first century Christians. The apostles, you see, represented a living link with the resurrected Lord. To be an apostle, you had to have seen the risen Christ. That’s what qualifies Paul. In part, he sees the risen Christ on the road to Damascus. The Church looks to the Apostles because they are the link, living testimony to the risen Christ. And now the Apostles are being taken away from them. They are dying.

So the questions now come rapid fire. How can we continue? How can we go on? What will we do without them? How will we function? Who will answer our questions? We’re so confused anyway. How are we going to make it through? Are we left just to muddle through? What about the promise? We were hoping that Christ would return. And that any time prior to his return, we would always have these apostles, these living testifiers, with respect to him in our midst.

For the Church then, for the Christians of the first century, for Timothy now, as he faces the loss of this father in the faith, this great apostle, the loss of the apostolic band would not be unlike the loss of Christ to the original disciples. You recall the scenes in the Gospels, the disciples themselves utterly bewildered, completely saddened, without comprehension, faced with the Departure of Jesus, and now they’re struggling. They can’t understand how this is going to happen in the first place, but once they’re faced with the reality of it, they’re just completely overcome. So utterly overcome are they, and so thoroughly disappointed that they are actually ashamed of Christ, and they deserve Him.

But as the apostles now depart, as if by design and plan, as if it were deliberate, as Paul makes ready for his departure, interestingly, the same sort of tragedy looms. It becomes then a matter not just that Paul is going, but the manner in which he is going. And in order to lay before us then the subordinate character of the departure of the Apostle, the Apostle, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, will describe his departure in language that parallels the departure of Christ. Did you pick it up as you were moving through that fourth chapter? It’s as if he’s patterning his own departure after the departure that Christ had taken himself.

He’s on trial, we’re told that. We’re told that when he was on trial, everybody deserted him. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? His departure is surrounded by shame, the shame of those who have become embarrassed by Paul and his change. They’ve run away, they’ve deserted him. His situation is overlaid by suffering. He is undergoing, as it were, a crucifixion.

And even because of this offense that is found in Paul, namely he is in change, Timothy is having trouble in his allegiance to Paul, and that has created the crisis for Timothy at Ephesus. If you want confirmation of that, I ask you to look at chapter 1, verse 8, where Paul speaks specifically about the offense that his imprisonment has become to Timothy, his own faithful dear son in the faith. Timothy is even stumbling. The tone of the letter, though, that Paul writes is comparable to the tone that we find in Jesus himself as he appeals to his disciples before his departure.

Oh, there’s the rebuke, there’s the reminder. It is firm to be sure, but it is gentle, it’s loving, it’s compassionate. His words, Paul’s words like his Savior’s, are comforting. And why not? Are they not born by the very Comforter, communicated by the very Comforter whom Christ promised to his disciples in his departure? Will Timothy be afraid? Who am I going to ask? Where am I going to get advice? How am I going to stand? What am I going to do? Well, might Paul say. It is necessary that I depart.” And what confidence is instilled by the Apostle with regard to that departure itself.

He speaks of his imminent death, but he also preaches the resurrection, does he not? Note verse 8 of that fourth chapter, he here calls upon Timothy to remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead according to my gospel. Why in the world would he have to remind Timothy of the resurrection of Jesus Christ? Well, why indeed? Why must you be reminded of it? On the basis of that resurrection, Paul proclaims the certainty of his own resurrection. Verses 10 through 12, and the resurrection of all who are united to Christ. What does it matter in the final analysis how much we suffer in this world for the sake of Christ?

Is there not laid up for us all a crown of righteousness? which God will give us when he delivers us from every wicked deed in this world and brings us safely into his heavenly kingdom, you should memorize 2 Timothy 4.18. And you should feel it in your souls.

It is because of this, you see, that Paul also stands tall as a man, regardless of his apostolic status. It is because of this that Paul is not ashamed. He is so absolutely certain that though there is suffering, though comes, though there is privation, though others deserve them, the resurrection is assured and the crown of righteousness shall be given to him. All of that then becomes the basis upon which you base your own confident walk and obedience, whether there are living apostles around or not. And it is because of this that you also are not ashamed.

For as Paul says at the opening of this letter, For we know him whom we have believed, and are persuaded that he is able to keep that which we have committed unto him against that day. But having said all of that, and taken stock now of the departure of the Apostle and what that means, Please understand this also.

Just as Jesus departed, he is still here by his Spirit. Now, I am not going to suggest to you that Paul is here by his Spirit. You know how theologically foolish that would be. But I am going to say to you that the Word of the Apostle is still here, and this is a living Word.

Timothy received this word, and you have received it. Timothy is to live by it, and all of us are to live by it too. Until Jesus appears. Until each of us receives our crown of righteousness. Won’t you then persevere? And as you persevere, don’t be afraid. Don’t be afraid.

Lord, it is your plan that your son would come and that he would then depart. And Father, it was your plan that the apostles would stand upon the earth for time and then they also would depart. We would ask you, Lord, that as we, the Church, are faced with these departures, that our confidence would even increase, knowing that the provision of our Savior and of our God is full and complete. And may it be, O God, that we are able to say with that early Church, in complete and absolute confidence, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

May 1, 1994
Officers, Prophecy, and 1 Corinthians 11

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, April 24, 1994.

About this sermon

Scripture’s passages on church office consistently reserve ordained office for men, even though 1 Corinthians 11:5 assumes that women prophesy in some way. Galatians 3:28 settles some questions about that distinction and leaves others. Several common arguments for women’s ordination fail on the text.

More sermons from 1 Corinthians · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

We are looking this morning at 1 Corinthians 11, and we are beginning at verse 2. Give your attention to the reading of God’s word. I am reading from the New American Standard Version this morning. Now, I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. Every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same with her whose head is shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.

For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man. For, indeed, man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. Therefore, the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head because of the angels. Neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.

For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman, and all things originate from God. Judge for yourselves, is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach us that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? that if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering.

But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God. Do help us, our Father, to submit to you, and help us especially, Lord, where we are confused, where passages are complex and difficult and seem to stand beyond our ability to penetrate. We pray for your help, that we might prove to be obedient in all things, and give us a submissive spirit, each of us, that we might be known as the servants of the Lord. Surely our Savior, Jesus Christ, is the perfect servant, to him we are united, and being united to him, how is it that we ought to behave? should not we be following in his steps, should not his attitudes be ours. We pray this through Christ. Amen.

Our Lord continues to build his church through the ministry of men whom he calls and endures with special gifts for teaching, ruling, and serving, it is proper to speak of such a publicly recognized function as an office, and to designate men by such spiritual titles of office and calling as evangelist, pastor, teacher, bishop, elder, or deacon.

Now, I don’t expect all of you to know where I got that quote, but I have just read to you from the former government of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, and that, for the purpose of being quite direct with you about the position of this Church on the issue, the very volatile issue, of women in ordained office within the Church. The Orthodox Presbyterian Church’s position is not bound by the traditions of men or the decisions of the Churches throughout their histories. Rather, the position of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church is bound by the Word of God. is bounded by the scriptures, and those traditions inscribed in the scriptures by God’s servants, his inspired servants. The critical texts ordinarily discussed in this regard are these.

First of all, 1 Corinthians 14, verse 34. not too far from where we read this morning, which says in part and says emphatically, let women keep silent in the churches, a passage which relates specifically to the issue of teaching, if you read the context there in 1 Corinthians 14. The next text is 1 Timothy, chapter 2, verse 12, which says, I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. This passage then, taking us beyond specific reference in 1 Corinthians 14, since it bears equally upon the matter of ruling, the matters of ruling and teaching. Next, just a few verses further in 1 Timothy, chapter 3, verses 1 and 2.

If any man aspires to the office of bishop, that is, the office of overseer or the office of pastor, It is a fine work he desires to do. Reading on, a bishop or a pastor must be the husband of one wife. A passage there dealing also with matters pertaining to rule, but if you look at the end of verse 2, you will note that it also deals specifically with teaching. These who are here described must be apt to teach. You drop down to the eighth verse of that third chapter in 1 Timothy, you read these words, “…deacons must be men of dignity.” A passage that may concern—I say may—may concern rule or the special function of service, depending on the way that term, deacon, was used by the early Church and in the setting to which Paul was addressing himself.

Finally, Titus, the book of Titus, chapter 1, verses 5 and 6, these words, “…appoint altars in every city.” from the fifth to the sixth verses in Titus chapter one. Appoint elders in every city as I directed you, namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife. Obviously, the elders in view are male. This passage, likewise, in keeping with the others that we have read, we have something of a cumulative effect here, dealing with the matters of ruling and teaching. Now, these are all passages from Paul.

We must not think that this matter of women in office is something to which only the Apostle spoke, as if he alone, in the course of salvation, addressed himself to it. Indeed, Paul is making his point explicitly and directly. because, in some cases, the consistent point of view on gender and office expressed throughout the entirety of the history of Revelation, Old Testament to New, namely that the ordinary, the ordinary ordained officers of the Church are to be male, whites being challenged. Indeed, that position was being specifically challenged in the Church at Corinth, and it was also being specifically challenged in the Church at Ephesus, where Timothy was laboring as an evangelist. Now, I want you to note, particularly, how carefully I have chosen my words. When I was speaking about the consistent point of view expressed throughout the history of Revelation, Old Testament to New, with regard to this matter, I stated the case this way, that the ordinary ordained officers of the Church are to be male. Hold on to that statement. I do, in fact, mean to exclude those extraordinary, unique, charismatically endowed women raised up by God for special times within the history of salvation.

You think of Miriam, the sister of Aaron and Moses. You think of the judge, Deborah. whose story is recorded for us in the book of the Judges, chapters 4 and 5. You think of the prophetess Holdah in relationship to the reign of King Josiah. She mentioned in 2 Kings 22, verse 14.

But you also think of the four virgin daughters of Philip. all of whom are described as prophetesses, mentioned for us in Acts chapter 21 verse 9. Now, concerning this last passage, Acts 21 verse 9, Philip’s daughters here, as I have already indicated to you, are described for us as prophetesses.

They have the office of They have the function of a prophet amongst the people of God. These people, these women, are especially supernaturally inspired by God, as all prophets are. They are agents of God’s special revelation. These women were possessed of a gift that was but temporary for the Church, since the gift of prophecy has ceased within the Church.

There are neither women nor men who presently, living among us, lay claim to this office or this function. At least, there should not be any, for if there were, we, in recording their words on paper, would have infallible words from God, in addition to what we have in Scripture.

But it may well be now that it is specifically this issue of the supernaturally endowed woman within the Church that is specifically in view In the enigmatic text that we have read this morning, 1 Corinthians 11, and even more particularly the 5th verse of that 11th chapter. In the year 1919, Benjamin B. Warfield said that no one knows the precise meaning of 1 Corinthians 11, those opening verses, and particularly that 5th verse.

This package has proved to be especially difficult, not just because of head coverings, but because of comments concerning long and short hair and all of that business that we have taken into account when we have gone through that test. But there are some even weightier issues here for us to consider as we look at this test. You see, on the surface, it seems to be suggested that women, here in this 1 Corinthians 11 passage, that women were both praying and prophesying publicly at Corinth. It seems to be something of the natural reading of the text.

But does this not then fly in the face of what Paul says later in 1 Corinthians 14.34, where he commands that the women are to keep silent in the churches? There’s the problem, there’s the difficulty. Are we faced here with an obvious contradiction? Now, every line has been pursued for the sake of resolving this apparent contradiction in 1 Corinthians, including the line that suggests to us that Paul is blatantly and even deliberately inconsistent.

I hope I don’t have to argue with any of you that that position is out of bounds. Our commitment is to the authority of Scripture and to its inherent integrity. However, with respect to this text, let me at least make two proposals to you that may be helpful in resolving the dilemma. First, look at the phrase, praying and prophesying, and concentrate, first of all, on the word prophesy.

Are we not here dealing with a unique and temporary gift given to these women, if in fact they are possessing of gifts from the Spirit. Are we not here dealing with unique and temporary gifts, not ordinary continuing ordained office? It seems very likely that what we have at Corinth, referred to here in chapter 11, are women much like Philip’s daughters, mentioned in Acts chapter 21. Women wonderfully blessed by the Holy Spirit as instruments of divine revelation.

But we have praying also mentioned with the prophesying in 1 Corinthians 11.5. It would be my suggestion that the latter element, namely the prophesying, controls the previous element, the praying. In other words, both the praying and the prophesying, in view, belong to the same order of phenomena. Both the praying and the prophesying are equally charismatic. They are equally supernatural.

This being the case, they are phenomenon that had ceased with the first Christian century, and they have risen up for a specific purpose in God’s administration, only then to be removed according to his providence, when the process of revelation was complete and the Bible was a settled matter.

This means that Paul is not here talking about an ongoing or even ordinary state of affairs. Further, it has been pointed out that Paul may not be dealing in 1 Corinthians 11.5 with the assembling of the people of God at all. He may not have in view here the actual congregating of the people of God in a worship setting. That is a circumstance in which the congregation has now come together for the express purpose of giving worship to God.

If this is the case, the women of 1 Corinthians 11, and particularly that fifth verse, exercise a private, non-assembly ministry for which Paul has given now special instructions for its carrying out. In 1 Corinthians 14, he has the public ecclesiastical situation in view.

And here, women, inspired by the Holy Spirit and otherwise, are not permitted to speak within the assembly. Not only does this approach confirm Paul’s consistency and thus help us to maintain our confidence in his inspiration, infallibility, and authority, but it also greatly strengthens the case against female-ordained leadership within the Church. You see, if Paul, by the Holy Spirit, forbids even those women who have been supernaturally endowed, blessed by the Holy Spirit, and are agents of God from speaking in the Church, then what must we say about those women who have not been so endowed? If inspired women are not to speak in the assembly, then surely non-inspired women are not to speak in the assembly. But having dealt now with 1 Corinthians 11 and that fifth verse in relationship to the general line of Paul’s argumentation, the early halfway home, there is another text that those favoring women’s ordination appeal to, and that is Relations 3, verse 28.

They say those favoring women’s ordination, if 1 Corinthians 11.5 doesn’t prove that Paul was inconsistent or, as one writer has put it, plagued by an inner conflict about the place of women generally within the Church, let alone in office, then Galatians 3.28 does, in fact, introduce this matter of inconsistency and that with a vengeance.

At first, Galatians 3.28 says, there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Now, supporters of women’s ordination say this verse alone mitigates whatever Paul says elsewhere on the subject of women in office.

But their argument is stretched at best, and at worst, utterly fallacious. Paul, by the admission of all, including those who are the most clear-sighted, Even though they be the defenders of women’s ordination, in looking at this verse, admit that Paul is not talking about the order in the Church or even the offices within the Church.

Therefore, it is only by way of a stretch, an extreme stretch of that, It is only by way of the application of a principle that is supposed to be found in the text that it can, in any sense, be applied to the matters of office and gender. What is the principle that is thought to be perceived in this text? The principle is this. Gender is meaningless in Christ, and when applied to office and ordination, this means that it cannot make any difference whether a minister, an elder, or a deacon is male or female. But it is strange to say the least.

Paul himself never recognized this principle to be at work in his very own words in Galatians 3.28.

Or else he would have never written, you see, 1 Corinthians 14.34, or 1 Timothy 2.12, or 1 Timothy 3.1, 2, verse 8, Titus 1, verses 5 and 6. Now you can say, as some of those who have been supporters of women’s ordination, that Paul never wrote some of these texts that we have referred to this morning. But I think that you can see what is happening, and what, in fact, is in the balance. The matter of inconsistency is introduced once more, and that with the greatest amount of insistence.

Paul is actually being discredited, and if he is not being discredited personally, the Bible itself is being discredited. the line that is suggested by those who have supported women’s ordination on the basis of Galatians 3.28. The Bible is an infallible witness. But these now are becoming increasingly insistent, if you are listening to what they are saying, they are becoming increasingly insistent that the Bible is but a fallible witness. In fact, its fallibility is noticed at any number of points throughout its entirety, not just in matters pertaining to specific verses, that we find here in Paul’s letters, but running things now back into the Old Testament, the Bible must be found fallible in what it records for us specifically in Genesis 1 and in Genesis 2, and the account that is given there with respect to creation and the witness that it bears with regard to the ordering of the sexes and their roles within the created order.

Called into account now is not just merely the matter of women in office and Paul’s attitude with regard to it. Called into account and placed in jeopardy is the biblical doctrine of creation. For you will note in a number of those texts that we cited from Paul, he builds his argument on the basis of the created order. Now, if this was all that we had before us with respect to this matter, it would be bad enough.

But you see, there is more still. The enemy is not just Paul, who is serving as a roadblock to women in office. The enemy is not just Moses as he writes about the creation in Genesis 1 and 2. The enemy is Jesus himself. Paul’s point of view, Moses’ point of view, rises out of their commitment to a patriarchal ideal. There was never one committed to the patriarchal ideal as Jesus. In fact, he makes that the centerpiece of his ministry. Matthew 6, 9, where Jesus has the audacity to suggest to us that God is specifically identified as Father, our Father.

Do you know what’s going on? There are groups now meeting all over the world that are rewriting the Bible. And the method that they are using is called the method of inclusivist language. That means that these renderings of Holy Scripture are thought to be free of all gender bias.

So if we are going to call God our Father, we must also as well call Him, or, excuse me, call Her Mother. And there are actually churches in this country right now where the alternate forms of the Lord’s Prayer are being used in worship. But it’s not just a matter of how we call God.

