Episode Transcript
Jesus said in Matthew 28:19, go therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Welcome to go teach all nations, bringing you Christ teachings through australian and international speakers. And here is today's presenter, Pastor Ashley Smith.
And so, Father, as we expound the scriptures here this morning, we ask and pray that you may speak to us that, Father, you might use me merely as a vessel. Father, I ask and pray this without fear or favour. In Jesus name, amen.
Can I speak to you plainly this morning, church? Do you want the straight testimony today? What we're going to be looking at is we're going to be looking at a principle. And I believe that this principle is a principle that is founded in the word of God. And this principle is a principle that is key to the great controversy theme.
It's a principle that is very, very simple. I am a very simple guy. I would not consider myself intelligent.
I am a very simple guy and I try to deduce things down simply so I can understand and comprehend them. The great controversy at its core is answered by this key question. Do we take God's word as it reads, or do we take man's word? That's it, isn't it? And today, what we're going to look, this is going to be the central pillar of our study, the point that I'm going to base my whole study on do we take God's word or do we take man's word? In other words, do we take traditions or do we take truth? Now, before we jump into the essence of my message today, I'm going to take us to some people that took the truth of God's word and were willing to stand for the truth of God's word, regardless of the culture or regardless of the traditions.
The first individual is John Wycliffe. John Wycliffe was born in England in 1328. He went to Oxford and he studied.
He later taught at Oxford. He was a priest and a theologian. And as he studied God's word, he came to the realisation that often what was said by the church, the Roman Catholic Church in his time, contradicted what the word of God said.
And because of the way that he would teach and the way that he would preach, a lot of the things that he said actually got him a lot of opposition. But you got to understand, the prevailing culture of John Wycliffe's day was the church. We live in a secular society where the prevailing culture of our society today is not the church.
It would have been unimaginable for John Wycliffe to live life without the church, because the church was so integral to the fabric of society that you could not possibly imagine or conceive life to be anything but controlled and organised by the church. Whether you were born, you were christened, if you wanted to get married, it was through the church. In fact, when you died, you were buried in the church graveyard.
And actually, before you died, there was this thing called last rites. Everything centred in the fabric of the church. It was the culture or the tradition of the day.
And as he studied the word of God, he realised that there were things taught by the church that were contradicting what the word of God said. John Wycliffe is known as the morning star of the reformation. If you don't know what a morning star is, it's a bright star that shines.
Just before daybreak, John Wycliffe's writings and his life started a fire that could not be put out. He trained these people, called the poor preachers or the lollards, and they would travel around the countryside of England and they would preach the word of God. And what was the sins of John Wycliffe? That he was denounced as a heretic? Well, this is one of them.
He put the scriptures in the native tongue because you got to understand it was actually against the law to actually have the word of God in the common vernacular. And he took the Latin vulgate, which was understood by the learned, and he put it into English. Now, the Latin Vulgate is not a perfect rendition of scripture, but his conclusion was this.
If people are going to accept the faith of Christianity, they've got to understand what is the faith of Christianity. And so what he did is he armed the common people of his nation with the word of God. And there was significant opposition to this.
In fact, some people, clergymen, they said that he is taking the pearl of truth and casting it before swine. Why? Because he's giving the scriptures to the commoners. In fact, 100 or so years after his death, he was dug up and burnt and then thrown into the river swift, because he was a heretic.
Why? Because he stood for the word of God and he pushed back against traditions. Can we say amen to that church? The next character that I want to have a look at today is Jan Hus, or John Hus as you may know him. He was from Bohemia about 40 years after John Wycliffe.
Jan Hus was reading the writings of John Wycliffe, and he was a theologian too. He was actually instated as the preacher of the Bethlehem chapel in Prague. Has anyone ever been there before? If you go to the Bethlehem Chapel in Prague, you will see all these paintings of Jan hus in his life, because as he preached the word of God, he saw the traditions of the church was at variance to the word of God, and he spoke out against it.
And there was this great council that was taking place in Constance, in Germany, and he was summoned to go. And the emperor of the day, Sigismund, he promised him a safe passage, and so he loaded up his horse. I can't remember the name of the horse, but he states the name of his horse, and he travels to Constance.
As soon as he arrives, guess what happens? He's taken, and he's put under arrest, and they throw him in a loathsome dungeon. In fact, you can still see the dungeon that they placed him in. There's this great lake at Constance, and this dungeon is below the water level.
