Month: December 2023

And Hannah prayed, and said, My heart rejoiceth in the LORD, mine horn is exalted in the LORD: my mouth is enlarged over mine enemies; because I rejoice in thy salvation.There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. (1 Samuel 2:1-2)

If you remember, I took our Call to Worship last week from 1 Samuel chapter 2. I thought it might be good to make a few comments about the reading since I do not usually make comments about our first reading of the day. Think back to it if you will. The first ten verses of the chapter are the prayer of Hannah as she praised God for the gift of a child. This child was Samuel who was a unique man in Israel’s history. We hope that most Christians would aspire that God use them in at least one special way, while Samuel held multiple offices of service for God’s people. He was a priest, a prophet, a judge, a military commander, and God’s choice to anoint both Saul and David as kings of Israel.

I could spend much time with Samuel and there are two books of the Bible named for him. Rather, I choose to speak of his mother Hannah, who in the time of the Judges, was a godly believer. This was unusual when so many refused to listen to God and chose their own way rather than obey and worship the Lord. Even the High Priest of Israel, Eli, was unreliable as a good example, moral influence, or faithful leader for Israel. When he saw Hannah praying silently at the tabernacle, he assumed she was drunk. Such were the expectations because drunken women in those days must not have been that unusual.

Hannah’s prayer after Samuel’s birth is a model of faith, thanksgiving, and devotion. She knew her God and she knew what God designed for her. She was a woman who wanted nothing greater than to be a mother. For years she tried but was unable, for God did not see fit to open her womb. Hannah’s desperation caused her to vow a special promise that she would give up her son for God’s service if God would allow her to have a child. God’s pause for so many years to grant her desire was to bring her to make this vow. She kept Samuel only until she weaned him from her breast and then took him to Eli at the tabernacle. As long as he lived, he belonged to God. She only came to visit him at the time of the yearly sacrifice. Otherwise, he stayed in Eli’s care to become God’s servant. Thankfully, he listened more to God than to Eli. Because Hannah kept her vow, God did not leave her sorrowful without her child. He blessed her five times over by giving her three more sons and two daughters.

As you would expect, I come to this story with purpose of a contemporary nature. It was on the day I wrote this article that I read in the news about the renewed efforts of this government administration to push for more access to abortion. They claim that women should have power over their own bodies to choose which children should live or die. This administration says it is not the purview of males or the government to make laws prohibiting this. We do not need to make laws about childbirth because God declared His law long ago. Hannah said, “My horn is exalted in the Lord.” This is strange language for us but common in the scriptures. A horn is a sign of strength. Hannah referred to the strength God gave her to bear children. Her choice was not her choice but God’s.

Despite Supreme Court justices unable to define a woman, we need not despair for God supplies the definition. Though this is not the only characteristic, a woman has in her body strength a man does not have. He may have brute strength as amazingly and surprisingly noted by the dominance of transgender (?) athletes, but he has no power over his body for this. God made the womb for the implantation of a miraculous zygote that attaches and begins the growth of a little human who bears the image of God. Heaven forbids anyone to destroy God’s image because a baby is an inconvenience.

The actions of this administration are a Romans 1 problem in so many ways we lose count. Who is better? I do not necessarily have a name, but it cannot be anyone with determination to kill the innocent by government fiat. It would never work for Israel, and it cannot work for us. Choose this day whom you will serve. Is it your politics, or is it God?

Pastor V. Mark Smith

A few days ago, I sat in my office at home working on an upcoming sermon. Variations of this duty fill most of my days. It takes time to prepare sermons and make all the peripherals of the sermon come together for the Sunday morning service. The material for the printed outlines, the PowerPoint presentation, choice of scriptures for our readings, writing the bulletin articles—these are just a few of the necessary parts for conducting the service. As you can see, the tasks at hand will not allow my mind to stray too far away. Each day plants me squarely in the middle of scripture.

