Automated transcript of the sermon audio, generated with OpenAI Whisper (small.en). It has not been checked against the recording and may contain errors, especially in names and Scripture references.

One of the great truths that sets the Christian faith apart from all others is the imminence of God. Now that's just a fancy theological term that describes God's nearness to us. In Deuteronomy chapter 4, Moses is preparing the people to enter into the Promised Land. As he's reminding them of God's promises and commands, he asks this rhetorical question, for what great nation is there that has a God so near to it as Lord our God is to us. Moses didn't know then that a day would come when God would dwell in everyone who is a believer. We do not offer up worship this morning to some God who is far far away. He's here in us, among us, and is closer than our own heartbeat. This truth is not some ethereal concept best left to theological eggheads to ponder. It is proof of God's steadfast love for us and the evidence that we have been joined into triune fellowship with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is God's imminence that gives us peace and comfort and assurance that He is for

us and we for Him. And so we gladly proclaim for all to hear. Our help is in the name of the Lord. Your steadfast love, O Lord, extends to the heavens. Your faithfulness to the clouds. Your righteousness is like the mountain of God. Your judgments are like the great deep. Man and beast you save, O Lord. How precious is your steadfast love, O God. The children of mankind take refuge in the shadow of your wings. They feast on the abundance of your house, and you give them drink from the river of your delights. For with you is the fountain of life. In your light do we see light. O continue your steadfast love to those who know you and your righteousness to the upright of heart. Let not the foot of arrogance come upon me nor the hand of the wicked drive me away. There the evil doers lie fallen. They are thrust down on evil unable to rise. Father, where can man go to escape your presence? Your word tells us if I ascend to heavens you are there. If I make my bed in Sheol you are there.

If I take the wings of the mornings and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me and your right hand shall hold me. If I say surely the darkness shall come over me and the light above me at night, even Even the darkness is not dark to you, and the night is bright as the day, for darkness is as light with you. It is impossible for us to ever be alone, for you are always near watching over us with steadfast love. Even in times of diversity, we will praise you because we know that you are ever present, and that the trials are only for a season, and then comes the time of feasting.

Thank you for the assurance of our salvation that fills us with hope and keeps us pressing on in the faith towards an eternal reward being prepared for us in heaven. As we spend the next 90 minutes in corporate worship, lead us to cast our cares upon you to repent of our sins, to be instructed by your word, and to simply revel in the beauty of your glory. Amen.

A very common lie of Satan is that some sins are private and don't affect anyone but ourselves. The Apostle Paul obliterates this thinking in 1 Corinthians 6 where he writes, Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never. Just prior to this verse, Paul points out that while many things are maybe lawful for us, not all things are profitable, and that we should not be dominated by any God-given appetite, be it food, sexual intimacy, or any number of other things. He gives us the principle that should govern every decision we make about how we use our body.

The principle is this. Our body is meant for the Lord and the Lord for our body. He who is joined to the Lord becomes one Spirit with him. Our union in Christ means that every time we engage in sin, be it secret or otherwise, we are, in a sense, dragging Christ through the sin with us. Satan deceives us by letting us believe that there are secret corners in the garden where we can hide and sin in private, but the reality is that we are joined at the spiritual hip to Jesus and there is no getting away from Him. few of us would be so brazen as to purposefully sin in the physical presence of Jesus, yet His presence in our lives is no less real or immediate just because we can't see Him with our physical eyes.

We need to stop kidding ourselves that He is somewhere else while we are sinning and learn to practice the presence of Christ and appropriate the power over sin that His union brings with it. It is not for want of Jesus presence or power that we sin. It's our want and disregard for keeping our bodies, for keeping our bodies for the Lord and our daily thinking that because we can't see Jesus that he somehow doesn't see us. I'll play that game with my grandchildren. My little two year old will think that if she pulls the blanket over her head, that because she can't see me, I can't see her.

Well, if any of this makes you think of any sin that you've been trying to hide have not confessed, now is the time to do so. As is our custom, you are invited, if you are able and willing, to kneel and take a moment to confess your sins in private. And then I'm going to pray for us corporately after a minute. Let's go ahead and take that moment now. Father, we are a people that are good at trying to hide our sins. We hide them by doing them in secret where no one can see us.

We hide them by relabeling them as disorders, syndromes, and mistakes. We hide them by justifying them and blaming others for making us do them. But for all our attempt to skirt around our sin, your spirit always brings us back to the place where we have to acknowledge them. Increase our faith so that we might sin less, especially those sins that so easily beset us. But when we do sin, help us more quickly confess it and to receive your forgiveness. Make us keenly aware of our union with Christ and help us to be more vigilant to avoid anything that would dishonor the name of Jesus or mar the fellowship that you have joined us into. We pray in Jesus name. Amen. You're invited to stand. And again our assurance that we have God's forgiveness if we've confessed our sins from Isaiah 1 18. Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord, though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow. They are though they are red like crimson. They shall be calm like wool. Praise God that there is no sin that is

too great. That his grace and mercy can't overcome. Let's sing and express our gratitude for that fact. Our scripture reading this morning is from Colossians chapter 1 verses 24 through 27, and I will be reading from the English standard version. Colossians 1, 24 through 27. Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions, for the sake of His body, that is, the church, of which I became a minister, according to the stewardship from God that was given to me for you to make the word fully known, the mystery hidden for all ages and generations, but now revealed to his saints.

To them, God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. Let's pray together. Father, this is the passage that reminds us of the sweetness of the gospel and of our purpose in this life. to live like you are great, bringing you glory, and then extending the influence of the gospel in this world. It is sweet, and it is transformational. We see it when we read the pages of history, and we have seen it in our own lives. As the gospel touches a culture, it cannot remain the same. And as a gospel touches a heart, by your spirit's work, that heart cannot remain the same.

And we ask that by your grace, the gospel would leaven our culture that we too may make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of the gospel. Please use us in that process. Grant wisdom to our political leaders and in particular to Christian voters everywhere in this season of political indecision. We don't have to be excited about any of the names on the ballot to be excited for for your demonstration of power and the expression of your will. You use men, in fact, for your purposes all the time, though your purposes themselves may remain hidden.

You gave no answer to Job. You certainly owe no answer to us when we ask why. But we do know that you ordain what happens. And with the saints of past generations, we love the doctrine of Deus Pro Nobis, God with or for us.

And as you are the good and sovereign God who loves to use the prayers of your saints, we then bring our petitions before you along with our thanks in obedience and boldness. Father, in the wake of the earthquake and earthquake in Ecuador last night, 233 are accounted among the dead even now and that number is escalating. 7.8 magnitude quake that was felt even in the capital keto. Father, there are no doubt many unbelievers among those who are dead and many unbelievers among those who are missing and may the difference between the mourning of the passing of those who love you and those who do not be an instrument that again you would use to draw many to yourself. We are reminded that life is fleeting and we pray that you would help us to be good stewards of what you've entrusted to us. Please bring comfort to those who are mourning the lost and we pray that you would please allow those who are injured to make full recovery and allow the region to recover economically as well and use that again to bring yourself glory as you routinely do. We're excited for the

recovery, the continued recovery of the Massey's brother-in-law Fred from this blood clot that basically debilitated him and now he's doing so well. I think his therapy is going as well as it is and that of course he is honoring you with this trial, but there's a twinkle in his eye while he rehabilitates himself.

So bring that speedy recovery we pray. For Good Shepherd Children's Home in India and their influence in southern India and Kivstown International which provides direction for even Good Shepherd. Now as under a new leader Chuck Valley we ask that you'd make the transition from Matthew Smith to Chuck Valley, a smooth one. Please bless the work and ministry of Matthew as he transitions to new ministry opportunities. We pray for Andrew Schneider and the Good Shepherd, the Children's Law Center of Washington. Please bless their work, give grace and joy and effectiveness to them as they serve. Please provide for their needs monetarily as they put feet to something that is so near and dear to your heart, namely adoption. Please clarify the vision and grow the influence of Evangel Classical School and grow the school at just the right pace bring just the right people to teach and to bring their students, their families to our school and help us to live out our motto rightly, laughter is war.

For students in our congregation who attend school in other contexts, whether it is homeschooling or day schooling secularly or privately or Christianly or even in college, we ask that you please give them a name among the unbelievers in their circles that is a good one.

May they be effective representatives of you in those circles. May they always be prepared to give a defense for the hope that is in them, and may their testimony force others to ask. We thank you for the encouraging work, the encouraging week that 12 of our men enjoyed together for the gospel, and even as Jim remarked already, 10 of whom are home now, bring Dan and Shawn back safely and quickly to us, and may they enjoy their times while they're away, and may the lessons that we learned there bear much fruit in the lives of those men, in the lives of their families and in the rest of our church by extension. And as your spirit works among us, we pray that we may be again transformed by our worship. Please give substance and potency to our worship, that you may be rightly glorified here and now. Even today, we pray this in Christ's name. Amen.

Father, as we've just sung that great hymn of the one true foundation and just contained within those words all of the fantastic promises of what our union in Christ has brought. Father truly it is a mystery it's even today it's still a mystery we don't fully comprehend it but I pray that you would increase our understanding of the tremendous truths that are there and the power and the hope the excitement that should bring to our hearts and as we look at your word this morning on the topic of our union in Christ. May we walk away Father greatly challenged and greatly encouraged to appreciate a new and a fresh this great hope that we have in Jesus Christ. We pray now in Jesus name.

Amen. If you are a Christian here this morning, and I assume most of you are, you are the embodiment of a mystery that was hidden from mankind for up until a a little over 2,000 years ago. The scripture reading this morning referred to this mystery. And the mystery is simply this. Christ in you, the hope of glory. Think about that for a minute. The God who created all things and who reigns over all things dwells within you. When I ponder this, I can't help but hear Robin Williams voicing the genie Disney's animated version of Aladdin as he says, all this phenomenal cosmic power in an itty bitty living space. We read in the Bible the phrase, Christ in you and you in Christ so often that I'm afraid we tend to gloss over them and miss the enormity of what this means.

Even if we do stop to meditate on them, we struggle to grasp what they mean to our daily lives and so we put them on the shelf of the theological curiosities alongside the doctrine of the Trinity. We relate better to the idea of a mythical genie trapped in a bottle than the idea that God dwells in us. How big a deal is the doctrine of our union with Christ? According to many past and current theologians, pretty big. Calvin, in Volume 1 of his Institutes, wrote, Our union with Christ has the highest degree of importance if we are to understand justification correctly. John Murray, in his book, Redemption, Accomplished and Applied, said, Our union with Christ is the central truth of the whole doctrine of salvation.

It is not simply a phrase of the application of redemption. It underlies every aspect of redemption. And then finally author Louis Smeeds wrote in his book, union with Christ, that it is at once the center and the circumference of authentic human existence, highest degree of importance, central truth, the center and the circumference, it sounds like a pretty important doctrine for us to understand.

In reality, every aspect of our relationship to God is inseparable from our union with Christ. The scope of our union with Christ covers from eternity to eternity. In eternity past, we were elected in Christ to be redeemed. In the future, we will be glorified in Christ and live eternally with Christ in the presence of the Father. And of course, everything in between hinges on our union with Christ, including our regeneration and subsequent sanctification. There is not one step in the ordo salutis, or order of salvation, that is not because of or dependent upon our union in Christ. Because we have two thousand years of Christian history behind us, the idea of Christ in us and us in Christ doesn't seem so strange.

But to much of the world today, and certainly during Paul's life, it was both crazy and scandalous to even think such a thing. The Apostle Paul would have studied the works of Plato in the course of his education. The teachings of Plato influenced many thinkers in Paul's day. The idea that God becoming man would have been preposterous, let alone the idea that he would join with man in any kind of a union. This was craziness. Plato taught that the themes of this earth that we might describe as good or beautiful were actually just mere shadows of true goodness and beauty. In his thinking, such abstract ideas as goodness and beauty could only exist in forms or ideas and never ever in the physical and material form.

In his work, The Republic, he likens our existence here on Earth to living in a dark cave where we're chained and we're facing a blank wall away from the entrance. So you see it? We're all in a cave, facing away from the entrance, looking at a blank wall in chains. All we can see are the shadows on the wall of the reality that exists outside the cave as light filters through the cave opening. That's what Plato says life is like. We only get to see the shadows of what's true. Since we don't know any better, we live life believing the shadows on the wall are reality. I would cry too if I thought that was what life was like.

In Plato's thinking, the path to God, or wisdom in his case, was to escape the cave and begin ascending a mental ladder away from the physical which are mere shadows towards the true form of what things are. In the physical world, nothing was ever a true representation of its metaphysical form.

In another work of his, The Forms, Plato suggested one could ponder what a perfect chair is like. He talked about the chairness of this imaginary chair. We could sit around and we could think about a chair and of course the chairs you're sitting on are imperfect, but what is the perfect chair? What is its chairness like? What attributes would it have? It didn't exist materially and as you pondered it you could quickly deduce that no chair on earth could ever achieve chairness because you could always imagine a more perfect chair. Plato's obsession was to leave imperfect chairs behind and other forms and to send a mental ladder towards a better understanding of chairness. Why settle for sitting on an imperfect chair when you can enjoy thinking about the chairness of the perfect chair? Now I just made you guys all unhappy for the next hour in house, you're sitting on your chair. Now I know what you're all thinking right now. They must have had legalized marijuana back then too. It was this philosophical backdrop that helped shape the culture in which Paul was

educated as well as many of the Gentiles. I'm trying to help you understand how preposterous Christ in you, the hope of glory, would have sounded when Paul first penned those words. A God who was truly man and who walked among us, who was joined in perfect union with us, was an impossibility according to Plato's teaching. Plato's philosophy helped shape the beliefs of various religious groups. Among them were the Gnostics, who taught that material things were corrupt and evil and nothing truly spiritual could ever coexist with them. Spiritual and material never the twain shall meet. The Gnostics believed in the system of eons or emanations moving from the immaterial to the material. The first eon originates with God, whatever that is, and is completely pure. But then as each subsequent eon radiates out and moves closer towards the material world, they become less pure and more corrupt until the final eon, which is the manifestation of the world we live in, which is totally corrupt, devoid of anything

good. You can imagine what they thought about the Christian teaching that God became man and dwelt among men. It was completely outrageous. You can see why Paul calls the doctrine of Christ in us the hope of glory a mystery. This idea was unheard of and would be shocking to anyone who did not experience it firsthand. It was foolishness to those perishing, 1 Corinthians 1.18. When it comes to understanding and believing in the doctrine of our union with Christ, I think a lot of believers tend to be like Plato's captives in a cave. This doctrine is like shadows in the cave of their mind. For them, the reality of this doctrine is so far up the spiritual ladder it will have little practical benefit for them in this life. As we dive into this topic of our union in Christ, my outline is simple. I want to discuss four aspects or blessings that come from our union with Christ. And so kids, if you're following along in the kids corner, there's four points today. These are the four blessings we get

from our union with Christ. First, the nearness of God to us. Secondly, the strength of God in us. Third, the security of God for us. And fourth, the oneness of God upon us. And I'll repeat those again as we go through. You'll notice in the bulletin that it says the text is selected scriptures. By the time I'm done, you'll think I have selected all the scriptures. It's going to be the mother of all sword drills. So there's no need to try and look up the passages as I go through them. I'll give the references if you want to scribble some of those down. There are a lot of passages that apply to this topic. I'll barely scratch the surface, but hopefully we will walk away today with a renewed honest of just how blessed we are to be in union with with Christ and how essential it is to the entire Christian experience. As you listen, just let yourself get wet as you stand in the biblical fire hose that I'm about to turn on. Like water, you aren't going to drink anything new today, but like cold water on a hot and dusty day, I hope that you'll be completely

refreshed by a review of these powerful truths. So let's first talk about then the blessing of the nearness of God to us. In Exodus 33 we learned that while God loves us with a profound love, we cannot with these bodies look upon him in his most glorious state because it would kill us. Apart from Christ, our sin makes it impossible to have a face-to-face with God. In Exodus 33 we read the story of Israel committing idolatry by making the golden calf, which invokes God's wrath. You know the story well. And then once that happened, Moses is meeting with God and then God says, Hey, timeout. The kids are making an idol. And God says to Moses, I have seen this people and behold, it is a stiff necked people. Now therefore let me alone that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them in order that I may make a great nation of you. Get the point? Moses time out. I'm going to go wipe them all out and we'll start over again with you.