You see, the reference to God at the opening of the Lord’s Prayer has specific reference to how God is in heaven. He is our Father. who is in heaven. This then is reflective of the eternal state of affairs. God is eternally and forever Father. But women’s ordination is but a portion of a program that is now directed in its attacks upon biblical authority, directed in its attacks upon the creation itself, directed in its attacks upon the Church as ordered by Christ through His Apostles, and even directed in its attacks upon the biblical vision for heaven.

With respect to Galatians 3.28, it can be said there are few more glorious texts in all of Scripture. This text, as we have already indicated, is not about office in the Church, rather it is about the inheritance of the promise. Note verse 29 in Galatians 3, as Paul continues his argument.

And if you, Jew or Greek, that is, slave or free man, male or female, belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs of the promise. That’s the specific point at issue as Paul is making his argument to the Galatians. If you are heirs of the promise, then you are called sons. Yes, Jews and Greeks are called sons, slaves and freemen are called sons, and males and females are called sons. Verse 26, For you are all sons of God through faith in Jesus Christ.

And according to another text, Romans 8.17, if sons then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ.

Personally, I would be much more willing to listen to those who were arguing in favor of women’s ordination if I could be convinced that they were as much concerned about the crew point in Galatians 3.28, namely having God as their inheritance, as they are about what they’re supposed to find in that text, namely that all offices must now be opened to women.

But the odd thing is, and the tragic thing, And the thing that now breaks the hearts of those who truly love the Lord Jesus Christ, and love his Word, and love his Church, is that these two approaches which I have outlined for you here are mutually exclusive and completely antithetical. I am saying this without embarrassment, and I am saying it without hesitation. Women’s ordination have already decided against the God of Scripture, against the Father, against the Son, against the Holy Spirit as their inheritance.

In fact, they have much better things with which to preoccupy themselves. It wouldn’t be so bad if you could perceive in the rhetoric a hunger for God, but that is not what you perceive. A desire for God, an interest in Him, a desire to have God and to be possessed by Him, but that is not what you find. It seems as if that thought is the furthest thing from the minds of those who pursue this agenda. There are even greater things with which to be concerned than God and his infallible, inherent Word. the fact that he has made himself the inheritance of his people.

May God, our Father, have mercy upon his Church through Jesus Christ, his eternal Son, that we might be brought finally into the heavenly arena, there to worship our God and the Lamb, together with and in the presence of the twenty-four male elders. Our Father, your church is going straight to hell. And there are many who don’t care even though they profess their faith in you. And there are others who are doing all they can in order to ensure that destination. Father, we ask that our interest may not be the concern for the pride of place, that we who have office in the Church are not concerned to continue to maintain our power over others.

Rather, O God, may it be our concern and our love and submission to you, to live by every word that proceeds out of your mouth. Bind our consciences, Lord, and then, Lord, bind our actions. This for your glory, this for the strengthening of your church, your people, in this world as they wait for the great day in which our Savior, your Eternal Son, will appear.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

April 24, 1994
The Feminist Agenda and the Church

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, April 24, 1994.

About this sermon

Inclusive-language theology, followed to its end, moves toward worship of the female form itself, as figures like Virginia Mollenkott and the invocation of ‘Sophia’ in place of the God of Scripture show. The cults have contributed to that drift. What looks like a debate over language is a question about who God is.

More sermons from Romans · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

We are reading tonight from Paul’s letter to the Romans, and we are in chapter 1. This is Romans chapter 1. We are beginning at verse 16. I give you attention to the reading of God’s word. For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith, as it is written, but the righteous man shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them, for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

For even though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish part was darkened. professing to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

Therefore God gave them over, in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, that their bodies might be dishonored among them, for they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator. who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions, for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural. And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire towards one another, men with men, committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind to do those things which are not proper.

Being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, malice, full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice, they are gossips, slanders, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful. And although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.”

Pray with me now. Our Father, do help us with respect to our confession, that our confession would not prove to be false. We confess, Lord, that your word, the Bible, is fully inspired. This word is breathed out by you into your servants. We confess, as it comes from you, It is to be received by us as the infallible truth. O God, help us, lest we belie this confession through a negligence of that word, or even a willful ignorance. Do help us, therefore, our God, to live in keeping with our commitment, confessing this word to be true, May we honor it. Indeed, O God, as we confess that this word has come from you, may we honor you as we honor the word. Help us, Lord, in our hearing that we might hear as you intended. That is, that our hearing would always be properly mixed with obedience. All of this in and through Christ, who heard perfectly and obeyed perfectly. Amen.

You’ve probably figured it out by now, but this is not Revelation chapter 13 that we are dealing with tonight. In fact, what we are dealing with is a continuation of and a conclusion of our morning message. Our messages in the morning have been concerned with the issue of the Church. The title that we have given to those messages is considering the Church. And the point at which we have presently come in our consideration of the Church is to that point which Time magazine has called the Second Reformation. If you are into Time magazine covers, that is.

And the question of gender and leadership in the Church. Now, I don’t want to spend a great deal of time—any more than one message—describing the present situation for you. Nor is this generally the proper approach in preaching. We are to exegete the Scriptures, not the culture.

Because of the crisis presently overtaking the Church, and a crisis, in fact, so noticed by Time magazine and described as the Second Reformation, we need to be very much aware of precisely what is in the balance as we look at this whole issue of gender in relationship to office in the Church.

Now, it could be said that Christian feminism began somewhat innocently in the last century, at least as far as the Church in the United States of America is concerned. But now it has become apparent that so-called Christian feminism has been progressively unfolding an agenda, a deliberate agenda, throughout the course of this present century. Originally, at least within the ranks of what we would call conservative and evangelical and orthodox Christianity, The argument hinged upon the question of equality, and that issue stirred within many who were honorable and forthright with regard to this by faith a responsive course. The argument was with respect to the equality of the sexes and the rights of women in the society at large, and even in the Church, as we might consider that subject in light of Scripture. Conservatives, then, in the last century and some as they have come aboard with respect to the so-called Christian feminist agenda, have stressed this matter of equality and claimed that the Scriptures actually championed the cause of equality when they were properly interpreted.

Now, here comes the rub. As things have turned out, the proper interpretation of Scripture has meant something of an across-the-board liberation from certain cultural restrictive norms, from which the scriptures themselves could not claim immunity. For instance, Paul, whom we cited this morning, subscribed, it seems, to those cultural and restricted norms. Therefore, so went the argument.

We should not allow ourselves to get hung up on texts like 1 Corinthians 14, verse 34, where Paul says that the women are to be silent in the churches. Nor should we allow ourselves to get hung up on texts like 1 Timothy 2, verse 12, 1 Timothy 3, verses 1 and 2, where Paul speaks once more about women in relationship to the ruling and teaching function within the congregations, or another text which we mentioned this morning, Titus chapter 1, verses 5 and 6. Because, after all, as we look at these texts, we conclude, do we not, that they are all culturally and restrictively conditioned? and thus removed for us from the category of being a norm for the Church. They belong to a particular time and era, and we have moved beyond that time and era.

If, then, we are looking for Paul’s true mind—well, who can say what Paul’s true mind was, at least If we were looking for the mind of the Spirit with regard to these matters, and we were to say that Paul, in some instance or other, gave expression to that true mind of the Spirit, we would have to turn to that classic text, then, the one that we mentioned this morning, Galatians 3, verse 28. Here, Paul is truly the servant of the Spirit. Paul is expressing himself in such a way that he is rising above the cultural and restrictive conditions of that time in which he lived.

Paul in that text, just to remind you, if you’ve forgotten since this morning, Galatians 3.28 says, there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Here is the motto, here is the standard, here is the banner, then, that is raised over the cause of Christian feminism. And that, early on, the consequence of which was seen in a very early stage in the development of the movement. translated into a demand that all of the offices in the Church must now be opened up to participation by the women in the Church.

This grasp then, so-called, this conviction then, with respect to the teaching of Scripture, and particularly now, This text, Galatians 3.28, gained ground throughout this century until the goal was realized. In this respect, all the mainline Protestant churches in America have, in fact, opened up all offices in the Church, all ordained offices in the Church, to women. Now, consider this.

We have said that the Christian feminist movement arose out of the last century, but the last century was not just the time and era in which this particular movement arose. You remember that the nineteenth century was the time of the rise of the Christian, or let’s say, if we even want to use that term, Christian. It was the time of the rise of the cults, the aberrations within the Church, and even over against the Church. Oddly enough, then, the mainline Protestant churches were actually beat to the punch by many fundamentalist and Pentecostal churches, as well as by a number of the cults such as the Seventh-day Adventists and the Christian scientists. The problem for the mainline Church became much more serious than the company it was keeping, with the likes of Ellen G. Weiss in The Seventh Day Adventists, Mary Baker Eddy in The Christian Scientist, Amy Semple McPherson, and Catherine Coleman from amongst the fundamentalist Charismatics. The problem became the Bible itself.

It was a nice argument that had been worked out. Disregarding certain texts in Paul, holding on to Galatians 3.28, but in the end it simply didn’t wash. It didn’t work. And the reason is because it wasn’t just a matter of focusing on Paul.

One had to deal with the entirety of Scripture. And in the end, the Christian feminist movement was saying, was admitting, that the Bible was essentially sexist. from Genesis to Revelation. The Bible was essentially sexist. That is, it was possessed at its deepest level by a male bias, a male prejudice. And because that was the case, it was untrustworthy. It wasn’t then just a matter of casting aside a few verses in Paul’s letters.

You see, the entirety of the Scripture became suspect. It was written by men, after all. So then the conclusion was that from beginning to end, from Genesis to Revelation, This was the case, and only occasionally, you see, did a glimmer of true divine thought shine through, penetrate. Only occasionally was there this penetration of something of the light by which we are all to be directed, in which we were all to live.

And where might those faint few shafts of light be found in those texts where women assume leadership positions, or in those texts where God Himself is portrayed in feminine terms. You think of the situations, the texts that we mentioned this morning. You think of Miriam in Exodus 15, where she is called a prophetess and leads the people of God, or even the women specifically in their praise, delivering divine revelation in that case. Or Deborah, we mentioned her, Israel’s female judge from Judges chapters 4 and 5. We spoke about Huldah this morning, the prophetess during the time of Josiah.

These texts were invoked, these texts were cited, and with these texts in hand, you see, then the Christian feminist movement made the claim that they were at the forefront of a new Exodus experience, a liberation experience that had the promise of bringing them into the Promised Land, a new conquest over a land that was presently dominated by male chauvinist pigs. There it was. All that language was used, and it being used.

At the same time, we have to recognize—so say the Christian feminists At the same time, and I might add at this point, parenthetically, all Christian feminists are not female. I hope you understand that. All Christian feminists are not female. At the same time, with respect to Jehovah and the revelation of Jehovah in Scripture, we are not to think of Jehovah in exclusively male categories, since, as the feminist movement was discovering, the female and especially mother imagery and language were used to describe God himself. Particularly, we are told by these that the language about compassion—anywhere you find compassion mentioned. And that is a particularly feminine quality, say, in the Old Testament prophecies, say, in the Psalms, say, with respect to Jesus himself. Here, pointed out for us, is the feminine quality of God, the feminine quality of God.

We cannot think, then, of God in exclusively male categories. That is improper. In fact, some have suggested that is idolatry. That is the worship of a false god. But if we must do justice to the feminine in God, can we still call God Father? not without also calling him mother—oh, I’m sorry, not without also calling her mother. And if we hold that Jesus Christ is God—not that these Christian feminists of a liberal stripe do, you see, in any orthodox sense—but if we are going to hold that Jesus Christ is God, we must also do justice to the female in him. At the very least, we are not to call him the son of God any longer. Rather, we are to call him the child of God, which is gender neutral. And where we become boldest, you see, we even paint Jesus with a female body, hang him her on a cross, and call her in our sister.

Now you think I’m stretching things. You think I’m up here as a ranting and raving fundamentalist. It is not true. I am telling you the facts. I am telling you what is going on. I am telling you what is happening even in Christian circles and within so-called Christian congregations. These things are in fact taking place.

It was inevitable. It was inevitable, however, what should dawn upon many feminists then within the Church. Namely, the realization that Christianity as a biblical religion is inherently resistant to the feminization of God. This then creates new conflict, you see.

As you’re going down this road and you’re retranslating everything, you’re turning the father into a mother, you’re turning Jesus the son into a sister. As you’re going down this road, suddenly struck with a fit of honesty, you realize that biblical religion inherently is resistant to the feminization of God.

And this even despite the fact that you would claim certain shafts of light breaking through upon the pages of our present situation, and that from Holy Scripture. But what do you know? You now come up with a novel interpretation of those particular shafts of light. You finally realize that these shafts of light are actually the intrusions of another religion, a superior religion, a religion superior to biblical Christianity. In fact, a religion that is opposed by the Bible. You think I’m being bizarre, don’t you? You think, nobody believes this, nobody’s talking this way. You think I’m up here and I’m out of my mind. I plead with you. What I’m telling you is true.

The so-called shafts of light then, there at one time appealed to as the ground upon which we could base our approach to a feminization of God and our religion, are now being recognized as the intrusions of a religion superior to that which is given to us in the Scriptures.

This means, you see, that We need more than a mere rewriting of the Bible into inclusivist language. We need more than a rewrite of the Bible into the inclusivist language that is supposedly gender neutral. What we need is the incorporation into ourselves of that which the Bible opposes. We need the incorporation into ourselves of that which the Bible specifically opposes.

Now, lest you think I’m speaking in mysteries here, if in fact you need a little translation at this point, Let me spell it out for you. What we need brought into ourselves is the capacity for the veneration of the Earth’s natural energies and sensuality. Does this begin to sound familiar? What we need brought into ourselves is the capacity for the veneration, that is, the worship of the Earth natural energies and its sensuality, and this, very much to the point, through the worship of the female form.

Now you’re thinking to yourselves, this is outrageous. This is utterly outlandish. If what you are saying is true, this is beyond my ability to comprehend it. I can’t imagine that these sort of things are being said. I can’t imagine that these sorts of things are going on in so-called Christian circles.

It’s not possible, is it? Don’t you read your newspaper? Do you get any Christian periodicals today? Are you aware of what is being said? I hope it didn’t get past you, but what I just described for you when I was speaking about that capacity for the worship of Earth’s natural energies and spirituality through the worship of the female force is nothing else but a reversion to pure pink man.

What do you think was going on in the hills of Judea? That’s in the days of the kings and the prophets. Do you really think this is new? What do you think the Asherah was? The Asherah was so gross, you see, that typical books on biblical archaeology refrain from putting pictures in them that depict what they were. Friends, we’re dealing with religious pornography here. Plain and simple.

Unless you think that what I am suggesting to you I set in front of you what in fact took place this last November in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a conference entitled Reimaging of God, which was supported by all of the mainline Protestant denominations in this country. and funded, even heavily, by the Presbyterian Church USA and by the United Methodist Church. Suggestion rising out of this conference in Minneapolis was that we now have arrived at the point where we need a new God.

And what might we call this god? We have decided that a better name for this god is Sophia. Sophia. Do you recognize the name? The name for the ancient Greek goddess of wisdom. This conference was attended by many Christian so-called men and women. But this conference was also significant for another reason.

Because of the presence at that conference of a woman named Virginia Ramey Mullencott, Now, some of you may be conversant enough in the Christian periodical literature to recognize that name. Virginia Rainey Mollenkopf is a rather well-known English scholar who at one time was a premier evangelical. spokesperson, whose work was often printed in conservative magazines, such as Christianity Today. A little history. In 1976, Virginia Mallincott published a book entitled Women, Men, and the Bible.

And with this book, she registered a great victory within evangelicalism for what she called biblical feminism. She argued eloquently. She’s a very, very good writer, as you can well imagine. She is a world-class English scholar. She argued very eloquently for the Orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, for instance. She also argued eloquently for the centrality of Christ’s atoning death upon the cross. But at the same time, she pleaded in this equally eloquently for sexual equality, an equality which she saw as included the right of women to ordained office within the church.

That was 1976. The Minneapolis Conference was in November 1993. How does Ms. Mollenkopf present herself in 1993? She is now a professed lesbian. She told the conferees at the conference that Jesus is, quote, first born only in the sense that he is the first to show us that it is possible to live in oneness with the divine source.

Does that sound like orthodoxy to you? Does it even sound remotely proximate to orthodoxy? She went on to say that the traditional doctrine of the atonement, the atoning death of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, presents Christ’s death as the ultimate case of child abuse. and even a model for child abuse. To accept the Atonement, Christ’s death on the cross, is to accept God as an abusive parent, the father abusing the son. As Jesus, the child in this child abuse case, is the obedient and trusting child.

And as to the ultimate philosophy of life, which Ms. Mullencott sees flowing from her lesbian conviction, she says, quote, everything that lives is holy. And my hope is that the one divine presence would be recognized in everybody, by everybody. Lamonism—you don’t understand that term, it’s her term— The monism, that is, the philosophy that holds that everything is one. You see how that flows out of her lesbianism?

Everything is one. No dualities. No antinomies. Everything is one. The monism I’m talking about assumes that God, small g, is so all-inclusive that she is involved in every cell of those who are thoughts in her mind and the embodiments of her image. Like Jesus, we and the Source are one.

