Does God Exist for Haiti Sermon Notes

Here are my sermon notes for the talk I'm going to give in Haiti. Pastor Dan gave me three criteria. First, preached the Gospel. Second, make it personal. Third, make it 20 minutes. Here is my best attempt to preach on suffering and meet those three critiera. By the way, it is totally ludricous to talk about the theology of suffering in 20 minutes, but I volunteered to do this. Please pray for me. One more thing, this is a very rough draft. They are just notes and I'm not publishing it anywhere so it is not polished. Furthermore, these notes are a work in progress. I posting it here so I can get feedback.

Haiti Sermon Notes

Thank you,
Jeff

Menno Simmons and Haiti

I am reading a short biography of Anabaptist reformer, Menno Simmons. The following quote is taken from Theology of the Reformers . Not only do I like the stress of how Menno preached both Law and Gospel, but I can see how this applies to our Haiti ministry.

Timothy George
The primary importance of the Bible in Menno's theology is its crucial role in the process of conversion. Drawing on the analogy of the Word to the seed in Jesus' parable of the Sower (Luke 8:11), Menno likened the Scriptures to a spiritual seed from which the new life springs forth. The Holy Spirit germinates the seed and brings forth its fruit in faith and repentance. Menno someties used the distinction between law and gospel to show the various ways the seed of the Word brings about regeneration. The function of the law is to produce the knowledge and conviction of sin, while that of the gospel is to present the remedy of salvation through Jesus Christ. In the early days of the Anabaptist movement, the preaching more often than the reading of the Word yielded this result. "So also where the gospel is preached in true zeal, so that it penetrates the hearts of the listeners, there one finds a converted, changed and new mind." Many of those who heard and responded to the Anabaptist message were poor farmers, unskilled workers, and displaced persons. Often they were completely or almost illiterate. Yet, once converted, they began to "hide the Word in their hearts." When hailed before the civil authorities, these unlearned believers would frequently confound their judges by their ability to quote and reason from the Scriptures.(p. 287)

If there is an apt description of the Haitian people, it has to be "poor farmers, unskilled workers, and displaced persons." We have given the Haitian people bibles, but what is a couple of hundred bibles compared to the tens of thousands of Haitians living in Luly, Williamson and surrounding areas? Some of these people can read and some can not. I am giving a talk this time to some of the Haitian men who are being discipled by their Pastors to be future leaders. I feel inadequate as a speaker here in Iowa, let alone in a cross cultural context. I have no idea how to tailor my message to the audience. However, my responsibility in Haiti at this time is spelled out in 2 Timothy 4:2

preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching.

I will do my best to explain the Gospel clearly to my audience. It is up the Holy Spirit to clarify the message and convict them. It is up to my audience to "hide the Word in their hearts." Please pray for my time down there that God will help me prepare my heart and my message. Please pray that God will open my audience's hearts for His Word.

We are 1 Flock/1 Body

I was reading John 10 about Jesus being the Good Shepherd. What struck me this time was the emphasis on Jesus's global mission on earth and the authority God the Father had given Him.

John 10:14-18
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.

Leon Morris wrote a very good commentary on the Gospel of John. He stressed that Christ felt compelled to reach all peoples, because that was the mission the Father gave him.

Leon Morris
He goes on to speak of "other sheep" not of the "fold" of Judaism (v. 16). In all four Gospels there is mostly a concentration on the people who were with Jesus at the time, as we might expect. But now and then there are glimpses of the wisder application of the gospel and we have one here. The death of Jesus would be for people everywhere, not only for those in Palestine who had so far heard his voice and followed him.

Notice that he says "I must bring them too." There is the thought of a compelling necessity. He had come on a mission of salvation, which meant dying for sinners. It also meant that those sinners must be informed of what had happened and invited to put their trust in the crucified Savior: In other words, he must bring them. That was in the divine plan and in due course it would inevitably come about. (p. 380, Expository Reflections on the Gospel of John)

In John's Gospel, Christ is saying that He has sheep that are not in this fold (people who are not of the Nation of Israel), but some day the people of the gentile nations will listen to His voice. He is bringing and will bring all the sheep into one flock. The whole book of Ephesians is about how God the Father is uniting all things in Jesus Christ. In particular, Paul specifies that the Jew and Gentile will become one body. We are being built together into the dwelling place of God.

Ephesians 1:7-10
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

Ephesians 1:20-23
that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.

Ephesians 2:11-22
Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands—remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.

I met a person years ago at a Desiring God conference. He told me he loved the gospels, but disliked the Pauline epistles. I have heard this from other believers. However, we can see the book of Ephesians is almost an expanded commentary of this passage in the Gospel of John. We read in 2 Timothy that all scripture is breathed-out by God. As we read the Bible, we see that there is a wonderful unity in Scripture that we ignore at our peril.

