JUDE: FIGHTING TRUTH DECAY #3

INTRODUCTION

There are very few people who enjoy conflict.  The vast majority of decent people will do almost anything to avoid situations of confrontation.  So, the soup may be cold, the meat tough and the pudding inedible, but when the waiter asks us if we are enjoying our meal we’ll smile and nod.  We don’t want to complain, we don’t want to make a fuss.  We’ll even pay for the privilege. 

This is how bullies succeed.  They realize that no matter how unhappy we are with their behaviour we’re not going to stand up to them, because the last thing we want is a shouting match. 

That was the gamble Hitler took when he marched German troops into the Rhineland in March 1936 in breach of a condition forced on Germany after World War 1.  It was a huge gamble.  If the French army, stationed on the other side of the border, had marched against him, the Germans would have had to retreat and there’s no doubt Hitler’s regime would have collapsed.  But he guessed correctly that the French had no stomach for a fight.  If only they had, then the tragedy of a second World War might have been avoided.

BRIDGE

Sad to say, but the Christian Church has never been a stranger to conflict.  Down through the centuries Christians have debated, argued, and fought over what we ought to believe. 

During the 4^th century the Church was divided over who Jesus really is: is he God or is he something less than God.  A man called Arius said of Jesus, “There was a time when he was not”; in other words that Jesus was not God and therefore not eternal.  This made sense to a lot of people. 

But Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, refused to compromise on this.  If Jesus were not divine, how could he be our Saviour?  He stuck to his guns, even though it cost him seventeen years in exile.  And in the end, because he had scripture on his side, he won the argument. 

The next generation had to contend with a British monk called Pelagius, who said that we could live a life without sin if we really put our minds to it.  Jesus didn’t die to save us from our sins but to give us an example to follow. 

It was Augustine who stood up against this.  What Pelagius taught was attractive, for it played to human pride.  But pointing to Paul’s letters, Augustine insisted that we are helpless to save ourselves; we are saved by God’s grace alone.

At the Reformation again the question centred on how we are saved from our sins.  Is it God’s work alone; or can we contribute to our salvation by collecting merits like tokens from a cereal box?  Where would we be if Luther and Calvin and Knox had run away from conflict?

Our Covenanting ancestors stood up to the king himself, insisting that there was only one king over their conscience, King Jesus. 

The fact is, if there had never been conflict, if there never had been people willing to stand up for what they believe in no matter the cost, Christianity would never have survived as an identifiable religion, distinct from all the other faiths that command human allegiance. 

Conflict is the anvil upon which the Christian faith has been hammered out.  It has been hard, it has been painful, it has been divisive, but it has also been necessary.

Jude tells his readers that he would rather be writing to them about the salvation we share.  He wanted to write an uplifting, encouraging, feel-good letter.  But he couldn’t.  The situation wouldn’t let him. It would have been negligent of him.  Instead, he had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. 

Jude is urging his readers to fight.  To fight for their very survival as Christians. 

Friends, I hope you realize that this is why I and many other minsters have entered the fray in recent weeks.  None of us enjoys conflict; none of us wants a fight.  Indeed, I believe a case could be made against us that in recent years we have erred too much in avoiding conflict.  We have taken the approach of “see no evil, hear no evil, say no evil.”  We had our suspicions, but we said nothing, not wanting to be labelled trouble-makers.  It turns out that even when sin is dangled in front of our noses, we are still called trouble-makers for opposing it. 

We have not sought this fight; nor have we chosen the battle-ground.  Arguments about sex and an individual’s private life are hardly edifying.  We’d rather the cause was something nobler, like the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, or our Presbyterian form of church government.  There has even been some friendly-fire from certain evangelicals saying that this is not the hill to die on. 

Are we making a mountain of out of mole-hill?  Should we agree to disagree?  Is all this conflict unnecessary? 

Let’s look at the situation Jude was facing and ask ourselves: If he were living today, would he be urging us to live in peace with those we disagree with, or would he be telling us to contend for the faith? 

 TEXT

Last week we saw that the situation Jude was confronting was within the Church.  He wasn’t giving a critique on the immorality of pagan society; he was exposing a problem within the Church. 

He identifies the problem in v.4:

For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you.  They are godless men who change the grace of our God into a licence for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

Certain men…have slipped in among you.  That implies that these men were outsiders who had somehow wormed their way into the fellowship, not just as members, but as teachers.  That’s the problem.  They weren’t there to attend worship; they were there to propagate their version of Christianity. 

The Lord Jesus warned that this would happen.  Mt.7:15:

Watch out for false prophets.  They come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.  By their fruit you will recognize them.

Our Lord was aware that just as the Old Testament people of God had been savaged by false prophets, so his Church could easily fall prey to those who would seek to lead people away from the straight and narrow road that leads to life. 

