Sunday sermon 2-24-19
My heart is inditing a good matter: I speak of the things which I have made touching the king: my tongue is the pen of a ready writer.
Jeremiah 17:1 The sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron, and with the point of a diamond: it is graven upon the table of their heart, and upon the horns of your altars;
Sunday sermon videos made 2-17-19
.Bishop Mulvey and the interesting prayer
.The sign of the ‘pen’
.Jeremiah 45- a message in itself
.Prophets- true and false
.The remnant principle
.North Bergen- White Castle and the paintings
.The parable of the trees [or bushes- plants]
.Don’t be ‘careful’ in the time of drought
.But be faithful even in the storm
.The historical truth of the Resurrection- a brief apologetic [defense]
.Karl Barth- Kant- Gnostics- Docetists
.A lesson from the morning glories and the bamboo [seen at the end of the video]
.Fruit that remains is the goal
.The nature of local church
.Look at Jesus and the disciples in the gospels
.The 501 c3 question
.See the corporate seal [on this video]
.Buildings? 501 c3? only if you really need it to accomplish mission
.Often times it’s simply a hindrance to the work
Jeremiah 17:7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is.Jeremiah 17:8 For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.
Cloud links- https://ccoutreach87.com/cloud-links-12-2018/
Youtube Playlist- https://ccoutreach87.com/youtube-playlist/
[Links to all my sites at the bottom of this post]
NOTE- Every so often some of my sites think I am Spam- or a Bot- I am not. My name is John Chiarello and I post original content [all videos and text are by me]. I do share my past posts from my other sites- but it is not spam- Thank you- John.
Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
[Other videos below]
All this is come upon us; yet have we not forgotten thee, neither have we dealt falsely in thy covenant.
OTHER VIDEOS [These are the videos I upload nightly to my various sites- PAST POSTS below]
Acts 3 https://youtu.be/Zdx2ZP4VqOo
Kings 13 https://youtu.be/twt47Xhpa84
9-23-18 Sunday sermon https://dai.ly/x722izl
Samuel 15 https://flic.kr/p/2eLosr3
10-14-18 Sunday sermon https://youtu.be/fH2oqS0H7aw
Teaching with homeless friend- Robert https://1drv.ms/v/s!Aocp2PkNEAGMhD0rfgp757-zfNMu
9-16-18 Sunday sermon https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o41eCriFMA18lSaOH88kt6-7F1pnWiwd/view?usp=sharing
Bethlehem christians https://youtu.be/3QiH9JSXn90
The loft- the windmill https://dai.ly/x6wgu4z
John 12 https://flic.kr/p/R4JR3H
John 19 https://youtu.be/iS9OG-fiBL0
Ephesians 4 https://1drv.ms/v/s!Aocp2PkNEAGMa9oOLIoJHhLVQi8
9-30-18 Sunday sermon https://dai.ly/x6weyw3
7-22-18 Sunday sermon https://flic.kr/p/29HNXUF
10-1-17 Sunday sermon https://youtu.be/54aI6rJ-Cl8
Acts 2 https://youtu.be/tEvhnzSd7OY
Teaching with friends https://1drv.ms/v/s!Aocp2PkNEAGMhD99kPwelxp8dLt8
God- science n logic https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vC16P3aMQvifjmzcCbrKA3LepElJnV4m/view?usp=sharing
10-7-18 Sunday sermon https://dai.ly/x71w6sd
Pops going to the chapel https://www.instagram.com/tv/Bt5xYvBHiWO/?utm_source=ig_web_options_share_sheet
John 14 https://flic.kr/p/SF2p61
Video- Acts 25 https://youtu.be/GO_EbKzNSpk
Galatians 5 https://1drv.ms/v/s!Aocp2PkNEAGMejbeju1g4BLexRc
Friends n Teaching https://dai.ly/x6vt6z3
Shepherd of Hermes https://flic.kr/p/28bn2mu
Danny- North Bergen https://youtu.be/Jr__T9QHwtI
Volume of the book https://youtu.be/AEBDf7BgAJg
Freely you got- freely give https://dai.ly/x71t9ze
Mark 15 https://flic.kr/p/R1Lw3c
7-22-18 Sunday sermon https://drive.google.com/file/d/1u7Wzz7qXaJ3mBpmP1xjXdVXiLbF8xhmY/view?usp=sharing
PAST POSTS [These are links and parts of my past teachings that relate in some way to today’s post- Verses below]
Historically- Christianity is what we call Trinitarian [for the most part- this is also a very long study]. Sometimes we refer to this as Nicene Christianity [from the famous council at Nicaea].