Calvin on the Office of Deacon

I'm still reading about John Calvin in Theology of the Reformers. This quote is about the office of deacon in the local church. It agrees with the book by Timothy Keller that was assigned to the deacon board or diaconate, Ministries of Mercy: The Call of the Jericho Road.

Calvin did in fact hold the office of deacon in high esteem. Deacons were public officers in the church in the church entrusted with the care of the poor. He urged that they be skilled in the Christian faith because, in the course of their ministry, "they will often have to give advice and comfort." Indeed, the deacons in Calvin's Geneva should have been experts in what we call today social work as well as pastoral care. Calvin admitted that the diaconate could sometimes serve as a "nursery" [again the maternal motif] from which presbyters are chosen," yet be opposed the Roman custom of making the deacon the first step toward the priesthood. This practice was an invidious undermining of "a highly honorable office." (p. 249, Timothy George)

Calvin has a high view of the office of deacon, but many evangelical churches today do not. GCC does a much better job than most churches I have seen in utilizing deacons. But in the Protestant tradition there is a motto, "Semper Reformanda," which means "Always Reforming." We need to improve every ministry of the church all the time. Maybe, some day we will align the diaconate's ministry with the vision of Calvin and Keller.

GCLI Notes on Book III -- Original Sin

GCLI Book 3 has a lesson on The Doctrine of Sin and Man: Shattered Humanity. Pastor Doug Brown, who wrote the lesson, quotes another pastor, J. Sidlow Baxter, a few times concerning original sin. Brown uses Baxter's comments on Romans 5:12-14. Here's the passage from Romans.

Romans 5:12-14
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

Here is Baxter's commentary on the passage.

J. Sidlow Baxter
Guilt is a legal term. There is guilt only where there is actual transgression. Human babes inherit hereditary moral and physical consequences of Adam's fall, but they are not born guilty! There simply cannot be guilt unless there is trangression. Ronmans 5:13 settles that once for all: 'Sin is not imputed when there is no law (i.e. where there is no trangression). The point made in Romans 5:13-14, is that sin and death continued between Adam and Moses, yet because the Law was not yet given, men were not transgressors after the similitude of Adam, who transgressed a specific command. Mark well that clear distinction which Paul makes: Sin and death naturally inherited, but guilt not imputed!" (p. 36, GCLI Book III, Pastor Doug Brown quoting J. Sidlow Baxter)

This interpretation of the passage seems to go against the larger context of the passage. The passage may tangentially apply to human babies, but the passage is referring to people who died after Adam and before Moses. Baxter's view of sin in his commentary seems to contradict Romans 6:23, which teaches, "For the wages of sin is death." The pre-Mosaic people can be defined as sinners (e.g. Cain, Lamech, mankind before the flood). Is J. Sidlow Baxter asserting all these people who died physically in the pre-Mosaic era escaped judgement and are now in heaven? I asked Brooks about this quote and he pointed me to his sermon in the Roman series. It is a difficult passage, but I think Brooks would agree with the following theologians: Martin Luther, John Calvin, Charles Hodge, Charles Ryrie, John Stott, and John Piper. The following quote is a little difficult to read, but Hodge's commentary on the passage is the most concise summary of the position that I could find.

Charles Hodge
1. That the words evidently admit of this interpretation as naturally as of the other. Paul simply says, the persons referred to did not sin as Adam did. Whether he means that they did not sin at all; that they were not sinners in the ordinary sense of that term; or that they had not sinned against the same kind of law, depends on the context, and is not determined by the mere form of expression.

2. If ver. 12 teaches that men are subject to death on account of the sin of Adam, if this is the doctrine of the whole passage, and if, as is admitted, vers. 13, 14 are designed to prove the assertion of ver. 12, then is it necessary that the apostle should show that death comes on those who have no personal or actual sins to answer for. This he does: 'Death reigns not only over those who have never broken any positive law, but even over those who have never sinned as Adam did; that is, who have never in their own persons violated any law, by which their exposure to death can be accounted for.' All the arguments, therefore, which go to establish the interpretation given above of ver. 12, or the correctness of the exhibition of the course of the apostle's argument, and the design of the whole passage, bear with all their force in support of the view here given of this clause. The opposite interpretation, as was attempted to be proved above, rests on a false exegesis of ver 12, and a false view of the context. Almost all the objections to this interpretation, being founded on misapprehension, are answered by the mere statement of the case. The simple doctrine and argument of the apostle is, that

THERE ARE PENAL EVILS WHICH COME UPON MEN ANTECEDENT TO ANY TRANSGRESSIONS OF THEIR OWN; AND AS THE INFLICTION OF THESE EVILS IMPLIES A VIOLATION OF LAW, IT FOLLOWS THAT THEY ARE REGARDED AND TREATED AS SINNERS, ON THE GROUND OF THE DISOBEDIENCE OF ANOTHER.

