John 8:31-39; Matthew 3:4-10
Baraca Radio Sunday School Class
First Baptist Church, Anderson, South Carolina July 7, 2013
Lawrence Webb
Baraca Radio Sunday School Class
First Baptist Church, Anderson, South Carolina July 7, 2013
Lawrence Webb
We've sung a lot of patriotic songs on the program this morning, and that's good.
But sometimes people get confused about patriotism and Christian faith. They think they are the same. I saw that a while back on a tour of Poet Carl Sandburg’s house up in Flat Rock, North Carolina. I’ve studied Sandburg’s poetry, and I know a lot about his life. I’ve given lectures on Sandburg. When I go to the Sandburg house, I usually take the guided tour led by volunteers. And, frankly, I could give a better tour than some of these guides. That particularly applied to the guide who equated Christianity and Americanism.
Sandburg was a loyal American, and he had a great heart for our less fortunate fellow citizens. He wrote many poems about down to earth and down and out people. Sandburg was a professing Christian, but he wasn’t much of a churchman. Anyway, somebody on the tour asked whether Sandburg was a Christian. And the guide assured us, yes, Sandburg was a good Christian. Then he proceeded to talk about Sandburg’s loyalty to the country and how he wrote lots of good poems and also wrote a biography on President Abraham Lincoln.
I’m a strong fan of Carl Sandburg, and I wouldn’t say anything to diminish him. But I had to bite my tongue to keep from trying to correct his assumption that being a patriotic American made Sandburg a good Christian. The tour guide was confused. Carl Sandburg could have written a thousand poems in praise of this country. He could have written the life stories of a dozen presidents, but that has nothing to do with whether the man was a Christian.
TRANSITION
In our Bible passages for today, we’re going to see some people who confuse their national heritage with their heritage of faith. Our first Scripture is from the eighth chapter of John, beginning with verse 31:
[31] Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, [32] and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." [33] They answered him, "We are descendants of Abraham, and have never been in bondage to any one. How is it that you say, `You will be made free'?"
Notice, these are Jesus’s fellow countrymen. They have a proud heritage as descendants of Abraham, the father of their Jewish faith. So, where does Jesus get off, claiming they will be free if they follow Him and understand the truth He teaches?
They claim that, as descendants of Abraham, they have never been in bondage to any one.
But they overlook their history. Their Jewish ancestors often had been subject to more powerful nations around them. Even at the time this confrontation takes place, they are under domination of the Roman Empire. So this is an empty boast, to claim they have never been in bondage to any one.
Abraham left a countless number of descendants who would form the nation of Israel. However, that nation was the result of the efforts of later generations, not of Abraham himself. If we look carefully at the biblical record, this father of the faithful was a nomadic wanderer. The writer of the book of Hebrews (10:8-10) describes it this way:
By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise.
Abraham’s great, great, great, great grandchildren formed the nation, but it was many generations beyond his time when that national structure came into being as Hebrews states it:
For he looked forward to the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
That tells us, Abraham’s vision enabled him to look beyond a territory set off within certain geographic boundaries. So he was a free spirit. These people arguing with Jesus have it right to that extent. But they are confused about what constitutes true freedom.
Jesus goes on to explain that they need to be free from sin:
[34] Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. [35] The slave does not continue in the house for ever; the son continues for ever. [36] So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.
But sometimes people get confused about patriotism and Christian faith. They think they are the same. I saw that a while back on a tour of Poet Carl Sandburg’s house up in Flat Rock, North Carolina. I’ve studied Sandburg’s poetry, and I know a lot about his life. I’ve given lectures on Sandburg. When I go to the Sandburg house, I usually take the guided tour led by volunteers. And, frankly, I could give a better tour than some of these guides. That particularly applied to the guide who equated Christianity and Americanism.
Sandburg was a loyal American, and he had a great heart for our less fortunate fellow citizens. He wrote many poems about down to earth and down and out people. Sandburg was a professing Christian, but he wasn’t much of a churchman. Anyway, somebody on the tour asked whether Sandburg was a Christian. And the guide assured us, yes, Sandburg was a good Christian. Then he proceeded to talk about Sandburg’s loyalty to the country and how he wrote lots of good poems and also wrote a biography on President Abraham Lincoln.