It's dank and it's dark. And they didn't feed him much, and he got very unwell. And after a number of months, they brought him out from this dungeon, and they took him to this great council before all the dignitaries of the church, and they asked him to recant.
And as he stood to speak, they would shout over the top of him so no one could hear what he had to say. They got a cap, a pyramidal cap, and they had demons on that cap, and they put it on his head. And they said that he committed heresies.
And some of the heresies that they said that he had committed were completely fabricated. They said that he said that he was the fourth person in the Godhead. He was declared a heretic.
They took him out from the council, they tied him to the stake, and they burnt him at the stake. Jan hus says, therefore, faithful christians seek the truth, listen to the truth, learn the truth, love the truth, tell the truth, defend the truth even to death. The prevailing culture of his day was the traditions of the church, but they were at variance to the word of God, and he had a decision to make.
Do we stand for the word of God, or do we uphold traditions that are contradicting the word of God? And he said, I will stand for truth. The third character I want to speak to this morning is Martin Luther. He's probably more well known, the great father of the Protestant Reformation.
This augustinian monk, this troubled soul that was wondering why the good deeds and the acts of penance wasn't actually achieving any peace for his soul. As he studied the scriptures, the word of God. He came to the realisation that the just shall live by faith.
But what really kick started all of this for Martin Luther was there was a man by the name of Tetzel. Have you heard of him before? He was an emissary from Rome that was sent to raise some money. Do you know what? He was sent to raise money for the building of St Peter's.
And do you know how they would raise money? He would go around and he would offer a thing called indulgences. You've got to understand that when the word of God does not abound, superstition abounds. And so people would go on pilgrimage in Martin Luther's day, and they would go to this church and they would go to that cathedral because there were things called holy relics.
And you would go to this church which was claiming to have some of the hair of Jesus. I am not making this up. This is what they claimed.
There was one church that said that they had some of the breast milk from Mary. I'm not making this up. And you go and visit these places, and in visiting these places and showing the homage, you receive years of purgatory.
And this man by the name of Tetzel, he was going around raising money and he was offering these things called indulgences, which means that you pay the money, you pay the money to him and you get forgiveness of sins past, present and future. You imagine how Martin Luther felt about this, studying righteousness by faith. And it was because of this that he nailed his 95 theses to the church door at Wittenberg, kickstarting the Protestant Reformation, which has fundamentally changed our world.
This is not something of little consequence, church. This fundamentally changed our world forever, because what it did is it disarmed the controlling powers of the state, because everyone looked to the king and everyone looked to the priests and the bishops, because they were the educated one. And he put the word of God in the hands of the people, that they could read the scriptures and they could discern what God required of them.
And they looked at what God required and they looked at what these pals were saying and they recognised that there was a difference. And my authority must be to God and God alone, not to the dictates of man. And this is what Martin Luther says.
He's taken to this trial, the diet of worms. It's not what you think it is. It was actually a trial.
And they asked him to recant. Deny everything that you've said and everything that you've preached. And as he stands there.
And as he tries to consider whether he can recant the things that he has said, he comes to this realisation. This is the famous statement from Luther. He says, unless I am convinced by scripture and plain reason, I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other.
This next sentence is powerful. I want you to hang off this sentence here. My conscience is captive to the word of God.
Isn't that powerful? My conscience is captive to the word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything. For to go against conscience is neither right nor safe.
Here I stand. I can do. I cannot do otherwise.
God help me. Amen. What was the common theme of the Protestant Reformation Church? It was the word of God.
It was the upholding of the word of God in the face of the traditions of men. And the challenge was simple. Like I said, I am a simple guy.
The challenge was this. Do we follow what God has said or do we follow what man has said? And this is the core, like I said before, of the great controversy, is it not, do we trust what God is saying about himself and what God is saying truth is, or do we trust Lucifer and what he is saying? And when you look at the biblical narrative, we see the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. You have Eve before that tree, and she's wondering whether what God has said is trustworthy or whether what the serpent is saying is trustworthy.
And sadly, she chooses the opinion of a created being instead of the authority of God's word. You think of the dark ages, and that same test is replicated again. And then in revelation 13, the same test, church is replicated again.