In other words, it was "by the offense of one man that judgment came on all men to condemnation." It is of course not implied in this statement or argument, that men are not now, or were not from Adam to Moses, punishable for their own sins, but simply that they are subject to penal evils, which cannot be accounted for on the ground of their personal transgressions, or their hereditary depravity. This statement, which contains the whole doctrine of imputation, is so obviously contained in the argument of the apostle, and stands out so conspicuously in the Bible, and is so fully established by the history of the world, that it is frequently and freely admitted by the great majority of commentators.(pp. 155-156, Charles Hodge's Commentary on Romans)

After Pastor Brown treats the topic of "Original Sin" in the lesson, He moves on to the topic of "Total Depravity."

Doug Brown
"...although man is spiritually dead and needs regeneration to a new spiritual life, he is not morally dead, even though sadly perverted. He is not only alive to moral good, but constitutionally bound to appreciate it when it is truly perceived, however much he may resist it. Being spiritually dead, man is utterly unable to regenerate himself; but being morally alive he can at least respond to the truth which regenerates. (p. 37, GCLI Book III)

I would agree that man is "constitutionally bound to appreciate" moral good. I don't understand how a man can a person be spiritually dead, but morally alive? What part of man makes moral decisions? According to Ephesians 2:1, we are dead in our trepasses and sins. If that is not a moral death, I'm not sure what is.

Brown quotes J. Sidlow Baxter again to define the doctrine.

J. Sidlow Baxter
"The phrase "total depravity" means all parts of man's mental and moral nature is infected with sin. Sin extends to the whole person-spirit, soul, and body (1 Thessalonians 5:23). "It means all the parts' of man are affected, it does not mean that all the parts are all bad... There is no human body on earth which absolutely free from disease. From birth, evary part is affected in greater or lesser degree by that hereditary infection which eventually issues in death. Yet though all parts are affected, it is utterly untrue to say that all parts are all disease. Degrees of disease, latent, dormant, chronic, may co-exist with degrees of health in the same body." (p. 37 Brown quoting J. Sidlow Baxter).

This analogy to me is confusing to me. What point is he trying to make? Man is not totally depraved in every part? If so, how can it be called "Total Depravity?" This may not be Sidlow's fault. The format of the GCLI materials lends itself to short quotes and he may have been taken out of context. For a clearer definition of the doctrine, I turn to Ryrie's Basic Theology.

Charles Ryrie
Every facet of man's being is affected by this sin nature. (1) His intellect is blinded (2 Cor. 4:4). His mind is reprobate or disapproved (Rom. 1:28). His understanding is darkened, separated from the life of God (Eph. 4:18). (2) His emotions are degraded and defiled (Rom. 1:21, 24, 26; Titus 1:15). (3) His will is enslaved to sin and therefore stands in opposition to God (Rom. 6:20; 7:20).

The scriptural evidence provides the basis for what has been commonly called total depravity. The English word "depravity" means perverted or crooked. It is not used in the translation of the King James Version, but some modern translations do use it to translate adokimos in Romans 1:28. This word means "not standing the test" and gives us a clue as to how to define the concept of depravity. Depravity means that man fails the test of pleasing God. He denotes his unmeritoriousness in God's sight. This failure is total in that (a) it affects all aspects of man's being and (b) it affects all people.

Negatively, the concept of total depravity does not mean (a) that every person has exhibited his depravity as thoroughly as he or she could; (b) that sinners do not have a conscience or a "native induction" concerning God; (c) that sinners will indulge in every form of sin; or (d) that depraved people do not perform actions that are good in the sight of others and even in the sight of God.

Positively, total depravity means (a) that corruption extends to every facet of man's nature and faculties; and (b) that there is nothing in anyone that can commend him to a righteous God.


Total depravity must always be measured against God's holiness. Relative goodness exists in people. They can do good works, which are appreciated by others. But nothing that anyone can do will gain salvational merit or favor in the sight of a holy God. (pp. 252-253, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth)

The Problem of Evil and Suffering

I'm researching a talk I'm giving in Haiti. William Lane Craig wrote a short book called, Hard Questions, Real Answers. I have not read the whole book, but the two chapters on Evil and Suffering are good. The following quotes summarize rather unfairly the argument of the first chapter. I hope the quotes will encourage the reader to read the whole book.