In this story, Moses intercedes to God on behalf of the people and in God it says relents. Then sometime later, Moses is in another meeting. He's in the tent of meetings in the presence of the Lord and we hear him expressing a little bit of uncertainty about his calling. He's still, even though God called him to represent his people, he's still a little nervous. He's asking who are you going to send with me and so he's insecure and so as confirmation of God's favor upon him he makes a special request he asked to see God's glory we pick up the story in Exodus 33 17 and the Lord said to Moses this very theme that you have spoken I will do for you have found favor in my sight and I know you by name Moses said then please show me your glory and he said I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name the Lord and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. But he said, You cannot see my face, for man shall not

see me and live. And the Lord said, Behold, there's a place by me where you shall stand on the rock, and while my glory passes by, I will put you in the cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by. Then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen. I I love this passage because it reveals the heart of God so well. Those who don't know God would expect that he would say something like, I am the Almighty, the ruler of the universe, bow down before me and worship. He would add some kind of a line like the genie in the Latin. Who would expect that God would choose merciful and compassionate for his calling card?

God would be completely righteous and just to remain aloof from us and expect us to worship him from afar. Instead, he did the unthinkable. He came up with a way for us to be near to him. God, in all his glory, is someone we cannot behold face to face. But the incarnate God, in the person of Jesus, came and lived among men, as John testifies in 1 John 1, 1, when he wrote that which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and have touched with our hands concerning the word of life.

Calvin described how Christ closed the gulf between God and man this way, quote, hence it was necessary for the Son of God to become for us Emmanuel, that is God with us, and in such a way that his divinity and our human nature might be mutual connections grow into each other. Otherwise the nearness would not have been near enough nor the affinity sufficiently firm for us to hope that God might dwell in us. Therefore, relying on this pledge, we trust that we are sons of God for God's natural Son, fashioned for Himself, a body from our body, flesh from our flesh, bones from our bones, that He might be one with us. What Calvin is saying is that Christ, by taking on flesh and maintaining his full divinity at the same time, made it possible for divinity and human nature to coexist in one perfect union. We must not lose sight of how incredible it is that God came and dwelt among men and now indwells the heart of believers. We don't fully appreciate the enormity of the gulf between God and man that Christ

bridged. Here's something to consider. If you are a believer, you have been in union with Christ from eternity past. Ephesians 1.4 tells us that He the the Father chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blameless before Him. You had an identity long before you were born. You were chosen by God in Christ before the foundation of the world was laid. God had you on a layaway plan before you were ever born. It's hard for us to comprehend being in a relationship before we even existed, but God is not bound by time and he knew us intimately even before we were born. Not only did God choose us in Christ in eternity past but he also made specific plans for us in Christ. Ephesians 2 10 tells us we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works which God prepared beforehand that we shall walk in them.

One of the main issues of life people grapple with is why am I here and And what's my purpose? On the flip side, some wrestle with feelings of uselessness and insignificance. It's like, why am I here? Our union in Christ answers these questions and erases those doubts. There are good works that we are called to be doing in Christ. The truth of God has ordained personal good works for us to do, coupled with the doctrine of the sovereignty of God, means we can have confidence that our lives have purpose and will be fruitful provided that we are walking in obedience. Through prayer, Bible study and Godly counsel, God will via our union with Christ guide our steps.

John 15 four through five abide in me and I and you as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it binds in the vine and neither can you unless you abide in me, I am the vine. You are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I and him. He is that who bears much fruit for a part for me. You can do nothing I love that passage What work does a vine do other than or the branch do utter and clean to the vine and the result is fruit? We spend so much time of our life in the flesh trying to produce fruit When Jesus says I will produce the fruit you put your energy into cleaning to the vine How does How does God want us to how near does God want to be to us?

Listen to Paul's prayer in Ephesians 3 14 through 19 For this reason I bow my knees before the father from whom every family in heaven on earth is named that according to the riches Of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his spirit in your ear and inner being So that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith that you being rooted and grounded in love may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge that you may be filled with all the fullness of God how close does God want to beat you that you would be filled with all the fullness of God did you get that Paul is praying that we might be filled with all the fullness of God through our union with Christ how near is that Plato and his disciples brains just exploded all over the place. It is a blessing. Is it a blessing to be in union with Christ? You better believe it. In Christ you were chosen in eternity past by God to be the

recipients of his mercy and compassion. Second blessing that comes from a union of Christ, the strength of God in us. Our union in Christ involves further blessing because God has not given us a mission impossible to work out our salvation under our own power. Though through our union with Christ, he has given us everything we need pertaining to life and godliness, according to 2 Peter 1.3. Sinclair Ferguson, in his book, Christian Spirituality, Five Views of Sanctification, puts it this way, this then is the foundation of sanctification in Reformed theology. It is rooted not in humanity and their achievement of holiness or sanctification, but in what God has done in Christ and for us and union with them.

Rather than view Christians first and foremost in the microcosmic context of their own progress, the Reformed doctrine first of all sets them in the macrocosm of God's activity and redemptive history. It is seeing oneself in this context that enables the individual Christian to grow in true holiness. All right. That was awesome. awesome. What did you say? Ferguson is saying that God has not left it up to us to muddle our ways towards greater holiness on our own. God in the macro cosm of his plan, the big plan is working through the microcosm of our lives in union with Christ to accomplish his purposes. It's not about us grabbing our bootstraps and pulling hard. It is about walking by faith, abiding in Christ, being in union with Christ and God affecting the change, working it out in us. Scripture is filled with promises of God's leading us.

Psalm 23 describes him as the good shepherd gently leading his sheep through the Valley of the Shadow of Death to green pastures. Hebrews 13 5 reminds us that he will never leave us or forsake us. 2 Corinthians 3 18 tells us that we are being changed from glory to glory because Christ is in us. A few verses later we are told that we are being renewed in our spirit even though our outer self is fading away. These all speak to the blessing of being in Christ and the strength that comes from it. We have not been merely justified and then abandoned to fight our way to heaven. In Christ, we are being carried along towards greater maturity in Christ's likeness.

These verses are not describing abstract ideas like chairness. These are tremendous realities that are occurring right now in you if you are in Christ. The Apostle Paul describes in Galatians 2.20 the unique blending brought about by our union with Christ. He wrote, I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. In the life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me. On the one hand he says it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me. And then he says the life of I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God. Which is it? Is it I who live or Christ who lives in me? Yes. There isn't really a conflict here. If we are walking as Jesus would walk, our union with Christ should look like a game of follow the leader right down to our footsteps and not like a a three-legged race. Did you get that? When we're walking into the spirit, when we're following Jesus, it's a game of following the leader, and we're walking in Jesus'

steps right behind him. It's not a three-legged race where we're lurching our way forward, us pulling this way and Jesus pulling that way. Another aspect of this particular blessing of our union of Christ is the ability to be content with whatever situation God has us in. Our union in Christ means His strength becomes our strength. Paul writing in Philippians 4, 11 through 13, not that I am speaking of being in need, for I have learned in whatever situation I'm in to be content. I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance, and need. I can do all things through him who strengthens me. Now some wrongly think the all things in this verse means all things we can imagine, but that's nonsense. The all things refers to all the things that God has ordained for you in his plan. This is not a verse telling us to be Superman or Wonder Woman. I will probably never play in the NBA, even if I claim this verse 100 times.

Nevertheless, it is a tremendous declaration and we should find encouragement in it. When we don't feel the strength for some particular challenge, it doesn't mean Paul was wrong in what he said. It means that we need more faith to appropriate the strength Christ supplies. How tragic it is when Christians mopel on as if these things were merely slogans to help us get motivated in the morning. I know life can be hard and our faith falters far too often. My faith falters as well. But I'm afraid that we sometimes treat these truths like Deepak Chopra quotes on coffee mugs and bumper stickers. A nice thought for the day but far from reality. The reality is that we have no greater reason for hope and no greater power to overcome than we have in Christ Jesus.

If that is not cutting it for you then there's something wrong with your belief.

I don't mean to be harsh or insensitive to those who are going through a spiritual desert right now but may I encourage you to not succumb to your feelings and to trust the reality of Christ in you, the hope of glory. Ever since the dawn of time, Satan has been planting the same basic thoughts, seeds in the minds of men. The thought is always some form of has God said. It is what God, he planted an ease mind and he continues to plant it in the minds of men today. Is that what God said? I know we know these things but do we truly believe them. Do they affect the way we live? Do they take away our worries and anxieties? The sad truth is that we very often put our faith in what we can see and touch rather than the knowledge that Christ is in us. Third blessing that comes from our union of the Christ, the security of God for us. I sometimes wonder why Christians speak of hope. They made this thought, well that was a heretical statement. I do. I wonder why we speak of hope. I know it's a biblical

word and one of the key verses that we've already read today is Christ in us, the hope of glory. But why do we speak of hope when the theme we are hoping for is a sure thing? Normally, hope doesn't guarantee anything by itself, but when hope is backed by the right kind of faith, it does. Hebrews 11 1 says, now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Not all faith is equal. I can have faith when Zig Ziglar declares I can be anything I want to be and hope with all my heart that one day I'll seen opera in Carnegie Hall, but it ain't gonna happen. If you have heard me seen, you'll be hoping that I never seen in Carnegie Hall. Hope based on faith in Zig Ziglar is equivalent to wishful thinking. Maybe it'll happen, maybe it won't, but hope that is based on faith in God won't. But faith, I'm sorry, but hope that's based on faith in God becomes assurance, a done deal. Our union in Christ grants us the exact same guarantee that exists when the Father made a promise to the Son. You can bank on it. Whatever certainty you have that when God promises it to the son, that's the same certainty you have when God makes a promise to us because of our union in Christ. It is Jesus' wish that we be with him in heaven and so it will be. Philippians 1 6 says, he who began a good work in you will be faithful to complete it. John 14 tells us, let your heart not be troubled for I

go to prepare a place for you. If it were so, I would not have told you so. In John 10 29 through 30 Jesus said my father who has given to them to me is greater than all and no one is able to snatch them out of my father's hand. I and the father are one. Are you starting to get a sense of security? Romans 8 10 through 11 but if Christ is in you although the body is dead because of sin the spirit is alive because of righteousness. If the spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his spirit who dwells in you. These and other verses scream out security in Christ and the promise of eventual glorification. And yet, many Christians still live with doubt as if they can somehow keep God from fulfilling his promises to them.

Not only does our union in Christ give us security in our future, it also provides security from our past being held against us. Our union with Christ Christ is not simply wallpapering over a previous life of sin. Second Corinthians 5, 17, therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away. Behold, the new has come. Being in Christ brings with it complete forgiveness for our past sins and the power to resist sin in the future. In addition, we can now claim the promise in Lamentation 3, 23 that God's mercies are new every morning. Well, there's one more blessing resulting from our union in Christ that I want to cover.

We've looked at how our union in Christ brings the blessing of the nearness of God to us, the blessing of the strength of God in us, and the blessing of the security of God for us. Next, we need to talk about the blessing of the oneness of God upon us. As you look around our nation and the world in general, you see increasing lines of division. lives matter, the war on women, Wall Street one percenters, labor unions on strike, the Arab-Israeli conflict, US Russia tensions, US China tensions, Trump cruise tensions. That's just part of yesterday's news. Strive among people is a hallmark of Satan's activity. He comes to tear down and destroy.

Conversely, our union with Christ has just the opposite effect. There is no way for believers to be abiding in Christ perfectly and to have division among themselves. Now, notice the qualifier I just used, believers abiding in Christ perfectly. Since sin is still with us, then we won't see perfect unity this side of heaven, but it should still be something that we're striving for. Our union in Christ removes the lines that separate us today. Galatians 3, 28 tells us that we all have equal standing before God in Christ. is neither June or Greek, neither slave nor free, there is no male or female for you are all one in Christ Jesus. I find it interesting that despite our nation's 40 plus years of diversity emphasis, we are more divided than ever before. How can it be after 40, 50 years of diversity training and all the rest of the stuff that many of you have been a part of, how is it that we can be more divided today than we were then? I think the reason is that almost all efforts to build diversity have stressed celebrating what makes us different.

God calls Christians to celebrate what they have in common, which is their union in Christ. Being in Christ is the great equalizer. The world's attempts at producing equality have just led to more divisions as various groups clamor to get their fair share. Being in Christ brings about real equality because the focus is not on us but rather on Him. from Christ, we draw distinctions based on race, gender, or nationality. Christ in us makes those distinctions unimportant. Another benefit the onus of God upon us brings is sincere love. 1 John 14, 12-13, no one has ever seen God. If we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in him and he in us because he has given us His spirit. Being in Christ means God's love abides in us and enables us to love other people we might not otherwise love. Notice how John presents this as a test of faith.