Or we can look to a few other church councils that hammered out the language of the Trinity.
I am Trinitarian- I hold to the historic belief on this- just to be upfront at the start.
Now- have all ‘Christians’ at all times held to the doctrine? No. Now- some will say ‘Then they are not Christians’ okay- I agree.
But the way I define ‘Christian’ while making the argument from history- I am speaking of all those who saw themselves as part of the church [men like Bishop Arius- who rejected the Trinity] and yet did not agree with the historic position.
Church history is littered with men/movements that fall into this category.
Muslims and Jews [even some Messianic Jews] also take the side [doctrinally] with those ‘Christians’ who reject the Trinity. Why? Both of these religions believe that exalting Jesus to Deity [being God] violates the teaching that there is only One God [the Father].
Many of these same objections are made by the various ‘Christian churches’ that also reject the Trinity.
Okay- the historic Christian doctrine- accepted by Catholics, Orthodox and most Protestants- says that God is One- and there are 3 persons in the God Head. The famous Christian him says ‘God in 3 persons- Blessed Trinity’.
So- the belief is there is only one God- yet 3 persons in the God head.
The various groups who disagree with this doctrine usually say it’s a contradiction- and they have various ways they try to explain it.
They will point to bible verses that say ‘Jesus is the Firstborn of all creation’ or ‘Jesus is the beginning of the creation of God’ and they will argue that Jesus was the first creation of God- but not ‘God’ in the sense of True God.
Most scholars will show you that looking at these few verses- in context of the entire bible- show us that they are not meaning that Jesus was actually created- but that he has pre imminence among the whole creation- he is Lord of all.
I really did get into the debate- have taught it in the past on the blog- and today’s intent isn’t to do it all over again.
But- we needed to cover that to say this- what then is the Mormon belief?
While most churches that disagree with the Trinity- usually disagree by saying the doctrine is Tritheistic [meaning you believe in 3 Gods] Mormons actually go the other way- they believe/teach that you actually do have 3 Gods- that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are 3 different Gods.
Okay- that’s the main reason [there are lots of other things] that scholars classify Mormons as ‘non Christian’.
But it’s really hard to have these debates in the political arena- and because of the various ways we use the term ‘Christian’ [most of the times in the media it covers a much wider range than what we use in studying theology] I would not say ‘Romney is not a Christian’.
Why? Because I would have to qualify it by explaining all of this- and you do have many groups that have branched off from historic Christianity- who never accepted the final councils on the Trinity- and many of these groups would still be defined as ‘Christian’ in a broad sense- say if your studying Sociology and not Theology.
Now- you ask ‘geez John- this can get a little confusing- does the bible actually give us a test on this’.
Glad you asked.
The only biblical ‘test’ that is where you have a clear cut statement on ‘if you believe this your okay- if you believe this you’re not’- the statement comes from the epistle’s [letters] of the Apostle John [New Testament].
In 1st John and 2nd John he talks about those who believe that Jesus is the Christ- they are ‘from God’ ‘Born of God’ and those who say that ‘Jesus has not come in the flesh’ these are not ‘of God’ these are ‘the anti christ’.
It’s interesting to note- that in the entire bible- the few times the actual word ‘anti christ’ is used are in these passages.
So the test- if you want to look at it this way- is a Christological test- do you believe Jesus is the Christ [Messiah]. And ‘do you believe he has come in the flesh’ [what we call the Incarnation].
That’s the test- you do not have a ‘Trinitarian’ test so to speak- though the doctrine itself is found in the bible.
Why would the apostle John give these 2 criteria as ‘the test’? Because for the 1st century Jewish believer- Jesus did indeed come as the promised Messiah- and the question is indeed ‘do you believe he is the promised one- or not’.