William Lane Craig on Hume's Theodicy
The eighteenth-century Scottish skeptic David Hume summarized the logical problem of evil nicely when he asked concerning God, "Is He willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then He is impotent. Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent. Is He both able and willing? Whence then is evil?" (p. 82, Hard Questions, Real Answers)

William Lane Craig
We can go even further than this. Not only has the objector failed to prove that God and evil are inconsistent, but we can, on the contrary, prove that they are consistent. In order to do that, all we have to do is provide some possible explanation of the evil in the world that is compatible with God's existence. And the following is such an explanation:

God could not have created a world that had so much good as the actual world but had less evil, both in terms of quantity and quality; and, moreover, God has morally sufficient reasons for the evil that exists.

So long as this explanation is even possible, it proves that God and the evil in the world are logically compatible.

So, to sum up our discussion of the logical problem of evil, we have seen that there is no necessary incompatibility between the presence of an all-good, all-powerful God and the presence of evil in the world. And I'm extremely pleased to report to you that after centuries of discussion, contemporary philosophy has come to recognize this fact. It is now widely admitted that the logical problem of evil has been solved. (Praise the Lord for Christian philosophers like Alvin Planting to whom this result is due!)

But before we breathe too easily, we have to confront the probablistic problem of evil. This we shall do in the next chapter. (pp. 86-87, Hard Questions, Real Answers )

According to Craig, Plantinga laid out his argument in the following book: The Nature of Necessity (Clarendon Library of Logic & Philosophy)

Some thoughts on Prayer

Pastor Brooks on his sermon on Colossians 4:2 gave some good advice on prayer.

Colossians 4:2
Continue steadfastly in prayer, being watchful in it with thanksgiving.

His comments on the phrase "continue steadfastly on prayer" reminded me of the passage in 1 Thessalonians on prayer.

1 Thessalonians 5:15-18
See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.

The phrase for "pray without ceasing" differs a little in emphasis than "Continue steadfastly in prayer." The greek word for "without ceasing" is "ἀδιαλείπτως." Thayer's Greek Lexicon defines it as "without intermission, incessantly, assiduously." Rienecker's Linguistic Key gives some good examples of how the word was used in the 1st Century:

without interruption, unceasingly, constantly. The word was used of that which was continually and repeatedly done; e.g., the uninterrupted necessary payment of hard taxes; the continual service or minstry of an official; a continual uninterrupted cough (Preisigke; MM); repeated military attacks... (p. 257-258, Rienecker, "Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament)

To focus on one example, the word ἀδιαλείπτως was used for a "continual, persistent cough." I had asthmatic bronchitus when I was a child. I was always catching colds and the flu. It seemed to me that at times that I had a persistent, hacking, cough for most of the winter nights of my childhood. Coughing was always present with me. It was almost as natural to me as breathing. Prayer should not be annoying, but it should be that natural and constant.

Leon Morris, in his commentary on 1 Thess. 5:5-18, explains how we are to live in a prayerful manner.

Leon Morris
Prayer is fellowship with God. Prayer is the realization of the presence of our Father. Though it is quite impossible for us always to be uttering the words of prayer, it is possible and necessary that we should always be living in the spirit of prayer.

But believers who live in this way, conscious continually of their dependence on God, conscious of his presence with them always, find that their general spirit of prayerfulness in the most natural way overflows into uttered prayer. Again and again in Paul's letters (and especially in the two letters to the Thessalonians) the apostle interjects little prayers into his argument. Prayer was as natural to Paul as breathing. At any time he was likely to break off his argument or to sum it up by a prayer. In the same way he looks for the Thessalonians to live lives with such an attitude of dependence on God that they will easily and naturally move into the words of prayer on all sorts of occasions, great and small, grave and festive. Prayer is to be constant. This does not, of course, mean that they are to spend all their time in uttering words of prayer; throughout these letters there are too many exhortations to be active in daily affairs for that to be accepted. Paul is arguing for lives lived constantly in a prayerful spirit. (pp. 173-176, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (The New International Commentary on the New Testament))

I will finish this blog post by quoting Richard Phillips about Donald Barnhouse, a great evangelical preacher, who exemplified a life of prayer. This snippet from Barnhouse's life both illustrates the teaching of both Colossians and 1st Thessalonians about prayer.

Richard Phillips
Donald Grey Barnhouse was one who set an example of combining gospel preaching with humble prayer. He often could be found in the sanctuary on Saturdays, kneeling beside each pew, thinking about the people who often sat there, and asking God to bless them with the following day's sermon.” (Jesus the Evangelist: Learning to Share the Gospel from the Book of John)