When we examine what it is that the false prophets of the Old Testament did, it’s not that introduced new ideas or beliefs.  They didn’t, for example, question the sacrificial system; they didn’t suggest an alternative method of finding forgiveness of sins. 

Rather, what they did was to tell people what they wanted to hear.  Micah 2:11:

If a liar and deceiver comes and says, I will prophesy for you plenty of wine and beer, he would be just the prophet for this people.

These prophets were for hire.  Pay them well enough and they’d tell you whatever you wanted to hear—in the name of the Lord.  And, of course, what people wanted to hear most was—Don’t worry, there’s no judgement, you’re ok. And all in the Lord’s name.  

Her leaders judge for a bride, her priests teach for a price, and her prophets tell fortunes for money.  Yet they lean upon the Lord and say, Is not the Lord among us?  No disaster will come upon us.  (Mic.3:11)

They were false prophets because they lulled their hearers into a false sense of security.  They allowed them to believe that all was well between them and God, when all was not well. 

Now then, what is it that these infiltrators whom Jude so opposed, were teaching? 

They are godless men who change the grace of our God into a licence for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

They change the grace of God into a licence for immorality.  They were doing the very thing that the Apostle Paul warned against in Rom.6. 

The Apostle has been speaking about the wonderful grace of God brought to us through Christ’s death on the cross.  Adam’s one sin led to condemnation; Christ’s one act of obedience brings life for all men.  Our sins are forgiven, not because of anything we can do or say, but because of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

At the beginning of Rom.6 the apostle anticipates an objection:

What shall we say, then?  Shall we on sinning so that grace may increase? 

He anticipates someone arguing that if God is a God of grace, who forgives us without any pre-conditions, without any demand that we reform our ways first, then why not go on sinning so that God can go on forgiving us.  Indeed, why not commit great sins, so that we can show the world just how far God’s grace will stretch.  After all, don’t we sing:

the vilest offender who truly believes, that moment from Jesus a pardon receives

Not long ago I had a conversation with a Moslem woman who made this very point.  We agreed on so many things—the greatness and majesty of God; the spiritual bankruptcy of our culture; the need to walk humbly before our Maker.  But here’s what she could not comprehend: Jesus being our substitute, Jesus dying for our sins.  The way she saw it, if someone else dies for your sins, there’s no incentive to be good.  Sin all you want, and Jesus will suffer the consequences.

Paul’s critics accused him for encouraging sin.  And it seems they were right.  The men Jude opposed reasoned that God’s grace meant they could sin with impunity.  It was a licence for immorality.  God had given them permission to sin.  And they were teaching others to do the same. 

It’s such an attractive way of thinking.  Here is your eternal “get out of jail free card”.  Christ has died for you and your place in heaven is secure.  So what difference does it make if you sin now and again?  God will forgive—that’s his job. 

How do we answer such an attitude?  Are we going to say that God isn’t really that gracious?  That he isn’t really that merciful?  For in fact, he is. 

Perhaps there is someone in church today who can’t quite grasp this.  You are only too well aware of your sin, how miserable you’ve made life for others, how proud you’ve been, how you’ve hardened your heart against God’s love.  And you’re desperate for peace, desperate to be reconciled to your Heavenly Father.  But you fear you are too far away; that you are beyond God’s reach.  Like the Prodigal Son, you are in a “far country”. 

You hear the gospel message of a free and full pardon simply by trusting in Jesus Christ.  This is what you long for; this is what you yearn for.  But it sounds too good to be true; it sounds too easy. 

Let me assure you: this is the Christian gospel.  All you need to bring to the Lord are your empty hands, open wide, ready to receive his grace.  All he asks is that you believe him when he says he will forgive.  It’s his gift to you and all he wants to hear from you is “thank you” thank you Lord for saving my soul/thank you Lord for making me whole

thank you Lord for giving to me/thy great salvation, so rich, so free.

But having received such a gift: Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase?

Paul’s answer to that conclusion is (Rom.6:2): By no means.  Or in the Authorized Version, God forbid.  The Bible translator JB Philips is very English in his version: What a ghastly thought!   

That’s right, it is a ghastly thought.  We died to sin, how can we live in it any longer?   

A Christian is someone who has died to sin.  Death is the penalty for sin; but Christ has paid the penalty for us.  In v.5 Paul talks about being united to Christ.  All that he did, we have done “in Christ.”  When he died, we died.  When he descended to hell, we descended to hell.  When he rose from the grave, we rose from the grave.

And when a Christian appears before the judgement seat of God, as we all surely will, our Heavenly Father will not see our sins, for they have been blotted out by the blood of the Saviour. 

We died to sin, how can we live it any longer?

It is inconceivable that a Christian would want to sin.  It doesn’t make any sense that a Christian would be attracted to sin.  The very idea of wanting to continue living in such a way that contradicts the will of God should be anathema to us. 