If we love one another, God abides in us and His love is perfected in us. Loving one another is not a prerequisite to gaining God's love. We don't get God's love because we're doing a good job loving one another. It's proof. Our love is proof that God's love resides in us when we love others, when we love one another. We're proving that God's love is in us. This means that it is the love of God in us through union with Christ that teaches us how to really love. Apparently, our oneness is pretty important to Christ. John 17 contains what theologians referred to as Jesus' high priestly prayer. And in his prayer, he asked the Father to bring us into the same intimate fellowship enjoyed by He and the Father. John 17 20-23, I do not ask for these only, His current disciples, but also for those who will believe in Me through their Word, that's us, that they may all be one just as you, Father, are in Me and I in you, that they also may be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent Me. The glory that you have given Me, I

I have given to them that they may be one, even as we are one. I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them, even as you've loved me." You get the idea that Jesus kind of wants some oneness in there? Jesus prayed specifically for you to be included in the most intimate of all relationships, The relationship of God, the father and God, the son. That is not theoretical. It is not just a future promise. It is reality. It is what our union in Christ is doing for us now. If we will believe in inviting Christ. Well, as we wrap up this morning, I want to draw our attention then to an implication of our union with Christ.

Um, yeah, I want to draw our attention to an implication of our union with Christ that hasn't been addressed yet. And then finally, I want to have one application of our union. So the implication, our union in Christ has brought to us tremendous blessings, but it would be improper to think that there is no cost to us involved. Identifying with the resurrected Jesus means that we also have to identify with his suffering, his death and his burial. We did not have to physically die on a cross to appease God, nor could we have. But there is a type of dying that we are called to do each and every day. Second Corinthians 4, 10 through 12, tells us that we should always be carrying in the body the death of Jesus so the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies. For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh. So death is at work in us, but life in you. Apart from union with Christ, dead is dead. Okay, quote-unquote.

Apart from union with Christ, dead is dead. This is the death that arises from either trusting in man-made, stairways to heaven, or else denying God altogether. The kind of dying that we are called to always results in resurrection because that's what life in Jesus does. Whether we're talking about the merits of non-physical deaths or as Shawn I think described as you know death by a thousand paper cuts, those kind of deaths we experience in life or our eventual physical death, union with Christ always terminates in life. Death cannot hold him and it can't hold us either because our union with Christ won't let it happen. And then finally an application. Let me do a little thought exercise with you. What if Jesus in the flesh was by your side every day? Right there, your arms around him. Hi Jesus. Good morning. What are we gonna do today? How would that affect your day? Would it change how you speak to others when you're feeling annoyed? Would you worry less or fuss less or be anxious less?

Would you find comfort in this company? Would it change what you do on the internet or alter your entertainment choices? Would it affect the way you approach work? In short, would having a living, breathing Jesus at your side alter your private and public habits or your responses to life in any way? If the answer is yes to those questions and all of us to one degree or another would say yes, then we have a gap between what the Bible says about our union with Christ and what we actually believe about our union with Christ. Unless and until we learn to practice the literal presence of Christ in our daily living, we will continue to see gaps in what we say we believe and we will not enjoy all the benefits that come from our union with Christ. Brothers and sisters, our union with Christ is not some theoretical concept like chairness. It is that are as real as the beat of your own heart. It is the signature on the adoption papers that says God is our father. It is the power of God at work in

us to make us more than conquerors in this life. And it is the promise of a day when all striving shall cease and our faith will become sight. It is Christ in us. The hope of glory. Let's pray. Well, Father, it's been my prayer that as we drink from the fire hose of your word and we see how predominant the union of Christ is throughout the scriptures, how central it truly is, the center and the circumference of our existence as humans. I pray that like a jackhammer you have taken some of these verses, some of the things I've said, and just crammed it home into our hearts into the deepest recesses where we would truly lay hold of it, believe it, drink it in deeply, and relish in the tremendous blessings that we have from our union in Christ. Thank you for having made it possible that God dwelt among men and now indwells the heart of every believer. How can we ever say thank you for that? I'm just praying Jesus' name. Amen. You're invited to stand as the team comes up again to lead us in

worship. We're about to sing when and as the offering is coming, we're going about to sing a song. Him and can it be? And can it be that I should gain? As we think about what we just went through and all the blessings that come from being in union with Christ, how much he has blessed us and given us this time in our worship service as a time of offering where we're putting really barely a trinket in the bucket as a representation of our gratitude and our thankfulness for all of the things that God has given us. So when we've seen the song now, hopefully as you just just rehearsed what it means to be in Christ, hopefully as we've seen and can it be, that'll have even more impact on our singing. Wow, that last song. Bold I approach the eternal throne." That is amazing. There's an old joke among some pastors that ministering in a church would be great if it weren't for all the people. People are messy. They fuss about this. They fight about that. They fume at the slightest provocation. The joke is humorous because of the irony, for the

people are the church. No people, no church, no ministry. Church is the ecclesia or the assembly of the called out ones. Communion is defined as intimate fellowship or rapport with others. You can't have fellowship by yourself. Me, myself, and I do not a church make. You can't have a communion of just one. Our personal union of the Christ implies union with each other. Some view this union like cars heading in the same direction on the freeway. We are the cars. We share the same freeway as we drive to our destination, but we want all the other cars to stay in their own lane. Life is good as long as everyone stays in their own lane and nobody slows us down or rides our bumper.

So we all are driving to heaven, but stay in your lane, I'll stay in my lane, And that's how we do communion. But isn't church supposed to be more like bumper cars? I know that sounds kind of chaotic, but isn't that closer to what fellowship looks like? Proverbs reminds us, as iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another. Solomon said in Ecclesiastes 4-12, a man who is alone might prevail in a small battle, The two are better than one, and a three-stranded cord is not easily broken. All of these illustrations are driving at the same point. Our union with Christ should result in a greater union with each other.

So much so that it can be said that we are one, even as the Father and the Son are one. Go ahead and stand. As we come forward to receive communion elements, we are proclaiming His death, burial, and resurrection. And we are also proclaiming our union with each other in Christ. What will the marriage supper of the Lamb look like? It won't look like Denny's with everyone sitting in their own booth and Jesus making the rounds.

do is put a little bit of shoulder into it and not fight against the yoke. That's a picture of what it's like when we work in union with Christ. Jesus said, come to me all who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me for I am gentle and lowly and hard and you will find rest for your souls for my yoke is easy and my burden is light. We can't escape the life God calls us to, but it's a whole lot better when we do it yoked to Jesus. And then Philippians 2 12 through 13 therefore my beloved as you have always obeyed so now not only in my presence but much more in my absence work out your own salvation with fear and trembling for it is God who works in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure. Amen.

do is put a little bit of shoulder into it and not fight against the yoke. That's a picture of what it's like when we work in union with Christ. Jesus said, come to me all who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me for I am gentle and lowly and hard and you will find rest for your souls for my yoke is easy and my burden is light. We can't escape the life God calls us to, but it's a whole lot better when we do it yoked to Jesus. And then Philippians 2 12 through 13 therefore my beloved as you have always obeyed so now not only in my presence but much more in my absence work out your own salvation with fear and trembling for it is God who works in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

Genesis tutors us by way of story. Unlike short and pithy proverbs, or lyrical and repetitive psalms, or dense and systematic arguments, Genesis is a narrative that frames our beliefs through stories about persons in places through plots.

The story of Genesis is about God getting glory. Every scene reveals something about Him, whether He's mentioned explicitly by name or not. He is the primary actor. He is also the writer and producer. He builds the theater. He selects that cast. He calls every shot and pulls all the strings. Every line on every page goes according to His script.

Much of the narrative starting in Genesis 12 focuses on local stories (compared to a global flood) of families with their hands at each other's throats. Here in Genesis 13 we read about the separation of Abram and Lot.

So Abram went up from Egypt, he and his wife and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the Negeb. (Genesis 13:1)

What was Abram doing in Egypt? In chapter 12:10, "Abram went down to Egypt," now, Abram went up from Egypt.

The Egypt event was not a success story for Abram, though that doesn’t mean it wasn’t profitable. Abram’s financial portfolio was much fatter thanks to Pharaoh even though Abram hadn’t done anything to earn it. And it did teach Abram that God was faithful though Abram got into the mess because he had failed to remember it.

Lot went with him is a necessary comment to set the stage for the friction. Lot wasn't mentioned as having gone with Abram and Sarai into Egypt, but since he's in the caravan coming up from Egypt, obviously he had gone down. He wasn't mentioned because he wasn't a player in that story, just as Sarai isn't mentioned further in chapter 13 because she's not a part of this story.

We aren’t told anything about the end of the famine, which was the reason Abram went down to Egypt in the first place, but their flocks were flourishing.

Now Abram was very rich in livestock, in silver, and in gold. (Genesis 13:2)

When Moses writes that Abram was very rich, the word "very" is the same word translated "severe" in 12:10, "the famine was severe in the land." Abram was severely wealthy, and what follows shows that too much can cause problems like too little. More is more than less, but more doesn’t always mean less problems.

Abram took with him all his possessions he had gathered when he left Haran (12:5) and his fortunes were increased substantially by Pharaoh for sake of Sarai, "for her sake [Pharaoh] dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys,...female donkeys, and camels" (verse 16). Pharaoh didn't take back those gifts either; Abram was sent "away with his wife and all that he had" (verse 20).

And he journeyed on from the Negeb as far as Bethel to the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Ai, to the place where he had made an altar at the first. And there Abram called upon the name of the LORD. (Genesis 13:3–4)

Abram journeyed on, or "he went from place to place" (NIV), "he went on his journeys" (NAS), meaning that he moved in stages, likely from one watering hole to another.

Bethel and Ai are north in Canaan, north and west of the upper shores of the Dead Sea.

There is no explicit mention of Abram's repentance. However, Abram' worship bookends the conflict with Lot. He called upon the name of the Lord at the place where her had made an alter at first. He builds another altar to the LORD in Mamre (verse 18). His worship, and how he handles the conflict, demonstrate fruit of repentance.

Meanwhile back at the ranch,

And Lot, who went with Abram, also had flocks and herds and tents, so that the land could not support both of them dwelling together; for their possessions were so great that they could not dwell together, and there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock. At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites were dwelling in the land. (Genesis 13:5–7)

If we could choose, most of us would rather try to handle the challenge of surplus rather than scarcity. Things got too crowded and people started bickering: the land could not support both of them dwelling together and they could not dwell together, repetition for the readers, which was probably a repeated, if not daily, report Abram received.

Abram had 318 “trained men” (Genesis 14:14) who went to battle, though not all of them were herdsman. There were enough of his herdsman and Lot’s to fight for the space.

At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites were dwelling in the land. The most obvious reason for mentioning the inhabitants is that Abram and Lot weren't the only ones with livestock to feed, and while Abram had a promise from God, he had no papers entitling him to the property.

To concede means to yield, to relinquish possession or control.

Then Abram said to Lot, “Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me. If you take the left hand, then I will go to the right, or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left.” (Genesis 13:8–9)

Abram wants peace. Note:

Lot makes his choice.

And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw that the Jordan Valley was well watered everywhere like the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, in the direction of Zoar. (This was before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.) So Lot chose for himself all the Jordan Valley, and Lot journeyed east. Thus they separated from each other. (Genesis 13:10–11)

Lot lifted up his eyes. If they were standing near Bethel, they could have been almost 3000 feet above sea level, putting them in a place for a panoramic survey of the Jordan Valley to the east.

This land was well watered like the garden of the Lord, a reference to Eden.

This was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah is a parenthetical thought added by Moses foreshadowing some of the problems to come. Lot will end up with worse problems than not enough pasture for his animals.

Do you think Lot sinned in his choice? On one hand, doesn't he just make the natural and logical decision? Perhaps, and yet he shows:

Abram settled in the land of Canaan, while Lot settled among the cities of the valley and moved his tent as far as Sodom. (Genesis 13:12)

It is interesting that Lot settled among the cities, centers of people, where presumably there would be more struggle to maintain livestock.

Now the men of Sodom were wicked, great sinners against the LORD. (Genesis 13:13)

A second signal of coming events. Lot probably didn't know it when he chose, but it didn’t take long for him to find out.

The immediate word from the LORD affirms the LORD’s approval of Abram’s generosity.

The LORD said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, “Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever. I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also can be counted. Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.” (Genesis 13:14–17)

The LORD hadn't spoken to Abram since he first arrived in Shechem (12:6-7). Yahweh adds fantastic specificity to His promise. Previously He promised to make Abram into a great nation, that families of the earth would be blessed through him, and that his offspring would receive the land (12:7). But now, the promise of land isto you too and to offspring forever. Lots of offspring, as the dust of the earth. That's almost unbelievable.

Neither the ESV or the NAS (or the NKJV or the NIV) include an important word in verse 14. When the LORD addresses Abram, He says "Please lift up your eyes." YNG translates it, "Lift up, I pray thee, thine eyes." The Hebrew word is na and it occurs over sixty times in Genesis alone. But only four times in the Old Testament is it used by God when He addresses a human: here, Genesis 15:5, 22:2, and Exodus 11:2. In each case "God asks somebody to do something that transcends human comprehension" (Hamilton, 394).

In Exodus 11, God tells Moses to tell the Israelites to ask their Egyptian neighbors for silver and gold jewelry on their way out of town. In Genesis 22:2, God asks Abram to take his own son and offer him as a burnt offering. In Genesis 15:5, God asks Abram to look and count the stars as an indicator of the multitude of his offspring. So here in Genesis 13:14, God asks Abram to believe that the land, as far as Abram could see in every direction, would one day be his. Walking through the land let him see it for himself.

Emphasis on size: northward and southward and eastward and westward (verse 14), all the land that you see (verse 15), through the length and breadth of the land (verse 17).

The LORD's confirmation (rather than rebuke) immediately after Lot left Abram does more than repeat the promise, it validates Abram's actions.

So Abram moved his tent and came and settled by the oaks of Mamre, which are at Hebron, and there he built an altar to the LORD. (Genesis 13:18)

The point of Genesis 13 is not about how impressive Abram is. The primary character is the LORD and the point of the story is that the LORD protects and provides for His chosen people. What makes Abram an example is that he saw the point of the story as well. He saw the LORD as LORD, trusted Him as LORD, and worshipped Him as LORD.

Because he was immersed in worship, Abram initiated peace in humility and with generosity. He put (at least) the following three things on the line.

Or, he put his pride on the line. Abram was the familial authority; uncle trumps orphan nephew. The act of deferring itself could have lessened his reputation, let alone actually surrendering the better land. There were at least another 300-plus men, let alone women, watching the patriarch concede to his nephew, perhaps wondering (and whispering about) how Abram had become so weak. Abram put his pride and reputation on the line.

Or, he put his protection on the line. Not only would Abram's concession communicate weakness to his own family, it would also convey vulnerability to the Canaanites and Perizzites nearby as well as the wicked Sodomites across the county line. If they heard the story, and certainly they would at some point, they may have considered the old man and all his stuff an easy target. Abram exposed himself and his family to physical insecurity.

Also, at least to some extent, it seems that Abram put his flocks and herds on the line, since Lot took the better land for supporting livestock. We don't know if the famine was still severe or what effects remained. Abram put the well-being of himself, his family, and his assets on the line.

