Wed 31 Jan 2007
Preaching the Whole Counsel of God, Including Uncomfortable Doctrines
Posted by Brent under Preaching , Scripture , Theology
I have been preaching through the book of Genesis on Sunday mornings. We have spent the last two weeks in chapter 19 which recounts the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Our first week in that chapter was spent examining Lot as a case of hardened conscience and we prayed that God would keep our consciences tender. This past Sunday we “zoomed out” to look at the larger picture of God’s wrath and the doctrine of judgment against sin.
To be honest, I was a bit nervous about preaching specifically on judgment and God’s wrath. I wasn’t nervous about doubting the truthfulness of such doctrines, but they are certainly not “comfortable” things to hear, much less to preach. I wondered how they would be received as part of a regular Sunday morning sermon rotation but I preached the sermon because I’m convinced that the Bible speaks about such things and as such, so must I.
Paul tells the Ephesian elders in Acts 20:27 that he declared to them “the whole counsel of God.” It is my goal, should I live and preach long enough, to preach through the entire Bible. I wonder what message so many of our churches really send by neglecting large portions of the inspired Word of God. What’s more, many modern Christians foster a healthy neglect of the entire Old Testament (with the exception of Psalms, Proverbs and perhaps Genesis 1-3 and some OT prophecies if you’re a Dispensationalist). I am convinced that it is my duty to preach “the whole counsel” of God no matter how “uncomfortable” it might initially seem.
What really struck me was the response. Several people thanked me for being willing to preach on such a topic. Many remarked about not hearing many sermons about judgment and/or God’s wrath which disappointed them. I’ve been thinking quite a bit about this since Sunday and I’m convinced that God’s people have a hunger for God’s Word.
It seems so fundamental. As a pastor I receive tons of mail about the newest workshops and the latest “programs” (read: “gimmicks”) to grow the church. While these churches may experience large numbers of people attending, I’m not convinced that many of these churches are not the “ear ticklers” that Paul warns Timothy about (2 Timothy 4:3). Whatever your personal opinions about John MacArthur and John Piper might be, each of their ministries serves as a reminder that God’s people have a hunger for God’s Word. Even if you think they might be wrong, you cannot question their commitment to the Word.
As a pastor, I cannot shrink away from God’s Word in order to please men. I will someday have to answer before the Eternal, Holy Creator and give an account. If I can help it, I don’t want one of the questions to be “Why did you not preach all of My Word?” I pray that God would convict my conscience to care more about what He thinks than what people think. I pray that I would indeed declare “the whole counsel of God,” including the uncomfortable doctrines.
- Read Thoughts on Preaching by J.W. Alexander
- Read Preaching With Passion by Alex Montoya
- Read The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God by D.A. Carson
on 31 Jan 2007 at 10:21 am 1.Catch of the Day: Blogroll « Unbound said …
[...] 31st, 2007 · No Comments Colossians Three Sixteen–You’ve been caught! “I’m convinced that God’speople have a hunger for God’s Word.” [...]
on 31 Jan 2007 at 10:55 am 2.proverbs31 said …
I’ve enjoyed the last few sermons a great deal. I don’t know why pastors shy away from preaching about God’s judgment. Well, I can see why they would want to, but I don’t see why they would actually do so. These topics seem so appropriate for the world we live in. I feel like Sodom and Gomorrah aren’t two cities from a long time ago — they are the world today! And just as Lot was tempted so are we, and just as Lot was sucked in, we could be too, and just as God demanded justice then, he does today, too.
The part about keeping your conscience tender because you get sucked in little by little and not all at once, is very true and exactly what I am trying to teach my children about when I tell them that a whole movie is ruined by one bad word, or one magic spell, etc. These are important things for us to hear.
on 31 Jan 2007 at 11:37 am 3.Mark said …
Great, Brent. Thanks for being faithful.
on 31 Jan 2007 at 1:50 pm 4.Hubert said …
Brent,
I am so blessed to hear how God is using you. Thank you for being faithful to the Word. I am extremely proud of your care in handling the task of preaching. HSE
on 31 Jan 2007 at 5:57 pm 5.mike said …
Great Brent! Thank you for being faithful. Its to bad that Im not there to hear these sermons. If I were still there at GCC I would have been the first in line to tell you great sermon(s)! We sure miss you guys. Take care and God bless.