And there is a word that appears time after time in revelation 13. And you might think that I'm making a very simple, and I'm deducing this in a very simple point, but it's so simple that we can understand and grasp it. There is a word that is repeated in revelation 13, and it's not the word worship, although that is repeated time after time.
Again. There is a word that is repeated time after time in revelation 13, and that word is authority. It's the authority of the beast.
It's the dragon who gives him authority. It's the authority that's given to the lamb like beast. This is not a God given authority.
This is a created being, Lucifer, giving authority to a power that is speaking as if he is speaking on behalf of God. At the heart of the great controversy is this being Lucifer, who thought that he could be like the most high and from them all the way up to now, the same test has gone forward. Do we trust what God says, or do we trust what this being says? Do we trust truth or do we trust tradition? These men that I've just shared with you and I could have shared a number of others.
William Tyndale Zwinkley Calvin. I mean, I could have shared a number with you. But the core.
The core fabric in all of them is the fact that they were willing to stand for truth. Irrespective of what their culture was. I want to invite you to open your words with me to the book of Mark.
The Gospel of Mark. Mark, chapter seven. And we're going to see that their stance is no different to the stance of Jesus Christ.
In Mark, chapter seven and verse one. I want you to know something here this morning. That Jesus didn't do something just because it was jewish.
Jesus often pushed against jewish UndeRstanDing. Jesus did things because they were sanctioned by the word of God. And a number of times in the GosPel, you actually see him pushing it back against the traditions.
And the false Scaffolding that the jewish leaders had erected around scripture. And a prime example that you can find is the SabBAth. How often do you see Jesus butting heads with the Pharisees about the SabbatH? It's because they had a false understanding what SabbatH was.
And tradition was elevated above the word of God. And in exposing the tradition or in revealing the truth, he exposed their traditions. And Jesus was willing to point these things out.
And in Mark, chapter seven, we see Jesus dealing with traditions. In verse one, it reads this. Then the Pharisees and some of the scribes came together to him having come from Jerusalem.
So you know that jesus is in trouble when he's teaching in GalIlEE. And all the religious leaders are coming up from Jerusalem. You know that the game's on.
That they're coming to trap him. Verse two. Now, when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is, with unwashed hands, they found fault.
Now, you've got to understand that the disciples are not washing hands. That's not for hygienic purposes. It was ritualistic.
Okay? It's good to wash your hands before you eat. It's good to wash your hands after you go to the bathroom. Jesus isn't talking about hygiene here.
He's talking about ritual. Okay. In verse three, for the Pharisees.
And how many of the Jews church. In verse three of Mark chapter seven, all. How many? All the Jews.
Would you say that this was the prevailing culture of the day? Would you say that these traditions were the prevailing culture. The thing is, you could use the word culture, and you can use the word tradition synonymously. Jesus is dealing with a culture here that was consistent with his day.
All the Jews, as taught by the Pharisees and the elders, did this not because it was sanctioned in scripture, but because it was the traditions of men. Look how Jesus deals with this. They do not wash, they do not eat.
Sorry. Unless they wash their hands in a special way, holding the tradition of the elders. You notice that doesn't say the word of God.
The tradition of the elders, when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other things which they have received in whole, like the washings of cups, pitchers, copper vessels and couches. Now, I want to ask you a question before we go any further in the text here.
Are traditions bad just because they're traditions? No, they are good traditions. Paul, throughout the New Testament actually says, remember the traditions that I have told you. Remember the traditions that I have taught you.
But where does the issue come? Well, the issue comes when those traditions contradict the word of God and not just contradict the word of God church, when those traditions are elevated above the word of God, because there's nothing here about washing that contradicts the word of God. But the issue here that Jesus finds is that they have elevated this tradition above the word of God. And they asked the question to Jesus.
And the Pharisees and scribes asked, why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands? And this is Jesus response here. And I want you to listen to what he has to say. He answered and said to them, well, did Isaiah prophesy of you, hypocrites, as it is written, this people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
And in vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men. When you overemphasise tradition, when you uphold culture that is at variance to the word of God, you worship God in vain, because you are upholding the traditions of men. And you're going to see the point that I'm going to get here soon.
Jesus continues in verse eight. For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things as you do. Verse nine.
He said to them all too well, you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. Then jump down to verse 13. You see another example where Jesus exposes traditions that are at variance to the word of God.