Well, to say the least, Virginia Mullencott has come a long way. I won’t finish that line. But maybe not so far after all. You see, even in her 1976 book, she was already denying the absolute authority of Scripture. She was suggesting that Genesis 1 and 2 and its doctrine of divine creation, the ordering of the sexes there and their role within creation, was misguided, incomplete. subject to the restrictions of cultural norms, not absolute. In that book, she charged Paul with inconsistency and with dealing in inner conflict over his attitude about women generally. He obviously had problems, this fellow. But even more, the equality she sought and advocated in 1976 has now become, you see, not equality, but domination.

Domination of the female in 1993, it’s the ascendancy of the female and the feminization of God. But it’s even more than that. If you pick it up in the quote that I gave you from her there last, it’s even more than that. What she is advocating is the literal absorption of all into the female. That’s what the quote was saying. The hope, the eschatology of the feminist position is the literal absorption of all, of everything, into the female. Listen to her words again. is so all-inclusive that she is involved in every cell of those who are thoughts in her mind and embodiments of her image.

Having surrendered, then, biblical creation, having subscribed to the position that Paul contradicts himself in his teaching on women and had trouble with regard to women generally, if he wasn’t a misogynist anyway, Mollenkopf has most effectively undercut her evangelical and orthodox roots, if they were there at all, by developing a theology that suits her neuroses and her sexual orientation. In fact, we can go further than that. We can say on the basis of her own words, Ms. Mollenkopf is a pantheist. She is a pantheist.

Everything is God. God is everything. This means, you see, as things have played themselves out, Ms. Mollenkopf was actually lying in 1976. The whole thing was a ploy. The purpose of it was not to advance the cause of God’s glory or the veracity of his word, but to promote a female-ism. But not only so, the vision is for the feminization of all that is.

Here is the one true God, and the opportunity, even for the male, to come back to his source, to his true mother. As we all then draw into her, our new God, all distinctions, all differentiations are removed. All boundaries, all unique properties dissolve, even between God and the creature. We all become one, and one, the one that becomes us. Creature and creator differences are gone.

Male and female differences are gone. And at the same time, Ms. Mollenkopf is bold to affirm that the female is older. In this regard, I am reminded of a quote from Abraham Kuyper in an article that he wrote a hundred years ago on the subject of pantheism. This is what Kuyper said.

When in the human body the boundary is disturbed between the tissue of the veins and the flesh of the muscles, then, with a necessity which is irresistible, there follows the decomposition of the corpse. As Romans 1 proves, moral corruption has a theological root. Moral corruption has a theological root. It’s all through the passage that we read in Romans 1, is it not? But note especially verse 28.

And just as they did not cease it to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind to do those things which are not of profit. May God preserve His Church, His true Church, from this perverse generation. O Lord, death stalks us, even within the Church.

And Lord, so many are liable to be sucked in or forced along with the flow. we know of the intercession of Christ our Savior, by His intercessions we are saved, we are preserved. Therefore, Lord, we rely completely upon the high priesthood, advocacy, and ministry of our Savior, Jesus Christ, who is even at your right hand. Oh, the wickedness that has come, the wickedness that is even being advocated by those who bear your name and claim that they have a right to be described as Christian. Help us, O God. Yes, help us in our prayers, even for our enemies. Help us, Lord, that we would not be self-righteous or think that we can stand in our own strength, for we cannot.

Bless us, Lord, with your true compassion, that we might be servants of yours to the end, that even many who have been seduced might be brought to repentance and restored to the proper fellowship of our God. in a church that is true to your word. We pray this in Jesus’ name.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

April 24, 1994
Christ’s Righteous Indignation

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, April 17, 1994.

About this sermon

Many in the church think Christ’s forgiveness costs nothing and requires nothing, and God’s own wrath exposes that belief as false. Real indignation toward the unrepentant sits beside real love for them. In 2 Corinthians 2 Paul prays for repentance more than for peace.

More sermons from 1 Corinthians · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

We are beginning our reading this morning in 1 Corinthians chapter 4, and we are starting with verse 14 of that 4th chapter. We’ll be reading through the 5th chapter, the 8th verse. From there we’ll be turning to 2 Corinthians chapter 2, so you may want to put your finger in that place as well. I’m reading this morning from the New American Standard Version. Please give your attention to the reading of God’s word.

I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. I exhort you, therefore, be imitators of me. For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, and he will remind you of my ways which are in Christ, just as I teach everywhere in every church.

Now, some have become arrogant, as though I were not coming to you. But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I shall find out not the words of those who are arrogant, but their power. For the kingdom of God does not consist in words, but in power. What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod, or with logs, and a spirit of gentleness?”

It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. And you have become elegant and have not mourned instead in order that the one who has done this deed might be removed from your midst. For I on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled and I with you in spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your boasting is not good.

Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean out the old leaven. that you may be a new lump, just as you are, in fact, unleavened. For Christ, our Passover, also has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast, not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” As I said, we are looking also at 2 Corinthians this morning, chapter 2.

But I determined this for my own sake, that I would not come to you in sorrow again. For if I cause you sorrow, who then makes me glad but the one whom I made sorrowful? And this is the very thing I wrote to you last when I came. I should have sorrow from those who want to make me rejoice. having confidence in you all that my joy would be the joy of you all. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears, not that you should be made sorrowful, but that you might know the love which I have especially for you, that if any had caused He has caused sorrow not to me, but in some degree, in order not to say too much, to all of you. Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the majority, so that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, lest somehow such a one be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him.”

For to this end also I wrote that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. Whom you forgive anything, I forgive also. For indeed, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ, in order that no advantage be taken of us by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his scheme.”

Our Father, by your word you made the world, and by your word you have made us, your people. Truly, now, by your word you sustain us. And we ask, Lord, that we might understand your word in relationship to our present situation. Indeed, O God, may we be sustained, may we be sustained by this word which you have given to us, as your Spirit is pleased to minister to us through it, and that for the sake of your Son, our Savior. Amen.

Now, it has been my prayer that you would not weary of our discussion of this matter of church discipline. We come to the completion of this discussion this morning, taking it up at the point at which we left it before stopping for special reflection upon our Savior’s resurrection, and also for special reflection upon the supper which we are to keep in our Savior’s memory. Our focus throughout our messages on this issue of discipline has been this text, which we have read from again this morning, 1 Corinthians 5. and the case of discipline that arose within that particular congregation. Here is what we have said thus far.

Despite the spirit in the modern Church, despite what the modern Church says, Church discipline, and this according to the Bible, and certainly confirmed by our heritage as Presbyterians, is a mark of the true Church of Jesus Christ. It is to be administered in cases of doctrinal and moral sin, and it is to be administered in cases of administrative injustice and this because of the honor of Christ, whose Church is to reflect His glory and purity, the very glory and purity of the heavenly assembly which is being convened by Him. So important is this discipline for the Church that the very presence of God cannot be expected without it. Therefore, to forsake or to abandon discipline within the Church is for the Church to forsake and to abandon God. In this regard, the modern Church does in fact remind us of the opening chapters of 1 Samuel.

You remember what was going on in Israel, described in those early chapters of 1 Samuel, Eli, the priest and the prophet of God, officiating over the people of God, yet unwilling to discipline his own sons, who had become infamous with regard to their behavior and attitude. God sent judgment upon Israel, the Philistines came, they even captured the Ark of the Covenant. Eli’s sons were killed in the battle, word having reached Ben, one of his son’s wives, with news of the death of her husband and the capture of the Ark. labor, gave birth prematurely, and in her death gave to her child the name Ichabod, which means no glory. Translated forth, then, the glory has departed from Israel, the people of God.

Indeed, then, with regard to this matter of discipline, as far as the modern Church is concerned, it has, in fact, posted over its doorway that word Ichabod. No glory, for the glory has departed. God, in fact, has departed because there is no longer any discipline within the Assumption.

In these messages we have also spoken about the manner and the attitude with which discipline is to be pursued. As to the manner, we have drawn from the comments that appear in 1 Corinthians 5, particularly verses 3 through 5, and the inferences that are there, and noted those inferences with what we find in Matthew 18, verses 15 through 20.

That discipline, while spoken of in one regard, is the action of the entire Church, the whole Church being enlisted in the enterprise, yet at the same time it is carried out within the Church by those who have that responsibility specifically. According to the Old Testament pattern, it was the priest and the judges. In the New Testament it is the ministers and the elders, and in our Presbyterian settings we call the alliance of ministers and elders the session. So that with regard to manner, the manner of discipline. What about the attitude with which discipline is to be pursued? Here we are dealing with something of the greatest importance, the attitude with which the Church is to pursue discipline within its ranks.

In this regard, we have looked at Paul’s attitude specifically from sections in 1 Corinthians, ranging from the fourth chapter through the sixth. It’s not that we don’t find examples of this elsewhere, but this is a point in Paul’s writings where this matter is specifically addressed. You note in these chapters that Paul comes at this matter of discipline with great intensity and with absolute seriousness. For example, at the end of chapter 4 in 1 Corinthians, Paul sets the tone with respect to his attitude by casting the present disciplined case in the light of the final judgment.

It can’t get more serious than this. This he does in the twenty-first verse of that fourth chapter, when he places the rod mentioned in that verse. of discipline over against love and gentleness, over against love and gentleness, as if the two were mutually exclusive. You see, then, how the light of the final judgment is shining forth from this text. We cannot think of a situation in which the rod would be so contrasted with love except that one that bears the mark of finality and is a reflection of the final judgment. In other words, But Rob here, spoken of at the end of that fourth chapter, is conceived of as devoid of love, and has in view a situation when there is, in fact, no love left. and all that remains is the wrong, all that remains is wrath.

All true and godly discipline, therefore, by way of God’s appointment carries the stamp of this terrifying prospect, and that’s what makes it so effective. It carries within it the prospect, you see, that love will cease. if there isn’t change. There is the threat, you see, however subtle, however quietly communicated, that the love can, in fact, end just as it will, in fact, end with respect to the reprobate in the last judgment. Now, although Paul’s suggestion of this in 1 Corinthians 4 verse 21 may appear to be quite subtle, so subtle that we are liable to miss it, certainly we do not miss the note that we find within his tone, a note which is totally and completely indignant with respect to the sin that is addressed.

His tone is fully indignant, so much so as you move through the fifth chapter and into the sixth, his statements seem to be abrupt and devoid of mercy. Note what he says, verse 2 of chapter 5, the one guilty of this deed is to be removed from you. He speaks about turning this individual over to Satan. In verse 13 of that fifth chapter, he says, remove the wicked man from among you.

Moving down into the sixth chapter, verses 9 and 10, there is absolutely no laboring with regard to Paul in this matter at all. His indignation continues to burn as he speaks about fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, the perverted, homosexuals, thieves, the covetous, drunkards, revilers, swindlers.

He says, unequivocally, these shall not impact the kingdom of God. No equivocation on the part of all, no discussion about extenuating circumstances, the environment in which you were raised. All the excuses that you might make to yourself, no dirty gray areas, only black and white. That’s the way it is. Justice, strong justice against religious and moral depravity.

Paul, therefore, as the spokesman of God, and I would dare say as the servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. For we must not think of Paul somehow abstracting himself from Jesus Christ at this point, when he begins to speak about discipline. Paul, therefore, as the spokesman for God and as the servant of the Lord Jesus Christ, calls upon the Church at Corinth to share his indignation. You’re asking about the proper response to this text?

He is calling upon that church at Corinth to share his indignation and to join him in his Christlike and godly desire for justice, strong justice. The call as a spokesman for God and as the servant of the Lord Jesus Christ He is calling upon all those, then, who would name Christ’s name and claim membership in his church. He is calling upon you, this church, Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Osborne, Pennsylvania, to share his indignation and to join him in his desire for justice, strong justice.

You must not draw back. If you draw back, to use the words of 2 Corinthians 2, you fail the test. You fail the test. You must not recoil. But I don’t like this business about discipline. I don’t like this matter of having to give an account. I don’t even much like apologizing or asking forgiveness.

You must not draw back from the Apostle’s intensity. even though it frightens you. And well, it should frighten you, because you see, we’ve already established that the very judgment of God, even the final judgment, aren’t due. But it’s not merely a matter of you not drawing back. You see, what the Apostle is forcing you to do is to embrace this intensity. You’ve got to embrace it! You have to embrace his zeal, not because you are convinced that justice, strong justice, is that which will make for a better world or an improved society, and you’re committed to a law-and-order approach to life generally. No!

But because you know God, and that he is terrible in all of his judgments, and that our God is a consuming fire. And because you know Jesus Christ, the one who is indeed the meek and gentle Savior, but also the one who is described as coming with a two-edged sword proceeding out of his mouth on the last day to exact justice upon the earth. So as a result of your knowledge of God, and your knowledge of Jesus Christ whom you own, you must embrace the Apostle’s intensity, his zeal, And you must be committed to this matter of the Church’s discipline. Realizing all the while that this discipline by its very nature carries within it the message that love can in fact end. Leaving a sinner to the wrath of God, and to the wrath of God alone. Now, two things must now become ever more clear to us on the background of what we’ve said.

First of all, it should be clear to you that the Bible in its entirety does not allow us to let go of the wrath of God. is that wrath that comes into focus in 1 Corinthians 4-6, and in the discipline that Paul demands with regard to this congregation and its circumstances. You will note, therefore, that God’s wrath is not simply an Old Testament reality. Is it not equally obvious in the New Testament?

But no further is the fact that God’s wrath here is set before us that does then bring into clear view, does it not, the absolute necessity for repentance. I have defined repentance for you on occasion. It is abandonment before God throwing yourself on His mercy without making any excuse whatsoever, in the declaration that you are sorry for what you have done. But this whole matter of wrath now being set before us, does it not set clearly before the absolute necessity for repentance. God’s wrath is a reality, a genuine prospect.

Our sin incurs the wrath of God unless there is repentance, that that wrath might be laid aside. Our repentance, then, becomes a testimony of the Spirit’s work in us, that we, after all, belong to God, that we are in Christ. And being in Christ, we are capable of repentance. Without repentance, there is no such testimony in us, and God’s wrath abides on us. This is why we must insist upon repentance in our own case.

In fact, we must demand it of ourselves, as well as in the cases of all those who might be overtaken in sin, be it doctrinal or moral, within the congregation. Now, I make this point to you because there is a spirit abroad presently in the Church that says that an insistence upon repentance is a sure sign of inferior spirituality. that the truly genuine Christian spirit is so elevated that it rises above offenses, above transgressions, and treats them as if they were nothing. That’s the spirit of gender in Christianity, we are told. In fact, even further, we are told, true love does nothing less than this. It forgets offense and never demands an accountability. Isn’t that what you’re being told day after day in the media?

True love rises above offense and treats them, treats offense, treats transgression, treats sin, as if they are completely immaterial. and this being the nature of love, it must also be the nature of God. Vengeance is therefore read out of God and His being. Accountability is read out of God and what He is. Such things as vengeance, wrath, and accountability are beneath God.

He wouldn’t dabble in such things. Instead, God is completely and totally accepting, and to use the emphatic form, irregardless. In this regard, Jesus is made then the chief example from the cross. He prays, Father, forgive them for they know not what they do. By this prayer, so we are told, Jesus forgave those who sinned against him out of hand completely, totally. Here in Jesus from the cross is revealed the new God. Through Jesus we come to know the new God, the one who forgives out of hand, who rises above the old deity, because this new God will not allow himself to be bothered by my sin to the point of distraction, to the point of exacting justice upon me. Jesus, by his prayer, therefore, doesn’t wait for repentance from those at the foot of the cross. At least, this is what we are told.

He forgives these individuals out of hand. Jesus does no such thing. He does not forgive those who sinned against him or executed him. Get that into your mind. He does not forgive those who executed him. He prays for their forgiveness, and there is a world of difference. And just how might those who are responsible for his execution receive forgiveness?

Like any other sinner receives forgiveness through repentance, you see. First of all, repentance has not been impeached, it has not been removed, it has rather been confirmed by the promise. And isn’t it interesting that the very gospel writer who records for us Christ’s prayer from the cross for his enemies, namely Luke, is the very one who later records these words of the risen Christ when he says, thus it was written that the Christ should suffer and rise again from the dead on the third day, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all the nations. Luke chapter 24, verses 46 and 47. It is the risen Christ in that text who is insisting upon repentance in light of the justice of God’s wrath against sinners. We who follow the risen Christ must do the same. The second thing that becomes clear to us, in addition to the fact that the Bible does not allow us to let go of the wrath of God. is this, the Bible does not allow us to let go of the love of God.

As oddly as it may sound, it is Paul’s love that is preserved beneath the surface, even as you make your way through those terrifying passages in 1 Corinthians 4 through the sixth chapter. While this man speaks so strongly about sin in the assembly and the end to which sin leads, yes, there is this note, this testimony to sin, to the love of God, rather, that is operative in him. That love expresses itself in verse 5 of 1 Corinthians 5. where Paul speaks about the man’s spirit being saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Christ. The operation of discipline then, as Paul understands it, is that this man’s soul, his spirit, may be preserved, saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Christ.

This means that even as Paul is speaking as he does in 1 Corinthians 5, his heart is open to the man. and his heart is ready to respond appropriately to the man in that man’s repentance. In this, Paul is like our Lord Jesus, who, though his heart was breaking on the cross, remained open-hearted towards sinners. prepared to receive them at their repentance. Is that not what he does, in fact, with regard to the penitent thief? Paul therefore proves his relationship to Christ, that he is bound not only to the Christ who comes as judge, but to the Christ who comes to embrace those repentant sinners who would be gathered to him as so many lambs to a faithful shepherd. Paul proves his relationship over and again to Jesus Christ, especially now as we move on to 2 Corinthians 2, where he pleads for this very man.