The other ‘test’ is a little more tricky- but in the 1st century you began having a challenge to the main belief of Christians- it came from the Gnostic ‘cults’. These were the quasi ‘Christian’ groups that mixed in Greek concepts of matter with Christian belief.
The last few weeks we discussed their ideas a little- and one of the ideas that Plato taught was that matter itself was evil.
This is not the Christian view- the Christian view is that matter [creation] is from God- it is good- not inherently evil.
Okay- so you had a division of the Gnostics [which their name meant Knowledge- they believed they had secret knowledge about these things that the average Christian did not have] called Docetists.
These guys taught that Jesus was not Really a human being- who came ‘in the flesh’. Why did they teach this? Because they also taught that matter/flesh was evil- and Jesus could not have really been ‘in the flesh’.
This doctrine violates the very clear N.T. teaching that Jesus was indeed born of the Virgin- and was fully God and fully man- thus the apostle John was targeting them when he said ‘if anyone does not believe that Jesus has come in THE FLESH he is not from God’.
Got it? Okay- we did a little teaching today- as you can see these types of debates cannot really take place in a 30 second news sound bite.
So even though most scholars [if not all?] would agree with the teaching that Mormonism does not fit in with historic Christianity- yet to say ‘this guy is not a Christian’ without being able to make the distinctions that I just did- well it just sounds bad- to be honest.
I personally could vote for Romney- to me it would be more of an issue of his political positions- if I felt he could do a good job- I personally would not use the ‘religious test’ on the guy- but you do have a large group of Evangelicals who would not vote for him- mainly because of this very issue.
I think these issues are important- and people should be aware of them. I also think the term ‘cult’ or ‘he is not a Christian’ if we are going to throw those words out- they need to be surrounded by the above context- when they just pop out on a short sound bite- without the time to explain them- then it’s probably better not to throw them out at all.
ACTS 1- Luke, the writer of this book, feels the need to document the ongoing work of Jesus and his revolution. He already wrote a gospel and believes this to be the beginning of the story. In essence, the reality of Jesus and his resurrection are just the start, we have much more to do and become on this journey. Most writers jump to chapter 2. We have churches and music groups called ‘Acts chapter 2’. Why does Luke seem to wait till chapter 2 before getting to ‘the good stuff’? Chapter one records the 40 days of Jesus showing himself alive after his death. Luke feels this singular truth to be important enough to simply stand alone [I do realize the early letters did not have chapter and verse divisions like today]. The real physical fact of Jesus bodily resurrection is without a doubt the foundational truth of the gospel. The outpouring of the Spirit and the whole future of the church depends on the reality of the resurrected Christ. Paul will write the Corinthians and tell them if the resurrection were not true then they are the most miserable of all people. Luke tells us Jesus gave instructions for the Apostles to wait at Jerusalem for the Spirit. Thy will be witnesses of him to all the surrounding nations after the Spirit empowers them. We also see Peter emerge as the key spokesman for the group. He quotes freely from the Psalms and reads their own history into the book. He sees the prophetic verse from David on ‘let another take his office’ as referring to Judas betrayal and death. They cast lots and choose Matthias as the one to replace Judas. Peter shows the importance of Judas replacement to come from one that was with them thru out the earthly time of Jesus. Someone who saw and witnessed Jesus after the resurrection. Scholars have confused this with the ‘ascension gift Apostles’. Some scholars have taken the truth of the early Apostles having the criteria of being actual witnesses of Jesus, and have said ‘therefore, you have no Apostles today’. Paul will teach in Ephesians that after Jesus ascension on high he gave gifts unto men ‘some Apostles, others Prophets, etc.’ The New Testament clearly speaks of Apostles as an ongoing gift in the church. Barnabas will later be called an Apostles [Acts 14:14] as well as many other references in the original Greek using the same Greek word for Apostle. But here we find Peter seeing the need to replace Judas. Other scholars think Peter might have jumped the gun. They see Paul’s apostleship as the possible person the Lord picked out as the replacement. You do find Paul referring time and again to his Apostolic authority as one ‘born out of due time’ who saw Jesus on the Damascus road. If Paul was simply an ascension gift Apostle, why would he refer time and again to his authority based on being a witness who also saw Jesus? It’s possible that Paul was in this group of ‘Apostles of the Lamb’ who had extra authority based upon their testimony of being eyewitnesses. So in chapter one we see that Jesus appeared for 40 days giving instructions to the early leadership and told them to wait at Jerusalem for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. We see the incarnational purpose of God, Jesus was and continues to be the express image of God to man. He was not some ‘phantom’ like the Docetists will claim, but a very real physical resurrected Lord. Luke begins the early history of the church with this reality being important enough to stand on its own.