But you come down to verse 13 and he says this. He says, making the word of God of no effect through your tradition, which you have handed down. What tradition will inevitably do is it makes the word of God of no effect.
Why was the dark ages the dark ages? Because tradition was elevated above scripture and the word of God became of no effect three times. In this passage, Jesus highlights how man's ideas, how man's traditions and how man's laws are at odds with gods. And you know that he's serious in this because he says, if you are upholding these traditions, then your worship to me is in vain.
But yet the Pharisees were the Pharisees, they were the righteous ones. And their pharisaical posture appeared to be able to bypass the commandments of God while appearing to be virtuous at the same time. It's an ancient form of virtue signalling, isn't it? Look how holy and righteous we are.
All the Jews do this. It doesn't have any basis in the word of God. But look at us.
We're doing what's required. But little do they realise that they're actually doing God a disservice and themselves a disservice, because they're denying God and worshipping him in vain. And today people will appease others by saying, look at what I am doing.
I appear virtuous. I believe what you believe. I teach what you teach.
Love. Love. This is a pharisaical position, because it is serving man, not God.
If you are upholding cultures and traditions that are variants to the word of God, you are pleasing men and not God. Is that correct? It is a pharisaical position. It is, in fact, a legalistic position, because at the heart of legalism is appealing to the carnal heart of man.
And this is what the Pharisees did. But yet we can deceive ourselves to think that we are better than what we are, because at least we are the loving ones. And I'm going to get to this whole idea of love a little bit later.
The test of where the heart stands with God is the evidence of a life that is following what he has said. I want to say that again. The evidence of where, or the test of where the heart stands with God is the evidence of a life that is following.
You can say all you want about loving God, but it means nothing unless you follow him. I'll show you a verse. Paul says, they profess to know him, but in works they deny him being an abominable disobedient.
And disqualified for every good work. Words are cheap. They truly are.
I can say all I want. I can sing the songs, I can pray the prayers, I can have the posture, but words mean nothing unless they're backed up with action. And this is what Jesus butting heads against.
So I want to pitch a question to you guys here this morning, and I want to get your response from this question. Do you agree here this morning that traditions that contradict the word of God are bad? If you believe the traditions that contradict the word of God are bad, raise your hand nice and high so I can see there are some people who believe. Everyone that believes that, raise your hand nice and high because I'm going to hold you to this.
Okay? Now I'm a witness, and everyone else's witnesses that we believe in this room, that traditions that contradict the word of God are bad. That's the argument of my message here today. Let's see where that argument goes.
Jesus was offensive, was he not? Was Jesus offensive? The things that he said were quite offensive. I'll give you an example. In John chapter six, he says, eat my flesh, drink my blood.
In John 666, it says that many turned away and stopped following him. Because for Jesus, success wasn't numbers, success was salvation. And the problem is, if we as a church begin to interpret success as numbers, that's not a biblical definition of success.
What matters to God more than numbers is the faithfulness of those who serve him. Because I tell you, when you look at the world, who has the numbers, who can have the claim for supremacy? Or Satan? But Jesus says, wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction. And guess what? He says after that, many, many find that way.
But straight is the gate and narrow is the way that leads into life. And what this world does not understand, it thinks that it's living in the most liberating way. But what it doesn't realise, it's on a no through road.
There's a dead end at the end of this road. And they see christians and they think that christians are restricted, they're not living the best life, when in all reality they truly are. Because life is found in knowing Jesus and the joy that he brings.
They see that as a restricted life, as a narrow way. But what they don't realise is at the end of that life, it opens up into everlasting life. Jesus was offensive in the things that he says.
In fact, if we have a look at what the gospel says, not the gospel in Romans, there is an Old Testament passage that is used seven times concerning Jesus in his ministry. In fact, it is used in three of the gospels where jesus speaks of his own ministry. It is one of the most quoted Old Testament verses in the New Testament.
It is this one that we are about to read here. And what does it say about Jesus as it is written? Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and a rock of. A rock of offence.
And whoever believes on him will not be put to shame. Would it be fair to say here this morning that Jesus was a rock of offence, that Jesus ministry was offensive to some? Absolutely. And is Jesus message any different to our message? Come on now.
Is it any different to our message? And so if people are offended by the christian message, this is par for the course, because they were offended about his message. And irrespective of what offence is or what the offence might be with what we preach and preach, we have an authority in the authority is the word of God, God, not the opinions of other people. In fact, Peter brings this theme out and he says this, and he goes even deeper into this.