Did you pick it up? Sufficient for such a one is the punishment which was inflicted by the majority. Verse six. Verse eight. Wherefore, I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. Paul is proving here his relationship to his savior as he pleads for this man and this man’s reception back into the full fellowship of the church. If this man’s discipline had the mark of God’s judgment upon it, his restoration through repentance has the mark of reception into glory upon it. We who claim the love of Christ therefore should stand to welcome back the slain lamb that has been turned away from God’s wrath. and we should stand to receive such with the joy of the angels welcoming sinners into heaven’s courts. No, even more, we should stand as with the heart of Christ who shall in fact receive us sinners all with great joy into the heavenly kingdom.

Our father. You have set in your word. This testimony as a test to us. May we not draw back. Rather, Lord, may we embrace that which is essential, even though others around us draw back, even to the point of offense, at the full and complete message of our Savior and his intention for his Church. We would pray, O God, for their forgiveness that they by repentance might be restored, and that our assembly might be full, as the assembly in heaven shall have no empty seat.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

April 17, 1994
When Discipline Actually Works

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, March 27, 1994.

About this sermon

Scripture gives real examples of church discipline that succeeded, and God himself takes an active part in the process. Paul’s language in 1 Corinthians 5:3-5 assumes a ruling body of elders with real authority. Discipline done rightly is a divine transaction.

More sermons from 2 Chronicles · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

We are beginning this morning our scripture reading in 2 Chronicles chapter 33, beginning at verse 1, give your attention to the word of God. Manasseh was twelve years old when he began to reign, and he reigned fifty and five years in Jerusalem, but did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, like unto the abominations of the heathen whom the Lord had cast out before the children of Israel.

For he built again the high places which Hezekiah his father had broken down and reared up altars for the Babylonians, and made groves, and worshiped all the hosts of heaven, and served them. Also he built altars in the house of the Lord, whereof the Lord had said, In Jerusalem shall my name be forever. And he built altars for all the hosts of heaven in the two courts of the house of the Lord, and he caused his children to pass through the fire in the valley of the son of Hinnom, Also he observed times and used enchantments and used witchcraft and dealt with a familiar spirit and with wizards, and he wrought much evil in the sight of the Lord to provoke him to anger. And he set up a proud image, the idol which he had made in the house of God, of which God had said to David and to Solomon his son, in this house and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen before all the tribes of Israel, will I put my name forever.”

Neither will I any more remove the foot of Israel from out of the land which I have appointed for your fathers, so that they will take heed to do all that I have commanded them according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.”

So Manasseh made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to sin and to do worse than the heathen whom the Lord had destroyed before the children of Israel. And the Lord spake to Manasseh and to his people, but they would not hearken. Therefore the Lord brought upon them the captains of the host of the king of Assyria, which took Manasseh from the Thorns and bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon. And when he was in affliction, he besought the Lord his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed unto and he was entreated of him and heard his supplication and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord he was God.

Now after this he built a wall without the city of David on the west side of Gihon in the valley even to the entering in at the fish gate, encompassed about Ophir and raised it up a very great height and put captains of war in all the fenced cities of Judah. and he took away the strange gods and the idol out of the house of the Lord and all the altars that he had built in the mount of the house of the Lord and in Jerusalem, and cast them out of the city. And he repaired the altar of the Lord and sacrificed thereon peace offerings and thank offerings, and commanded Judah to serve the Lord God of Israel. Nevertheless, the people did sacrifice still in the high places, yet unto the Lord their God only.” Then, turning over to 1 Corinthians 5, reading verses 3-5, 1 Corinthians 5, beginning at verse 3.

For I very, as absent in body but present in spirit, have judged already. Though I were present concerning him that hath so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, we are gathered together and my spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ to deliver such a one, undisturbed for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” Help us, our Father, in our prayers with respect to the Word. May we pray as we approach your Word that this Word may profit us to the full. And also, O God, give us a heart for those who proclaim your Word throughout the world in various places. And may they have the encouragement of your spirit as they preach, and may they be blessed with faithfulness as they proclaim the gospel. And may it please you, Lord, this very day, to save many, even those whom you have ordained unto everlasting life. We pray it in Jesus’ name.

Amen. there is something exceedingly great about the story of Manasseh. The story that appears here in 2 Chronicles chapter 33. This man was the most wicked king that Judah had ever seen. we might go even further and say that this man was the most wicked king that Israel in the entirety of its history had ever seen. We may even be bolder still and suggest that this man was the most wicked man that had ever lived. But it is specifically this man whom the Lord brings to repentance, so that he became as great in his humility before the Lord as he had been in his sin.

Now, there are many parallels between this story about Manasseh And the passage that we have been looking at recently in 1 Corinthians, the 5th chapter specifically. I’m not suggesting to you that the Apostle Paul has the story of Manasseh in mind as he goes and writes what he does in 1 Corinthians 5, but there is a common pattern as you move from one text to the other. are intriguing.

Look, for example, at 2 Chronicles 33 verse 9. In the New American Standard it reads this way, Thus Manasseh misled Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to do more evil than the nations whom the Lord had destroyed before the sons of Israel. To say the least, the sin of Manasseh is proverbial.

It would seem that his sin exceeds the sins of the nations that had been dispossessed. But now look at what is said about the man in 1 Corinthians chapter 5, the first verse. This man who has been overtaken in this particularly deplorable sin That is, he is now living with his stepmother as if that woman were his wife. Paul says this about him, that this is such a sin that it does not even exist among the Gentiles.

So you have the enormity of the evil commented upon in both instances. But we also have the relationship, the relationship specifically that Manasseh sustains to Judah, his people. Once more, that ninth verse in 2 Chronicles 33, we are told that Manasseh misled Judah.

Look now at 1 Corinthians 5, verse 6, and what is said in the case of the man that is in view in that text. Here, Paul compares the iniquitous man to leaven and asks, Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? As Manasseh’s wickedness affected all Judah, this man’s notorious sin affects no better, in fact, the entire church at Corinth. Just as the sinner in Corinth is to be delivered over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus, verse 5, so Manasseh is delivered through the judgments of the Lord to Babylon, of all places, that he might be restored finally, ultimately, to that place which God has set for him among his people.

And finally, with regard to these parallels, which are in fact striking and intriguing, some have suggested for us quite strongly and cogently that this particular man of whom Paul speaks in 1 Corinthians 5, so sternly to be disciplined through the Apostle’s admonition, is the very man for whom Paul then pleads in 2 Corinthians 2. where he says of this individual, assuming they are the same, sufficient to such a man is the punishment that has been inflicted by the men.

Now, if this is the case, if we can see that this man himself was restored, The man in you in 1 Corinthians. We have then record in each testament, old and new, of successful discipline administered, both incidents involving severe sin, the greatest of sins, and then resolution of the same, and reclamation of the transgressors. Combining these passages creates a uniform testimony from testament to testament, the impact of which is an encouragement, believe it or not, an encouragement to individual transgressors and to congregations of God’s people alike. To the individual transgressor, because we are assured that the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the discipline of the Lord can, in fact, bring restoration and reconciliation. If in the case of these notorious sinners, then so also in our case.

The Westminster Confession of Faith is found at the back of the Trinity hymnals, and on page 680 you have the chapter, Repentance unto Life, chapter 15. And there is a statement in that chapter from the Confession that I think is well worth committing to memory. I have in mind paragraph 4. What can, in fact, be as encouraging as these words to us, sinners that we are? Paragraph 4, chapter 15 of the Confession, reads, As there is no sin so small but it deserves damnation, so there is no sin so great that it can bring damnation upon those who truly repent.

Oh, marvelous stuff. Encouragement, then. And encouragement as it works itself out in the life of a congregation, in particular cases, need I remind this congregation of instances in which discipline has brought the desire of recovery. Manasseh, then, and the man of 1 Corinthians 5 communicate hope, hope to the spiritually and morally stricken, that through a godly discipline, restoration and reconciliation are possible.

This is why, then, we personally must not—and underscore that—must not resent or hold in contempt the discipline of the Lord, which would be brought to bear on our own individual cases. For we may find ourselves so desperately, personally in need of that discipline for a proper restoration and reconciliation amongst the people of the Lord and with the Lord himself.

Nor can the Church ever afford to hold discipline in contempt itself. It seems that the congregation in Corinth was guilty of this very thing. They were arrogant, to be sure, they were spiritually boastful, they were filled with all kinds of pride, and they couldn’t be bothered with taking care of the case of this particular man who had fallen into sin. But instead of following the course of the Church at court, the true Church is bound to pursue discipline because of its zeal for the purity of the Church.

Bound as the Church is to a holy Lord, and is that not the impact of verses 7 and 8 in that fifth chapter of 1 Corinthians, where Paul speaks about the old leaven, the leavening the whole loaf, where he speaks about Christ, our Passover, having been sacrificed where he calls upon us to celebrate the feast not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of mollusk and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. But furthermore, and of great importance with Manasseh and this man of 1 Corinthians 5 squarely set before us, The Church must not move down the road of discipline without the conviction that God can bring a glorious outcome to the effort, to the enterprise of discipline specifically. And here is a tendency that dogs too many steps these days. the judgment that the situation is beyond recovery.

Why even expend oneself? The sin is too great, the sinner is too obstinate to admit to any resolution. That sin and that obstinance preclude any prospect for a happy and glorious outcome. Let me be clear with you about this point. Such an attitude on the part of the Church is a form of unbelief. The situation is beyond recovery. The sinner is so thoroughly obstinate that we do better simply to ignore him. Let me say that one more time. Such an attitude is a form of unbelief. And it is especially this question of belief and unbelief that he is now the last dimension to the discipline process, as the Church would be engaged in that process.

You see, it is absolutely imperative that we believe God is present and active among his people. It is absolutely imperative that we believe that. Yes, not only in our personal lives, not simply as we are a Church congregated here and we have the confidence that God is present with us as we gather for worship, or even as we gather for the purpose of celebrating the sacraments and affirm the presence of our God with us in the celebration, say, of the Lord’s Supper. But even now, more going beyond those points, yes, it is absolutely imperative that we, the Church, believe that God is present and accurate in the discipline processes of the Church. From the telling of the story of Manasseh, As it appears in 2 Chronicles, this indeed is obvious.

And the Lord’s involvement, His presence, His activity, is direct, is it not? In fact, there doesn’t seem to be any other actor in the scene described for us than God Himself. He is the one alone, even though He may have used prophets to bring His word to man, so God is seen in that sense as the sole actor. the one who is present and active to administer discipline to this wayward king.

But let me tell you now that the Lord is no less involved, no less present and active, in 1 Corinthians 5 and in the discipline passage that is set out in front of us there. There is a change. There is a change, to be sure. The emphasis now is upon God’s indirect presence, and you have to be sensitive to that as you read through that text to pick it up. God is indeed present and active. How so? He is present and active through his servant, who is no other than the Apostle Paul. Note the manner in which the Apostle selects to frame this thought with respect to the presence and activity of God.

It is so thoroughly informing the mindset of the Apostle as he addresses the problem that it intrudes itself into the way in which he describes himself in his relationship to the Corinthians. Look, for instance, at 1 Corinthians chapter 4, verse 15. Here Paul speaks of himself as a father in relationship to the Corinthians. Now, I want you to drop down to verse 17, where Paul speaks about sending to the Corinthians his son, Timothy. And something’s sounding familiar here. First he describes himself as the father, and next he sends his son. If you move down towards the end of the chapter there, you have Paul describing himself in relationship to the fact that he is promised to come again to these Corinthians, and he is coming again to the Corinthians. in language that sounds very much like the second coming of Christ.

But he isn’t done. Did you catch it in what we read from the fifth chapter this morning? We’ve got the Father, we’ve got the Son in chapter 4. What are you waiting for? You’re waiting for the Spirit, aren’t you? Well, the Spirit comes, does he not? verses 3 through 5 of that fifth chapter. He says, I’m not going to be there in body, I’m going to be there in spirit. Father, Son, Spirit.

Paul will then indirectly communicate the truth of God’s presence and activity among these people by the very way in which he speaks of his relationship to them. Paul’s knowledge of God in his triune nature informs his understanding of his relationship to these Corinthians, and it communicates that sense of the presence of God, even God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in the entire matter of his dealings with them in this issue of church discipline. It is this union, then, of the Triune God and His Apostle that continues to guarantee God’s presence with His Church in the discipline of the Church’s membership. You see, just as the Apostle is removed geographically from the Corinthians, he’s not there, he is also removed from us. He is removed from us in space and time. The Apostle is in heaven.

Nevertheless, there is that sense in which he continues to function in the midst of the Church of Jesus Christ, and that even to the end of the world. And how so specifically by his witness, by the word that comes through him, as that word has been recorded in the Scriptures.

The point being, as long as the apostolic witness is alive in the Church, God’s presence is among us to exercise His discipline upon us. We as much bound to believe now, here’s the point, we as much bound to believe that our God is present, specifically in disciplining us, as we are to believe that he is present at all in our worship, or even to be present with us in our celebration of the sacrament. We no longer look for a living and bodily present apostle, for surely none in the Church today should even dare to speak with the authority with which the Apostle Paul speaks. But God’s presence is bound to that witness. is bound to that witness, the witness of his servants. God’s presence is preserved in our midst, mediated by the apostolic word, the Bible. But secondly, the presence of the Lord is indirectly evident here in this text. demanding of us once more faith, the exercise of our faith that God is present through the specifics of church discipline.

And here I have in mind the actions of the judicatory that would be at work in the church at Corinth, something comparable to our session. charged with the administration of discipline within the people of God. And it is my judgment, and I believe an informed and correct judgment, that this is exactly what is going on in that long, complicated, difficult sentence that runs from verse 3 to the end of verse 5 in 1 Corinthians 5. In this text, in this long run-on sentence, in view, is not a general gathering of the congregation as at other times, such as at worship, but a specific gathering, the express purpose of which is the discipline of this man who has now been exposed in his sin. Nor is it, might I add, The assumption of these verses is that the whole of the congregation will in fact be present to administer this discipline. Rather, the meeting in view is one that specifically takes place in a gathering of the Corinthians with Paul’s spirit, using the words of those verses now, with the power of their Lord Jesus, for the purpose, verse 5, of delivering this man to Satan, that his spirit might be salvaged in the day of Christ. Not only is a specific meeting in view, but it is a meeting of the Church’s judicatory at which the Lord himself then will be present to administer the discipline for those whom he has called in the church to do just that. I might add that this is the specific interpretation of that famous verse that comes from Matthew 18.

If two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst. It’s not the encouragement to you that the Lord’s presence is with you as you gather together for your little Bible study on Tuesday nights. That text is about Church discipline. Read the context.

The promise is specifically related to the presence of the Lord in the administration of discipline over the people of God. Not only is a specific meeting in view, meeting of the Church’s judicatory recession, but it is specifically with the judicatory as it conducts its affairs on the basis of and consistent with the apostolic witness that God is present. And insofar as the decisions of the judicatory are treated as decisions of the whole congregation and embraced by the whole congregation, The congregation is called upon to give its assent that God is with it in the administration of justice within its walls.

As the world, and even much of the Church in our day, has decided that the exercise of discipline by the Church is a sign, a sure sign of hypocrisy, we must be biblical in our convictions. In this, that discipline is not only necessary as a mark that God is truly with us, but indispensable for the full and glorious restoration of sinners, though they be as sinful as Manasseh, and as corrupt as the man at Corinth.

Our Father, we are the first to admit that this whole matter of discipline is very difficult for us. It is difficult for those who have office, for the administration of it. It is also difficult for us in the congregation, for it is necessary, Lord, that we would receive your disciplined grace.

Help us, Lord, we who have office, to be about our task, and that, Lord, with our Savior in mind, and even as he is presented to us in the Scripture as that one who seeks and saves that which is lost. But Lord, we are asking at the same time that all of us who are subject to discipline, and that excludes no one, would have hearts that are ready to receive your admonitions as they are appropriate, as they come forth from your word, that we with all humility might receive this discipline so that, yes, there may be the destruction of the flesh and the preservation of the spirit in the day of Lord Jesus. Oh, help us, Lord, that we would be a glad people, even a people that welcomes your judgments, that by them we might be restored and reconciled. as is right. We pray these things through our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who is Head and King of the Church, in the confidence, yes, that our God is present, not only in our general worship, but also even in the administration of discipline for our good.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

March 27, 1994
Discipline That Leads Back

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, March 20, 1994.

About this sermon

The media’s own moral depravity forms the backdrop for a sermon insisting that sexual sin, like any sin, finds its only real remedy at Christ’s cross. Discipline exists to lead the sinner to repentance and back into the church’s fellowship rather than to exclude for its own sake. Purity, understood that way, is a destination rather than a gate kept shut.

More sermons from 1 Corinthians · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

This morning we are reading from 1 Corinthians 6, beginning at verse 1. I am reading from the New American Standard this morning. Give your attention to the word of God. Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints?

Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world, and if the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more matters of this life? If then you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the Church?

I say this to your shame. Is it so that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren? But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers. Actually then, it is already a defeat for you that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud, and that’s your brethren. Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor feminine, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, Nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers shall inherit the kingdom of God.