Or, he put his promise on the line. Abram had special revelation that the land was to be his (12:7), revelation given before the LORD's confirmation in 13:14-17. He put his trust to the test by offering Lot the land he'd already been promised. In holding the land with open hands, it's clear that Abram receives it by God's giving rather than his own grabbing. It is only possible by faith.

Abram's peacemaking effort shows his initiative, humility, and generosity. How does that result from worship? Worship impacts behavior because we are image-bearers. We become like what we behold. Abram was reflecting God.

How do you get to be like Abram? Worship a generous God like Abram. Giving is the way of those who believe in the Giver.

Before looking at the text itself I want you to think through something with me again that we considered a couple Sunday nights ago. For those who weren’t here, or because it is difficult to put our minds around, I want us to take a moment and consider God’s display of God: His right and delight in promoting Himself to His creation.

As Jonathan Edwards argued in his book, The End for Which God Created the World: God does everything He does to glorify Himself.

Some hear that and struggle with the idea that God is seeking His own glory. That sounds selfish and proud. That sounds like the kind of thing that we despise in someone else. Doesn’t God Himself speak about pride as a sin? Isn’t seeking to serve oneself selfishness? Egocentric?

It is true that for a human to lift himself above others is nothing but pride and desire for self-glorification. This is an accurate judgment because no one man is inherently more valuable or excellent than another because we all bear God’s image.

But Scripture paints a very different picture about God. Scripture describes God as THE being who is inherently more valuable and more excellent than every other.

Every part of creation comes from Him, exists through Him, and is ultimately directed to Him. From the creation of the world in the beginning through the flow of history since, all things are brought into being for His sake!

In fact, if God did not to seek to glorify Himself then He would be an idolater. If He were to give glory to something that was not the most excellent or worthy thing, then He would be unrighteous. In following Edward’s thought we may argue about God’s creation that:

So God is doing everything for His own sake, for His own glory, because He is the most excellent and infinitely worthy being. Again, it would be wrong for Him not to do this.

As it relates to our study in Romans 9 we may apply the general principle above to two of God’s specific attributes:

AS WELL AS (to no lesser extent or degree)

THEREFORE:

God’s end is the display of BOTH His grace in salvation AND His wrath in condemnation. This is how it could be His purpose to raise up Pharaoh, His purpose to harden whom He desires, His purpose to prepare vessels of wrath for destruction, and His purpose to reject Israel for a season.

God is God. He is at work displaying His “god-ness.” Romans 9:19-23 should continue to help us see how “right” this is.

I think that the most logical end of the paragraph is at the end of verse 23. I know that most of our translations have the next paragraph division at verse 29. But what makes verses 14-23 distinct is that Paul’s justification of God deals generally with the issue of God’s sovereignty, not specifically with the issue of God’s faithfulness regarding His promise to Israel. Paul concludes his justification of God’s unconditional election with the unfinished sentence of verse 23, and then with verse 24 returns to the particular discussion of 9:6-8 which had given rise to the issue of unconditional election in the first place.

You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” (verse 19)

The question (or objection) of verse 19 flows from the previous paragraph where God shows mercy and hardens whomever He wills regardless of human effort or choice. God’s will determines whatever occurs, and therefore (the objection goes), He, rather than human beings must be held responsible.

There would be no teeth to this question if the previous verses taught that the deciding factor in human destiny was human choices. The question emerges precisely because the destiny of human beings is attributed to nothing but the will of God.

Embedded in these questions is an complaint that God’s sovereign act of hardening (verse 18b) contradicts the clear biblical teaching about the justice of God’s judgment on people who resist Him (see Romans 1:18-23). The assumption is that people must be responsible for their own actions if God’s judgment can be truly just.

But how else can these verses in Romans 9 be explained other than by saying that God is in control and He still righteously finds fault in sinful men? He chooses to condemn those who He wants apart from anything in them, and then punishes them for their rejection of Him.

Perhaps someone still wants to say, “That does nor seem fair.” For sake of consistency we should also ask that person to give up the doctrine of salvation by grace too, because it is also unfair for God to save any sinner. If He cannot condemn who He wishes, He cannot save who He wishes. You must be willing to reject God’s grace if you want to reject His sovereign wrath. It is potentially even more unfair to save those who are actually worthy of eternal punishment.

Paul is still not ready to solve the problem by retreating from his previous argument. He does not disagree at all with the idea that God’s will is the ultimate cause of one’s destiny. Paul does not deny the premise: no one can resist His will. Paul agrees that no one can resist His will. If the objection had been false, undoubtedly Paul would have refuted it (probably with one of his frequent phrases, “May it never be!”).

This is so important, if you want to hold on to any hope…you must not back down from this truth either. If you want to believe that “all things work together for good to those that love God, to those that are called according to His purpose” then you must believe that no planet, no person, and no proton can resist His will. He is either in control or He is not. He is either God, or He is not.

Paul doesn’t deny the premise but he does deny the conclusion of the proposes argument: God therefore cannot find fault with human beings. In other words, Paul believes that God is ultimately sovereign and determines all things AND AT THE SAME TIME maintains that human beings are responsible for their choices and actions.

Verses 21-23 show that Paul does not reject a humble inquiry into the ways of God. There is an appropriate type of questioning in order to know God more. But verse 20 shows that the objection here does not represent a humble attempt put the puzzle pieces of God’s sovereignty and human responsibility together.

The questioning Paul responds to here manifests a rebellious spirit that refuses to tolerate and stomach a God who holds humans responsible for what He sovereignly purposes. The objection was not a humble “How can these things be?” but an indignant declaration that these things ought not to be.

That makes a huge difference. There are some who may not understand yet exactly how Paul fits everything together underneath the umbrella of God’s sovereignty, but they are willing to believe and learn and wrestle and pray and consider. There are some others for whom the problem is not understanding but rather a rebellious heart. We want to make sure that we are in the former group, not the latter.

A “rebuttal” is a denial of something, especially by presenting arguments that disprove it. In Paul’s rebuttal against the idea that God cannot justly hold accountable those that He chooses to harden he gives two lines of argument: what it means to be the pot, and what it means to be the Potter.

On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? (verse 20)

What is under consideration here in the first part of Paul’s rebuttal is what it means to be the creature rather than the Creator. This is the creature’s standing, his status, his rank before the Creator. The creature has no right to judge His Creator. That’s what it means to be the pot.

The verse should not be interpreted to say that there is no answer at all to the question posed in verse 19. An answer is provided, but it is an answer that emphasizes the frailty of human beings and the greatness of God rather than one which defends human greatness and ability.

So the first part of Paul’s rebuttal emphasizes the gulf between human beings and God, and he accentuates the subordinate, creaturely status of the ‘objector.’

We know that some people argue that this makes men into robots. Well, at least robots can move. They can at least be sort of sophisticated. Here, Paul compares us with inanimate, totally lifeless pots.

The presumptuousness of the complaint is conveyed in the words o man, and in the emphatic who are you? Even more, the audaciousness of the protestor is signified in the words who answers back to God. The word “answers back” describes an argumentative and resistant response, not merely an attempt to get an answer to a difficult question. It’s as if Paul said, “Who do think you are?”

Frail and finite human beings should not arrogantly question God’s justice and give Him direction on how to run the world. God’s sovereign rights are defended with the illustration of the potter. God, like the potter, has sovereign rights to do what He wishes with His creation.

Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use, and another for common use? (verse 21)

What is under consideration in this second part of Paul’s rebuttal is what it means to be the Creator. What we see here is God’s sovereignty, His liberty, His autonomy, His authority as Creator to do whatever He wants. That’s what it means to be the Potter.

As the sovereign one, God has the right to make some vessels for honorable use (salvation) and some for common use or “dishonorable use” (destruction). The potter has independence to do whatever He wants. It is His prerogative and His choice. By definition the Creator has absolute freedom to do what He wants with His creatures.

Note that both pots are made from the same lump. The various types of vessels which the potter chooses to make are not at all determined by what the clay itself is. Had the vessel for honor and the vessel for dishonor been made from different lumps of clay one might argue that there was some distinctive quality in the different lumps which caused the potter to appoint them for different ends.

But the idea here is the same as it was in 9:10-13. The stress in those verses falls on the fact that Rebecca conceived her two sons “by one man, Isaac.” As I heard R.C. Sproul say one, they were "wombates."

Some have tried to argue that verse 21 refers not to eternal destiny (salvation or condemnation), but that being made for honorable use or common use is simply a description of earthly position; some pots have more prestige than others. But everything in the context argues against this interpretation. Romans 9-11 deals with why some in Israel are saved and why others are not. God’s wrath and destruction (verse 22) are contrasted with His mercy and glory (verse 23), all four terms dealing with salvation or the lack of it.

So out of the same formless lump, God makes some who are destined to stand in honor (as partakers of the Messianic glory), and others who are to stand in dishonor (as partakers of eternal damnation). That is precisely what it means for God to be God and for us to be His creatures.

Paul could have concluded his defense at this point. But since He does not, we see that he is not reluctant to reflect a little longer and more deeply on the problem of God’s sovereignty in hardening some and having mercy on others. Romans 9:22-23 is Paul’s final insight into the whys and wherefores of unconditional election.

This may be the closest that the Bible ever comes to offering us an explanation of God’s mysterious ways with man, and in particular, how the existence of evil, sin and suffering fits with what we know to be a good and loving God.

Why has God made the world to function this way? Paul has just affirmed in verses 20-21 in the most sweeping terms imaginable the sovereign freedom of God to do what He wishes with what He has created, but He has not supplied a reason. Verses 22-23 build on the illustration by informing us now why God prepared some vessels for destruction and others for mercy.

There are three purposes found in verses 22-23: first, God made some vessels that are destined for destruction because He wanted to reveal His wrath. Second, God made some vessels that are destined for destruction because He wanted to reveal His power against sin. And third, God made some vessels that are destined for destruction because He wanted to show off His immeasurable grace to the vessels of mercy.

What if God,… endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, (verse 22)

Before we can look specifically at the purposes we need to find out just what it means that God endured with much patience God defers His immediate judgment of vessels of wrath so that He can unveil the full extent of His power and wrath on those who continually resist His offer of repentance. The idea that God suspends an immediate retribution in order to impose a severer judgment later is common.

In a military conflict, a measure of patience and restraint at one point in the battle may secure a greater victory later. This insight into the patience of a military commander may explain how it is that God’s desire to demonstrate His wrath and make His power known motivates Him not immediately to overthrown the enemy but rather to patiently sustain and tolerate the enemy for a while.

The vessels of wrath describe those that God “hates,” such as Esau, those that He “hardens,” such as Pharaoh, those that He has chosen to destroy. There is no basis found in the context for thinking that these vessels of wrath will later become vessels for mercy. The text itself rules this out explicitly by describing them as vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.

The word destruction is disputed, but it is always used by Paul with reference to final condemnation (see Philippians 1:28; 3:19; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 6:9; etc.). Some have suggested that no potter would create a pot just to shatter it. But “destruction” here does not mean that God prepares vessels just to take away their existence, rather the opposite, He takes away glorious existence.

And the strongest evidence yet that salvation and damnation are in view is the contextual flow of thought throughout Romans 9-11. The discussion is centered around the Jewish national unbelief.

There is some question as to the force of God’s willing. Some suggest that this “wishing” is concessive. In this case Paul is expressing what God wanted to do but did not actually do, while verse 23 would state with God’s ultimate purpose in bearing with vessels of wrath.

The second possibility is that God’s “wishing” is causal. In this case, the two infinitives in verse 22 that depend on this participle would be essentially parallel with the purpose clause in verse 23, all three summarizing God’s purpose in bearing patiently with the vessels of wrath.

The second interpretation fits the context better since it achieves a more natural parallel with verses 17-18. In the case of both Pharaoh and of the vessels of wrath, God withholds His final judgment so that He can more spectacularly display His glory.

For example, God’s raising up of Pharaoh and enduring him through the whole story of hardness was not in spite of His desire to show His power but because of His desire to show it. These three things, then, are the cause or motive for His enduring.

So a paraphrase might be: “What objection can you make if it is true (and it is), that God has tolerated with great patience vessels He prepared for destruction when you realize that His purpose in doing so has been to demonstrate His wrath and to make known His power, all so that He could ultimately make known the riches of His glory to vessels of mercy prepared beforehand for glory?”

to demonstrate His wrath

Just as it is appropriate for every great artist to demonstrate in the variety of his work the full range of his skill and power, so, according to Paul, it is God’s right and His great desire to manifest the full range of His character in the things that He does.

The first purpose here is that He would demonstrate His wrath. For man to argue that it is wrong for an eternal, sovereign Creator to “demonstrate His wrath” he must also argue that it is right for the Creator not to reveal any parts of Himself. To argue that God should not give open display to His wrath is to imply that it is not in fact glorious, and that God is not in fact as he SHOULD be. They must redefine God apart from His revelation of Himself.

Paul is not attempting to show that God’s sovereign hardening accords with normal human values, nor that it is consistent with the ways human regularly work. Instead he shows that it follows necessarily from what it means to be God!

Our persistent and habitual bent toward self-exaltation keeps us from naturally affirming the ways of God. He, however, is at work to make the grand demonstration of Himself, and in verse 22 He is showing off His wrath.

and to make His power known,

and (willing these [two] things) in order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory——

The and at the beginning of verse 23 may appear to coordinate this third purpose with the first two. But its position as the last of three purposes and its distinct introduction with in order that (and not an infinitive like the first two) suggest that the purpose in verse 23 is the ultimate and that the two purposes of verse 22 are subordinate to this ultimate one.

So God has endured for the sake of purposes 1 and 2, but mainly because they are necessary for the fulfillment of purpose 3.

Paul’s justification of God does not stop with the demonstration that God, as God, must display the whole range of His character in order to be righteous; he goes on to assert that there is a unity in this display, and that perhaps we might say that all of God’s attributes stand in the service of His mercy, and thus function to heighten the revelation of glory for the vessels of mercy and to heighten and intensify their appreciation of it.

Here is Jonathan Edwards answering the question why a good and holy God would decree that there be hardening and evil. This is not a passage from the Bible, yet this is a man who I believe understood the Bible correctly on this point:

If it were not right that God should decree and permit and punish sin, there could be no manifestation of God’s holiness in hatred of sin, or in showing any preference, in His providence, of godliness before it. There would be no manifestation of God’s grace or true goodness, if there was no sin to be pardoned, no misery to be saved from. How much happiness soever He bestowed, His goodness would not be so much prized and admired, and the sense of it not so great.

So evil is necessary, in order to the highest happiness of the creature, and the completeness of that communication of God, for which He made the world; because the creature’s happiness consists in the knowledge of God, and the sense of His love. And if the knowledge of Him be imperfect, the happiness of the creature must be proportionably imperfect. (Jonathan Edwards, "Concerning the Divine Decrees," in The Works of Jonathan Edwards (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1974), 528)

Paul doesn’t retreat one step from the accusation that God determining who would be His makes God unjust. On the contrary, he goes on the offensive and buttresses his teaching about the unconstrained freedom of God in making choices that determine people’s lives.

