Saved Just as They will be
Mission: Unstoppable • Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 3 viewsDuring the first missionary Journey of Paul, there were a group of people following him as he went from city to city called Judaizers. They would preach behind Paul saying that a person had to be circumcised in order to be "completely" saved. The Apostles met in Jerusalem to discuss this issue and after a heated discussion, they came to the agreement that it was grace along (Sola Gratia) through faith alone (Sola Fide) in Jesus Christ that saved a person. Today we must battle many forms of legalism and get back to what really matters and that is the truth of the one and only gospel of Jesus Christ.
Notes
Transcript
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
Introduction:
I think most all of us agree that we, as Christians, are saved by God’s grace alone by faith in Jesus Christ and His atonement and nothing else. That is the basic tenet of Christianity. Many of us may divert at our process of sanctification though. What is sanctification? Sanctification is defined as, “the state of growing in divine grace as a result of Christian commitment after baptism or conversion.” To put it in more simple terms, it is a process of being conformed to the image of God set out for us in accordance with scripture.
In Moses’ time all the way up to the time that Jesus came, there was no way to be considered justified before God. Being justified is a state of being declared righteous in God’s eyes, yet the law of Moses provided a way of practices to be sanctified by people. That included duties as prescribed under Levitical law (sacrifices, observing the feasts, and the biggest evidence circumcision.)
From this law, there came two camps, the Pharisees and Sadducees. The only difference between these two groups was the Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead and the Sadducees did not. They were basically Jewish lawyers all of them. As an example, the commandment that says, “remember the Sabbath and keep it holy” bred many rules regarding what constituted “work” on the Sabbath. They did this in order to keep people from “breaking” the Mosaic Law. I wonder if this has ever happened in the modern (New Testament era) church. I wonder if we have ever prescribed that certain activities were seen as particularly “unholy” in an effort to “abstain from all appearances of evil” (cf. ).
Background:
The early church faced a similar issue within its ranks. As the church spread from the Jews to the Gentiles, a dissension arose (like that NEVER happens in a church body). What happened was, there was a group of Jews (called Judaizers) that preached in order for a person to be truly saved, they had to be circumcised in order to “prove” they were a believer and become a Jew. This was a carryover from what proselytes had to do upon their conversion to Judaism. If you remember, there were three groups of people outside if Jewish culture. (1) You had the average Gentile - these people were seen as completely and totally unworthy. The Jews believed THEY were God’s chose people and only they could go to heaven, (2) then you have the God-fearer - this was a Gentile that openly believed in the one, true God and participated in all of the feasts and adhered to Levitical standards (including dietary laws and sacrifices, and (3) there were proselytes - these were people that became culturally Jewish. They were the ones that completely and totally converted to Judaism and signified it by becoming circumcised.
This carried over into the early church. The Judaizers would go behind the apostles (mainly Paul) and tell the new believers, “It’s good that you have placed your faith in Jesus Christ, now prove that you are truly saved by being circumcised so that God will fully accept you.
This confusion for the new believers (and the leaders of the early church) warranted a business meeting to discuss the implications of what the Judaizers were teaching, and in Acts chapter 15, we read the events of that meeting, and the decision the leaders came to as a result of that meeting:
And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”
After what we can only assume is a pretty heated debate among the church leaders, Peter comes to a decision, and this is the focus of our discussion this morning. What Peter decides, is that God save all people in the same manner, and He makes no distinction on HOW He saves people, and because of that decision by the early leaders, we take this point home: because God saves all people the same way, we are to receive those who trust in Him without imposing our personal preferences on them.
The issue at hand (vv. 1-5):
Legalism, if left unchecked, can cause division.
Legalism, if left unchecked, can cause division.
The issue that was brought before the leadership was whether or not people had to be circumcised in order to be a Christian. We read in verses 1 that there were a group of people that went about saying, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” This brought on quite a heated debate with these guys and Paul and Barnabas, and because of this, Paul and Barnabas decided to take it up collectively with the rest of the living apostles. The meeting convenes and we read in verse 5 that the contending party was none other than the Pharisees (but thanks be to God because some Pharisees got saved). The Pharisees will contend to the council that it was “necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.”