I’m a strong fan of Carl Sandburg, and I wouldn’t say anything to diminish him. But I had to bite my tongue to keep from trying to correct his assumption that being a patriotic American made Sandburg a good Christian. The tour guide was confused. Carl Sandburg could have written a thousand poems in praise of this country. He could have written the life stories of a dozen presidents, but that has nothing to do with whether the man was a Christian.
TRANSITION
In our Bible passages for today, we’re going to see some people who confuse their national heritage with their heritage of faith. Our first Scripture is from the eighth chapter of John, beginning with verse 31:
[31] Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, [32] and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." [33] They answered him, "We are descendants of Abraham, and have never been in bondage to any one. How is it that you say, `You will be made free'?"
Notice, these are Jesus’s fellow countrymen. They have a proud heritage as descendants of Abraham, the father of their Jewish faith. So, where does Jesus get off, claiming they will be free if they follow Him and understand the truth He teaches?
They claim that, as descendants of Abraham, they have never been in bondage to any one.
But they overlook their history. Their Jewish ancestors often had been subject to more powerful nations around them. Even at the time this confrontation takes place, they are under domination of the Roman Empire. So this is an empty boast, to claim they have never been in bondage to any one.
Abraham left a countless number of descendants who would form the nation of Israel. However, that nation was the result of the efforts of later generations, not of Abraham himself. If we look carefully at the biblical record, this father of the faithful was a nomadic wanderer. The writer of the book of Hebrews (10:8-10) describes it this way:
By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise.
Abraham’s great, great, great, great grandchildren formed the nation, but it was many generations beyond his time when that national structure came into being as Hebrews states it:
For he looked forward to the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
That tells us, Abraham’s vision enabled him to look beyond a territory set off within certain geographic boundaries. So he was a free spirit. These people arguing with Jesus have it right to that extent. But they are confused about what constitutes true freedom.
Jesus goes on to explain that they need to be free from sin:
[34] Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. [35] The slave does not continue in the house for ever; the son continues for ever. [36] So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.
He offers a freedom they don’t understand. Jesus says, in effect, “You claim freedom because you are
descendants of Abraham, but if you stand in your own strength as sinners, you are no better than slaves.” On the
other hand, if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.
This is at a time when the religious leaders are looking for justification to have Jesus arrested and put to death by Roman officials. And the argument between Jesus and His listeners becomes more heated as to who is a child of whom: [37] I know that you are descendants of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me, because my word finds no place in you.
Then Jesus claims God as His Father and casts a reflection as to who their father is: [38] I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.
His listeners repeat their claim (v. 39): "Abraham is our father." Jesus then disputes that: "If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did, [40] but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God . . . Further challenging their claim to be Abraham’s children, Jesus says, this is not what Abraham did. You do what your father did. Then we have some heavy back-and-forth about fatherhood:
Jesus Himself wades in with some uncomplimentary words about their parentage:
"If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did, [40] but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did. [41] You do what your father did."
They said to him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." [42] Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. [43] Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. [44] You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. [45] But, because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. [46] Which of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? [47] He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."
After this from Jesus, we read in verse 48: The Jews answered him, "Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?" So, in the heat of the argument, they say Jesus was born out of wedlock. Then He says they are children of the devil, and then they heap a double insult: Jesus is a Samaritan, and He has a demon. You remember, the Jews of that era considered Samaritans half-breeds and heretics. And, not only do they say He is a half-breed heretic. They also say He is the one who comes from the devil.
This disagreement continues to escalate, to the point that they try to stone Him, but He slips out of the Temple. We’ll come back to that stoning episode -- in the Temple, of all places. But let’s look a bit more at this argument about Abraham. This boast about Ancestor Abraham is not new. We see this same attitude in Matthew’s Gospel.
Jesus is strongly influenced by the preaching of John the Baptist. You remember, when Jesus is ready to begin His ministry, He goes to the Jordan River where John is preaching and baptizing. Luke tells us the two men were cousins, so they must have been aware of each other across the years. John is calling people to repent of their sins and be baptized as a sign of repentance. Although Jesus has committed no sin, He asks John to baptize Him, probably because He wants to identify with the call to repentance and faith. John refuses at first, saying Jesus ought to baptize him instead.
In Matthew (3:5-10), John strikes out at the Pharisees and Saducees who come for baptism:
[5] Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan, [6] and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. [7] But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sad'ducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? [8] Bear fruit that befits repentance . . .