He says, therefore, it is also contained in scripture. What is the authority of Peter? The authority is scripture. When Paul wrote in Romans, he says, it is written.
That is the authority upon which we stand. It is scripture. Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God.
Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect precious. And he who believes on him will by no means be put to shame. Talking of Jesus, therefore, to you who believe he is precious, but to those who are disobedient.
Now, this is an interesting point. Those who are offended are those who are disobedient or disobedient to what? Disobedient to the word offence comes about to those who are disobedient to what the scripture teaches. Does that make sense? This gets even deeper as we continue.
The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. And a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence. They stumble.
Listen to this. They stumble being disobedient to the word to which they were also appointed. Offence comes because people will not be obedient to what God has said.
They will not align their lives to what God's word says. The issue is this. The Bible says that we are to bring every thought into captivity to Christ.
Every thought should be subject to the word of God. The problem with our society today is they try to take the word of God and make it subject to their thoughts. That's not how this works.
They are disobedient to the word of God. And because they are disobedient, they stumble. Culture changes, society changes, values change.
But God's word does not change. We do not change our message because of the culture. It is the preaching of the message that changes the culture.
The answer, church. And before you think that I'm talking about politics here, the answer is not politics. The answer is not placards on the corner of the streets saying offensive things.
The solution is the preaching of the word of God. It always has been and it always will be. We must never, ever, ever apologise for what the word says.
Never. Whether that comes to sexuality and what the Bible says regarding sexuality, we must never apologise for what the word says. In the book of Genesis, God made men, male and female, in the image of God.
He made them in the gospel of Mark, Jesus himself, that rock of offence, what does he say? He says a man shall leave his mother and father and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This is the biblical ideal of sexuality. We should not apologise for it.
We should not apologise for what scripture says about the sanctity of life, that we all have intrinsic value because we're made in the image of God. And whether you're inside the womb or outside the womb, you have intrinsic value because God formed you in the womb. We should not apologise for what scripture says or seek to reinterpret what scripture says.
Because if we're seeking to reinterpret what scripture says, we are upholding traditions to the expense of God's word and in vain we worship him. You see where we're going with this? Because the culture in Martin Luther's day was the Roman Catholic Church. The culture in Jesus day was the jewish thoughts and traditions.
What is the culture in our day? Well, it's not religious. It's secular. And these things are seeping into Christianity.
And I will also say they are seeping into adventism. If we will not stand up for what the word says with these things, then we will fall for anything. Can you imagine the early church in the upper room gathering together and having this conversation? Is it okay? Can I keep pressing? If you said no, I was going to do it anyways.
And they asked the question. So Peter, James, John. The greco roman world is very, very different to our understanding.
Maybe we should just tone down some of the things that we preach. Is that what they did? Like, let's just tone down some of the things that we say. So they like us, they accept us? Is that what they did? No, they preached the word.
They were stoned, they were crucified, they were speared and they were burnt. But they said, we must preach the word of God. And you might say, well, they preach Jesus.
Yes, they preach Jesus, but they went into these superstitious places, they had this pantheon of different deities and they went into these places and said, there is no other God but the God Jesus Christ. And they chased them out of the city and they stoned them outside the city. They preached Jesus.
But when you preach the message of Jesus, it is countercultural and something's gotta give. The reason that we ended up with the dark ages is because Christianity wanted to be what the world was. There was no marked difference.
And Christianity is rapidly undoing the reformation. Why? Because it is compromising on truth. And there's various things here at the end of the day.
The Protestant Reformation was founded on this principle, sola scriptura, the word of God alone. If the word of God is not our foundation, then we will stand for anything, which means we will fall for everything. Do you believe that church? And this is what we see in the early church, in fact, 250 years after the apostles, we have this thing called the Council of Nicaea.
And think what you will about the council of Nicaea. This is the point I want to make. It's the first time in christian history since the apostles, where all the christian leaders from around the empire were able to assemble, because Christianity was now legalised.
A historian who writes on this event, who spoke to the witnesses at that council, do you know what he says about that council? He calls it an assembly of martyrs. These leaders of the christian church around the empire, they turned up with limbs missing, eyes missing, bodies burnt. Why? Because they preached the word and they didn't care what culture thought.