On this day, it was cool enough to leave the window in my office open. It was shortly after the local schools dismissed their students in the afternoon when I could hear the conversations of these young people as they walked along the sidewalk in front of my house. Their conversations are at times breathtaking. In my day, we used to comment that some people “curse like a sailor.” We understand the expression despite some sailors do not curse. Jarred rudely from my concentration in my studies, this is what came to mind. What I heard was not the filthy talk of sailors but some of the worst language I have heard any adult speak. These were school children in their normal conversation. There was no anger. No one was fighting. It was their regular fare, just their normal vocabulary.

As I thought about the sermon for this week, the evil speech of the scribes in Jerusalem constructed parallels. They were part of the religious ruling class of Israel who used nothing less than the worst language imaginable. Their comments were not about ordinary affairs but directed towards the activities of Jesus. Our English translation spares us from the details of intended meanings. However, make no mistake the original readers of Mark’s gospel well understood their intent.

In today’s message, I will tone it down to the G-rated version. These comments were against the Holy God whose purity defies our ability to understand. To compare the Christ to demons or working with the power of demons is beyond the depths of our minds. We do not know the nature of our crimes if we take part. This is so deep in the well of mire and filth that no daylight exists. Indeed, Jesus said there is no forgiveness for it.

Returning to the speech of the school children, I dare say they speak what they know by watching television, listening to their music, buried in their phones, and yes, hearing their parents in their normal conversation at home. Neither parents nor child knows the weight of sin contained in their speech especially if God’s name is there. The third commandment prohibits this language. I find it hugely interesting that in Mark 3, Jesus mentioned the Holy Spirit. The speech of the scribes offended the Holy Spirit. Listen to Paul in his letter to the Ephesians: “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice…” (Ephesians 4:29-31).

Many Christians have no clue what they do when they lace their conversations with filthy language. What comes out in speech is the same as thoughts lodged in the heart. Read Mark 7:20-23 in conjunction with these thoughts. We hear so much filth every day from Christians and non-Christians that we consider it normal speech. God does not. It is the territory of the unforgiveable. Think carefully before you open your mouth. Speak no evil.

Pastor V. Mark Smith

Today’s message from the Gospel of Mark delves into questions about the way Jesus treated His family. Our text in chapter 3 at first appears that Jesus showed disrespect to His mother and brothers. While Jesus was addressing the multitudes of people always following Him, His family came asking others to inform Him they were outside waiting to talk to Him. Upon hearing this, Jesus said, “Who is my mother, or my brethren?” In our English translation, it appears as a curt, disrespectful answer. Would Jesus show such insolence, or would He always keep the commandment to honor His father and mother?

For those who want to find fault in Him and thus disqualify Him from being the sinless Messiah, any port in a storm will do. The truth is that Jesus would never break any of the commandments especially one that stands at the head of the second table of the law. This is the fifth law that commands us to honor our father and mother. This commandment is the first relating to societal order which takes up the duty of believers towards our fellow man. The second table begins the fulfilling of the second greatest commandment which is to love our neighbor as ourselves. If there is a social gospel, this is it. The true social gospel is faith in Christ that works outwardly towards the treatment of our fellow man with love and respect, and to honestly wish his best welfare. God loves people, and to be like Him we must love them too.

I speak this cautiously because loving souls is different from saying we must be tolerant of evil lifestyles and to live and let live. We do not love our neighbors if we do nothing to correct them. We do no favors for anyone by letting them continue in a lifestyle that is against the Holy Word of God. We are to warn offenders about the wrath to come.

I wonder sometimes what people think the warnings of God’s word are for if God says we are to keep quiet and tolerate every evil perversion. What could we warn people against if there are no consequences for their behavior? How could we love anyone that we care too little about to warn them that sin brings destruction and eternal death in the fires of hell? To love a person is to bring him to Jesus Christ. To love him is to tell him to turn from his sins, to repent of them, and to trust Christ who is the only one who can save him. To love him is to teach him to worship God in spirit and in truth. This means forsaking sinful lifestyles that God so clearly says are against His holiness.