In the 19th century there was a movement in Christian theology called ‘Liberal theology’- not liberal in politics- but a whole genre of teaching/thought that challenged a lot of the ‘old time’ beliefs [like original sin] and focused on the ability of modern man to rise above the ignorance of the past [even in religious thought] and man was on the road to a true Utopian society that would never fail. This belief was strong- both in the universities of Germany as well as in the politics of the Western world. Then you had the world wars- 8 million people killed in the first one- and 50 million in the 2nd one. Men like Karl Barth [a Swiss theologian- teacher] would challenge the liberal view of mans ‘inner divinity’ and he would blast the Christian world with his famous ‘the epistle to the Romans’ his commentary on Paul’s famous treatise- released in 1918. Though Barth is what some describe as 'Neo- Orthodox’ [the strong Reformed teachers don’t appreciate Barth very much] yet he did bring the church back to the biblical doctrines of original sin and mans inability to ‘save himself’. Barth saw the reality of the WW1 and rejected the Utopian belief that man was so advanced that he would reach for the sky- and grab it! Today we see lots of shaking in the world- some are focused on March madness- some find it profitable to do a story on a stripper- we need to keep our eyes [and bibles] open- mankind is in need of God- man has gone thru stages where he thought the ‘old belief’ in God would fall away- to the contrary- the govt’s of man [apart from God] seem to be the thing that’s falling away.
 JESUS MANIFESTO, Frank Viola and Leonard Sweet. The other day I received an interesting email, Thomas Nelson book publishers offered me a free advanced copy of the above book, they are giving away 200 advanced copies and they offered one to me. They simply said they would appreciate it if I mentioned the book on my blog. So here I am; I’ve read a few chapters and ‘Frank-Len’ make a good case for restoring the church back to a strong Christology [I think I would have said ‘Christ centric model’ instead]. The point they argue is that the people of God and Christianity itself has lost the matchless vision of a magnificent Lord and has replaced it with all types of other stuff. They give a list of some of the stuff; it includes end time things, prosperity, leadership…theology, evolution versus creation- well you get the hint. While it’s difficult to argue against the authors main point [who can argue against returning the church to Christ?] the danger is in thinking that ‘theology’ or any other attempt at clarifying the orthodox Jesus is a substitute for Jesus himself, that is we as believers do need to be aware of the many rabbit trails we often get sidetracked on but at the same time we need to understand the need for good Christian doctrine [theology]. I noticed that the authors did not include ‘organic church’ on the list. I do like the many quotes from historic church figures; Tertullian, Aquinas, Barth, etc. and I like the ‘folksy-popular’ style the book is written in, sounds like reading Eugene Peterson’s Message version. All in all the first few chapters are well worth reading, they do center you back on Jesus Christ, and the devotional style restores the soul. To be fair the authors do answer the charge that the bible itself teaches lots of subjects, so why be against all the other things on their list? They explain well that although we as believers will learn and teach various subjects, yet according to the apostolic pattern, these things are like ‘spokes on a wheel’ they are needed at times, but Jesus is the center of the wheel. All in all it’s hard to disagree with the main point of the book. I have found the argument ‘we focus on Jesus only’ to be at times an excuse for ‘unlearned preaching’ sometimes preachers have used this as an excuse to not delve into good Christian ‘theology’ but I don’t sense this with this book. Over the next few days I will finish the book [it’s not big, I’m just busy!] and hopefully will comment a few more times. I’m not sure how I got on the list to receive an advanced copy, but I’m grateful for the copy- as a book collector its cool to have a copy that says ‘advanced copy- uncorrected proof- not for resale’. I guess Frank must have recommended me for the book; I have blogged on a mutual site in the past. I have heard of Leonard Sweet before, but am not familiar with him at all. I should note that I have taught many of the same themes found in this book, and I think it would benefit all of us to re focus on the early church’s emphasis on knowing the Lord, not just doctrinally, but in a real way- this is the main point of the book.