And such were some of you, but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the spirit of our God. All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. Food is for the stomach, and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body. Now, God has not only raised the Lord, but will also raise us up through his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? May it never be! Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a harlot is one body with her?

For he says the two will become one flesh. But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with him. Flee immorality! Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body. but the immoral man sins against his own body? Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price. Therefore glorify God in your body.” Then, backing up to 1 Corinthians 5, verse 1. It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, an immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife.

Our Father, our confession remains settled with respect to your word. We who have assembled here today believe that the Bible is the infallibly inspired word of God. O Lord, we pray that this confession would be evident in the manner in which we speak and act. Father, we ask that we would not have a mere paper confession. We ask our God also that you would bless your church May we be concerned for your church in its testimony throughout the world. Help us understand better that there are your children in various congregations throughout this region, this nation, and to the ends of the earth. And may our concern be for them, that they would confess with us the one true word of the living God. Father, help us, help us all, your people in these times, not to desert the truth. We pray this, for Jesus said, Amen.

A few months ago, I was struck by a newspaper article reporting on an AIDS benefit concert. Now, the reason for my amazement about that article was not its subject matter, but its brazen style. a brazen style that was obvious in the many quotations that appeared in it from the number of celebrities the reporter had chosen to quote. And also, because of the brazen style of the reporter himself, Here it was, in the paper, stretched out on my dining room table, first thing in the morning, in the bright light of day, an article filled with vulgarities, filled with comments that a few years ago would have been found only in the raciest and most vile tabloids. if not reserved exclusively for pornography. Of course, I have been aware, as you have been aware also, that for a long time we have been on the skids in our culture. And that reflected very directly in our media.

At one time, I was an avid moviegoer. I was even employed at one time as a movie critic. But I don’t go to many movies anymore. And the movies that I rent tend to be of the older vintage. I also find that I am having an increased difficult time making it through much of anything that is on network TV. And that because of the obvious, open, perverse humor, the endless streams of double entendres. I don’t know why they even bother anymore with the double entendres. That because of the deliberate and gratuitous savagery, and I have in mind here not just the violence but the sexuality, that because of the superficial political correctness of what is communicated, and the low-life voyeurism Obviously, something has happened in our society.

There has been great change over the last fifty years, has there not? Now, we can’t go into all the reasons for this this morning, but I want to mention to you the thought that ran over me like a freight train while I was reading that article in the newspaper.

You see, I realize that the reporter and the celebrities that he was quoting had a very well-conceived mission. A mission that they had well-defined and they had well in their grasp. These individuals are the sworn enemies of what they consider to be the vestiges of prudishism, the vestiges of victorianism, the vestiges of a repressive Christianity, and to their way of thinking, is there any other kind? Here are the champions of license, not liberty, but license, who believe that anyone should be free, specifically free sexually, to do whatever they want, to act and to speak in public in any way they judge appropriate for the purpose of destroying what they conceive to be the restraints that are inhibiting them. These people are on a mission. Their actions are deliberate. They are calculated. They have a specific end in view, a goal in mind—the removal of all restraint.

Therefore, the public media wishes By and large, increasingly it seems, acting utterly irresponsibly, they wish to be able to depict any human action, to speak about any body part or any bodily function, all this in the name of honesty and freedom, with the corollary conviction that anyone who resists them is either a hypocrite or a fascist, if not both. Now, I mention this to you today not because I think these people deserve or merit your attention on a Sunday morning here at Grace Church, nor is it because I fear you are in the dark about what is going on and that you need a wake-up call. We all know, do we not, that former restraints within our society, one time a great comfort to the Christians in this society, are gone. It has become abundantly clear to us, I hope, that those who believed that the difference between the world and the Church was being eradicated by the improvement and Christianizing of the world were wrong. My concern, and the reason why I bring up these things, is because of the persistent danger posed in them for the Church, specifically for the Church to begin to act like the world, or, as in the case of the Church at Corinth, to harbor within its membership those who even outdistance the world in an open-display exhibition of depravity.

That’s how Paul, very directly, very forthrightly, puts it in 1 Corinthians 5.1. It seems that a man, a member in good standing within this church at Corinth, was living with his stepmother as if that woman were his wife. Now, our intention in this present segment of our study entitled Considering the Church has been to look at the very difficult area of one of those marks of the true church, namely the proper administration of church discipline. And we find ourselves here in 1 Corinthians 5 because this passage, along with Matthew 18, is a classic text on that subject.

And it is my hope that before we leave this text that we will all see just how full and deep and helpful this text is with respect to this matter. But as far as the message this morning is concerned, Let me zero in on the specific issue in view in 1 Corinthians 5, namely immorality and sexual impurity. Now it is true, it is true that at particular periods in the history of the Church and in some parts of the Church presently, sexual sin has been treated as the unpardonable sin.

This attitude compounds the often deep and lingering sense of remorse that many a Christian has felt with regard to sexual immorality. A remorse untreated by the gospel that has proved to be nothing short of devastating spiritually, generating such guilt that it has left individuals with that certain sense that their particular sin cannot be forgiven, leaving them in a permanent state of semi-depression. if not with a persisting sense of dread.

These people, Christians that they be, are in desperate need. They are in desperate need of a better grip on the truth of Christ’s cross and its power. They need very much to understand better their repositioning with respect to God through the work of their Savior, because of what he has done in his death, in his resurrection, in his ascension for them. They need to understand the mark of demarcation that comes with respect to the work of regeneration and the transformation affected by the Spirit of God in the souls of sinners.

Yet, indeed, as we’ve read this morning from 1 Corinthians 6, they were formerly classified with those that Paul describes in verses 9 and 10. idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, homosexuals, thieves, covetous drunkards, revilers, swindlers. Yes, classified with these, but now, because of the work of Jesus Christ, washed, Paul goes on to say, verse 11, washed, sanctified, justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Transformation, change, yes, effective and effectual. Taking you out of one life, putting you in another. Taking you out of one environment, the environment of the world, and putting you in the environment of a totally different world, and that by root of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That resurrection and that world above defining who you are. But the response may well be to this, The response of the troubled heart may well be to this.

Well, that’s all well, fine, and good, talking about those sins that I committed before I became a Christian. I’m concerned, however, about those sins that I’ve committed since becoming a Christian.” Is not the Bible full of testimony concerning the forgiveness of believers overtaken by sin? Need I remind you of David in the Old Testament, of Peter in the New, and of many, many others? Do we not confess in the Apostles’ Creed that we believe in the forgiveness of sins? Not just those that were committed before we came to Christ, but even those that have persisted why we are yet claimed to be believers in the war.

In fact, our text here, 1 Corinthians 5, most definitely holds out this very prospect, does it not? The discipline Paul brings to bear upon this man, mentioned in verse 1 of chapter 5, is has in you the salvation of his spirit.” The discipline which Paul is bringing to bear upon this man has in you the salvation of his spirit. Note verse 5.

I have decided to deliver such a one, to save him from the destruction of his flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” Now, I realize that there are many complications and difficulties with this verse, and we’re not going to get into those difficulties this morning, but just to tell you that the conclusion of that verse is holding out the prospect, the end, that the discipline will in fact lead to salvation or deliverance in the day of the Lord. the man’s spirit preserved.

Now, you must understand that it’s not his spirit absent his body. No, not at all. The use of the word spirit there has in mind what this man is in his totality. Body and soul standing over against the flesh, which is to be destroyed. In other words, Paul’s objective here, he being patterned for us, and as it is to be with respect to all true and good discipline within the Church, is the restoration of sinners, the communication to them, yes, effectively, the forgiving love of God, the grace that is there for them. Yes, even as they fall and stumble, he is there picking them up, restoring them to fellowship, not only of his people, but of his dear love. Consider the text that is before us, then, and its severity. It is specifically in God’s providence that this particularly heinous sin of which this Christian man is guilty is this particular heinous sin that is recorded for us in the pages of Scripture. The point being that if this despicable act can be remedied, and Paul certainly thinks that it can be, if this despicable act can be remedied, covered by the blood of Christ, dealt with by the ministrations of the Holy Spirit in the discipline of the Church, then my sin, my sin too, can find resolution in Christ.

Will you not be ministered unto by 1 Corinthians 5.1? If this sin can be forgiven, your sin can also be forgiven. Do you not know that?” But I’m sad to say that too often and more the problem is not The sense that my sin can’t be forgiven, I fear that the sense increasingly is, and this even within the Church of Christ, my sin is not sin at all. My casual dalliances My private perversions are not sin.

In fact, this is undoubtedly what Paul was up against at Corinth. Paul wasn’t battling here the profoundly sensitive conscience that could not be comforted. Paul was up against an attitude in this church, if not in the man, that was seemingly not bothered at all by sexual misconduct. But the sad truth is, you see, that something of this very attitude has now crept into the thinking of all too many Christians.

And if it is not creeping into the attitude of adult Christians, and I definitely think It is most definitely creeping into the thinking of all too many Christian young people. Either God doesn’t see or He doesn’t care what I do with my body. So we move from the unpardonable sin to no sin at all. At least no sin about which I need to feel guilty, nor about which anyone, including the Church, should be able to make me feel guilty.

Casual sex on Christian college campuses has become a scandal. on evangelical Christian campus. You get the alumni rags. You see some of them from Christian institutions. Are you amazed issue after issue by the name why I thought she married so-and-so. Divorce statistics and, I judge, the consequence often of adultery is rising at an astounding rate within the Christian community.

Immorality among the clergy now has become an offense about which the clergy need feel guilty, about which the church need feel guilty, only when it reaches the civil courts for the front page of the newspaper. This is an outrage. The church cannot even police itself. It will not even discipline its clergy, its ministers. until it cannot help but do so, because it’s forced to it.

Homosexuality, and this even among one-time conservative denominations, is now judged to be an alternative lifestyle, not an abomination as it is so called in the Bible. And how many Christians, young and old, male and female, have excused themselves, having convinced themselves that pornography is a victimless, innocent entertainment?

Be it on the printed page, or in the movie theater. Pornography is no such thing. It is not only not victimless nor innocent, it is an out-and-out lie, as anyone who has been trapped in it will tell you. You see, pornography suggests that the gal and guy next door, or right around the corner, are just waiting for you, only you, to satisfy their desires and your desires, and that they will fulfill those desires free of charge. They have nothing else to do, nothing better to do. There’s nothing that they want to do more of. What a lie. Pornography is not about people who care for other people. Pornography is about money. It is about sex for money. It is another form of prostitution.

So as our culture becomes increasingly and openly corrupt, the restraint’s gone. We, the Church, must look to ourselves. If the world wants to act this way, God is their judge. We have to act differently. Because, you see, we are not our own. We have been bought with a price. We are to glorify God in our bodies. beyond the alert, therefore, for the assault of the world upon you. The believer, the member of Christ’s Church, no more the believer, a member of Christ’s body, his own body, that is, the believer’s being a temple of the Holy Spirit. Keep these things in mind.

And keep in mind just how seriously Christ’s ambassador, the Apostle Paul, dealt with sin, sexual immorality. And be assured that even this sin, unchecked, leads to death. But also be convinced that in a good and true Church, Such sin, becoming public, must lead to discipline. And if that sin is repented of, all the blessings of God’s forgiveness assured once more within the soul of that believer. But if not repented of, then such sin leads to excommunication, being put out of the Church, so that that individual who is guilty of such sin might live out consistently their own heart’s confession that they, after all, are not a part of Christ, but belong to the world.

Our Father, we ask that you would bless us with a proper spirit regarding this matter of discipline in the Church and the propriety of it. We are asking that in this Church we would always keep in mind the goal of reclaiming the sinner and the sinner’s forgiveness in and through the marvelous workings of Christ. We are also asking, Father, if there are struggles, even struggles in the area of morality, for members of this congregation, that those individuals would be given blessings from your Spirit and strength in and through your word. And Father, may we approach these matters with a proper judiciousness and propriety, born of your Spirit, so that even in dealing with them we would not overstep the bounds that you have laid down for us in your Word. May we be a help to one another. always supporting one another with our love, our encouragement, and even our forgiveness for the sake of Christ who forgave us. Amen.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

March 20, 1994
Discipline With an Eschatological Edge

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, March 13, 1994.

About this sermon

Paul’s ‘rod’ in 1 Corinthians 4:21 keeps love and discipline in separate categories. Real church discipline carries eschatological weight, since it anticipates a final judgment already at work. The same logic extends to how parents discipline their children.

More sermons from 1 Corinthians · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

This morning we are looking at 1 Corinthians 4, beginning at verse 14. We will be reading through the fifth chapter of 1 Corinthians. I give you attention to the word of God. I do not write these things to shame you. but to admonish you as my beloved children. For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers. For in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. I exert you therefore be imitators of me. For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, and he will remind you of my ways which are in Christ, just as I teach everywhere in every church.

Now, some have become arrogant, as though I were not coming to you. But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I will find out not the words of those who are arrogant, but their power. For the kingdom of God does not consist in words, but in power. What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod or with love and a spirit of gentleness?

It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his wife’s father. And you have become arrogant. and have not mourned instead, in order that the one who has done this deed might be removed from your midst. For I on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled and I with you in spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a wand to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

For boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral people. I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he should be an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a violer, or a drunkard, or a swindler, not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the Church, but those who are outside God judges? Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.

Let’s pray together. Our Father, may we be a people concerned for the full effect of your word. Therefore, O God, we are asking that we would not be concerned merely for ourselves, but for one another. That your word would be beneficial to the entirety of this assembly. May this be our prayer.

And Lord, may your word also be most powerful in those congregations of your people where you are loved and where your word is revered. And bless them regardless of their denomination in that common stand in and under your word. May we sense by your spirit our unity with them for the sake of the gospel. May the ministry of this church and the ministry of those churches where you are loved and honored be most beneficial today.

We ask it in Jesus name. Amen. Now I believe, at least to my satisfaction, and I hope to yours as well, that we have established the fact that discipline within the Church is an absolute requisite for the true Church of Jesus Christ. It is my hope that we are beyond argument and debate on that point.

Now, you may recall what we laid out last week before you, and that’s from three texts. We cited an Old Testament text, 2 Chronicles 19, a Gospel text, Matthew 18, and we also cited our present text from 1 Corinthians. And we attempted, endeavored, to make plain in our citations of these texts that these texts do, in fact, support the fact that the presence of discipline within the assembly of God’s people is intimately tied to God’s presence within the assembly.

In other words, the loss of discipline to the Church is most serious, indeed, because of what it spells with respect to the presence of the Lord. Lose the discipline of the Church, and you lose the Lord in His Church. I hope then that we are all agreed that church discipline is essential to the identity and the well-being of the people of God.

It is not strange then that when you became a member, a communicant member of this particular congregation, You were asked this question, do you promise to submit in the Lord to the government of this church, and if you are found delinquent in doctrine or life, to heed its discipline? Now, that question is posed in the interests of this church continuing to be a true Church of Jesus Christ. And thus it is imperative that the authority within this Church take that question with utter seriousness in administering that question to you when you become a part of the congregation. But this question is also posed in the interest of your being a genuine Christian.

A hallmark of your profession being your willingness to submit to properly constituted biblical authority in the Church. and a testimony to the fact that you will indeed submit yourself to that authority throughout your stay in this congregation. To use the illustration of the home, no good home lacks Likewise, no good household of God lacks good discipline. Now, God has not left us without witness with regard to the matter of Church discipline and the general provisions that we ought to keep in mind as discipline would be administered in the Church. The Corinthian correspondence, both 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians, provides us much information along these lines. This morning, we want to consider the seriousness with which the Apostle takes this matter of discipline within.

And I direct your attention to the last verse of the fourth chapter in 1 Corinthians, where Paul asks, Shall I come to you with a rod, or with love and a spirit of gentleness? Shall I come to you with a rod or with love and a spirit of gentleness?” First of all, I want you to note that the seriousness with which Paul takes this whole matter is communicated by his use of the word rod. Now, of course, the rod, as Paul speaks of it here, is meant in a figurative sense.

Paul is not threatening to come to the Corinthian church to administer corporal punishment to the believers in that city. He wasn’t on his way to Corinth for the purpose of administering a slagging, for instance. Nor is he on his way to Corinth to officiate an execution, be it by hanging or by burning some heritage at the stake. Even though, as I’m sure you know full well, The Church eventually came to the position that it was proper for the Church and the Church’s authority to administer these kinds of punishments. That it was within the power of the Church to administer corporal punishment.

But no, Paul’s use of the word rob here in 1 Corinthians 4.21 is figurative, not literal. According to the testimony, then, that we have received from the New Testament, we are convinced that the literal rob of corporal punishment belongs to the world’s social institutions, not to the Church.

That the literal rod belongs to the world’s social institutions. The family, for instance, administering minimally a form of corporal punishment in the discipline of children. We think of spanking. The state administering a form of corporal punishment that leads even to the most extreme form in capital punishment.

But the literal rod that belongs to the world’s social institutions, it does not belong to the Church. And this is why, you see, the Church has spoken as it has in more recent days with respect to the authority that it bears. We are told in good forms of government and in proper books of discipline that the Church’s authority is only ministerial and declarative, and wholly moral and spiritual. That is the realm of concern and interest, and the authority of the Church is effectual with regard to that realm. But even though this is the case, that does not mean that we can diminish the seriousness with which we take the Church’s discipline. Simply because the Church doesn’t have the power to administer corporal punishment does not mean that we can take the Church’s authority or its responsibility to administer discipline any less seriously. And that is why, you see, Paul uses the word robbed deliberately in order to communicate the seriousness with which he takes the whole matter of discipline. But Paul also communicates the seriousness of this whole matter in another way.