John apparently senses these men are there more out of curiosity than for conversion, more to find out what he is up to than to find a new life of faith and repentance. Religious people of the day often invoke the name of their Ancestor Abraham, and John tells them not to rely on Father Abraham for their salvation:
[9] and do not presume to say to yourselves, `We have Abraham as our father'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.
This is at a time when the religious leaders are looking for justification to have Jesus arrested and put to death by Roman officials. And the argument between Jesus and His listeners becomes more heated as to who is a child of whom: [37] I know that you are descendants of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me, because my word finds no place in you.
Then Jesus claims God as His Father and casts a reflection as to who their father is: [38] I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.
His listeners repeat their claim (v. 39): "Abraham is our father." Jesus then disputes that: "If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did, [40] but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God . . . Further challenging their claim to be Abraham’s children, Jesus says, this is not what Abraham did. You do what your father did. Then we have some heavy back-and-forth about fatherhood:
Jesus Himself wades in with some uncomplimentary words about their parentage:
"If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did, [40] but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did. [41] You do what your father did."
They said to him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." [42] Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. [43] Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. [44] You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. [45] But, because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. [46] Which of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? [47] He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."
After this from Jesus, we read in verse 48: The Jews answered him, "Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?" So, in the heat of the argument, they say Jesus was born out of wedlock. Then He says they are children of the devil, and then they heap a double insult: Jesus is a Samaritan, and He has a demon. You remember, the Jews of that era considered Samaritans half-breeds and heretics. And, not only do they say He is a half-breed heretic. They also say He is the one who comes from the devil.
This disagreement continues to escalate, to the point that they try to stone Him, but He slips out of the Temple. We’ll come back to that stoning episode -- in the Temple, of all places. But let’s look a bit more at this argument about Abraham. This boast about Ancestor Abraham is not new. We see this same attitude in Matthew’s Gospel.
Jesus is strongly influenced by the preaching of John the Baptist. You remember, when Jesus is ready to begin His ministry, He goes to the Jordan River where John is preaching and baptizing. Luke tells us the two men were cousins, so they must have been aware of each other across the years. John is calling people to repent of their sins and be baptized as a sign of repentance. Although Jesus has committed no sin, He asks John to baptize Him, probably because He wants to identify with the call to repentance and faith. John refuses at first, saying Jesus ought to baptize him instead.
In Matthew (3:5-10), John strikes out at the Pharisees and Saducees who come for baptism:
[5] Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan, [6] and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. [7] But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sad'ducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? [8] Bear fruit that befits repentance . . .
John apparently senses these men are there more out of curiosity than for conversion, more to find out what he is up to than to find a new life of faith and repentance. Religious people of the day often invoke the name of their Ancestor Abraham, and John tells them not to rely on Father Abraham for their salvation:
[9] and do not presume to say to yourselves, `We have Abraham as our father'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.
Does that sound familiar? Jesus must have heard this same boast from these men time and again, dating
back even to when He was baptized by John. So on this later encounter we’ve seen in this lesson, Jesus
issues the same challenge to those who boast their ancestry.
But John often is much more confrontational than Jesus. There at the waters of the Jordan, John is
blunt. He declares their boast of being Abraham’s children is worth no more than a pile of rocks: You think you’re so great to trace your family tree back to Abraham. Well, let me tell you: "God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. So, where does that leave you?”
Let’s imagine John is talking about boasts of family trees with what he says next: [10] Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. God is a woodcutter who’s going to whack away at your family tree. Forget Father Abraham. You need to get right with our Father God, the Father of Abraham.
REALLY WORKED UP
Now, let’s go back to this name-calling incident recorded in the eighth chapter of John. Jesus and the religious leaders have been exchanging insults about parentage. Then the Gospel narrator ends the story this way: "So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple." Let that soak in for a moment: "they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple."
In our terminology, we can say, these men are so worked up over this argument, they try to kill Jesus in church, the very structure dedicated to the worship of God. Now, the Temple of that day is a huge complex, and they aren’t in the space where the priests are offering up the sacrifices. But they are in the sacred precincts, and they took up stones to throw at him. Earlier in this same chapter, the religious leaders bring an adulterous woman to Jesus, apparently ready to stone her to death. That also takes place in the Temple.
So, what on earth and in heaven’s name are these religious leaders doing with a pile of rocks in the Temple or, as we would say, in church, ready to kill people?