They preached the word of God and they stood for it. Christianity that doesn't stand for truth is a Christianity that dies. But God always has a people who will stand for truth.
They endured the greatest persecution that the world has ever seen. This is some ancient graffiti? Yes, the ancients graffiti as well. This is from the first century.
And you can see on the left hand side here, this is the graffiti on the right hand side. It's sketched out so you can actually see what's happening in this graffiti. This was discovered a number of years ago.
And the wording underneath this picture is Alexa. Manos worships his God. Now, what do you notice about the picture? See, the guy is raising his hand in worship towards his God.
What do you notice about his God? What you notice is his God's hanging on a cross, don't you? Arms out like this. But what do you notice about the head of his God? It's donkey. It's an ass.
What do you notice about that? This was the perspective of the first century towards christians and their belief. Did you know that there was more, there was far more opposition against christians in the first century than what there are for christians living in the western world today? Because there were very real consequences for preaching the message of Jesus. It was not highly esteemed.
It was ridiculed. You were talking and preaching about a saviour that couldn't even deliver himself on a cross. He's a criminal, but yet he's your saviour.
He's your God. And there are no other gods. In fact, the ancients looked at Christianity and they're like, these guys are atheists.
And they said that they were atheists because they denied all the other gods and believed in the one true God. They called them atheists. Some of the first and truest atheists in the world are christians.
In fact, this is what Paul has to say about this. For the Jews request to sign and Greek seek after wisdom. But we preach Christ crucified irrespective of what the culture thinks and what the culture believes.
We preach the message regardless. And he says, to the Jews, it is a stumbling block. In the Greek it means it's a scandal.
The message of the cross was a scandal to the Jews and to the Greeks, it is foolishness. They cannot reconcile it with their culture. But this is what he says.
But to those who are called by Jews and Greeks Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God. For those who are being saved, the gospel is the power of God. The things of God don't make sense to the world.
They just don't. But for those who are being saved and quickened by the spirit, you wouldn't have it any other way, would you? And we preach it nonetheless. Can you imagine the early church, I might get in trouble for this one.
Can you imagine the early church calling Paul into the headquarters saying, paul in Galatians chapter five. You speak of the works of the flesh. Not very nice.
Just ease up a little bit on what the Bible, what you have to say about drunkenness and idolatry. We're getting a little bit of kickback here. You imagine them calling him in to Romans chapter one.
Hey, Paul, you're a little bit strong here on homosexuality. Just tame it back a little bit that we might be liked. Do you reckon that's what they did.
No, because their theology was not determined by the culture they preached. What the word said. Truth is an obligation towards God.
Tradition is an obligation towards men. We all have a choice in this life. Will we serve God or will we serve man? That is as simple as it is.
Will you serve God, or will you be more concerned about the perceptions that people have about you? Often we think that if I was in the days of Martin Luther or Jesus, I would have been in the front line championing the cause. But the question is, would you really? Because in today's day and age, are you front and centre championing the cause and being that moral voice to a society that has lost its bearings on God. Because if we aren't now, then we never would.
Then it is so easy to go with the current because we don't want pushback. And then when someone starts to speak up, and someone starts to speak up, and there's a bit of a group speaking up, we'll happily rally to the cause, and we see a group. But you imagine Martin Luther, John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, you imagine them stepping out into that void, not knowing where it was going to take them, but their conscience was bound by the word of God.
And they're like, we will do this not because it is the most convenient path, but because it is the most righteous path. That's character. And God is calling for a people who will stand up today that will share the straight testimony.
That is not the most. That is not the obnoxious testimony. That is not the angry testimony.
That is not the intentionally trying to disrupt testimony. That is just preaching what the word of God says. And the carnal heart, which is at enmity with God, does not like that message.
And it will push against that message. People today are offended of the word, and they seek to reinterpret scripture to suit the culture. And I have heard this many times.
They will use the verse in one John, chapter four, that says, God is love. And they will use this passage as a verse to communicate that we ought to be loving, which we should. And I wholeheartedly agree with that passage.
God is love. But this is the problem. Often what people do with this verse is they take a human understanding of love, and they impose that on the text, and then they see the rest of scripture through this human understanding of love, which means that you can arrive at a very, very different destination when you allow the Bible to interpret what love truly is.