The social issue that Christians are most concerned with is our action towards the lost unbelievers of this world. It is not our judgment that counts. It is God’s judgment, and the word shows us how to judge righteous judgment. It not only shows us; it demands that we do it. God does not tell us to tolerate sin but to purge it from us. It is not governmental action that will do this. Its solution is to plead with the heart through the grace of God for repentance and faith.

The sum of this is that rejection of God’s commandments is rejection of God. There is no peace and prosperity in the rejection of God. There is only this—the bypassing of the blood of Christ and trampling beneath the feet His holy sacrifice. We will not circumvent God’s righteous retribution by preaching tolerance. To live and let live is a fantasy. It is live and let die if we do not fight for the justice of the commandments. Leaving people alone to die in their sins is not love. When most say peace and love, understand they mean let everyone do their own thing. To do so without intervention is to condemn lost souls to eternal hell.

Pastor V. Mark Smith

In last week’s article about the apostle Paul, I mentioned the dust-up between him and Peter over Peter’s hypocrisy among the Galatian churches. I am sure you did not think too much about this, but I am concerned I could have left the wrong impression about Peter’s faith. At no time were Peter and Paul in disagreement over the doctrine of justification by faith.

It is important to understand this because both Peter and Paul received the call of apostleship directly from our Lord. Their steadfast faith was critical for the establishment and indoctrination of local churches. All Christians can be sure that arguments among the apostles were not signs they were unsure of their own faith in Christ or of the clarity of the gospel. It is tempting to make Peter and Paul adversaries and call this conflict. It did not rise to the level of two Christian leaders in a debate about doctrine. The problem was Peter’s dissimulation in treating Gentile Christians differently than Jewish Christians. The method of their salvation was not in question. However, Peter’s actions could have easily led to the misconception that Gentiles must conform to Old Testament law in the rite of circumcision before acceptance into the fellowship of Christian churches.

If you were to question Peter on this matter, he would not hesitate to state and even to elaborate on the doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ alone—plus or minus nothing. Peter was the first apostle to preach the gospel to Gentiles when after a vision he went to the house of Cornelius in Caesarea. When salvation came to this household, Peter reported to the church in Jerusalem that the Holy Spirit had fallen on the Gentiles when they believed. There is no mention in the text that any other requirements were necessary or met for their baptism. Neither did the church in Jerusalem ask, “What about circumcision?” Later, the apostles settled and sealed this matter when confronted by a certain group, we now call Judaizers. These were Jews who claimed salvation by grace through faith but were still holding on to the custom of circumcision and other Old Testament laws as qualifiers for identification with the people of God.

The apostles hashed this out in Acts 15 after Peter’s testimony before them of his personal experience in the conversion of Cornelius. In Acts 15:8-9, Peter explained: “And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” This leaves no uncertainty where Peter stood or of his consistency in the clarity of the doctrine of justification by faith.
In the Galatian passage, Paul wrote another confusing statement. He said the problem with Peter arose when certain men came from James. The wording appears to say James entered the disagreement by sending representatives from the Jerusalem church to correct the Galatians and turn them towards a more Jewish path. And yet, we read in Acts 15 that James, the spokesman and pastor of the Jerusalem church, specifically commanded there should be no burden of circumcision placed on Gentile converts. James spoke this in consideration of the ministry of Paul and his companions who preached among the Gentiles (Acts 15:13-29). This matches the language in Galatians 2:12 that “certain came from James.” Obviously, James did not send them. They were Judaizers who before were contentious in the Jerusalem church.
We need not fear that those we trust most in scripture were doubtful or were less than stalwarts of the faith. They never gave an inch to false doctrine. We must, however, acknowledge they were not perfect men who never made mistakes, although there is no mistake in their Holy Spirit inspired writings. How we respond when confronted with our mistakes is also important. Peter did not get angry nor shake his fist at Paul. He owned the rebuke and wrote that Paul was a brother in Christ. This is a lesson for us. Give up our stubbornness and examine ourselves closely. Make sure we hold the truth without compromise.

Pastor V. Mark Smith