Allusion in this part of the chapter to unbelieving Israel is muted but clear. So many Jews have failed to embrace the gospel because God has so willed it: as with Pharaoh, God has hardened them, and many of them are now vessels on whom God’s wrath rests.

Paul has explained in Romans 9:14-18, as well as in 9:19-23 that God’s righteousness (that is, His doing what is right) consists in His sovereign choosing of mercy for some and hardening for others, all for the purpose that His “name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” It is the most right thing for God to display Himself as God.

If we properly understand this God who has revealed Himself “we will be deeply sobered by the awful severity of God, humbled to the dust by the absoluteness of our dependence on His unconditional mercy, and irresistibly allured by the infinite treasury of His glory ready to be revealed to the vessels of glory” (John Piper, The Justification of God, 220).

May God help us to see His infinite value and excellence, and may He grow in us a passion for His glory like that passion He has for it.

This morning we come to the first of many, really ugly stories about the patriarchs in Genesis. It’s surprising how many stories there are about ugly unfaithfulness from God’s own people.

Not everything in Genesis has been pretty so far. Adam and Eve rebelled in the Garden, but they didn’t know how dark it would get on the other side of disobedience. Wickedness spread across the face of the earth before the flood. That wasn’t pretty, but the wickedness stood in contrast to Noah; Noah, at least, was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Likewise at the Tower of Babel, the crowd acted inconsistently with the givenness of their image-bearing status, but they didn’t claim to be worshippers of God.

But from Genesis 12:10 through the rest of the book, and in some ways through the rest of the Old Testament, we read story after story of God’s chosen people acting unfaithfully. It would repulse us more if it didn’t reflect us so much.

The unhidden ugliness is one of the reasons to believe that the Bible is true. If you were making up a religion and writing a book to persuade others to join, you probably wouldn’t write about the moral failures of your heroes. Abram, who is the father of the Jewish nation, and the father of all those withfaith (Romans 4:11; Galatians 3:7), is one of the worst examples of unbelief as well as being in the Hall of Faith (Hebrews 11:8-12). If the Bible were no more than propaganda, the marketing team would have said, “I know that’s what happened, but can’t we clean it up a bit? Let’s just leave the good parts.” The Bible doesn’t edit every recipe to make it sweet.

In Genesis 12:10-20 there is a bad problem: a severe famine. But by the end of the chapter there we will have seen an even bigger problem than the lack of food. Abram’s famine of faith is worse.

It wouldn’t be too difficult to pelt Abram with verbal stones from a distance. “What was his problem? Why didn’t he believe?” Of course, these are questions we want to apply to ourselves first. I wouldn’t want all of my story written down for others to read. There may be some good paragraphs here and there, and there would also be more paragraphs than I care to count telling my lack of trust. Some of the worst come right after some of the best. Let’s read and learn, and be fair to Abram as we acknowledge that when God tests our faith it can be very tough. Even more so, it takes God’s faithfulness. God is the most important character, and He is faithful to expose our faith-gaps.

There are five developments in the story.

In verse 4 Abram moved because the LORD told him to. Here he moves because there was a threat to the survival of the family.

Now there was a famine in the land. So Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. (Genesis 12:10)

A famine means scarcity of resources, in particular of food, to provide for yourself and your dependents. Abram had just traveled over a thousand miles from Ur through Haran down into Canaan, and we last saw him in southern Canaan in the Negeb. He doesn’t have his own land, nor is Canaan itself fertile land, especially compared to where he came from. He came from the Fertile Crescent into a place more like desert, and irrigation hadn’t yet been sufficiently developed to pull in necessary water during a drought. This famine threatens Abram and Sarai’s survival. It is a bad situation. Abram starts planning how to provide.

We can easily imagine how Abram might be extra discouraged at this point. How long had it taken him to get here with all of his flocks and servants? He’s been faithful to follow God for months. And now there’s a famine too? “God, I’m only here because You said to come here. I’m here, I’m trusting You, and then this?” Abram’s faith could only take so much.

It happens to me. I see that thing coming and know I need to trust God. But then this happens, the thing I wasn’t expecting, and faith fails. This and that can be closely connected, or one right after the other. I think about it like I think about batting average. A batting average is good for nothing when you’re at the plate. Each at bat requires it’s own effort and what you’ve done yesterday doesn’t guarantee today’s success. Just because we passed yesterday’s faith test doesn’t mean we will continue to believe during today’s test.

A famine doesn’t happen overnight, or even over a week. Resources dry up over time. You wait as long as you can and hope that things are going to get better. Abram must have agonized over this decision, but nothing in the story explicitly states that Abram took his problem to the LORD. As the story develops, his lack of faith becomes more evident. Hence the title of the message: a famine of faith. Even if it was permissible for Abram to leave Canaan to provide for his family, the next decision demonstrates that his faith wasn’t strong.

That said, it wasn’t as bad as it could have been. The author of Hebrews points out that at least Abram didn’t go home to Ur. He could have gone back to Haran where his family did well. Even the translation that Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there suggests that Abram didn’t see this as a permanent move. Maybe he would rent in Egypt rather than buy, though sojourn could be translated as “dwell.” Had he gone south to stay?

He trades problems that he knows for problems that he doesn’t know. Be careful trying to run from your problems. There may be greater problems you can’t even imagine lurking behind your current ones.

If—and this is a big if—his sojourn was acceptable—and Moses doesn’t say either way—then this is definitely not acceptable. There is no way to spin this action on Abram’s part as being driven by faith. This moves from bad to worse.

When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to Sarai his wife, “I know that you are a woman beautiful in appearance, and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me, but they will let you live. Say you are my sister, that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared for your sake.” (Genesis 12:11–13)

As Abram attempted to compensate for one problem he creates another problem. Famine threatened the family survival in verse 10. Now there is another perceived threat to his family’s survival, or at least Abram’s personal survival.

Had Abram heard that the Egyptians were immoral? Was Abram’s proposal based on stories he’d heard? He thought that the Egyptians would not commit adultery so much so that they would commit murder?

The trouble was Sarai’s good looks. She’s ** beautiful in appearance** even at 65 years old. She’s at the mid-point of her life (she died when she was 127), and hadn’t bore any children yet. We know of no reply on her part; she goes along with her husband’s strategy.

Abram thought he could preserve his life by playing with her honor. So he schemes a half-truth. Genesis 20:12, the second time he tries this approach, clarifies that Sarai is his half-sister. They had the same father, not the same mother. But this was a lie with the purpose to deceive. Presumably he thought that as her brother, he could use her as a tease. Suitors could pursue her in marriage, but he could string them along for however long they sojourned. To all interested parties: “We’ll see.”

Abram thought he could stall with this charade.

The famine was bad, the possibility of his murder was bad, but this difficulty was unforeseen. His unbelief makes a tough situation even tougher.

When Abram entered Egypt, the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. And when the princes of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male servants, female servants, female donkeys, and camels. (Genesis 12:14–16)

Abram suspected that the people would see Sarai’s beauty. He probably did not suspect that he would have to stall Pharaoh. How long can you stonewall the King of the country? Pharaoh is a title, a word that means “Great House.” He had more than square-footage, he had unilateral authority. He was not a President with checks and balances.

Princes or “courtiers,” those who were in and out of Pharaoh’s court, sought to earn Pharaoh’s favor by flattery and by pandering to Pharaoh’s wants. Sometimes they were asked for advice, but they mostly did whatever they could to keep their seat at the royal table. Perhaps we would understand it comparable to America’s Next Top Model, something such as “Egypt’s Next Top Concubine.” Look for the pretty people to please the Pharaoh.

Sarai was so pretty that the Princes knew that they couldn’t keep her for themselves. They took her from Abram and brought her directly to the Pharaoh; he is not one to say No to.

Abram doesn’t say no. Abram instead receives the gifts of Pharaoh.

It should have been the other way around based on Genesis 12:1-9. Abram should have been the one to bring blessing. Instead, Abram is blessed by Pharaoh, and Abram brings curses to Pharaoh’s house.

How long did Abram’s conscience plague him? What agony was Abram in, with no one to blame but himself? Did he think about telling Pharaoh the truth? If he thought that they would kill him for her being his wife, what about when they realized that he lied to them about her being his wife? Would they even bother to take him to a back room to kill him?

The best case scenario was to stall the suitors. There’s no stalling Pharaoh. What fear was in Sarai’s eyes? What panic was in Abram’s heart? How did he think he could get her back? He moved them there, he counseled her to deceive, and the mess is all his fault.

But the LORD afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. So Pharaoh called Abram and said, “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife; take her, and go.” (Genesis 12:17–19)

Abram becomes a channel of plagues rather than blessing. His presence brings the opposite of favor on Pharaoh and his house. Plagues is typically used in reference to skin diseases but Moses doesn’t specify the symptoms. It could have been something like leprosy, or perhaps something that caused the women to be barren. We’re not told how long it took to identify the plagues.

We’re also not told how Pharaoh recognized the cause of the plagues. But Pharaoh calls Abram and asks three quick, irritated questions. ** “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife?** Pharaoh is not trying to get to know Abram or understand where Abram’s coming from. These are “Off with his head!” level questions. Pharaoh understood the disrespect behind the deceit.

The worst thing happens now. Famine was bad. The deception was bad. The possible adultery was bad. But Abram losing credibility was the worst. Abram should have feared the loss of his testimony. Abram rationalized that he would fight their immorality with his own, and now Pharaoh has the high moral ground. Pagan Pharaoh is more righteous and he rebukes God’s chosen man. Abram has no defense.

Abram also lost credibility with Sarai, probably also with Lot, though he isn’t mentioned until the start of chapter 13. Lot certainly heard about it, as did all of Abram’s household servants.

But it was the LORD who afflicted Pharaoh and his house…because of Sarai. Yahweh protected Abram and his wife though Abram’s attempts failed.

Pharaoh kicks Abram out, hat in hand, tail between his legs.

And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they sent him away with his wife and all that he had. (Genesis 12:20)

Sent…away is the same as when God sent Adam and Eve from Eden (3:23). Abram and Sarai receive a military escort to the border.

They are deported and go back to Canaan where, as far as we know, there is still famine. They’re back to the bad ritual where they already were and now without credibility.

He has to be ashamed. How did his servants talk about him? What did Abram think about his own lack of faith?

Just because things are hard doesn’t mean that we’re in the wrong place. The famine didn’t make Abram leave. Based on what happens in Egypt, and since God gets him back to Canaan by rebuke, God didn’t direct Abram to leave the hard place in the first place. When you’re down in the count by two strikes, that doesn’t mean you should go back to the dugout. Keep swinging.

Just because things are hard doesn’t mean that they couldn’t be harder. Abram went out of the frying pan, into the fryer, into a bigger fryer, back into the pan beaten and rebuked.

You can’t avoid faith-choices. You can put your faith in God, or you can put your faith in something other than God. In one sense, Abram did live by faith. He believed in himself and his own abilities to provide and protect. It’s still faith. Trust in God or trust in not-God.

God is faithful even when we are faithless, see 2 Timothy 2:13. Abram made faith look good in the first part of the chapter. But God doesn’t need us to make Him look good. He protects Abram and Sarai in spite of Abram’s unbelief. That doesn’t give us warrant to do whatever, because real things were lost such as relational trust and spiritual peace.

How do you know when to wait or walk? It’s tough, but stay where you are. Or, it’s tough, go over here. It isn’t always obvious. Wait or walk by faith in Him, not in yourself. Fight or retreat, speak or don’t, because you believe He’s in it.

Death could not keep Jesus from rising again. No one took His life, and no one could keep Him from coming back to life. He had the authority to lay it down and the authority to take it up again (John 10:18). He died, was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:4). We confess the resurrection and celebrate it as of first importance. His resurrection is a reality that has changed more than we know and a reality we know has changed and is changing us.

Resurrection distinguishes Christian teaching from every other belief system. We believe that God, the eternal Word, took on flesh, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. Of course other religious radicals have died as martyrs for their teachings, maybe even unjustly. But on the Sunday morning following Jesus’ crucifixion, when the ladies went to His tomb, the stone had been rolled away (John 20:2). Mary Magdalene ran and told Peter, and he and John ran to the tomb (John 20:3-4). They found no body, only linen cloths lying where the body had been (John 20:5-7). His disciples claimed that He appeared to them multiple times in the following forty days, sometimes eating food with them. At least 500 people witnessed Jesus walking around in body after the weekend at Golgotha (1 Corinthians 15:5-8). No other prophet can claim anything similar.

The resurrection of Jesus is a constant subject of the apostles’ sermons; being a witness to His resurrection was a requirement for the position (Acts 1:22). In Jesus own generation, among hundreds who could deny the claims, men proclaimed that Jesus was risen from the dead just as He had said. Peter preached the resurrection on Pentecost (Acts 2:32). Paul preached it to the philosophers in Athens, telling them that God raised Jesus from the dead as an assurance that He would judge the world (Acts 17:18, 31-32). Paul preached it when he was on trial (Acts 23:8). He even claimed that “It is with respect to the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial” (Acts 24:21).

There is no gospel or assurance of salvation without the resurrection. Again, the gospel is Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). If He is not raised from the dead, then preaching is not only foolish it is futile (verse 14), our faith is empty and we are still in our sins (verse 17), and we are pitiable creatures trying to sooth our consciences with a lie (verse 19). But He is alive! (verse 20) And we must believe in our hearts that God raised Him from the dead in order to be saved (Romans 10:9).

Forever we will worship the Lamb who was slain, but who now stands (Revelation 5:6). The resurrection from the dead declared Him to be the Son of God with power (Romans 1:4). It verified that payment for sin was complete. He was “delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Romans 4:24).

But His resurrection is more than a Roman numeral point in our gospel presentations. It is a necessary chapter in our soteriology books, and it lives beyond the pages. His resurrection is an historical event with consequences that are far from complete. He rose again so that we could be raised to life—twice.

Christians have been raised and will be raised. We know a resurrection today and we will know it another way on the last day.

Our baptism symbolizes the spiritual life we now have. We are raised to “walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:4), “raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead” (Colossians 2:12). That resurrection is an already fact that should empower today’s sanctification. God, being rich in mercy and grace, “made us alive together with Christ…and raised us up with him” (Ephesians 2:6). Since we’ve been raised with Christ, we seek heavenly things (Colossians 3:1).

But our resurrection is also a not yet fact. The “trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable” (1 Corinthians 15:52). “God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power” (1 Corinthians 6:14).

So consider the three resurrections:

What does this do for us? Better, what doesn’t it do? It fires our conversations, it orients our decisions, and it forges our attitudes. The resurrection(s) bias our message, our lifestyle, and our posture. Knowing the principles of resurrection makes us people of resurrection principles.