And he does so by stating his position very oddly. I don’t know whether you picked it up as you read that twenty-first verse of the fourth chapter or not. But you see what he does as the sentence or the question is completed. He sets the rod that he mentions there over against his love and his spirit of gentleness. He sets the rod over against his love and his spirit of gentleness.

Now, the reason why I say that this construction or this statement is odd is because We would think, would we not, that Paul always would approach the Corinthians with love and with a proper gentleness. Would we not? In fact, the very first verse that we read in our scripture reading this morning, verse 14 of that fourth chapter, finds Paul speaking of the Corinthians as his beloved children. And later, Paul will speak about the supremacy and the perpetual appropriateness of love in the glorious thirteenth chapter of this very letter, the love chapter.

But the situation at Corinth is so serious, and this whole matter of Church discipline is so serious, that Paul sets his own approach to Corinth in mutually exclusive terms, as if the rod excludes his love and his gentleness. It’s one or the other. That’s the way he framed the statement. It’s either the rod or it’s love and gentleness. Now, we might think that all Paul means by this is to contrast attitudes of severity and gentleness. with which he might address or approach this Corinthian congregation.

This would mean that we could read 1 Corinthians 4.21 along the lines of another text that speaks about discipline. I have in mind Hebrews 12, and specifically the 6th verse of that 12th chapter of Hebrews.

Hebrews 12 at that point, quoting Proverbs 3.12, for whom the Lord loves and disciplines and scourges every child, every son that he receives unto himself. But you note the call here in his formulation at the end of 1 Corinthians 4 has added specifically the word love.

It’s not the rod in contrast to gentleness, simply. It is the rod in contrast to love and gentleness. It is as if, then, as Paul formulates the statement, he sees these things as mutually exclusive. The rod is over here, love and gentleness is over here.

Now, you might well ask the question if there is any situation that you can think of in which discipline and love are set in such antithesis. Can you imagine any situation in which the rod and love are set in such antithetical categories? Is there such a situation? Is there such a situation where love acts? because the rod has intruded, where love ceases because discipline has commenced. Have you identified the situation? It’s the end of the world, friends. It’s the judgment.

You see, what’s informing Paul’s vocabulary here is his vision of the end of the world and how that comes to bear upon the matter of discipline within the Church. To point it out a little further, you see, as Paul speaks of his own coming to the Corinthians, you notice the prior verses? As Paul speaks about his own coming to the Corinthians, he is reading his own coming to the Corinthians against the background of the coming of Christ of the last days. That is his point of reference. That’s what he has in the background of his mind, speaking as he does. Paul speaks, therefore, as if his own coming to Corinth parallels the coming of Christ at the end of the world.

So we know that God is love, do we not? We are told that. But we also know that when God comes in Christ at the end of the world, that love which he is in himself, which he bears toward his faithful church, will stand in sharpest contrast to his wrath which he bears toward those who are disobedient.

And it is apparent, is it not, that those upon whom that wrath is visited are not aware of God’s love in their faith at all? They are aware of the administration of His rod and His anger. Those, then, upon whom the judgment comes, perceive nothing of God’s love in their faith. his dealings with them. They are the objects of his wrath and indignation.

Now, may I be bold to suggest that there is something of this very path that is always operative, let me underscore that, is always operative where good and true discipline is epitomized. This may not be something you want to think about at all, but let me force you to it on the authority of the Word of God. I am bold to suggest to you that this very pattern that you see working itself out here in Paul, in his language, is always present where good and true discipline is administered. For example, good and godly parental discipline always communicates the seriousness with which it must be taken in light of the end in view. You play out your role in discipline and you administer that discipline because you see the judgment coming. And you don’t want your children to come to a bad end. and we’re not talking here about them missing out on a good income someday. There is a sense then, a sense of and even a threat of finality, finality stamped upon good, proper discipline. And yes, although I am hesitant to say it, there is a sense of, a threat of, the mutually exclusive character of indignation and love that appears in the administration of any good and proper discipline.

Have you wondered, you parents, why it is impossible for you to convey to your child simultaneously your severe displeasure at their attitudes and actions, and your love for them as persons? They certainly can’t see it. It should not be a mystery to any of you children, then, as to why you have such a difficulty perceiving your parents’ love for you when they are administering discipline to you. There is something about the rod. There is something about discipline inherently. that in the nature of the case, case sets before you an antithesis between that love and love and gentleness. Now it’s not that you don’t love your children, your parents.

Of course you do. You who are godly, You who are sensitive to the word of God, of course you do. And I would dare say that children in whom the spirit of God is at work to subdue their nature’s depravity know that too. They know, yes, ultimately, that you love them. same pertains with regard to the Corinthians in their church, to which Paul writes. They know also that Paul loves them.

However, the discipline that he has in view of which he speaks bears the imprint of the seriousness of that wrath that ultimately comes if one’s attitudes, if one’s behavior, is not corrected. The discipline administered by Paul, in view by him, bears the imprint of the seriousness of that wrath. that ultimately comes when love and gentleness do, in fact, give way to absolute justice and divine retribution.

You keep thinking like this, you keep living like this, you are going to be damned. You turn from your ways, your mind changing, your behavior corrected. According to the Word of God, you live. Let me add at this point, if you a parent administer discipline that rejects or is devoid of that appropriate stamp of seriousness, that rejects or is devoid of the imprint that communicates to your child the fact that love can end. It’s possible that your love can end for them.

That it can cease, as it indeed does in God’s case. then no child of yours will take your discipline seriously. That is the price you will pay. They simply will not take you seriously. If you are not convinced of the seriousness of this discipline, they will not take you seriously.

Do we need evidence? Are you reading the papers? Are you watching the news? We are reaping the whirlwinds. We are witnessing the consequences of a number of generations of children, by and large raised in the new philosophy. in which discipline was a matter about which parents were made to feel guilty. It is a contradiction of my love. We are witnessing the consequences of a number of generations of children raised in a new in which behavior and attitude modification were to be achieved through exercises in stroking a child’s depraved ego and building his or her vanity. We are witnessing the consequences of a number of generations of children raised in a new that has actually decided that it is more appropriate to bribe your children into a proper attitude and a right behavior. I have witnessed it, have you not also? A parent actually giving their child money to behave, paying them to be good, It is a most tragic case of which I have been recently made aware. A dear Christian couple whom I love dearly.

I first witnessed them trying to cope with 80 or 90 young people at a summer camp where they were leaders. They were miserable failures. The young people never took them seriously because they never viewed the discipline that they were there to administer seriously. And therefore, breaking the rules became a game, a wonderful entertainment in which both these adults and these children engaged throughout the course of the week. Today this couple’s oldest daughter, only a few years married, is going through a divorce and their oldest son is in jail. And who knows what their ends will be with respect to the faith. This couple is increasingly the rule, not the exception.

So that we not be self-righteous, we all may be visited with similar tragedies simply because we have not been alert to the contaminations of our age, and we have failed to recognize the importance and seriousness of discipline, as in the family, so in the Church. If in the family, how much more so in the church?

Now in conclusion, lest you think I’m off the mark in this message, I want to remind you of the Lord Jesus Christ, who was also a son under discipline for our sakes. At the moment in which the rod of his father came upon him as he bore our sins upon the cross, he uttered those horrifying words that have within them the impress of the absolute character of divine judgment and irrevocable wrath. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

But so glorious is this son, that not only is he capable of bearing God’s wrath for us, he presently lives, that we who have been disobedient children all might truly take in him, enter into that discipline that was perfectly effectual in him, and lose not to the exclusion from God’s love. of God’s spirit of judgment, but into his eternal embrace.

Our dear God, we know that your love is set as a banner even over the discipline of your children, even over our discipline. Yet, Lord, we also realize that the discipline that you administer to us comes to us with all seriousness. We are praying, our Father, that we would see the imprint of the last day in the discipline that is administered to us so that we might fear, so that we might flee the wrath to come. But Father, we are also asking of you that you would bless us in our various stations in life helping us especially in our families as we parents seek to do what is right before you. Help us, our God, that we would realize that, yes, there is this stamp of your judgment even in the discipline that we are called upon to bring to bear within our families. We pray, our Father, above all, that we would look to Jesus Christ, our Savior, and understand more perfectly the matters of your love and your wrath as we view him.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

March 13, 1994
The Demise of Church Discipline

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, March 6, 1994.

About this sermon

A specific case of church discipline opens onto a much larger survey: discipline’s near-total collapse across the mainline denominations over the past century, a collapse Machen himself could not finally stop. Both Old and New Testament patterns of discipline are set against that decline. What looks like an isolated case belongs to a long, documented history.

More sermons from 2 Chronicles · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

We turn first this morning to 2 Chronicles. 2 Chronicles chapter 19, and we begin reading at verse 4. Give your attention to the word of God. So Jehoshaphat lived in Jerusalem and went out again among the people from Beersheba to the hill country of Ephraim and brought them back to the Lord, the God of their fathers.

And he appointed judges in the land in all the fortified cities of Judah, city by city. And he said to the judges, Consider what you are doing. For you do not judge for man, but for the Lord, who is with you when you render judgment. Now then, let the fear of the Lord be upon you. Be very careful what you do, for the Lord our God will have no part in unrighteousness or partiality or the taking of a bride.” And in Jerusalem also Jehoshaphat appointed some of the Levites and priests. and some of the heads of the father’s households of Israel, for the judgment of the Lord, and to judge disputes among the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Then he charged them, saying, Thus you shall do in the fear of the Lord, faithfully and wholeheartedly. And whenever any dispute comes to you from your brethren who live in their cities between blood and blood, between law and commandments, statutes and ordinances, you shall warn them that they may not be guilty before the Lord, and wrath may not come on you and your brethren. Thus you shall do, and you shall not be guilty.

And behold, Amariah the chief priest will be over you in all that pertains to the Lord, and Zebediah the son of Ishmael, the ruler of the house of Judah, in all that pertains to the king. Also the Levites shall be officers before you. Act resolutely and the Lord be with the upright.” Then, turning over to Matthew 18, beginning at verse 15, and this is Matthew 18, verse 15, verse 15.

And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private. If he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the Church. And if he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax gatherer.”

Truly, I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. Again, I say to you that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by my Father who is in heaven.

For where two or three have gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.” Finally, turning to 1 Corinthians 5, it is actually reported that there is immorality among you and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles that someone has his father’s wife, and you have become arrogant and have not mourned instead in order that the one who has done this deed might be removed from your midst. For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled and I with you in spirit, With the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that the spirit may be preserved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Cleanse out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

It is your pleasure, O God, that the message which you have for the world would go forth in the foolishness of preaching. Lord, through these weak things, then, and by weak vessels, you proclaim your truth and your mighty works. Grant mercy, O God, through the ministry of your word today, not just here, not just in this area, but throughout the world, that your people may be gathered, that they may be assembled in hope in hope of you and of coming glory, and that they might live for you presently in all godliness and reverence. We pray this in Jesus’ name. Amen.

One of the first things to face me when I took up my first pastorate was a situation I was hardly prepared for. It was a situation in that congregation in southern New Jersey that had been lingering for years. It had become the object of gossip throughout that small rural community, and it was the subject of whispered comments and those all-knowing looks among the church members within that congregation which I passed it. But no one did anything responsible before the Lord with regard to that situation. They just talked about it. They talked about a certain church trustee, a married man who had moved his wife out of his house only to move his secretary in. and to live with her as if she were his wife.

Now many in that community never forgave me for raising the issue. And many within that congregation never forgave me for forcing the session to deal with that You see, it would seem that there was one sin, and I was guilty of it. There was one sin more heinous than adultery in the eyes of these people, and that was the sin of demanding that that particular sin be repented of. and that the situation ends. It was even worse than that. Many in that church and within that community, aside from talking about that man’s affair, had decided virtually to ignore They would ignore the sin, but they would not ignore my effrontery.

A few years ago, I got a call from a member of a local mainline congregation here in the The man on the other end of the line wished to know if I would make a trip with him to Washington, D.C. at the end of January for the purpose of protesting the slaughter of the unborn. To take a stand with him publicly against the iniquitous 1973 Supreme Court decision with respect to the execution of the unborn. He was very emotional in his appeal, and I was impressed by his fervor. And as he spoke of the Lord in his comments, I was convinced that he was utterly genuine in his love of our Savior. But I asked him if it wouldn’t be a better use of his time if he began a judicial process within his own denomination for the purpose of bringing the abortionists and the abortion activists to ecclesiastical trial.

There was dead silence. He then spoke and said he had never heard of such a thing. It wasn’t that it had been considered and dismissed. He had never heard of such a thing. But he went on to say that such a procedure would be completely out of place in the Church. It would be in place in Washington. In the civil court, it would be out of place in the Church.

Mainline Protestantism is a disgrace. I hope we are all agreed about that. It has become a movement utterly and completely devoid of any genuine, true, biblical discipline. It has become a movement in which true, genuine, biblical discipline is not only not practiced, it is impossible for it to be practiced in mainline Protestantism. How bad is it?

Adulterers, homosexuals, fetus executioners, political revolutionaries, blasphemers, heretics, open pagans, live comfortably and with impunity in all of the mainline Protestant denominations in this country. Now, they not only live comfortably and with impunity within these denominations. Many of these folks actually have the leadership and determine the attitude and mindset of these churches. You may ask, how can Bible-believing folk, how can conservative individuals who express a love for the gospel of Jesus Christ remain in such churches. I know many who do. This is their approach. They complain. They write letters. They carve.

They grouse. that no one, none of these conservatives, brings charges in the courts of the Church against any of these offenders, regardless of the seriousness of the offense. And that’s simply not because it would be fruitless or impossible to do so. but because such action in their mind is considered to be a greater crime than the crimes that they’re seeking to correct. Church discipline has become a crime, a sin. Not that the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, even though it has separated from the mainline body of Protestantism, can hold its head up too high with regard to this matter of Church discipline.

Our beginnings are not all that exemplary. Jerry Gresham Nation was a great man, we all admit that. But when it comes to Church discipline, he was a failure. And he failed repeatedly. He was present at the 1924 General Assembly, when the protest with regard to the Author Nation came before that General Assembly.

There was no dissent from the floor of the assembly with regard to the report that had been issued concerning the Auburn Affirmation and the Auburn Affirmationists. That report recommended no action. when he gets to the matter of the Church, preferred to talk about protecting the Church trust funds from the hands of the liberals, as opposed to protecting the honor of Christ and the purity of the Church by bringing the liberals to trial. trying to find its way.

There were many cases in those early days that cause us shame now. There was a refusal to deal responsibly with overt sin, especially among the clergy. There was, for instance, the refusal to deal responsibly with homosexuality amongst the clergy. A sad fact that spelled disaster for a number of families, ministries, and congregations.

A good and proper Church discipline, then, is reclaimed only slowly even by the very best-intentioned churches during the course of this century. And that’s the way it has been for the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. But certainly things always haven’t been this way, have they? Discipline was at one time part and parcel of what the Church was. What has happened, then, to the Church that discipline, once recognized to be an essential mark of the true Church, has disappeared? What has happened that even Orthodox and Reformed Churches find themselves in such an uphill battle either to retain or regain discipline for themselves? As I’ve intimated, it wasn’t all that long ago that discipline in the Church was recognized as being as natural as breathing air. You were part of the Church, you were subject to its discipline, you expected it, you even welcomed it.

I think once more about my first pastorate, a congregation in South Jersey. It was a venerable and famous Church. dating back to 1680. Reading from its session minutes from the middle of the last century, you could find a number of entries describing discipline cases that were at various stages of development. And particularly moving were the accounts of public confession. in which someone guilty of a public sin such as drunkenness confessed it before the entire congregation and was publicly received back into the fellowship of that church, that sin having been laid aside in the name of, to the honor of, and by the power of Jesus Christ. in the Church.

What are the reasons for that? Well, there are many. Some may cite tragic abuse of power, by which the innocent were falsely accused or the guilty cruelly treated. Some may cite ugly hypocrisy, by which Church authorities condemned in others what they allowed in themselves. Some may cite the injustice of partiality, by which clerics, certain families, and individuals remained immune to discipline while others proved to be all too much a target. I think that probably all of us are aware of congregations, if not entire denominations, where everybody is so interrelated that if you were to bring charges against one individual, the entire denomination would be somehow involved. All these things that I’ve mentioned thus far are true and contributing reasons as to why discipline has become unpopular.

But they do not account for the death of discipline in the Church. You see, all of these things—abuse of power, hypocrisy, partiality—are flaws that we observe with respect to any legal arrangement. There are flaws that we observe with respect to our nation’s legal arrangement and its judicial system. But none of us is saying that we ought to discard our judicial system altogether because of these flaws. Are we?

Now, the disappearance of Church discipline is because of reasons far deeper and more complex than the foibles and sins of those who are called upon to administer that system. And I want to point out to you two of those deeper and more complex reasons this morning. First of all, the Church lost her sense of her true identity. The Church lost her sense of her true identity as the community of God, as a community distinct from the community at large, as a people in and of themselves. as a pilgrim and alien people in the world? The question that was being asked by many as they came through the process of this dissolution with regard to discipline, was this.

Is this not a Christian nation? Is this not a Christian country? Do not our civil courts operate according to biblical principles and biblical law? Our societies and our churches, they are the same, are they not? Our civil courts will prosecute our case against those who violate biblical and Christian morality.