One clue is a warning chiseled into a limestone block from the Temple which archaeologists discovered in 1871. Any and all non-Jews were forbidden to go beyond the large outer court. This space was called the Court of the Gentiles, the term Jewish people use to refer to non-Jews. Temple authorities posted several warnings on the stone wall separating this Gentile area from the inner sanctums. Here is the warning on the limestone block:
“No Gentile May Enter Beyond the Dividing Wall into the Court Around the Holy Place. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his subsequent death” (Fowler Bible Collection).
What we had, then, was a religion tied so closely to its national system that no one outside that nationality had a place in that system of belief. “This is our religion. If you do not share our religion and are not from our nation, you are not welcome. So stay out or suffer the consequences.”
That was bad. That was then, and this is now. So, aren’t we glad that outlook, that threat, no longer exists. But, not so fast. There are nations today which only tolerate religions other than the official religion. And there are nations today which forbid religions other than the official religion.
For one example, the nation of Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, is eighty-nine percent Buddhist. The other eleven percent include Christians, Muslims, Spiritualists, and Hindus. These smaller groups are tolerated, while Buddhism receives government funding (Kipgen).
Saudia Arabia is officially a Muslim nation, and non-Muslim religious practice is officially forbidden.
The United States State Department from time to time cites what it calls “countries of particular concern” regarding restriction of religious freedom. Several countries which usually make that list include North Korea, Iran, and China. Sudan and Uzbekistan have also been cited as countries in which religious freedom is extremely limited (Markoe).
Our United States Constitution calls for free expression of religion, but some professing Christians insist that we are a Christian nation. Numerically, a sizable majority of Americans profess belief in Jesus. And some say we were established as a Christian nation and that Christianity should be given preference as the majority religion. But a careful look at our Constitution will show that the Founding Fathers were careful not to mention Jesus Christ or even mention God. The First Amendment forbids the government to show preference for any one religion and at the same time prevents any effort to prohibit the free exercise of religion.
When the first Muslim was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 2007, this upset some people. He was further criticized when he took his oath of office on the Islamic holy book, the Qur’an instead of the Jewish and Christian Bible (Lawton). But if he was duly elected by his constituents, he had as much right to be in Congress as a Baptist or a Presbyterian. And, as an elected Muslim, he would have been untrue to his faith if he had used a Christian Bible for his swearing-in.
But John often is much more confrontational than Jesus. There at the waters of the Jordan, John is
blunt. He declares their boast of being Abraham’s children is worth no more than a pile of rocks: You think you’re so great to trace your family tree back to Abraham. Well, let me tell you: "God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. So, where does that leave you?”
Let’s imagine John is talking about boasts of family trees with what he says next: [10] Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. God is a woodcutter who’s going to whack away at your family tree. Forget Father Abraham. You need to get right with our Father God, the Father of Abraham.
REALLY WORKED UP
Now, let’s go back to this name-calling incident recorded in the eighth chapter of John. Jesus and the religious leaders have been exchanging insults about parentage. Then the Gospel narrator ends the story this way: "So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple." Let that soak in for a moment: "they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple."
In our terminology, we can say, these men are so worked up over this argument, they try to kill Jesus in church, the very structure dedicated to the worship of God. Now, the Temple of that day is a huge complex, and they aren’t in the space where the priests are offering up the sacrifices. But they are in the sacred precincts, and they took up stones to throw at him. Earlier in this same chapter, the religious leaders bring an adulterous woman to Jesus, apparently ready to stone her to death. That also takes place in the Temple.
So, what on earth and in heaven’s name are these religious leaders doing with a pile of rocks in the Temple or, as we would say, in church, ready to kill people?
One clue is a warning chiseled into a limestone block from the Temple which archaeologists discovered in 1871. Any and all non-Jews were forbidden to go beyond the large outer court. This space was called the Court of the Gentiles, the term Jewish people use to refer to non-Jews. Temple authorities posted several warnings on the stone wall separating this Gentile area from the inner sanctums. Here is the warning on the limestone block:
“No Gentile May Enter Beyond the Dividing Wall into the Court Around the Holy Place. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his subsequent death” (Fowler Bible Collection).
What we had, then, was a religion tied so closely to its national system that no one outside that nationality had a place in that system of belief. “This is our religion. If you do not share our religion and are not from our nation, you are not welcome. So stay out or suffer the consequences.”