We could use more principled people, principled Christians in particular. We need more Christians with integrity who do not compromise because it will increase their profit or power or ease. We need more believers who will suffer, if necessary, for truth, righteousness, and the good news. We need the resurrection(s).

When we understand the resurrections—completed, current, and coming—on Easter, what does it affect? What does it mean to be raised with Jesus?

2 Corinthians 4 shows the way. Every paragraph in this chapter is one of my favorite passages. 2Co4 belongs on a small shelf of guaranteed-to-be-rewarding soul-hole-stoppers. The pace-phrase of the whole chapter is, “we do not lose heart,” leading in verse 1 and leading the final paragraph in verse 16. Paul not only rehearses realities that cause him to endure in ministry, he also provides an example for all Christians close to collapsing on the track.

Verse 14 is critical among the eighteen verses in the chapter.

knowing that he who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus and bring us with you into his presence. (2 Corinthians 4:14)

Based on the finished resurrection of the Son by the Father, all believers look to their future resurrection by the Father to be with Him, with the Son, and with one another. The only prerequisite has been fulfilled: Christ is risen. The fact that we believe He’s been raised is evidence of our being raised which will end in being raised with Him. Knowing these resurrection principles changes things.

This “knowing” explains why we say what we say, how we live, and what attitude we spread. Here are three pairs of resurrection principles.

Knowing His and our resurrections is the motive for verse 13.

Since we have the same spirit of faith according to what has been written, “I believed, and so I spoke,” we also believe, and so we also speak, knowing… (2 Corinthians 4:13)

The quotation comes from Psalm 116, a song of endurance and boldness in the face of suffering. When tears well up, when men slander, when distress and anguish run at us, those who love the Lord trust the Lord. He’s the one that we confess especially when affliction hits.

The psalmist said, “I believed, even when I spoke, ‘I am greatly afflicted.’” Paul adapts it. We also believe, and so we also speak.

We believe what? We speak about what? From the beginning of chapter four he’s made the case for “the open statement of the truth” (verse 2). He’s referring to the gospel, to proclaiming Jesus as Lord. Verses 3-4 explain that unbelievers are blinded from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ. A veil covers their spiritual eyes.

But we believe in God who raises the dead. He is our salvation, and He is the one we trust to raise dead men around us. We have faith and so we speak about the gospel, about the Lord, about His resurrection. We believe and speak knowing the resurrection. We speak about the resurrection; it is the hope of all men. We speak in light of the resurrection; our own resurrection is secure no matter how men respond. The reason for courage is built right into the confession.

The resurrection fills our hearts and mouths. It also functions as the pattern for our lives.

The previous paragraph is well-known for describing the jars of clay who show the surpassing power of God. We proclaim His resurrection power and we embody it.

But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies. For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh. So death is at work in us, but life in you. (2 Corinthians 4:7–12)

The series of “but-nots” lead to the ultimate analogy of incarnation. We are almost broken, looking like we’re on our own, and this wave of breaking points is epitomized by carrying Jesus’ death and manifesting Jesus’ life in our bodies. We are death-and-resurrection pots, enacting Easter by the day.

Physical death is not what Paul had in mind because one cannot be “always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake.” Death cannot be “at work” more than once in a body. But by analogy, we die to what’s precious to us, we endure affliction and confusion and criticism and loss so that life comes in us and through us.

Paul made a similar comment at the start of the letter.

For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. (2 Corinthians 1:8–9)

That last phrase is not merely an accomplishment of God, it is an attribute of God. God: the dead-raiser. God: He who is unlike all other gods, those for whom raising the dead is preposterous fiction. He who raised the Lord Jesus is He who by nature raises. Jesus is the first fruits because resurrection from the dead is part of who God is. We have this treasure in containers that keep showing this pattern when we get battered. We do not run away from sacrifice and suffering, we expect God’s resurrection power to be put on display through them.

Christ’s resurrection, and ours on the final day, is good news and all gift. We couldn’t have made Him walk out of the tomb even if we would have been there. We could not raise ourselves from the dead; dead men don’t even apply for help. When we believe it, we receive grace. When we speak it, we’re just stewards of grace. When we embody it, it’s painful but not meaningless.

So believing, speaking, dying, living, are all acts of grace, empowered by His grace, and for the purpose of extending His grace.

For it is all for your sake, so that as grace extends to more and more people it may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God. (2 Corinthians 4:15)

The resurrected spread grace, not law, or burden, or grief, but freedom and gladness. We say, “Come to Jesus and escape death. Follow Jesus and you will walk in light and know true beauty and freedom.”

They type of people who understand this grace, the type of people we should see increasing around us, are thankful people. There is a play on words, abounding grace (χάρις) brings abounding gratitude (εὐχαριστίαν), from the same Greek root. The thanksgiving of the many is growing. It isn't only information about resurrection that we want to spread, it is gratitude. If we want to see thanksgiving go viral, we've got to be willing to be used up and endure all things.

What you wear, what you eat, who you’re with and how you handle their fussiness, will be flavored by knowing that Jesus is risen and you will be raised with Him. Our resurrected gratitude grows and glorifies God.

Resurrection is what we believe, what we should speak, how we should conduct ourselves, and our hope for seeing the spread of grace and gratitude, in our hearts, families, church, and among the nations.

As we are poured out, banged up, beat around pots, sloshing grace over every side, the only way we'll keep going is as we look to our resurrection. We will only give up our lives for others if we believe that in giving up life we gain life, that dying is never vain and not the end. Dying and death result in resurrection, being raised with Jesus. If we are examples of pettiness, bitterness, or reluctance, we’re not living like those who have been raised. If we only do what is convenient, cheap, and selfish, the gratitude of others will shrivel, and then God will not be honored as He deserves.

We are not dead stones. He has made us living stones, and He is building us as His temple on the living cornerstone. Resurrection is not a dead truth on a page, it is a living energy that fills and builds and unites persons.

Evangelical culture sells a candy and bubble-gum Christianity. God is sweet, small, and changes His mind sometimes. He really wants to do things but human freedom keeps popping His bubbles. Professing believers—and many preachers—present God as not much more that a vulnerable, grandfather-like figure. If He cares, He can’t control much anyway.

But that’s not what God says about Himself. For us to speak about God as He does is to speak about the non-weak, non-feeble, non-genie-like God. Our God is the heavens and He does whatever He pleases (Psalm 135:6).

What’s on the table in Romans 9:14-18 (and in the next paragraph, 9:19-23) demands our discussion. This is one of the clearest passages in all of Scripture that exposes God’s “god-hood,” His “god-ness.”

To be sure, there are many who would just as soon skip any discussion on Romans 9. In fact, I own a book titled, The Most Neglected Chapter in the Bible: Romans 9. There have been some who in studying this passage were troubled so much by Paul’s apparent disregard for human choice and responsibility that one commentator criticizes the biblical argument here as a “false step.” Another goes further and says that the teaching is “thoroughly immoral.” And others hate it so much that the assume that these “offending verses” must have been written by someone other than Paul.

But there is no “false step” here in Paul’s argument, and these verses are “offending verses” to men who do not want a sovereign God. This passage concerns God’s very right to be God and to do God-things. We are addressing core questions about God like: “What does it mean to be God?” “How does God show Himself to be God?”

In God’s providence I was reading Jonathan Edward’s book, The End for Which God Created the World while also studying to teach Romans 9 in 2003. Edward’s thesis is that: God does everything He does to glorify Himself.

Think about what that means for a moment…everything God does is to glorify Himself. Every part of creation comes from Him, exists through Him, and is ultimately directed back to Him. He brings all things into being for one purpose: for His sake.

We might ask, “Why does God seek to display His greatness?” In following Edward’s thought we may reason:

God is doing everything for His own sake, for His own glory, because He is the most excellent and infinitely worthy being. In fact, it would be wrong for Him not to do this.

Now for our study in Romans 9 consider the following more specific application. We may apply the general principle above to some of God’s specific attributes:

AS WELL AS (to no lesser extent or degree)

THEREFORE:

He intends to display BOTH His grace in salvation AND His wrath in condemnation. This is how it could be His purpose to raise up Pharaoh, His purpose to harden whom He desires, His purpose to prepare vessels of wrath for destruction, and His purpose to reject Israel for a season.

As we consider the context of these verses, remember that the entire point of Romans chapters 9-11 is founded on this idea that God is showing off Himself. The question was raised by Paul in 9:1-5, what about the Israelites? All the promises God made to the Jews in the Old Testament seem to be falling short of fulfillment. If God isn’t going to come through on those promises, how can we trust His promises of salvation (and security) in Romans chapters 3-8?

Chapters 9-11 are included by Paul not as a parenthesis but as crucial to his explanation of God’s faithfulness to save. It is in these chapters that he explains how so many of the Israelites were rejecting their Messiah.

It is true that chapters 9-11 show His delight in His mercy, as well His delight in His faithfulness through the final fulfillment of His promises to the nation (11:11-32). But they seem to primarily indicate that He is no less pleased with His wrath (especially 9:14-23) as it communicates an excellent attribute of His.

God is God. He is at work displaying His “god-ness.” Romans 9:14-18 should help us see how right this is.

The flow of this text is relatively easy for us to follow with parallel conjunctions that mark it off:

What shall we say then? Is there injustice [or, unrighteousness] on God’s part? By no means! (Romans 9:14)

This question states the inevitable human response to the previous paragraph in verses 6-13. If God decides apart from works and before people are born whom He will save and whom He will reject, then how can He be righteous (verse 14) and how can He blame people if they reject Him (verse 19)?

The question springs from the immediate context where God’s choice of Jacob over Esau preceded their birth and was not based on their works. The very possibility of the question is evidence that election means that He chooses some and rejects others regardless of their works.

However, Paul emphatically defends the righteousness of God in verse 14, rejecting any notion that God’s electing actions are blameworthy.

The aim of the question (which is really more of an accusation) is God’s character. Isn’t this really unfair? Isn’t this an injustice on His part? It would be common to hear a person who had this objection say something like, “That is not what my God does.” Or, “If that is the way God is, I want nothing to do with Him.”

Nevertheless, it is valuable to observe, (before even looking at the specific defense Paul gives for God’s righteousness), that Paul does not attempt to show how God’s choice of human beings for salvation fits with their own “choosing” of God in faith. He is not trying to ease our upset stomachs and confirm our ideas that God is really much more like we would like Him to be.

Quite the contrary. Rather than qualifying the nature of God’s election, he underlines it with brighter colors. God not only has mercy on whomever He wants, He also hardens whomever He wants (verse 18).

God’s freedom to act this way is the freedom of the Creator toward His creatures and does not need to be qualified (verses 20-21). In other words, the standard by which God must be judged is nothing less and nothing more than God Himself. Judged by this standard, Paul contends, God is indeed righteous.

Paul knew the objections. Even the way he begins here shows that. What shall we say then? is typical of the questions Paul uses at several points in Romans to answer protests. If God, on the basis of nothing but His own choice (verse 12), determines who is to be saved and who rejected (verse 13), then how can God be righteous (verse 14)? Not only that, if God is in control of those who receive Him and those who reject Him, how can He still righteously find fault in them (verse 19)?

The key word is unrighteousness (ἀδικία, “injustice” NASB). In Romans 3:5 it is the opposite of “righteousness,” a concern of moral behavior, and it is also used in Romans 1:18 as the opposite of truth. Unrighteousness refers to a disposition and conduct which contradicts truth, particularly the truth about God.

The most right or righteous thing a being could do is to properly recognize God’s infinite worth. So the most unrighteous (ἀδικία) thing is to disregard His infinite worth (see Romans 1:18-23 where unrighteousness is used to describe the refusal to worship and give thanks to the Creator).

God cannot act in a way that is contrary to His own infinite greatness. God would not be “right” if He did not conduct Himself with a view to honoring Himself. God’s righteousness is His commitment to act for the glory of His own name above all.

For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” (Romans 9:15)

The first reason that God’s righteousness is vindicated comes from Scripture (a quotation from Exodus 33:19) to show that God’s decision to love Jacob and hate Esau was no isolated case but reflects God’s very nature.

It is a fair question, though: “How is it an argument to say that God is not unrighteous in election because – for He says to Moses…‘I will have compassion on whom I have compassion?”

The unstated premise of this argument is that when God acts righteously He must use His freedom in this way. His sovereign giving, or withholding, of grace is the primary way He acts for Himself. Election is how God displays God.

The citation from Exodus represents a principle about the very nature of God, the way He characteristically acts in His sovereign freedom to show mercy and also to withhold it.

Again, how does this constitute an answer to the objection that God is unrighteous? God is righteous because He is committed to proclaiming His name and advertising His glory by showing grace to those He chooses and hardening those He chooses.

In Exodus 34:6 (in the same context as Exodus 33:19) God passes by Moses, showing Moses His glory, and He proclaimed to Moses His name using both words “mercy” and “compassion.” So it is the glory of God and His essential nature to dispense mercy (but also wrath, 34:7) on whomever He pleases apart from any constraint originating outside His own will. This is the essence of what it means to be God. This is part of what makes His name glorious. The righteousness of God is defended, then, by appealing to His freedom and sovereignty as the Creator.

So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. (Romans 9:16)

Verse 16 draws a conclusion about God’s electing righteousness from verse 15 and is a sharpened repetition of the thesis of predestination in 9:11 and following. More specifically, the “not from works by from Him who calls” (9:12) corresponds to the “not of him who wills or of him who runs but of God who has mercy” (verse 16).

Paul’s first conclusion in verse 16 has two parts. First, God’s choice is NOT based on man. And Second, God’s choice is based ONLY on His sovereign determination.

We might see the human will as the origin of an action, the choice to do it, and exertion as the consummation in action of the will. Thus Paul aims to say that no part of the process in the mental-physical life of man determines God’s decision to give grace.

This verse excludes in the clearest possible terms the notion that free will is the determining factor in divine election. This is the point! God must be sovereign and free in His bestowal of mercy on whomever He wills in order to get all the glory Himself. His purpose of election comes out of a full allegiance to His name and esteem for His glory. So Paul proves that God is righteous, because righteousness consists basically in preserving and displaying His own glory.

For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” (Romans 9:17)

In verses 15-16 Paul expands the positive side of God’s sovereignty in election that he alluded to in verses 10-13 (“Jacob have I loved”). Now Paul will do the same for the ‘negative’ side (“Esau I have rejected”). Verse 17 is additional proof that the principle explained in verse 16 is not merely true of God’s mercy but also of His severity. Verse 17 argues that the matter of divine hardening “is not of one who wills or of one who runs but of God.”

The words are again from Exodus, from the Lord’s instructions to Moses about what he is to say to Pharaoh on the sixth occasion that Moses and Aaron are told to go before the Egyptian ruler to demand the release of the people of Israel.

