I want to offer some clarification about my previous post. My intent was not to criticize my friends for being upset about what was said in the sermon. There was nothing inherently wrong with feeling uncomfortable about a choice of words used in the pulpit.

None of us comes to the church as a blank slate, even those of us who grew up in the church. We have political and social opinions that are formed in us through education, society and our own reasoning. So in the church and in the pulpit we are going to encounter thoughts and ideas with which we do not agree. It is what it is and this cannot be avoided unless we are interested in becoming Stepford Christians.

We all have opinions but not all of them are correct and we need to be willing to have our opinions challenged. This is why the Apostle Paul tells us that we are in need of transformation in our thinking (Rom. 12:1-2). We are in need of transformation in our thinking because none of us has a perfect understanding of the gospel, nor do we fully understand the implications of the gospel.

To better understand the gospel involves a process of seeing how deep the flaws in our thinking and behavior go. If I think that I have arrived at full understanding, it only proves that I have a long way to go.

A deepening understanding of the gospel is part of fulfilling the first of the two great commands (Matt. 22:37). As we grow in our love of God we increasingly see our need of grace and transformation. As a result, we should be increasingly thankful for God’s provision in Jesus Christ.

A deepening understanding of the implications of the gospel is part of fulfilling the second great command (Matt. 22:39). Once we understand our own need of grace, we are more likely to offer that grace to others. Once we understand how deeply we are loved by God, on the basis of that love we can extend love to others.

All this, admittedly, is easier said than done.

Because none of us are blank slates, we come to the church with differences in our thinking. The larger the church, the more differences there will be. As soon as you have more than one person in the group, there are going to be disagreements.

My point was not to chide those who disagreed with the pastor, but to encourage them to look on the discomfort in a new light.

The discomfort can be used by God to challenge us at our core.

When I am angry, it is almost always because I am inconvenienced or I feel disrespected. There have been a few times in my life when my anger had a righteous component to it, but even in those times it was tainted by selfishness.

So when someone says something that upsets me, I should take the opportunity to think through why it upsets me. What is it about the situation that is making me upset? Usually, too much of my angst does not come from a good place.

In the context of the church, and especially in the sermon, when I encounter something that makes me feel uncomfortable, a healthy reaction involves reflection on Scripture combined with introspection. If I combine these two, my response to the discomfort will be measured and seasoned with grace. I can then own where I need correction and then, and only then, lovingly offer correction to others.

The point I intended to make was that we need to find some level of comfort in being uncomfortable. The church should be the shining example of bringing unity out of diversity.

It is a shame that using the word “diversity” may bring us back to where we were at the beginning of my last post.

Those who have grown up in the church can lose sight of how radical the claims of Christianity are. We can be so casual about truths that should blow our minds.

Imagine your shock if Aunt Betsie came knocking on your door three days after you attended her funeral. You would want an explanation as to how this was possible. You would wonder if it is safe to answer the door. In short, you would probably stand there incredulous as to what was before you. Your mind would be blown.

But this is exactly what we celebrate at Easter. Jesus came back from being dead and caused a stir in Jerusalem one Sunday morning. This event should cause us to ask all sorts of questions if we are really connecting with what happened.

Is this myth or did Jesus actually rise from the dead? If it is not a myth, how is the resurrection of Jesus possible? What implications does the resurrection of Jesus have for humanity?

With regard to the first question, there is one argument that in my mind stands above all the others against the idea of the resurrection being a myth. All of Jesus’ first followers went to their graves believing and proclaiming that Jesus did indeed rise from the dead. The apostles were all martyred or exiled because of this belief. It is hard to imaging that if there was conspiracy to promote a myth that all of them would have maintained the story as being true. For other arguments for the truth of the resurrection, I suggest reading The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona.

With regard to the second question, Paul writes this about Jesus is Romans 1:4:

“and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,” (ESV)

Because Jesus was the Son of God, he was able to conquer death and rise again. The resurrection was proof that Jesus was who he claimed to be. Of Jesus, the Nicene Creed states:

“We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.“

There are many implications for believers as a result of the resurrection but I will state two of them. First, it is right to worship Jesus in response to the event of the first Easter. The second one is that the resurrection of Jesus proves that we do not need to fear death. We may fear the process of dying, but we should not fear the result.

A corollary of the removal of fear of death is that all our other fears should be alleviated. If death has no power over us, what else is there to fear?

I’m not saying that I live this way, but I am acknowledging that I should. This is a classic example of “do as I say, not as I do” because I often respond in fear to my circumstances.

Today is Easter, the day set aside to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. Can we at least acknowledge that the event we celebrate should give us victory over all fear? Perhaps with that acknowledgement, we can take baby steps toward living that way.