Oh ya, when are you guys coming over to eat?
Mike
on 01 Feb 2007 at 6:12 am 6.Dan Trabue said …
As an outsider, I’m glad to hear that you’re dedicated to preaching the whole counsel of God. Many people don’t - perhaps out of discomfort, perhaps just out of being blinded by bad teachings they’ve learned to begin with.
For instance, it took a great deal of prayer and contemplation for me to realize that the Sodom/Gomorrah story was not about homosexuality! I had been so thoroughly indoctrinated that Sodom was destroyed because of the gay people there, but in looking at this story, this is a description of an attempted rape.
ALL the men of Sodom were calling for the angels to come out so they could have their way with them.
Well, of course, forced rape is wrong, but that is not what I was taught this story was about.
As backup for the point, Ezekiel 16 tells us:
She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me.
How surprising that was to me! How hard to realize it was different than what I had been taught.
So, please, preach the whole word of God and do not find yourself by the traditions of men.
Blessings.
on 01 Feb 2007 at 8:22 am 7.Brent said …
Dan, thanks for your comments but if you notice in the text, the angels had already come to destroy the cities. That’s why they were there in the first place. The attempted rape was a symptom of the underlying depravity that had already reached its limit. The account of the destruction begins all the way back in Genesis 18 when God reveals his plans to Abraham. Surely it is about more than just the attempted rape.
on 01 Feb 2007 at 2:17 pm 8.Dan Trabue said …
Yes, it’s about a lack of hospitality. It’s about neglect of the poor. It’s about being arrogant, overfed and underconcerned, according to what God spoke in Ezekiel.
That’s my point. I’d been SO indoctrinated into believing that Sodom was about homosexuality that it was quite a shock to me that homosexuality never comes up in the context of Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible.
That’s why preaching the “whole counsel of God” can be difficult, it seems to me - because we bring so much cultural baggage to our faith that it’s hard to read God’s Word with an humble and open heart. At least for me.
on 03 Feb 2007 at 2:16 pm 9.Jim said …
Dan, since you are charging that anyone who doesn’t subscribe to your revisionist argument is closed-hearted and SO indoctrinated, permit me to show you how you are inserting an assumption into the text.
You have argued that Ezekiel 16 is somehow the magic exhaustive key to interpreting why Sodom was destroyed saying that it amounts to rape, neglect of the poor, and lack of hospitality. Then you cite it:
Using your hermeneutic, we cannot conclude that a culture of rape contributed to divine wrath either because it’s not explicitly named.
You say, “Well, of course, forced rape is wrong…” Of course? Your logic does not allow for that leap from this text because like homosexuality, rape isn’t named in Ezekiel 16. You are inserting that into the text. Your a priori is that homosexual acts cannot be included in the “detestable things”. Rape? Absolutely! Homosexual acts? Never!
Why do you make this assumption, particularly when the Hebrew word your translation renders as “detestable things”, is the exact same word used earlier to describe homosexual acts in Leviticus 18:22? In most Bible versions this word is rendered as “abomination,” so the Law and Ezekiel 16 are speaking with the same voice.
The Bible is absolutely clear on God’s prohibition of homosexual acts in both the Old and New Testaments. Mirroring the account of Sodom is Romans 1 where it’s clear that failing to honor God and thank Him leads to a darkened heart that produces all kinds of depravity, homosexual behavior included.
I suspect that you’ll likewise need to invent some scenario where the idolaters are given over to homosexual acts described as unnatural and degrading, yet they are not really sinning sexually. When you find yourself having to repeatedly insert special exemptions into these passages, shouldn’t it give you cause to ask yourself if you are the one neglecting the whole counsel of God?
Or maybe given that you were describing yourself as an “outsider”, you were making it clear that preaching the whole counsel of God is not something important to your own worldview, but you feel that pastors like Brent are not being consistent.
on 05 Feb 2007 at 9:43 am 10.Dan Trabue said …
“The Bible is absolutely clear on God’s prohibition of homosexual acts in both the Old and New Testaments.”
Actually, it would be a matter of debate if the handful of verses that are typically used to support not allowing full fellowship to our gay brothers and sisters are valid, but that’s off topic here. I was just praising Brent for trying to look for the whole counsel of God.
More power to him and to all of us as we do so.