John 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
https://youtu.be/fYld3Wm4elE John 15
You tube songs below-
https://youtu.be/vBecM3CQVD8 I mention this song on the video
https://youtu.be/H3By4DZyTNM I like this one too [sound of silence]
.Longest last supper discourse
.Branches cut- pruned
.Sympathy for the devil?
.Cards in a deck
.Suicides in the bible
.What is a valuable legacy?
NEW- [links- verses below]
Jesus teaches us that he is the TRUE VINE- God is the gardener- and we are the branches.
Branches that do not bear fruit get cut off.
The ones that produce fruit get pruned.
Ok- in the history of the church- some Christians believe that ‘believers’ can get cut off [lose their salvation].
My purpose in covering this chapter is to show you that good Christians do disagree on this- and they are all Christians.
Now- what does it mean?
I’ll give you my view.
Remember- John’s gospel is unique in many ways.
One way is he gives us the longest discourse of Jesus which seems to have taken place at the last Supper.
We read about the meal in chapter 13- and if you read the beginning of chapter 18- it seems as if all this instruction was in the upper room.
Even the great prayer of Jesus recorded in Chapter 17.
So- here’s context.
Judas was no longer at the table- he went out already.
As far as we know- the only disciple that knew Judas was getting ‘cut off’ was John.
But they all knew that one OF THEM was going to betray Jesus.
This was tough stuff.
Jesus might have been giving them some ‘reasons’ for this.
Meaning ‘ok- Judas was part of the group [branch] and some tough stuff is still to come- remember- those who do not produce fruit [as Judas] will get cut off’.
‘What about us Jesus- the good guys’?
Ok- you guys get pruned- because that’s the process.
Now- this obviously extends to all of us- Jesus was teaching the church- but maybe this will help us see a little better.
We have a peculiar insight from John’s gospel- because out of the other 3 gospel writers- only John wrote 3 teaching epistles [1-2-3 John].
Peter wrote 2 letters [1-2 Peter].
But he didn’t write a gospel [there is a gnostic one- but most say it was a fake].
So- John talks about abiding in Christ in his letters- and also about sins that lead to death
16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
He says we should not pray for those who ‘sin unto death’.
Sounds harsh- but remember- John was at the table that day.
And Jesus taught his men that this betrayal was meant to be.
Peter also tells us there were some who were false preachers- yet- when they fall away-
It would have been better for them not to have known the way of truth- then after knowing it [like Judas] to then fall away.
21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
Both Peter and John seem to say that these were never really true believers
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 1st Jn. 2:19
And Judas did have a special place- yet we know he was not sincere from the start.
John also teaches us much about abiding [resting] in Christ- and warns us that if we don’t learn how to abide- then we will face shame.
The overall theme in the New Testament is there are indeed judgments for those who turn away.
Some might die psychically 1Corinthians 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.
1Corinthians 5:2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
1Corinthians 5:3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
1Corinthians 5:4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
1Corinthians 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Others might face a harsher sentence.
The reality of apostasy is indeed in the bible-
And whatever side you fall on [Arminian -From the preacher Jacob Arminius – Calvinist- Comes from John Calvin’s name] that warning remains clear.
Hold fast to the doctrine of Christ- walk in the Spirit- do not justify a sinful life.
And in the end- all will go well.
PAST LINKS- [verses below]
https://ccoutreach87.wordpress.com/2016/06/21/the-flood/ John 3
https://youtu.be/f8VpxlYM_kU John 8- ‘who the Son sets free’
I mention Corinthians on today’s video- here’s my study- https://ccoutreach87.wordpress.com/1st-2nd-corinthians/
The 6th session of Trent was the one where the church dealt with justification [how we become saved in Gods sight].
Rome made a distinction between mortal and Venial sin in the council- the church said that Baptism is the INSTRUMENTAL CAUSE of justification. Yet faith is the Root- Foundation and Initial act that justifies.
Rome also taught that Mortal sin kills the grace in the soul that brings justification- and when a person commits a mortal sin- they need the ‘2nd plank of justification’ in order to be brought back into a state of Grace.