That's the proper hermeneutic. You don't start with a subjective human standard, and then see the rest of scripture through this human understanding of love. You come to the word of God and you ask the question, how does scripture define love? And if everything in scripture is a revelation of God's love, then therefore this must be what love is.
And it may not be what I like, and it may not be what I desire, but my authority is the word of God. And if this is what revelation says, that this is what revelation says, does that make sense, church? The problem is this. If we conclude what we think love should be, instead of consulting what scripture says love is, and we say love is love, then based upon us or society, we impose upon God a nature that is fundamentally different to who he is.
And we worship a God of our own image, which means that we are worshipping a God of our own imagination. We, in essence, worship a Jesus that never existed. But we say, this is the Jesus of scripture.
Do you think the Jesus of the Dark Ages was very different to the Jesus in scripture? Oh, you better believe it. Why was he different? Because this Jesus was guided by the traditions of the day. If we are looking at the traditions of the culture of the day and trying to figure out a Jesus that fits with that culture, then we will arrive at a very different Jesus, a Jesus that never existed.
We are worshipping a God of our own imagination, and I am an atheist. To that God. There is one God that I serve, and he is the God that is revealed in the word.
Love is defined by scripture, not culture, tradition. And if this picture does not fit our paradigm, then we have a wrong understanding of love. You imagine the ancient Israelites as they are about to enter the promised land.
I'm winding up here as they're about to enter into the promised land, and all the grotesque practises are the Canaanites, and we won't get into the details of them. Do you think it would have been the loving thing or do you think it would have been an unloving thing for them to point out those grotesque practises and say that they were wrong? Loving or unloving because some of these practises concern children? Would it have been loving to tell them that what they're doing is not only degrading them and others, but it's actually destroying their very fabric and morality? Do you think that would have been the loving thing? Sad thing is, when you consider the history of the Israelites, is the moment that they began sympathising with the cultures around them. They inevitably became them.
This is serious. Do you think it's possible for us as a church to begin sympathising with the cultures around us and inevitably become the culture ourselves church. This is an important message.
This is a message that I have no satisfaction in giving. But it is a message that I feel compelled to give because I love my church. And I realise that compromises here will lead to compromises later.
If our authority, if your authority is not the word of God, and what thus saith the Lord clearly states, then you are building your life upon a shifting foundation. A foundation of sand. It's the word of God.
And it's not how the word of God makes you feel, that's what it says. Because at the end of the day, it's not about you and how you feel. Because the carnal heart is an entity with God.
And we can't trust our heart, can we? So why would we ever trust its understanding of what love is? That's why we need an objective standard of righteousness. You see, the children of Israel, they establish idols for the canaanite deities because they wanted to be like them, and they engaged in idolatry. And Christians today, sadly, I've been guilty of this at time.
I've created a God in my mind and I preach to God often. Well, not often. I correct that.
I recant that position sometimes. I have shared a God that is more palatable to the modern understanding than one that is scripturally revealed. That's idolatry.
The calling of a Christian is not to be liked. It's also the calling of a Christian is not to be obnoxious either. But the calling of a Christian is to be a witness, which means you testify.
And that means that the things that you often testify to are going to meet some pushback. But you testify nonetheless. In one corinthians chapter 13 and verse six, this is your definition of love.
Church. It's not anything goes, but love is found in something. Love is synonymous with something.
And in one corinthians 13, this is a verse that's often read at weddings. Mish, was it read at your wedding? Okay, Kelly, was it read at your wedding? Just say yes, because it makes my point. So it's usually a verse that's read at weddings.
Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud, it is not rude.
We know that at the end of this, in verse six, it says love. It does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. If you want a biblical definition of love, it does not rejoice in wrongdoing.
It does not rejoice in error. It rejoices in truth. Love is truth.
Truth is love. What the Bible has revealed is truth. Therefore, what the Bible has revealed is love.
Does that make sense? Like I said, I'm a simple guy, and I want you to know that love is always on the side of truth. But that may not necessarily appear at the time to be the most loving thing. The most loving thing often is if I agree with you.
But in fact, that's the most unloving thing to do. The most loving thing is to share what is true. When my kids are playing on the road, do you think I let them do what's only going to hurt them? I would be considered a very unloving parent.