The purpose clause, for this very purpose I raised you up, is probably the reason that Paul has cited this particular text since its lack of explicit reference to Pharaoh’s hardening makes it initially less suitable than others as a preparation for Paul’s conclusion in verse 18.

This purpose clause also lets us in on the fact that God’s raising up of Pharaoh is virtually the same has God’s hardening of Pharaoh.

Paul wants to make clear that even God’s ‘negative’ actions, such as the hardening of Pharaoh, serve a positive purpose. This positive purpose is the greatest purpose imaginable: the demonstration of God’s power and the wider proclamation of His name.

The purpose for which Pharaoh was raised up represents the answer to the question regarding God’s righteousness. God’s righteousness, then, consists in the revelation of His saving power and mercy AS WELL AS His sovereign free judgment that results in the proclamation of His name in all the earth.

So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. (Romans 9:18)

Pharaoh’s resistance to God’s purpose is caused, according to Exodus 4-14, by his “hardness” of heart. It is this concept which connects verses 17 and 18, as Paul now states a principle of God’s acting that Pharaoh’s experience serves to illustrate: God hardens whom He wills.

The word hardens (σκληρύνει) was used in secular Greek in medical contexts with reference to the calcification of bones. In the Greek translation of Exodus 4-14 it occurs 14 times where it has the idea “make spiritually insensitive.”

God’s hardening, then, is an action that renders a person insensitive to God and His Word. If it is not reversed (by God Himself) then the hardening culminates in eternal damnation.

Paul insists that God bestows mercy on His own initiative apart from anything that a person is or does (verse 16). The parallelism in this verse requires that the same is true of God’s hardening: as He has mercy on “whom He desires” so He hardens “whom He desires.”

Many people who study this passage deny that this is the case. They point back to Exodus 4-14 where the first reference to God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:12) comes only after references to Pharaoh’s hardening of his own heart (8:11, 28). This implies that God’s hardening is a response to a person’s prior decision to harden himself or herself.

But there are three reasons why that’s wrong. First, nowhere in Exodus 4-14 is there an indication that Pharaoh’s hardening of his own heart was the basis for God’s hardening. Chronology is not a cause. Besides, the record of events shows more about the chronology. Before Pharaoh is said to harden his own heart, God twice predicts that He would harden Pharaoh’s heart (4:21 and 7:3). There are also five references in the passive voice to Pharaoh’s heart being hardened (7:13, 14, 22; 8:11, 15). The understood subject of these passive verbs is none other than God.

Second, Paul’s “whom He desires” shows that God’s decision to harden is His alone and is not constrained by any consideration having to do with a person’s status or actions.

Third, if Paul wanted his readers to assume that God’s hardening was based on a person’s self-hardening, we would have expected him to make this clear in answering the question in verse 19. What more natural response to the objection that God is unfair in “finding fault” with a person than to make clear that God’s hardening was actually based on some fault?

The “hardening” Paul portrays here is a sovereign act of God that is not caused by anything in those individuals who are hardened. And 9:22-23 and 11:5-8 suggest that the outcome of the hardening is damnation. As contrasted with His mercy – which we always think to lead to eternal salvation, His hardening must lead to eternal damnation to keep the parallel. Not only that, but four verses later the vessels of wrath (compared with vessels of mercy) are prepared for destruction and it is clear that they are excluded from salvation.

This is what answers the question of God’s faithfulness to His promises. The reference to Pharaoh here must be grounded in the Romans context (chapters 9-11 overall), as the hardening of Pharaoh is analogous to the hardening of many Israelites in Paul’s day. Paul uses the principle of God’s free rejection of Pharaoh as an example of why the majority of the Israelites are unsaved. Just as Pharaoh was hardened to effect the salvation of Israel, so Israel is hardened so salvation can be extended to the Gentiles.

What is the most “right” thing any being could do? It is right to recognize the infinite value and worth of God. For God to be righteous He must do everything for the glory (or the properly displayed value) of His own name.

Paul has explained in Romans 9:14-18 that God’s righteousness (that is, His doing what is right) consists in His sovereign choosing of mercy for some and hardening for others, all for the purpose that His “name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” It is the most right thing for God to display Himself as God.

By quoting two OT texts (9:15, 17) Paul shows that God’s freedom from human “willing and running” is God’s display of God, it is at the very heart of what it means to be the all-glorious God. In fact, God’s righteousness is His commitment to act for the glory of His own name above all (you can see more about this in John Piper’s book, The Justification of God).

If there is any problem in our world today, and for that matter in our churches as well, it is the marginalization and trivialization of God. The reality and supremacy of our personal, supernatural God is NOT the center and the ground and the goal of all of our thoughts and actions.

We need to be relentless in our exalting of God, just as He is. This exalting begins with knowing Him and delighting in Him as we see His display of Himself. May we not be unrighteous in apathy about God’s display of God.

The author of Hebrews makes it clear that Abraham obeyed the Lord’s call by faith, desiring a “better country, that is, a heavenly” one (Hebrews 11:6). Abram is an example of following God to receive a blessing, and he is the channel of God’s blessing to all the earth.

Within four to five generations after the flood men became so proud again that they attempted to make a name for themselves apart from God. God judged them at Babel, turning their language into confusion (Genesis 11:1-9) and thereby causing them to disperse into many lands and clans and nations (Genesis 10). God chose a line through Noah’s son Shem to offer hope to all peoples, focusing on and through Abram (Genesis 11:10-32).

Maybe you are old enough to remember “Body by Jake.” It was a line of fitness equipment sold by Jake Steinfeld on a TV show by the same name. The implication was, if you get Jake, then you will get healthy.

According to Genesis 12, if you get Abram, you get happy. This is blessing by Abram.

Though we already learned that Abram left Ur in Genesis 11:31-32, chapter 12 provides more details about how he came to relocate. This God’s summons.

Now the LORD said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. (Genesis 12:1)

In the beginning, God’s word brought everything into existence that had no existence, including humanity. Now God’s word again creates permanent changes to the stream of humanity and history. Note four things about the call.

There is nothing in Abram that caused God to choose him. Abram lived among idolators in Ur and was counted among their number (Joshua 24:2). Some of the women in his family were named after goddesses connected to worship of the moon. More than likely Melchizedek was alive at this time (see Genesis 14), as well as Job, both of whom would have been better candidates according to righteousness. But God elects according to His sovereign, redeeming initiative. He does not need a “good” start according to our assessment.

God calls Abram to Go…to the land that I will show you. He does not tell him where or give him a coordinates or the name of a city or country. The LORD points Abram in the right direction and will let Abram know when he gets there. He traveled around 600 miles from Ur to Haran and another 400 or so miles from Haran to Canaan. Abram had to go.

God includes the cost when He gave Abram the command. Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house. In order from least attached to most closely connected, God called Abram away from familiarity into uncertainty and difficulty.

It is as if the LORD said to Abram,

I command thee to go forth with closed eyes…until, having renounced thy country, though shalt have given thyself wholly to me. (Calvin)

Or as Luther wrote in “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God,” we must “let goods and kindred go.”

We may not (or we may) be called to geographic change, but discipleship could cost us in other ways (friends, position, etc.). God called Abram to trust in Himself for security and prosperity.

And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Genesis 12:2–3)

All of these are gifts to Abram not achievements by Abram. Four times the LORD says I will, a declaration of His purpose to involve Himself.

There are at least five parts promised:

The emphasis of the promise is on blessing. The word is used five times in these first three verses compared to five times in the previous eleven chapters of Genesis. “Blessing” means God’s goodwill that leads to well-being, peace, a good harvest, children, and joy. Abram is the focus of blessing and becomes the “blessing bearer” (Waltke).

All further promises, therefore, not only to the patriarchs, but also to Israel, were merely expansions and closer definitions of the salvation held out to the whole human race in the first promise. (Keil and Delitzsch)

God promised a blessing through the seed around 2000 years earlier in Genesis 3:15, and God sent a blessing in the seed of Jesus around 2000 years later. In between was Abram, called by Yahweh to believe and follow.

Abram must exchange the known for the unknown (Heb. 11:8), and find his reward in what he could not live to see (a great nation), in what was intangible (thy name) and in what he would impart (blessing). (Kidner)

This is Abram’s sojourn. He didn’t leave Ur or Haran because he was discontent, he wasn’t on the run, he was following the Lord.

So Abram went, as the LORD had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan. When they came to the land of Canaan, Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. Then the LORD appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” So he built there an altar to the LORD, who had appeared to him. From there he moved to the hill country on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. And there he built an altar to the LORD and called upon the name of the LORD. And Abram journeyed on, still going toward the Negeb. (Genesis 12:4–9)

God called Abram when he was 75 years old. We don’t learn anything about the previous seven and a half decades, but we do know that Abram effectively starts over mid-life. The LORD told him to “Go” and he goes. The ESV translates it as departed but it is the same Hebrew word as “Go” in 12:1.

Lot is mentioned twice, perhaps to foreshadow issues of inheritance in following chapters. He’s Abram’s nephew, could he be the one through whom Terah’s line continues?

Shechem was the heart of Canaan. Canaanites were in the land is more than a statement of fact. It highlights that the promised place was already occupied, and probably that Abram was not received with kindly hospitality.

The LORD appeared, the first theophany or visible manifestation of God, at least to a patriarch. The message was that everything would be okay for Abram and that Abram wouldn’t see the fruit of the promise.

To your offspring I will give this land sounds great until you realize that “offspring” means later. It means not now, not even me.

Twice Abram built an altar to give thanks for the revelation, for the promises before they were fulfilled. We have reason to worship God when we receive promises from Him not only when we receive the fulfillment of them. The altars stayed even when Abram moved.

To call on the name of the LORD is to make an invocation; it’s a part of worship. The altar provided the place but dependence provided the motive. An altar, like any external form of worship, is only as good as the heart. We do not trust in our liturgy while believing that our liturgy is an expression of our trust in God.

Abram sees the land from the north to the south, the Negeb being the bottom border of Canaan. He kept pitching a tent and then pulling up the stakes. He keeps moving and he keeps believing. His part was to believe God.

Abram is a clay pot blessing. He isn’t worthy. He receives blessing. He pours out blessing. He also could not have imagined how great the blessing would be.

We should remember:

First, every salvation blessing we’ve received relates to God’s promise to Abram.

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. (Galatians 3:7–9)

God focused toward fulfillment, narrowing for sake of spreading. All who believe, whether Jew or Gentile, are “sons of Abraham.” We do not identify ourselves as the great nation (Israel) that God promised to Abram, but we do identify with that great nation as those of another nation. We’re part of the “all the nations.”

Second, every salvation blessing we pour out extends God’s promise to Abram. When you tweet and Facebook and talk to your neighbor about Christ, you are talking about the same story that started in Genesis even if you don’t reference the earlier chapters. That’s fine; you can’t tell the whole thing every time. But be encouraged as you remember that the blessings you extend are only the tip of the iceberg.

Third, every salvation blessing we enjoy provokes Israel to desire Abram’s blessing. This is also part of God’s means to His ends. Check Romans 11 for more on this.

Abram makes faith look good, not easy, but good. He never saw the nation that came from him, he could not grasp how great his name became, and he could not imagine the extent of blessing that would come through him. Abram’s tests are far from finished, and he’s already quite an example (Hebrews 11:8-19). Do we make faith look good?

One commentator gave the following counsel regarding Genesis 11:

In our judgment, the only section that can be used to advantage as a text is that of verses 1-9.

The Tower of Babel profits for preaching, but the rest presumably can only be used for…disadvantage? I acknowledge the challenge, but Genesis 11:10-32 is far from hopeless.

A transition takes place here in the book of Genesis as we move from Primeval history to Patriarchal history. If you don’t know what either of those words means, I’ll come back to it in a bit.

In the summer of 2003, Jonathan Sarr, Chuck Weinberg, and my father-in-law, Dave Light, volunteered to drive my mom and dad from Marysville to Cincinnati, OH, where my sister lived. My parents had flown to Washington to see Maggie who had just turned one. My dad also really wanted to see some of the sights going back across the middle of the United States, but he wasn’t well enough for the two of them to make the drive. So one August Tuesday morning all six of us headed east in a minivan.

We traveled around 500 miles a day for the first five days and slept in hotels the first four nights. We saw Yellowstone, Mt. Rushmore, and the Mall of America in Minneapolis. But when we dropped my parents off on the fifth night, a Saturday night, we took stock. We had a rental van with unlimited miles, my parents had already agreed to pay for the gas, we had four drivers, what could we do?

It had been percolating for a couple days, but we made the decision that night to drive from Cincinnati to the East Coast in New York City. We were going to try to get to New York and then back home in two days; which we did. We didn’t stop at another hotel. The four of us covered a total of 28 states and one District in seven days, and called it the Trogdor Tour due to some audio clips I’d play from Homestarrunner when the four of us were getting punchy. Mo made us celebratory t-shirts with a map of the U.S. and all the states we went through were colored.

We’ve talked since then about trying to hit all 48 continental States in seven days, but gas prices went crazy and a couple of us had more kids and more responsibilities.

The reason I tell you that story is because, from the time we left Marysville, we were on the same trip. We had the same goal: to take my parents, drop them off, and return. But there was a moment when we were in NYC when the trip totally changed. Up until that time, we were headed toward the same purpose, but when we turned south west in NYC we made a turn that would change the rest of the trip.

There are times when one turn changes everything after that. That’s exactly what happens here in the last part of Genesis 11. There is a turn in God’s story of redemption that changes everything to come. It’s not a different goal from before. God’s goal was the same since before He created in Genesis 1. His goal is still the same as it was in Genesis 3 after Adam sinned and God promised a Seed who would save.

From nothing but the Trinity to a universe is a big change. From innocence to sinfulness is a big deal. From pre to post flood, things are different, geographically and geologically and meteorologically. In comparison this transition between verses 9 and 10 in Genesis 11 might not seem as important, but God’s choice of Abram, a descendant of Shem, is like a snowball that continues to gather size today. We’re in it.

Moses organizes Genesis by “Generations,” by toledot. Two divisions are started (and one completed) in Genesis 11, verses 10-26 and then 11:27-25:11. Consider how many chapters Moses spends on the story of Terah’s offspring. No coverage has come close to the proportion given to the “generations of Terah.”

Genesis can be outlined by generations as well as by four key events and four key persons. That turn also takes place in Genesis 11:10. We move from the beginning of the human race to the beginning of the Hebrew nation. We move from what’s called ancient or primeval history about the easiest ages in the world. Most of that group are the antediluvians, those who lived pre-flood. Primeval history extends to Genesis 11:9. Then we move to patriarchal history about the “fathers.” A patriarch is a male head of a family or tribe, usually the oldest of the group.

The biblical patriarchs are Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jacob’s Twelve Sons (called “patriarchs” in Acts 7:8). Genesis 11:10 is where the patriarchal story starts.