Ultimate what this discussion boiled down to was that there was a group of men that were having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that they were no longer at the top of the religious food chain. They had been so accustomed to telling people they were wrong and breaking the law that they had a difficult grasping that things had changed, and much of the ceremonial law no longer applied.
It is often difficult to come up with a standard definition for legalism, but one author defines legalism as, “behavior motivated by the false notion that sinners can earn favor with God, either before or after salvation through legal means.” (Don Kistler, “Introduction: What Legalism Is, What Legalism Does,” p. 2.) Legalism can take many forms. Many times it takes the form of unwritten rules that we ascribe to certain “Christian behaviors” that we often claim is evidence of a true salvation, and we justify our beliefs as being “fruit inspectors.” The bottom line on this is scripture is very clear that we are all sinners and we all fall short of God’s glory and expectations no matter how mature of a Christian we are (cf. ). Every one of us here this morning, are at a different place spiritually. We cannot impose extra-biblical requirements on anyone just because we adhere to a certain set of standards.
Peter’s Presentation (vv. 6-12):
Everyone is saved by God in the same manner.
Everyone is saved by God in the same manner.
This was not a short business meeting by any stretch of the imagination. There was quite a bit of debating going on (cf. v. 7). After an extended debate, Peter stands up and addresses the group by saying, that God gave the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles just as He gave the Holy Spirit to the Jewish believers. Peter makes it a point to say in verse nine that God “made no distinction between us and them.” This is important to understand in light of the Jewish mentality toward Gentiles. If a Jew could rank people according to their cultural background, they would rank them as Jews being on top because THEY were God’s chosen people, then you have the half-breed Samaritans, and below them, they would have listed Gentiles. They saw Gentiles as dogs, and not the pet that you have that is loyal, but the dastardly dog that would steal the food off your plate if you weren’t looking.
Peter then goes on to say in verse ten, that the group was basically testing God’s patience by placing a yoke (which is representative of a heavy, controlling burden) around the neck of the new Christians and he recognizes the fact that even them, as Jews could not even stand up to that load. He then closes his argument out by saying that salvation comes to all people in the same way regardless of their background, and that basically stopped the discussion and the council hears from Barnabas and Saul regarding the work they had done among the Gentiles, and here is where more likely, Paul introduces Titus to the group as a Gentile that had no need to prove his conversion by becoming circumcised because of his active participation in Paul’s ministry.
The gospel is available to all people regardless of their cultural or social background. We cannot stereotype people and think they will never achieve salvation because of where they come from or where they are at socially. Just because someone has gone to church every Sunday for the last 40 years does not make them a “more saved” Christian than someone who only attends two or three times a month. Salvation happens at the foot of the cross and it is there that all barriers are removed. There is no one better than another under the blood of Jesus Christ. Grace is grace and it is free for every person that accepts it.
The concept of grace is God’s unmerited favor. Unmerited because we do not deserve salvation. Favor because God loves us and desires us in His presence eternally. God chose to give us that gift in spite of our shortcomings and sinful nature and all we have to do is accept it through Jesus Christ.
James’ response in agreement (vv. 13-21):
Do not let tradition trump scripture.
Do not let tradition trump scripture.
After Peter finishes his analysis of the situation, James speaks up in agreement with Peter and quotes and pull from scripture the promise that God made to make an allowance for even Gentiles to come to knowledge and fellowship with Him. He closes out his agreement in verse nineteen by saying they should no longer trouble the Gentile who turn to God, but rather accept them. He doesn add a caveat to his statement by saying they should write a response and add four things to this that aren’t considered “requirements” of salvation, but more of a way to bridge the cultural gap. He address food sacrificed to idols, sexual immorality, eating strangled animals and handling blood.
When we look at what James suggest writing to them, we see one item that is explicitly spoke of in scripture and that is sexual immorality. The other three were Jewish customs, and the reasoning behind that was because those were things that could possibly become a stumbling block for those of a Jewish background.