That was bad. That was then, and this is now. So, aren’t we glad that outlook, that threat, no longer exists. But, not so fast. There are nations today which only tolerate religions other than the official religion. And there are nations today which forbid religions other than the official religion.
For one example, the nation of Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, is eighty-nine percent Buddhist. The other eleven percent include Christians, Muslims, Spiritualists, and Hindus. These smaller groups are tolerated, while Buddhism receives government funding (Kipgen).
Saudia Arabia is officially a Muslim nation, and non-Muslim religious practice is officially forbidden.
The United States State Department from time to time cites what it calls “countries of particular concern” regarding restriction of religious freedom. Several countries which usually make that list include North Korea, Iran, and China. Sudan and Uzbekistan have also been cited as countries in which religious freedom is extremely limited (Markoe).
Our United States Constitution calls for free expression of religion, but some professing Christians insist that we are a Christian nation. Numerically, a sizable majority of Americans profess belief in Jesus. And some say we were established as a Christian nation and that Christianity should be given preference as the majority religion. But a careful look at our Constitution will show that the Founding Fathers were careful not to mention Jesus Christ or even mention God. The First Amendment forbids the government to show preference for any one religion and at the same time prevents any effort to prohibit the free exercise of religion.
When the first Muslim was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 2007, this upset some people. He was further criticized when he took his oath of office on the Islamic holy book, the Qur’an instead of the Jewish and Christian Bible (Lawton). But if he was duly elected by his constituents, he had as much right to be in Congress as a Baptist or a Presbyterian. And, as an elected Muslim, he would have been untrue to his faith if he had used a Christian Bible for his swearing-in.
Most recently, in January, when the new Congress was sworn in, there were two religious “firsts”
represented by two women from Hawaii. A new member of the House of Representatives is a Hindu, and she was
sworn in with the Bhagavad Gita, which is a sacred text for Hindus. The Senate had the other religious first when a
Buddhist was sworn in. Another first came when a House member from Arizona listed her religion as “none.” Although the first Muslim’s swearing-in caused quite a stir six years ago, few people seemed to notice
these exotic new faiths and lack of faith this time (Lawton).
The calmer spirit regarding this growing diversity could lead us to hope they support Article Six of the Constitution which forbids any kind of religious test for people who seek public office. To underscore the need to keep government and religion separate, the Founders put in the following provision:
“. . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
APPLICATION AND CONCLUSION
Still, some American Christians get quite exercised when they realize their numbers are shrinking and other religious faiths are growing in this country. But we can be grateful that they don’t take their hostility as far as those men in the Temple who tried to stone Jesus or the guards at the entrance to the Holy of Holies who stood ready to kill non-Jews who tried to enter. These situations developed when these zealous men as they blended religion fervor and national pride.
This Baraca Radio Sunday School Class originates in a classroom at Anderson’s First Baptist Church, and those of us who bring you the program week by week are Baptists. And Baptists, of all people, need to be aware of the need to protect religious freedom for everyone.
When the Baptist denomination came into existence a little over four hundred years ago, one of the two things which set them apart from other churches was their concern for religious freedom. Those early Baptists in England and Holland suffered because they refused to be part of the official religion in England or Holland. Some Baptists paid fines for being Baptists. Other Baptists went to prison for being Baptists. Still other Baptists died for being Baptists.
In the early years of the American colonies, a man named Roger Williams left the Massachusetts Bay Colony under threat of his life because he refused to be part of the Episcopal Church, which was the official church in Massachusetts. Roger Williams had left England for the same reason: He insisted on freedom of conscience in matters of faith. After a terrible winter in which he was sheltered by an Indian tribe, Williams established Rhode Island. There he started the first Baptist church on this continent. He didn’t stay a Baptist very long, but he stayed long enough to make sure people of all faiths and people of no faith were welcome in Rhode Island.
Listen to what Roger Williams wrote:
. . . it is the will and command of God that (since the coming of his Son the Lord Jesus)
a permission of the most paganish, Jewish, Turkish, or antichristian consciences and worships, be granted to all men in all nations and countries (Williams).
In this season when we celebrate the founding of our nation, I am proud of my Baptist ancestors who paved the way for freedom of religion and separation of church and state in what would become the United States of America.
BENEDICTION
If you want the true freedom which comes from Jesus Christ, claim these promises:
God’s love that will never let you go.