The move is from global history to one group, a new nation formed by God. The first eleven chapters of Genesis covered some 2000 years of history and the final 38 chapters cover less than 200. Much more attention is given to the story of the Fathers than to the creation of the universe, and there’s more concern for the land of Canaan than the rest of the earth.

Two sections divided by toledot, verses 10-26 is Book 5: Shem’s genealogy, and verses 27-32 introduce Book 6: Terah’s genealogy.

These are the generations of Shem. When Shem was 100 years old, he fathered Arpachshad two years after the flood. And Shem lived after he fathered Arpachshad 500 years and had other sons and daughters.

Shem’s genealogy is what’s known as a linear rather than segmented genealogy. The only other linear genealogy in Genesis is in chapter 5 which traces the line of God’s promised seed. There are other sons and daughters but it doesn’t name more than one per generation until the end. Many of the other genealogies in Genesis are segmented, incorporating a variety of details, including the most recent in Genesis 10.

There is nothing extra in verses 10-26. There are no digressions. There are the same number of words following the same pattern in each of these verses before verse 26.

One reason for that might be because the aim is Abram; there’s no need for sightseeing between Shem and Abram. The point is to get from the flood (mentioned here for the last time in Genesis) to Abram and his offspring. The first five generations up to Peleg were already mentioned in Genesis 10. The elect line from Eber goes through Peleg and, since his name means division, he was probably born around the time of Babel. Arpaschad was born two years after the flood, so there were only 10 generations between the flood and Abram.

We have to do the math for ourselves to determine how long each father lived, and the length of life was significantly shorter than before the flood. Noah was still alive when Terah was born. I think about my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather who has been dead a really long time. None of my grandparents are alive and I never met any of my great-grandparents. But Noah and Shem were alive around Abram’s time.

Usually someone insists that there are gaps in the genealogies, perhaps thousands of years of gaps. The primary reason that men want to add invisible names and make “father” mean “in the same line together” rather than father is to find room for evolution in the Bible. Maybe there are other, smaller reasons (based on reading in 1 Chronicles, Luke 3), but the the burden of proof is on the gap-finders who willy-nilly throw out the detailed information. Why repeat the five names from Shem to Peleg as in 10:22-25? Why list how old each father was when his son was born if the son was not their son? There’s no reason in the text to explain it otherwise.

This is a segmented genealogy presenting the pivotal persons and plot line of Book 6.

The first paragraph tells us the characters. It repeats the very end of the last toledot.

Now these are the generations of Terah. Terah fathered Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran fathered Lot. Haran died in the presence of his father Terah in the land of his kindred, in Ur of the Chaldeans. And Abram and Nahor took wives. The name of Abram’s wife was Sarai, and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran the father of Milcah and Iscah. Now Sarai was barren; she had no child. (Genesis 11:27-30)

These are the primary characters found in the story over the next major section of Genesis.

Sarai is Abram’s half-sister, a daughter of the same father (Terah) but a different mother. Sister status becomes an issue in a later chapter.

The darkest foreshadow comes in verse 30. Barren means that Sarai had no kids, she couldn’t have kids.

The name Abram combines ab “father” and rum “be high,” so “exalted father” (Waltke, Wenham). When God changes his name to “Abraham” in 17:5 it fits even less: “exalted father of a multitude.”

So this is the “father” God chose to make a nation for Himself? This is the patriarch through whom all the families of the earth would be blessed? God starts with Abram and Sarai.

To go back to Sarai, her name is likely based on the Akkadian word sharratu which was a name for the mistress of the moon god Sin, the primary god of Ur. Milcah is based on malkatu which was the title of the goddess Ishtar, daughter of the moon god Sin (Watke).

Terah took Abram his son and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife, and they went forth together from Ur of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan, but when they came to Haran, they settled there. The days of Terah were 205 years, and Terah died in Haran. (Genesis 11:31–32)

Three specific locations are mentioned: Ur, Haran, and Canaan. It’s more than likely that Ur was originally a seaport on the gulf coast in Mesopotamia, and sediment deposited over time so that the archaeological finds connect to Ur are now inland. It’s about 125 miles southeast from Babel/Babylon.

Ur and Haran were both centers of moon worship.

Haran was approximately 600 miles from Ur (so a little more than from Seattle to Spokane and back, or Seattle to Redding, CA, which is 590 miles). Their goal was Shechem in Canaan which is about the same distance again from Haran. They did not travel from Ur to Canaan directly because of the desert. It was wise to follow the water source of the Euphrates River.

In Acts 7, Stephen said that God called Abram in Ur to move. Genesis 11 says Terah moved the family. Abram must have communicated that revelation to his father and his father agreed to leave. They left for Canaan via Haran.

The LORD reaffirmed His call while Abram was in Haran. Perhaps they stopped and Terah settled there because Terah was too old, or he was hurt. Perhaps Terah never fully committed to the LORD and fully turned from his idolatry. Maybe the moon worship in Haran kept him back.

Though Abram is in the chosen line of Shem through Eber, there is no evidence that Abram was worshipping the Lord. The evidence is to the contrary. The Lord chose him out of worshipping strange gods.

Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem and summoned the elders, the heads, the judges, and the officers of Israel. And they presented themselves before God. And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Long ago, your fathers lived beyond the Euphrates, Terah, the father of Abraham and of Nahor; and they served other gods. (Joshua 24:1–2, see also verse 14)

Terah and his family, including Abram, were in the chosen line but they were idolators. The turn in the salvation story, the creation of the Jewish nation, comes from God’s call of a pagan with a barren wife. A people who will worship the LORD come from a people who aren’t.

There are no “tips” from this passage, unless we consider this to be the tip of the redemptive iceberg.

Why did God choose an idolator? Why did God choose a man with a barren wife to be a father? God chooses those who look like they don’t have a future to blessing by faith.

The Tower of Babel is a monument to what man can accomplish when he puts his mind to it. With nothing but his ego, man can destroy mankind in the name of Man. The greatest enemy of humanity is Humanism (desire for self-realization and rejection of religion and the supernatural).

Approximately 150 years after the flood, around 30,000 or so of Noah's descendants migrated from the region of Ararat into the Mesopotamian plain. In a stunning display of ingenuity (that is, clever inventiveness), industry (that is, hard work), and camaraderie (that is, mutual trust and togetherness), they began to bake bricks and build themselves the tallest tower known to man. For real, imagine getting permits for these blueprints. Try to get the committee to agree on the color of the walls. And they did.

One thing they had going for them was that they all spoke the same language. Never again have so many people worked at such a massive project with such great understanding of one another and with such unity of purpose. It was their purpose, however, that made the monument a disaster.

The voice of the people said:

“Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.” (Genesis 11:4)

Here they could live in security, free from danger. Here they could live in unity, free from division. Here they could live in immortality, free from unimportance, if not in body then at least in remembrance. They would make a name for themselves.

Even though the LORD had to “come down” to see what the boys had built, the LORD said, “this is only the beginning of what they will do” (verse 6). What’s wrong with that? Didn’t He make man to relate and create? It’s not as if they’re doing indecent things with angels. There’s no comment about conflict or killing one another. They are using the raw materials to make something great. “Nothing they propose to do will now be impossible for them.” They are in position to make great progress.

God does not think it’s great. He responded by confusing their language, which ruined their relationships, which wrecked the project, which stained their reputation. Why? Why did the LORD kick over their sandcastle? Why did God react to their strengths as if they were hideous? Aren’t man's strengths His own likeness in them?

Let's go back to the why? question and lessons learned about God and image-bearers from Confusion Tower. Was this the act of a worried and vindictive God? "If you guys aren't going to play how I want, then you can't play at all" sort of attitude? No. His punishment was not driven by fear or a vindictive spirit, it was merciful. There are four considerations that point this direction.

The God in chapter 11 is not a new character. He is the same God we read about in chapter one, creating the immense and intricate universe. He is the same God we read about in chapter six, flooding the entire planet in demonstration of His purity and power. God was not afraid for Himself or of losing His position. This punishment was not fearful; He had no personal loss to fear.

He's within His rights to kill them on the spot. This sort of rebellion is flood worthy, but He promised He wouldn't destroy the earth with a flood. In fact, He said in 8:21, "Neither will I ever again strike down every living creature as I have done." But His hands weren't tied behind His back; He could have made it a lot worse for them than complicating their communication. That He is faithful to keep His word to this bunch is no less merciful because it is righteous. This punishment fit within His merciful promise.

When Adam and Eve sinned, God didn't kick them out of the garden because He was trying to hurt them.

The the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever--" ...[and] He drove out the man. (Genesis 3:22-24)

It was merciful punishment that protected them from eating of the tree of life, living forever, and living with the guilt of knowing that all hurt and death started with them.

In Genesis 11, when the LORD is concerned that this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them, Who is He concerned for? Himself? No. He's concerned for them! They don't know what they're doing. They don't realize that what they most want is the thing that they can least afford. He's protecting them by punishing them. He's protecting them from their worst enemy: themselves.

This is paradigm shaping stuff here. Genesis frames our view of God and the world, and this is a cornerstone.

What does it mean to be human? Being human is more than walking around on two legs or having opposable thumbs. Being human involves more than having a brain or even ability to communicate with others of the same kind. Being human includes the capacity for relationships--deep, intimate, and unified, as well as capacity for responsibilities--studying, stewarding, making things.

The people of Babel had both of those things. They had ease of communication. They clearly had been being fruitful and multiplying. They were creating and building. What were they missing?

Relationship and responsibility by themselves are NOT what it means to be human. Relationship and responsibility are parts of bearing God's image. Relationship and responsibility are reflections of God.

By using their relationships and responsibilities to make a name for themselves, the people were not reflecting God's image, they were trying to be their own image. They tried to be their own source of light rather than depend on the true source and life went dark. They were trying to create a new gravity while (verbally) denying the current force.

I don't want to go all über-philospher here, but men who act (study, teach, relate, build, work, play) apart from God are not fully men. They are not something other than human, but they are something less than fully human.

By using their abilities to "make a name for themselves," they were consciously not reflecting God's image. They were trying to be their own image, and "man" isn't anything without God.

Do not free a camel of the burden of his hump: you may be freeing him from being a camel. Do not go about as a demagogue, encouraging triangles to break out of the prison of their three sides. If a triangle breaks out of its three sides, its life comes to an end. (G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy, 35-36)

What happens when we free a man of his God-reflecting nature? What happens when we act as if neutrality is possible for humans? That's why I said men who act apart from God and His truth are not really men. They walk around in two dimensions thinking everything is good. From the front a lot of things look similar. But when they turn to the side they are thin. They have no chests. Only those who do what they do to reflect God's image, therefore, only those who live according to what is really real, live in all three dimensions.

The more they try to make a name for themselves, the more they miss the point of being humans. The more they attempt to redefine reality, the more they live outside of it. We're made to enjoy worship, but there is no joy worshipping ourselves. The greater their pride, the greater distance between themselves and God. He is man's best good. His punishment humbles men so that they might turn to Him. Confusing their language was an antidote to their arrogance, with the aim of humbling them for their good.

God knows this. That's why He doesn't let the people at Confusion Tower have what they think they want. God does not let them continue unabated in their attempt to be their own image.

Stirring the pot might make the beans uncomfortable, but it also keeps them from burning on the bottom.

That this punishment is merciful is also demonstrable from the New Testament commentary.

And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. (Acts 17:26-27)

The "one man" is usually Adam speak, and it's true, everyone goes back to him. But the "one man" from whom nations come is Noah. Their times and places are determined by God" (in order) that they should seek Him."

He frustrates their plans not because He's mean but because He's merciful. He doesn't always allow men to have what they want because what they want will destroy their souls. He won't let them drink the poison they're convinced will satisfy them no matter how thick the latte foam. They attempted to construct a city, a tower, and a name for themselves. God demolished their plans, their presumption, and their pride. He did it so that His name would be the highest, and that was good for them.

By punishing them He invited them to humility. By inviting them to humility He was inviting them to true humanity and the joy of dependence on Him. The confusing of language was a reminder and an invitation to repent and turn toward joy as a glory-reflector.

They wanted to make a name for themselves; so they did. They will forever live in infamy, well-known for their foolish pride and half-finished project. We remember their city, Babel, related to the word for "confusion." For all their abilities, technology, and organization, they will forever be known as the confused.

Let's be clear, though, that abilities, technology, and organization were not the problems. The brick making, city and tower building weren't the problems. The problem is that their hearts were wrong. Motivation matters.

I have spent a lot of my Christian life being confused, thinking that there were some parts of life that were neutral. I knew God required one kind of worship and not another. But it seemed obvious to me that men could go to school and learn all about creation whether or not they referenced God. It seemed to me that men could build sturdy houses or develop interesting websites or write true books. In one sense they can, but two-dimensional humanity.

Education, employment, creativity, family, are appropriate parts of image-bearing. They can all likewise be idols. In every project we either reflect the image of God in us or we rebel against our original nature and against God. How high the bricks are stacked isn't as important as Who the stacked bricks are meant to reflect/honor. No brick stacking is neutral/unreflective.

Should men ever build towers? That is, should men build business, build temporary structures or systems visible in this world? Some unbelievers believe that nothing matters. Therefore, building is vain, it's futile. Other unbelievers believe, like the men in Babel, that building is a way to be someone. It's vain, but self-obsessed. Both of those are wrong.

More specifically, should Christians build towers? I think there are three possible answers Christians might give.

First, No, Christians should not build towers because visible things are perishing, only invisible things are eternal (2 Corinthians 4:18), and we are only pilgrims in this world (1 Peter 2:11). It is, therefore, wrong to build.

Second, No, Christians should not build towers because the Jesus does not command us to. It may not be wrong, but it is not wise. It is a waste of time when Jesus does commission us with so many spiritual things to do.

Third, Yes, Christians should build towers (or help build or invest in the building of) because such building expresses God’s glory. Visible things may be temporary, and God Himself made them and gave them to us to enjoy and use. Believers are dual-citizens of heaven and earth. Our heavenly citizenship has priority and it keeps the motivation for our earthly work from being hideous.

We are working to persuade men to stop suppressing the truth about the Creator and attempting to redefine men in the image of Man. We are warning those who think that all the rewards come in this life on this earth. And we are working to convince and motivate Christians to build.

Humility doesn't require not doing amazing things; humility is doing amazing things for God's name. Architecture can either be war against God or worship of God. It is worship to depend on each other as image-bearers modeling the Trinity. It is damnable to depend on each other as replacements for the Trinity.

He's patiently letting some build their own cultural Chump Towers. He lets men build up more wrath for themselves. We Christians ought to obey, build towers, and do it as image bearers. May we raise our kids to know how to be who they are, with a worldview with Christ as Lord over it all and them as His reflections in it all. May God be pleased to make the right sort of hard-working, successful, holy, and honorable image-bearers using their strengths for His name.