If we see the truth, if we know the lie, don't you think the obligation is with us to share that? Actually, the most anti love thing to do would be to agree with somebody when their understanding and their perspective is at variance to the word of God. And like I said, it doesn't mean that we become unloving. It doesn't mean that we treat people with disrespect, and it doesn't mean that we're obnoxious.
But it means that we stand for something because the world is desiring to see something from Christianity. I've said a lot, maybe too much in the book of Matthew. I'll close with this thought.
Matthew, chapter seven. Jesus finishes his sermon on the mount with this thought. Matthew 724.
He says, therefore, whoever hears these sayings of mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock. But everyone who hears these sayings of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand.
And the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house. And it fell, and great was its fall. Jesus shares this parable, this story here to believers.
And he says that there are two believers in this story, the wise man and the foolish man. There is a characteristic that is consistent with both the wise man and the foolish man. Do you want to know what that characteristic is? Besides the fact that they're building something? They both hear the word of God.
Did you see that in the text? The wise man hears, the foolish man hears. But what is the contrast? What is the difference? The wise man hears and does the foolish man hears and does not do. We see what scripture says? Church and our carnal hearts rebel against it.
We are like the foolish man, but is building his house upon the sand. Why? Because we are building upon a foundation that does not exist. We are worshipping a Jesus that never existed.
For Martin Luther, for Hus, for all these guys, their culture was the tradition of the day, and it was the traditions of the church. Culture and tradition synonymous in Jesus day. It was the traditions of the religious leaders passed down from generation to generation to generation.
They were exalted above the word of God. And Jesus had issue to that in today's society. Or there is a lot of culture in today's society that the church would do well to steer clear of, to not reinterpret our understanding on various things.
So we are palatable to the society around us, but we are a voice in the wilderness, making straight the way of the Lord. The great controversy boils down to this simple question. Is your authority God's word? Or is it man's word? Remember you said to me at the beginning of the study here this morning that any tradition that exalts itself above or contradicts God's word is bad.
May you live your life like that, not just in profession, but in action. And I say this today because I want to be a faithful shepherd. I feel compelled to do so.
Not because I've observed anything with you, but I've observed a lot of stuff in culture. I want to read to you something that I believe to be prophetic. That's what Ellen White says, and she's talking here of the shaking.
I'm going to talk about that as I close. But she says this, and it pulls everything that we've looked at this morning together. The time is not far distant when the test will come to every soul.
The mark of the beast will be urged upon us. Those who have step by step yielded to worldly demands and conform to worldly customs will not find it a hard matter to yield to the powers that be. Isn't that interesting? That's exactly what we just said, isn't it? Rather than subject themselves to derision, insult, threatened, imprisonment and death, and this is the sentence here, the contest is between the commandments of God and the commandments of men.
You see that? The word of God or the word of man, that's the great controversy. It started in heaven. Satan brought it down to the garden even.
It's been continuing every generation from then onwards. And it will culminate in the end, except the contentious issue. In the end, it still remains the word of God and the authority of God.
But it's man's day or it's God's day. So I want you to choose your authority today. Who will you choose? As for me, in my house, we will serve the Lord.
And may your prayer today be my prayer. Be Martin Luther's prayer that at the diet of worms, where he stood up before the prelates, the emperor, the dignitaries, alone in the eyes of man, but on the side of righteousness and truth, he stood with angels and God himself. And he said, my conscience is captive to the word of God.
Today. May our conscience be bound by the word of God. Let's pray.
Father, in heaven, we are living in strange times. But, Father, may we not let up or give up. May we preach the message that you have given to us to preach.
And may we never believe that your message is anything but a message of love. Father, may you give us boldness and courage and the grace and the meekness of Jesus. Father, may we be a voice in the wilderness.
May our voice, Father, be captive to your word. And may your word be our authority. Nothing more, nothing less.
May we buck against the culture and traditions of the day. And father, may we seek the land in which righteousness dwells forevermore. May we be faithful to the commission that you have given us.
And, father, may we not desire to be liked. May we desire to be witnesses, true and faithful servants. Because at the end, truth does win.
It always does. Father, may we choose in our lives to side with the side of righteousness and truth. We ask and pray this Lord in Jesus name.
This message was made available by the Murwillumbah Seventh-day Adventist Church. For more resources like this, visit their facebook page. Murwillumbah Seventh-day Adventist Church. Tthis programme has been brought to you by 3ABN Australia radio.