God’s grace that is greater than all your sin.
God’s peace that passes all understanding.
These are yours through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
The calmer spirit regarding this growing diversity could lead us to hope they support Article Six of the Constitution which forbids any kind of religious test for people who seek public office. To underscore the need to keep government and religion separate, the Founders put in the following provision:
“. . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
APPLICATION AND CONCLUSION
Still, some American Christians get quite exercised when they realize their numbers are shrinking and other religious faiths are growing in this country. But we can be grateful that they don’t take their hostility as far as those men in the Temple who tried to stone Jesus or the guards at the entrance to the Holy of Holies who stood ready to kill non-Jews who tried to enter. These situations developed when these zealous men as they blended religion fervor and national pride.
This Baraca Radio Sunday School Class originates in a classroom at Anderson’s First Baptist Church, and those of us who bring you the program week by week are Baptists. And Baptists, of all people, need to be aware of the need to protect religious freedom for everyone.
When the Baptist denomination came into existence a little over four hundred years ago, one of the two things which set them apart from other churches was their concern for religious freedom. Those early Baptists in England and Holland suffered because they refused to be part of the official religion in England or Holland. Some Baptists paid fines for being Baptists. Other Baptists went to prison for being Baptists. Still other Baptists died for being Baptists.
In the early years of the American colonies, a man named Roger Williams left the Massachusetts Bay Colony under threat of his life because he refused to be part of the Episcopal Church, which was the official church in Massachusetts. Roger Williams had left England for the same reason: He insisted on freedom of conscience in matters of faith. After a terrible winter in which he was sheltered by an Indian tribe, Williams established Rhode Island. There he started the first Baptist church on this continent. He didn’t stay a Baptist very long, but he stayed long enough to make sure people of all faiths and people of no faith were welcome in Rhode Island.
Listen to what Roger Williams wrote:
. . . it is the will and command of God that (since the coming of his Son the Lord Jesus)
a permission of the most paganish, Jewish, Turkish, or antichristian consciences and worships, be granted to all men in all nations and countries (Williams).
In this season when we celebrate the founding of our nation, I am proud of my Baptist ancestors who paved the way for freedom of religion and separation of church and state in what would become the United States of America.
BENEDICTION
If you want the true freedom which comes from Jesus Christ, claim these promises:
God’s love that will never let you go.
God’s grace that is greater than all your sin.
God’s peace that passes all understanding.
These are yours through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
WHO IS YOUR FATHER?---SOURCES
William E. Hull, "John," The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 9. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970.
“Jerusalem Temple Warning Inscription, 1st century BC, Reproduction,” Fowler Bible Collection, http://www.fowlerbiblecollection.com/jerusalem-temple-warning-inscription.html.
Nehginpao Kipgen, “Religious Tolerance Key to Myanmar’s Democracy,” Huff Post World, Posted June 21, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nehginpao-kipgen/religious-tolerance-key_b_3479383.html.
Kim Lawton, “Religion and the New Congress,” Video Interview, Religion & Ethics Newsweekly, http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/2013/01/04/january-4-2013-religion-and-the-new-congress/14464/, January 4, 2013.
Lauren Markoe for Religion News Service, “Does religious freedom report need more ‘teeth’?” Report from the Capital. Washington, D. C.: Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, June 2013.
Roger Williams, “A Plea for Religious Liberty,” http://www.constitution.org/bcp/religlib.htm.
William E. Hull, "John," The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 9. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970.
“Jerusalem Temple Warning Inscription, 1st century BC, Reproduction,” Fowler Bible Collection, http://www.fowlerbiblecollection.com/jerusalem-temple-warning-inscription.html.
Nehginpao Kipgen, “Religious Tolerance Key to Myanmar’s Democracy,” Huff Post World, Posted June 21, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nehginpao-kipgen/religious-tolerance-key_b_3479383.html.
Kim Lawton, “Religion and the New Congress,” Video Interview, Religion & Ethics Newsweekly, http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/2013/01/04/january-4-2013-religion-and-the-new-congress/14464/, January 4, 2013.
Lauren Markoe for Religion News Service, “Does religious freedom report need more ‘teeth’?” Report from the Capital. Washington, D. C.: Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, June 2013.
Roger Williams, “A Plea for Religious Liberty,” http://www.constitution.org/bcp/religlib.htm.
No comments:
Post a Comment