But not only did this attitude betray a fundamental breakdown on the Church’s part with regard to her own identity as distinct from the community at large. But quite seriously now, it opened the door for the Church to conclude that all social discipline, all moral discipline, even doctrinal discipline, belonged to the civil court, belonged to the state. And that only those crimes defined to be crimes by the civil authority, were crimes. Which is the more serious crime? Blasphemy or murder?

I can tell you what God thinks. I can also tell you what the state thinks. And they don’t agree. So if the state refuses to prosecute the crimes of Sabbath-breaking, the crimes of blasphemy. If the state refuses to prosecute the crimes related to failure to worship or the worshiping of false gods, then these crimes must not be crimes at all. And if the state won’t prosecute them, where does the Church get off? thinking that it can and even should prosecute them. The situation is even more desperate than that.

You see, as time has gone on, if the state refuses to prosecute parental abuse… Now, I’m not speaking about child abuse. That too is a crime, yes. I’m talking about parental abuse, where parents are abused by their children who are utterly incorrigible and fairly and completely rebellious.

If the state refuses to prosecute such an offense, if it refuses to prosecute in cases of sexual immorality, then these offenses must not be offenses. In fact, since the law promotes and protects a child’s right to a bed, since the law protects the execution of the unborn, since the law promotes and protects anyone and everyone involved in a divorce case with no guilt assigned.

If the law protects and promotes public obscenity, if the law protects and promotes a state-sanctioned system of larceny, and I am not referring to the Internal Revenue Service. I am referring to the state lotteries. This is public graft. It is a violation of the commandment, Thou shalt not steal.

If, in fact, the state coquettes and even promotes these things, then these things cannot be crimes, you see, but actually become the ingredients of a genuine and true morality in the mind of the state. It is a moral thing to execute your unborn child. It is a moral, commendable, righteous thing to do. The Church then has witnessed the death of discipline because she has lost her sense with regard to her true identity. But secondly, in losing her sense of her true identity, she has changed her identity. She has become something else altogether.

Rossiter’s church discipline has died not only because the church has abdicated to the state, but because somewhere along the line the church has changed her understanding of herself, and become convinced that church discipline is not merely a matter of impropriety, it is an evil. and inevitably and invariably an evil. Church discipline therefore is out of step with the Church’s new identity. It isn’t so much that the Church has surrendered her judgment to the state. No, the Church has surrendered judgment with respect to discipline altogether.

Somehow doctrinal and moral judgment by the Church has become inherently an exercise in self-righteousness invariably encumbered by an improper and evil authoritarianism, and utterly contrary to what the Church is in her true identity. And what is the Church in her true identity? It’s the place where you can go where they love you just the way you are. No change, no repentance, no confrontation, They love you just the way you are.

Well, the Bible presents no such definition. Neither is the Bible bothered by the objections that are raised, suggesting that judgment by the Church is inherently self-righteous and invariably authoritarian. No. The Bible is very positive and plain in its prescriptions for Church discipline. No theoretical paper proposition.

Here is real medicine. Here is true substance. Yes, by which the Church is to be cured. Yes, by which the Church is to be governed. that church made up of sinful people living in a sinful world. We find church discipline then administered in the Old Testament.

That is why I read to you this morning from 2 Chronicles. It’s unavoidable there. And that 2 Chronicles passage isn’t the exception, it’s the rule. We find Church discipline in place in the Old Testament, not because the God of the Old Testament is a God of wrath, but because he is a holy God and his people are to be holy. They are to be like him. That involves discipline brought to bear upon them. But we find that discipline also administered in the New Testament. That is why we read from Matthew’s Gospel.

Jesus himself makes prescription with regard to Church discipline. The apostles also present us with Church discipline through the epistles that they have written. In the actions of the Church, it is clear. And Christ and his apostles set discipline before us, not because they are the advocates of some kind of primal view of what life is all about. But because, you see, they understand that the body of Christ is to be pure, even as Christ himself is pure. We on earth are to reflect the glory of our pure and wonderful Savior in heaven.

Just one final comment. I set before you these passages for a reason. And I want you to look at them again. But I want you to look for something in them. The manner in which discipline is bound to the person of God himself. in each one of those texts. The implication is, you remove the discipline, you remove God. The discipline goes, God goes. I plead with you. especially if you have problems in this area. If you struggle with the issue of the propriety of church discipline, to take another look at your Bibles and think the issue through again.

Our Father, we are asking that an appropriate discipline would belong again to the Church. We are aware of the dangers, and we pray, O Lord, that the dangers would be avoided, that the Church would not pursue a course of severe treatment, cruel treatment of those who were overtaken in offense, but rather that the Church would pursue a course of graciousness, a course of humility, wherein she always looks to herself, lest she be tempted and succumb. We pray, Lord, that in those assemblies where discipline is part of the habit of the congregation and part of the mind of the Church, that you would encourage those who are charged with administering it, that they might always see before them their God and the Lord Jesus Christ. and help us, Lord, especially those of us who are having trouble getting beyond the almost wholesale denial of the right of the Church to discipline. Help us, our Father, to realize that as we are called to submit to you, so also we are called to submit to the proper authority which you have established among your people.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

March 6, 1994
Not Saved Alone, Not Saved to Be Alone

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, February 27, 1994.

About this sermon

Faith and repentance are the fruit of regeneration and never its cause, so salvation belongs to the Lord. God saves no one in isolation or into isolation. Christ’s love for the church, on display in 1 Corinthians 5, holds that whole shape together.

More sermons from 1 Corinthians · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

and we are beginning with verse 1. 1 Corinthians chapter 5, we are beginning at verse 1. Give your attention to the word of God. I will be reading from the New American Standards. It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles. if someone has his father’s wife. And you have become arrogant and have not mourned instead in order that the one who had done this deed might be removed from your midst. For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that the spirit may be preserved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, just as you are, in fact, unleavened. For Christ, our Passover, has already been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people. I did not mean at all with immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he be an immoral person, or a covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler, not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.”

We are praying, Father, that we may have integrity in our confession, that we would not then be those who would confess your word to be true and then live in a way contrary to that word. Father, we have embraced the doctrine of your Word in keeping with the testimony of your Church. The Word indeed is inspired and infallible. We ask our Father that we would take heed to ourselves in light of your Word and help us, Father, so that we might embrace your word in truth, living in light of our confession with respect to that word. Truly, Jesus Christ is our guide in this matter, and he is our strength. Bless us for his sake. Amen.

The intention of this sermon is to catch us up a bit. And such sermons are necessary when you find yourself in an extended series as we find ourselves presently. We have been considering the matter of the Church for some time now. I have set before you a passage, 1 Corinthians 5, that we will not get to this morning. But believe me, we will get to it in time. We will be dealing with the matter that it raises.

But it is important for us, in an extended series such as this present series, to step back and to catch our breath, to see where we’ve been and even anticipate where we are going with this series of messages. Our approach has been somewhat topical, and I know that that has made some of you uncomfortable and a bit uneasy, but my effort here has been to set the topical discussion of this matter within the context of a biblical theological orientation, so that we would be well grounded in the Word and the flow of the Word. It has been my hope that the effect of these messages would be cumulative, one building upon another, as we make our way specifically through a number of New Testament texts. And that’s for the purpose of confirming us with regard to certainties that we have embraced about the Church, convictions that we have. convictions which we have judged to be right, but now seeing the confirmation of these convictions as we take up particular texts in Scripture.

But not only that, not only the confirmation, it’s not as if we have everything right after all, is it? No. the series has as its intention as well that we might be corrected. Do you labor with your own souls with regard to this dimension? As you hear the preaching of the Word week after week, not simply so that you can resonate with regard to the things with which you already agree, but that you might be corrected even through the reproof of the word with respect to those things that are true, yet those things which you have not properly, rightly, adequately embraced. So, lest we be proud. lest we be arrogant about this whole matter.

Yes, confirmed, but also corrected. Now, believe it or not, my interest in all of this is to be evangelistic. Now, I mean that in two senses. One, I am evangelistic for the Reformed faith. Now I want to be gracious in that, but I’m not going to be apologetic.

I have contact with a number of people throughout this country in various Reformed churches. They are in contact with me regularly. And I was there. And one of the griefs that they share with me time and time again in their Reformed congregations is this. There seems to be embellishment about the Reformed faith.

To pick up the creed, of course, the Church is Calvinistic. that there seem to be apologies offered repeatedly for holding to such strict doctrine in our day and age, or even insisting upon the truth of that doctrine. And what a grief it is to these people if they find themselves in these situations.

So yes, I’m an evangelist, and while I wish to be gracious about this whole matter, I am not going to apologize for my commitment to the Reformed faith. Nor am I going to apologize for the fact that I am evangelistic in light of my commitment to the Reformed and Presbyterian view of the Church. Now, if you think that I might be odd in this regard, I want you to think about what J. Gresham Machen said during his battles in the twenties with the forces of liberalism, and with those forces that were relatively indifferent to ecclesiastical identity. This is what he said in 1927 in his battle for Orthodoxy at Princeton Seminary.

He said, as over against a reduced Christianity, we stand for the full, glorious gospel of divine grace that God has given us in his word, and that is summarized in the confession of faith of our Church. We cannot agree with those who say that although they are members of the Presbyterian Church, they have not the slightest zeal to have the Presbyterian Church extend through the lengths and breadths of the world. As for us, we hold the faith of the Presbyterian Church, the great Reformed faith that is set forth in the Westminster Confession, to be true. And holding it to be true, we hold that it is intended for the whole world.

This nation was an evangelist. He was an evangelist, yes, for the Reformed faith, for Presbyterianism, and so am I. This means that I have an agenda. This means that I am prejudiced. This means that I am biased. This means that I have presuppositions.

A number of years ago, a radical scholar by the name of Rudolf Moltmann wrote an essay entitled, Is Exegesis Possible Without Presuppositions? Now, his radical character and theology aside, the man was right. It’s impossible to engage in exegesis without presuppositions. Dr. Van Til has made this plain to us, has he not? He’s told us that we cannot operate apart from presuppositions, commitments that we bring to even the matter of the proclamation of the faith.

So yes, I am setting in front of you an agenda, and I am an evangelist with regard to that agenda. to encourage you with respect to convictions that you may properly hold, and at the same time, my agenda is to convince those of you with regard to my position that you might come to share the position that I hold.

But my interest is evangelistic in another sense as well, and I think that you understand this quite well. Does anyone think that I am interested in preaching the Church, or even as if Presbyterianism were the objective of my preaching? or that the Church herself were the content of my message, it is imperative that I make it plain that I am called upon as a minister of the gospel to preach Christ. While it is true that the saved assemble as the Church, it is Most certainly true that we are not saved apart from the Church, it must as well be clear to all of us that it is not the Church herself that saves us, right?

And only Christ saves us. Therefore, with Paul, I say we preach Christ and Him crucified. It is my hope, therefore, even as I preach on the Church, as I have been doing for quite some time now, that I would always be understood as one who is preaching Christ to you, one who is preaching Christ and Him crucified to you, and this even for the purpose that those of you who do not know Christ, do not know Him truly, who have not genuinely believed in Him or repented of your sin before Him, might in fact come to know Him, giving evidence of your rebirth, your regeneration, the fact that you have been born again by your faith and repentance, giving evidence of this new birth by your faith and repentance, and by your godly walk with God. People is part of Christ’s Church.

But even here, as I make that statement, it should be apparent to all of us here that even in our proclamation of Christ, The Reformed character of our preaching is unmistakable. You heard it, didn’t you? As I said it before you, the objective, the interest being with regard to those who have not come into a saving relationship to Christ, that they might in fact know him, giving evidence of their rebirth. Listen to this. of their rebirth, their regeneration, by their faith and their repentance, and by their godly walk with God’s people.

It is not then your faith and repentance that saves you, you see. It is not even by your faith and repentance that you are regenerated. Your faith and your repentance are testimony to you that you have been regenerated. So even here, as we proclaim Christ, it is impossible for us to escape the Reformed and Calvinist character of our proclamation. We do not preach Christ as if the reception of Jesus Christ were within our power as sinners, as if we were regenerated by our believing and by our repenting. as if we who were dead in our trespasses and sins have within ourselves the power to believe and to repent. No, as sinners we are as dead as Lazarus in his tomb. And God has chosen to bring us to life through the preaching of the gospel, our faith and our repentance then being the evidence, not the cause, of our new birth. The preaching of the gospel calls sinners to Christ, and if they come, it is because God, by the Holy Spirit, has given to those sinners new life.

Edmund Plowmey used to say that Jonah 2.9 closed the case for him as far as Reformed faith was concerned. I see some of you reaching for your Bible, because you don’t know that one by heart. It’s a good verse to know, especially the last line. That last line reads, Salvation is from the Lord. Dr. Crowney said, as far as he was concerned, it was that verse that closed the case. And if you read the account of what goes on before the conclusion of that ninth verse, you can’t help but be overwhelmed with the testimony. What is Jonah saying in his psalm of praise?

This man is sinking like a stone in the ocean. He is swallowed by a great fish. As he gives testimony in his psalm of praise in Jonah 2, you see, he considers himself as good as dead. It’s not as if there’s the possibility of him getting out of this at all. Therefore, his deliverance is nothing short, in his estimation, of a resurrection, life from the dead. Do you see why it’s so appropriate for Christ, then, to use Jonah as an illustration with respect to his own coming, resurrection?

Salvation is from the Lord. It is utterly impossible except God do it. But further still, we cannot deny the Reformed character of our proclamation of our Savior when we consider that none of us is saved alone, nor saved to be alone. Are you grasping why I’m spending so much time on the doctrine of the Church? and why I consider it to be such an important issue for us. Even in our proclamation of Christ, even as we evangelize, we must take into account the fact that none of us is saved alone, nor are we saved to be alone.

God does indeed deal with us as individuals. We rejoice in this personal and intimate love and fellowship. But He deals with us as individuals just as He deals with all of us who are His own. His dealings with us, therefore, are not for the purpose of leaving us detached, separated, isolated, orphaned, but in order to include us in the body, in the Church. But the question comes up, does it not? What does the body look like? You have to ask the question. What does the body look like? What does the church look like?

Unfortunately, much evangelism that is taking place presently is summarily unconcerned about that issue. It’s almost as if they don’t care what the church looks like. The most important thing is that you exercise your individual rights and choose one that suits you. You might even choose the church that you’ve been a part of. You might even go back to it, even though it’s apostate. Doesn’t matter. The form and the shape of the church doesn’t matter. Do you believe that? Do you think that’s what the word teaches? to what then will we direct the converts? What will we tell him or her to look for?

If we are convinced that we cannot leave converts isolated from the body, that the scriptures do in fact mandate the church, do we not then tell them that the scriptures are concerned to set before them the pattern for the church and even for her structure, that these things do matter? to God, and they should matter to us. In other words, what we are saying is that there is a biblical doctrine of the Church to which we are bound, which we are to teach. We are then evangelistic that we are evangelistic with presuppositions, with commitments, and those commitments and presuppositions are Calvinist, Reformed, and Presbyterian. And we trust biblical until we are convinced by the Bible that they are not. Thus far in our study, and this by way of quick review as to where we have been, I know it might be very, very foggy in your minds right now. We have had a half-dozen messages on Matthew 16. That’s where we started.

And the great story there of Peter’s magnificent confession at Caesarea Philippi. Here in this passage, we learned about the proper context for a confession, that Peter’s confession stands over against the confusion of others or the various opinions that others have of Christ. And so it is for any confession, you see. that’s genuine. Many, in embracing Christ, do so saying to themselves, I hate discord. I hate debate. I hate arguments. Let me tell you, to be in the church of Jesus Christ is to be embroiled in controversy. You cannot escape it. And you do well to listen to your Lord when he said, I did not come to bring peace, I came to bring a sword.

So confession in context, in that passage, Matthew 16, but also there you hear Christ promising to build His Church, He there giving us seminal instruction about the relationship that His Church sustains to Israel over against Israel, the fulfillment of Israel, and the relationship that His Church also sustains to the Kingdom of Heaven. It’s the place you look to see the Kingdom of Heaven. After we finished out our messages on Matthew 16, we had three messages from John’s Gospel concerning the Church in John’s Gospel.

This is important because of the way in which some have viewed John’s Gospel as if that Gospel were the champion of an individualistic faith. me by myself alone.” Period. John’s gospel, Christ’s message presented in that gospel, is anything but the champion of an individualistic thing. Rather, it is wonderfully full of the doctrine of the Church. I cite only one passage as proof. Love one another. there is in any way for you to obey that command from Christ apart from the Church. None. Period.

We then have five messages from the Book of Acts that set before us the Church as God’s new creation, in which the realm of the ascended Christ lays hold of us. bathing us with indestructible joy in the Holy Spirit. Are you not impressed with the joy of that book? It comes from heaven. It touches down in the church.

Our sermons from Acts were followed by six from Romans. in which we expounded the doctrine of the Church in terms of its universality, as well as its local expression, adding content to what it means for us, the Church, to confess Christ, Romans 10.9, and what it means for us to be the body of Christ, Romans 12.5.

We also dealt with the thorny issue of the relationship between the Church and state in Romans chapter 13. This brings us to our present current messages from the Corinthian correspondence, in which we have handled the questions of Christian liberty out of 1 Corinthians 9, and the matter of Christians in relationship to their money, the Church in relationship to money.