In the life of the church, we have tended to focus on things that are more traditional rather than scriptural. We have focused on things that are more preferential rather than things that build others up. Paul was very explicit about things of this nature when he addressed the church at Corinth in 1 Corinthians chapter 8. Here he addresses the issue specifically of meat that had been sacrificed to idols. He said “an idol has no real existence,” and for the believer it really doesn’t make a difference what you eat, but he advised believers to “take care that this right does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.”
So the question we must all ask ourselves this morning, does my personal preferences become a stumbling block for others, especially new believers or other members? Sometimes, there are concessions that we must make when it comes to traditions that we have inside a church that are extra-biblical especially when there is no scriptural foundation to those traditions or habits.
The council’s final decision (vv. 23-25):
Encourage others by explaining traditions.
Encourage others by explaining traditions.
The council makes their final decision as a group and they send the letter off to the other churches that had experienced this spiritual confusion in order to set the record straight and encourage the Gentile believers in their faith. The content of the letter was basically the same as what the council had just discussed and what James had added. Verse 31 says, “they rejoiced because of its encouragement.” We also read that Judas and Silas encouraged them while they were there, and I imagine they spent some time explaining what circumcision was and meant for the Jewish people. I also suspect they spent some time discussing why they were asked to steer clear of meats that were sacrificed to idols and food that were not prepared in accordance with the law.
When we face a spiritual confusion, it becomes disheartening. Especially when something doesn’t always add up in our mind. When we place tradition over scripture, we can cause more discouragement that you can possibly imagine. Especially for a new believer and a younger Christian. Those that are more mature Christians, I would encourage you today to look at what traditions we as a church have adhered to and examine them in light of scripture and determine what traditions we could easily do away with. There are some very valid traditions, but other traditions become preferential driven, and when we place extra-biblical requirements on others because we have always done it a particular way, we run the risk of placing believers under an undue burden.
Conclusion:
How adamant are you about traditions? DO you know the source of those traditions? Do you even know if those traditions are scriptural and why you celebrate those traditions? Or is it just something you have always done and expect others to feel the same way you do? Perhaps you spend time being angry because the younger generations don’t do things the way we have always done them.
We must always stop and ask ourselves if what we believe as truth is really truth or extra-biblical tradition. There are some traditions that are blatantly contrary to scripture. Just because there is nothing scriptural about a certain tradition doesn’t make it a bad thing, we just must be very careful not to let it get in the way of our core beliefs, and we must take care not to make it a standard to determine someone’s salvation experience.
I want to close with this point: Traditional Southern Baptists have opposed drinking alcohol. This belief arose from the temperance movement in the late 19th to early 20th century and more than likely saw its height in the 20s during the prohibition era. While the premise of not over-indulging is very honorable, and the lack of self-control within a person is clearly contrary to scripture, just because someone drinks an alcoholic beverage doesn’t mean they are actively sinning. We can twist our arguments however we want and find all kinds of “scriptural” discussions on why drinking alcohol is bad. We now have a clash of generations that argue over this very issue. we have a group that says one or two drinks is not a bad thing and another group that says any alcohol is sinful. Ultimately, there is no scriptural guidance for or against drinking alcohol, and if we are not careful, we can take past teachings and equate them with scripture and say, “the Bible says” because that is what we were taught. While over-indulgence is a bad thing, we have help form the Holy Spirit. One of the categories of the fruit of the spirit is self-control, and when we align ourselves up with the mind of God through study of scripture and prayer, we can be assured that we can exercise some self-control in areas that may seem “questionable.”
We must take care, however, not to let our personal preferences become an issue for someone else. There are points we can disagree on and I believe drinking alcohol is one of them. There are some that may disagree with me on this, and that is fine. I respect that, but we cannot impose our beliefs like that on others claiming that it is evidence of salvation if we stay away from alcohol. Then we have become a legalist in that aspect and run the risk of becoming a hindrance to someone else’s spiritual growth, and the opposite id just as true, if something you believe is ok to partake of, take care not to force that particular point of view on other, because you run the risk of being a stumbling block for others.