So that’s where we’ve been. Now, where are we going? Our future messages will include sermons from the Corinthian Correspondents, additional messages from the Corinthian Correspondents. From there we will go to Ephesians, and from there to the pastorals, taking up such matters as church discipline. That’s why we read this morning 1 Corinthians 5. That’s our lead into that subject. We will progress from there to take up the issue of office and gender, a matter that is forced upon us in our time.

We will look at the matter also of biblical church order. We will deal with Christian unity and the relationship of the church as a whole to individual congregations, but also the whole question of denominations. We want to consider the Church in relationship to families and also the Church in relationship specifically to children. This will move us out of the Pauline material in the New Testament and into the rest of the New Testament writings, from Hebrews to Revelation we will be confronting issues like worship, the issue of suffering in relationship to the Church, the question of apostasy, the matter of corporate prayer, healing, final triumph, all of these matters.

And as we make our way through our Bibles on this glorious issue, with respect to the Church, let us remember that there are salient points that we are to keep in mind that are to be reinforced along the way, the cumulative effect having its fruit in us. Keep this in mind as we move through this material. The Church of Jesus Christ is the fulfillment and goal of God’s promises to Israel in the Old Testament. Keep this in mind.

Jesus Christ cannot be separated from His Church. And let this be an axiom for your thinking and for your living. There is nothing that Jesus Christ loves more in this world than His Church. Nothing. The popular idea that you can have Jesus Christ but not be in his Church is a lie out of the pit of hell. And remember this also.

The Church, while visible and local, while sojourning in this world, possesses a heavenly life and submits to a heavenly order. Therefore, to ignore, neglect, or rebel against the Church is an affront not to man, not to an institution invented by man, but to heaven and to the One who reigns in heaven. The way in which you treat the Church is the way in which you treat the Ascended Christ. For you see, the Lord has been pleased to call the Church His body. your attitudes and actions, therefore, with respect to the Church, do have eternal consequences.

Our Father, may we be strong in our faith and full in our confession of you. Full in our confession of all that you have done. And may we love what you love. Our souls and spirit disciplined by your love revealed in your word. And as you count your church dear, so dear that Christ dies for her, may we likewise count her dear and give ourselves to her. Indeed, Lord, may we love one another, and may we give ourselves one to another in the body of this fellowship. to the glory of your name, to the worship of our God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

February 27, 1994
The Tithe as Acknowledging the King

This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, February 20, 1994.

About this sermon

A tithe rightly understood is an acknowledgment that Christ is King over everything a household has rather than a tax, which is also why children need to be taught to give and not just told to. Genesis 14 and Hebrews 7 supply the pattern of giving to a priest-king that the tithe still follows. Christ gave everything, and that example, not a percentage, is the real standard.

More sermons from Genesis · Browse all sermons

Sermon transcript

This morning we are beginning our scripture reading in the book of Genesis. We are at chapter 14, beginning with verse 1. I’ll give you attention to the word of God. In the days of Amrasel, king of Shinar, Eriach, king of Elassar, and Shadalamor, king of Elam, and Tidal, king of nations, that these made war with Berach, king of Sodom, and with Bershah, king of Gomorrah, Shinad, king of Abma, and Shumaber, king of Zebelim, and the king of Bela, which is Zohar.

All these were joined together in the Vale of Shadun, which is the Salt Sea. Twelve years they served Shaddamir, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. And in the fourteenth year came Shaddamir and the kings that were with him, and smote the Raphaeans in Ashteroth Carnaim. and the Zuzines in Ham, and the Eemes in Shadda, Piriath the Eem, and the Horites in their Mount Seir, unto El-Koran, which is by the wilderness. And they returned and came to En-Mishpak, which is Kadish, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwell in Hazavon-Tamar. And there went out the king of Sodom, and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboim, and the king of Bela, the same as Zoar, and they joined battle with them in the Vale of Shaddim, with Chattel-Amor, the king of Elam, and with Tidal, king of Nations, and with Amrasel, king of Shinar, and Ariok, king of Elassah, four kings with five. The vale of Shadim was full of slime pits, and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and they fell there, and they that remained fled to the mountain.

And they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah and all their vittles and went their way, and they took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed. and there came one that had escaped and told Abram the Hebrew, for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre, the Amorite, the brother of Eshcol, the brother of Aner, and these were confederate with Abram. And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, 318, and pursued them unto Dan, and he divided himself against them, he and his servants by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah which is on the left hand of Damascus. And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot and his goods, and the women also, and the people.

And the king of Sodom went out to meet him. After his return from the slaughter of Chattelammer and of the kings that were with him at the Valley of Sheba, which is the King’s Dale, Melchizedek, the King of Salem, brought forth bread and wine, and he was the priest of the Most High God. And he blessed him and said, Blessed be Abram, of the Most High God, possessor of heaven Blessed be the Most High God which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hands.’ And Abram gave him tithes of oil.”

Then, turning over to the letter to the Hebrews, chapter 7. Just a couple of verses here, verses 9 and 10 of Hebrews 7. And as I may say so, Levi also, who received tithes, paid tithes in Abraham. for he was yet in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.” And then finally to 1 Corinthians 9 verses 13 and 14. This is sort of like a Bible drill for you this morning.

Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple, and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.” Pray with me now. Father, we rejoice that you have given yourself to us even in the gift of your Word, even in the Scriptures which we have. And we are praying, Lord, that This grace to us would not be neglected. Help us with your word that we might receive it as it was given to us, that we might be instructed by it. And encourage us, Lord, even in those areas where we need to be corrected, that we might be corrected by your word. That for our good and your glory. Through Christ. Amen. We have come to our third and final message on the matter of the Church and money. This is our last message on that subject.

Dr. Leopard Coppice, a man known to many in this congregation and respected in this Church, a number of years ago argued very eloquently that the New Testament demanded the continuation of a form of the Old Testament tithe. A continuation of a form of the Old Testament tithe, that is, the offering of one-tenth of one’s income to the Lord for the Lord’s work. Dr. Coppice did this, as was his habit, in fine Biblical theological style, and in response to a very practical question. How will the Church of Jesus Christ be financed if not through the obligation laid upon the people of God in the tithe?

According to Dr. Coppice, Jesus Christ possesses an eternal priesthood, a priesthood that predates and postdates the Old Testament Levitical priests. Therefore, when Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, as we read this morning from Genesis 14, both Abraham and the Levitical who were as yet in Abraham’s loins, were acknowledging the prerogatives of the eternal priesthood of the Son of God. This then being the conclusion that Dr. Coppice drew from his analysis of the seventh chapter of Hebrews, and particularly that ninth and tenth verse which we also have read. Christ’s eternal priesthood then posits for us a perpetually binding ordinance, command, which the Old Testament figures of Abraham and the Levitical priests were obliged to honor, as was also all Israel. But we also, in the New Testament era, are much obliged, even more obliged, to honor this perpetually binding ordinance mediated to us and for us through Christ’s eternal priesthood. Dr. Coppice then would appeal to 1 Corinthians 9 verses 13 and 14, which we have also read this morning.

He would say that this passage, while not mentioning the tithes directly, relies upon the truth of the tithes and the practice of the tithes in the early church. It assumes that the New Testament Church was operating according to the pattern found in the Old Testament, and in keeping with the perpetually binding obligation imposed by Christ’s eternal priesthood. As the Old Testament ministers of the Word, namely the priests and Levites, received their living through the tithes of God’s people Israel, so the New Testament Ministers of the Word receive their living through the tithes of God’s people, the Church.

Adding weight to the argument, continued Dr. Coppice, is the Reformed principle of the unity of the Scriptures, the unity of the Covenants, the unity of the Testaments. On the basis of that principle of unity, Reformed and Presbyterian folk have maintained their convictions about the baptism of children, for instance. We recognize a line of continuity moving from Old Testament to New. There is the Old Testament sacrament by which the children of the covenant are included within the covenant, namely the sacrament of circumcision, and that is matched by the New Testament sacrament of baptism. by which also children are included in the covenant.

He would go on to make the same point with regard to the Sabbath and the New Testament Sabbath. Of course, there is the difference. The day has been changed, but Christians, so say Reformed and Presbyterian folk, oblige with respect to the Sabbath commandment. Not the last day of the week, but the first day, marking the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Dr. Coppice then would say, we defend the tithes on similar grounds. Therefore, we must expect Church members to tithe, to give a tenth, a tenth of their income to the Church for the support of the Church’s ministry. But it is precisely at this point that Dr. Coppice’s argument seems to run aground. Do we really see the tithe along the same lines as baptism and the Sabbath? Do we see the tithe as setting before us an obligation that is on the order baptism and the Christian Sabbath.

Now please don’t misunderstand me here, and with all respect to my friend, Dr. Thomas. My purpose here is not to raise objections to Dr. Coppice’s position generally, and the way in which he maps out for us the relationship between the Old and New Testaments. Nor is it to raise objections to the tithes in such a way that those who give little but should be giving more might feel even more comfortable and complacent in their negligence. Let me say, as we progress in this message, there should be no question about it in any of our minds. The biblical pattern from beginning to end, the practice of godly people in every age, has been the presentation of their offerings as part and parcel of that devotion that they owe to God. In fact, what God expects of his people. Yes, we are to give. No, even more strongly, we must give. We must give.

If you would allow me a bit of a parenthesis here. Let me speak to you who are parents. especially those of you looking for practical advice in the rearing of your children, and particularly with regard to this dimension of piety which you dare not overlook. Which you dare not overlook.

Many of the Church’s children simply are not being taught to give. Now, I’m speaking of the Church generally, not of this particular congregation. But this is a truth. Many of the Church’s children, generally speaking, are not being taught to give, and this is especially lethal in our time because you see, selfishness abounds. Out and out miserliness, cold-hearted tight-fistedness abounds.

There is a squandering of money by a generation of youth that is the wealthiest generation of youth that the world has ever known. It’s not that they aren’t spending money, they are spending money, but on themselves, and as never before. Young people raised within the church, children of good Christian homes, are now confessing, having graduated from their education years, finding themselves in the workaday world, they are confessing that they don’t give a dime for the Lord’s work. They sought not to be.

We parents must ask ourselves if our children have picked up something in us, if they are merely playing out what they see in us—a lack of generosity, a lack of magnanimity on our part, a selfishness in ourselves that breeds selfishness in them. They don’t give because we don’t give. Or is it that our children have failed to pick up something quite attractive and commendable, something quite appropriate, good, and biblical from us? And that’s simply because we have never taken the time to sit down and talk to them about what they ought to do. Our example, worthy as it might be, may be reinforced, may not be reinforced, by the instruction that our children should receive from us.

What is it that we are to believe about this matter of giving, about this important area of biblical devotion? What should we be teaching our children? What must the Church of Jesus Christ teach? Surely, we must teach charity, generosity. We must teach the obligation that we have to give our offerings in service to our God.

But are we obliged to teach the command, the obligation of the tithe? the tenth as a binding obligation, as a command laid upon us as members of the Church of Jesus Christ. Let me go further along this line and ask another question. What if the Church were to teach the tithe as a binding obligation?

Would not such a position demand of the Church that she make this obligation clear in her Now, I’ve gone looking for the word tithe in the documents of the Westminster Assembly, and I can’t find it. Now, this is the case. I recognize the history of the situation.

This is the case, not necessarily because the Westminster Divines had no commitment to an imposed and percentage-type contribution from the Church membership for the support of the Church. that because that percentage type contribution came through taxation at the hands of the state, not the church. However, you will note that the word tithe is not mentioned in the OPC standards either, even though those standards were produced in circumstances in which the church no longer depended upon taxation for its income. Nor might I point out, were you asked, when you became a member of this congregation, whether you would tithe, nor were you compelled to promise to tithe when you united with this congregation. It seems clear, then, that the OTC does not believe that it can lay this obligation upon the people of God.

If it did, it would say so. And if it said so, that would mean that this obligation would be within the standards of the Church, and be there as a rule for membership, a rule that could in fact be held over our heads, in terms of which we could be disciplined. If we failed to tithe, we could be brought to trial for not doing what our obligation was to do. It seems to me, then, that Dr. Coppice’s argument fails at this most practical level.

No changes to the OP standards mandating tithing have been proposed. No changes have been proposed that would mean that the tithe was a spiritual and moral obligation upon the membership of the Church. Why does the OPC, while insisting adamantly upon the giving of offerings, not promote the tithe as obligation, as command, as duty?

Is it because of cowardice? Because the subject is unpopular? Would it cause riots in the peers? This is not to boast, but I don’t think that the OPC historically has been known as a coward. Is it because of an inherent inconsistency? The OPC just doesn’t get it, just doesn’t get the point. Or is it because the OPC fails to be impressed with the proper biblical theology, in the way in which Dr. Coppice has been impressed. My conclusion is that we answer these questions in the negative, every one of them. In fact, it is precisely because of the OPC’s biblical theological commitment that she doesn’t mandate the pie.

Our offerings are prescribed from the Old Testament to the New Testament, specifically and most importantly because of the revelation of the Lord’s kinship. And here we join in with that biblical theological argument that has been presented. Our offerings are prescribed specifically. Whether we are in the Old Testament or the New Testament, because of a revelation of the Lord’s kingship. Look at that Genesis 14 passage.

When Abram returns from the slaughter of the kings, he gives a tithe to Melchizedek, because the Lord has revealed himself as king to Abram and in Abram’s triumph. Abram’s offering is the payment of homage. It honors his king, it honors the Lord. That is what is going on when we offer our gifts to God. We are presenting our gifts to God in light of the Lord’s kingship over us.

By way of the offering in Genesis 14, Abram supports the king’s ambassador, in this case he is Melchizedek, and contributes to the king’s visible domain, specifically Salem, the city of Salem, where Melchizedek serves as the Lord’s vice-regent and priest. And we observe the very same pattern when the Lord triumphs over Pharaoh and all of his hosts, the Egyptians, and also when he triumphs over the tribes of the Canaanites. He is acknowledged as king. Homage is paid to him by his people by way of tithes and offerings to support the Lord’s ambassador, the priests of God, to maintain the king’s sanctuary throne, first the tabernacle and then the temple, and also in the circumstances of Israel to relieve the poor among the king’s people.

But what happens when we arrive at the New Testament? Yes, we still have our offerings. presented in light of that revelation of the Lord as King, in light of his triumph in Jesus Christ, our Savior. Yes, our offerings are given in thanksgiving for God’s victory in Christ over sin and death, and those offerings are directed to the support of Christ’s ambassadors, those ministers of the Word properly ordained, who spread the Word and declare the meaning of that Word. at the center of which is the testimony concerning the King’s triumph on behalf of his people. Our offerings also are directed to the relief of the poor among the King’s people within the Church and beyond, as we have opportunity.

But where there are these similarities, there are also gaping dissimilarities. One dissimilarity is the lack of an earthly, sanctuary throne for our Lord the King. The true sanctuary is above, and regardless of what we may wish to say about our building here, it is not anything on the order of the Old Testament tabernacle or temple, nor can it be. Our building is at best a convenience.

It is not a necessity for the administration of God’s dealings in this age. that the more important dissimilarity is that we who belong to Jesus Christ dare not place a percentage on our demonstration of devotion to him. The most important dissimilarity as we move from Old Testament to New is that we who belong to Jesus Christ cannot place a percentage on our demonstration of devotion to our Savior. The absence of the mandate for the tithe in the New Testament does not mean that we are free to get off with giving less than the tenth. The absence of the mandate means that we are being scrutinized by the One who gave Himself totally, 100% for us.

Thank God, Christ’s offering of Himself was not an offering of a mere tithe. The cross of Christ means that we cannot hide behind a pin, behind our measured allotment, our fair share, our part, our token, when paying homage to our King. Love so amazing, so divine, demands my soul, my life, my all. Practically speaking, many of us here at Grace Church have chosen voluntarily to give the tithe as the minimum for our offerings to the Church. And I rejoice that there are many such in this congregation. But I rejoice exceedingly because I know that for many of you, you will not hide behind the tent, the tithe, as if when faced with need you were under no further obligation. You see, the obligation laid upon all of us is that of Christ, who gave his all. How marvelous the cross shines. How wonderful, in the totality of that offering. It was a hot summer’s afternoon, July 1978.

After the morning worship service, what was left of Grace Church congregated in this back room. There were 12 giving families left. In the discussions that were held in that meeting on that Sunday afternoon, those who were gathered committed themselves and said, we will do what we have to do to make sure that this church continues and that the gospel is proclaimed in this pulpit. We who were present walked out of that meeting convinced that a mere 10% would not be enough.

Our Father, the matter of giving is oftentimes a very sensitive issue. And Father, we pray that we ourselves may be sensitive to the very depths of our souls with respect to this matter of our giving. If we have been trained wrong, we pray our God that we might be correct. If we have not been doing what we ought to do, we ask, Lord, that we might be turned around. If in fact, Lord, we have contented ourselves, even with the spirit of self-righteousness that we have given after all percentage, and you should be content with that, O God, may we be forgiven of such an attitude Instead, our Lord, may we look to the cross for the glory that we see there, the expenditure that you have made for us totally. Father, help us in our giving to give what we vow, but also, Lord, to give gladly, thankfully, in light of the revelation of your kingship over us. we your subjects, truly in thankful acknowledgment of what you have accomplished. And may it please you, Lord, to use our gifts, even our tenth and beyond, even to the fullness of what we are, for your kingdom, to the glory of your name, to the honor of Christ who gave himself completely for us.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.

February 20, 1994