So these men who change the grace of God into a license for immorality cannot be embraced as brothers in Christ.  They probably thought themselves very enlightened, very progressive.  They regarded men like Jude as repressed and thrawn to an out-dated morality.  Christ had freed them from the constraints of the law.  The had no fear of the judgement to come.

Look what Jude says of them.  He says they are godless.  They weren’t atheists in the strict sense of the word, but they might as well have been. 

Worst of all, by their behaviour they were denying Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord. 

The Lord Jesus called his disciples to a very high standard of morality.  The Old Testament said “do not murder”; Jesus said, don’t even be angry with your brother.  The law said “do not commit adultery”; Jesus warned against bedding someone in your mind.  Jesus told us to go the extra mile, to turn the other cheek, to pray for our enemies. 

These godless men were contradicting all of that.  They might call themselves Christians, but they weren’t following Christ.  They were following their own lusts. 

Ultimately, that’s what sin is.  When we sin we are denying that Jesus Christ is our only Sovereign and Lord, for we are obeying another sovereign, another lord.

Jude, therefore, must urge his readers to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

He doesn’t say that we are to be contentious, seeking controversy for its own sake.  We don’t go looking for a fight.  But when the faith comes under attack we are to defend it.  The Greek word for “contend” means to struggle.  It implies exertion.  It’s the word that was used to describe wrestlers battling out in the ring. 

And it’s more than just defending the faith; it’s more than not just giving ground.  It’s about going on the offensive too, doing all that we can to promote the advance of the gospel.  Fight the good fight of the faith, says Paul to Timothy (1Tim.6:12). 

And note what it is that we are to contend for: not our rights, not our status, not our money, nor our buildings.  Still less our party, our group, our opinions.  We are to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

Jude is referring to the fact that Christianity is not a religion that evolved over time like the animistic or pagan religions.  Christianity is a religion with a clear set of beliefs which the apostles taught their first converts and expected them to adhere to in perpetuity. 

Paul, for example, in 1Cor.11:2 says:

I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings just as I passed them on to you.

The Christian faith is not like clay which can be moulded and shaped to suit the tastes of each new generation.  Sure, there are certain aspects to our church life that are going to change over the years, such as the hymns we sing.  And there are areas of disagreement which Christians have learned to live with—should we have bishops or not, should we baptise our children or not, should we use set prayers or not.  We agree to disagree on these issues because ultimately whatever side of the fence you come down on does not affect your eternal salvation. 

But when it comes to issues such as who Jesus really is, what he did for us on the cross, his resurrection from the grave, and the authority of Scripture, Christians have never regarded these as peripheral.  If you don’t believe that Jesus is the man who was God, if you don’t believe that he died on the cross as our substitute, if you don’t believe he rose from the dead, if you regard the Bible as useful but not authoritative, call yourself whatever you want: just don’t call yourself a Christian.  For you have departed from the faith once for all entrusted to the saints. 

And isn’t it interesting that what Jude is calling on his readers to fight for is not, in a sense, strict doctrine: it’s about the moral implications of the gospel.  For that too is not peripheral. 

We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?

That’s what the gospel is all about; it’s about changing lives; it’s the power of God to transfer sinful men and women from the realm of darkness to the kingdom of his light; it’s about being freed from the tyranny of sin.  It’s not about giving men and women the licence to sin with impunity. 

The present crisis facing the Church is not about secondary issues.  It goes to the very heart of the faith itself, a faith through which we glorify God by demonstrating to the world around us that we are the new creation, who are called to be holy as God is holy. 

To claim that the homosexual life-style is worthy of a child of God; to demand that a same-sex partnership be recognized as on a footing with marriage; to commend such a life-style to others is to deny that Jesus Christ is our only Sovereign and Lord.  It is to turn the grace of God into a licence for immorality. 

Such people will not inherit the kingdom of God (1Cor.6:10).  And therefore they must be resisted.  The sake of those tempted by same-sex attraction; for the sake of the brother or sister seeking to live in conformity with God’s Word; for the sake of the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints, they must be resisted at all costs.

CONCLUSION

Let me assure you, neither I nor like-minded minsters enjoy conflict.  We long to be getting on with the work of the gospel in our parishes.  It’s a distraction we could do without.

But have we learned nothing from history?  Remember Hitler and the re-taking of the Rhineland.  He got away with it.  No one stopped him.  So next it was Austria, then Czechoslovakia, and then Poland and only then world war.

I can’t help asking myself: if we say nothing, do nothing at this time, what next?  What scriptural truth is next for shaving?  The uniqueness of Christ as our only Saviour?  The nature of God as Holy Trinity?  

What moral standards will we depart from?  Can we expected unmarried couples in our manses?  A line has to be drawn in the sand, or the whole edifice will come tumbling down (now there’s a mixed metaphor for you!)

Let me finish by quoting Bible commentator, John Benton ]from Slandering the Angels, Welwyn Commentary series]

 We must contend for the faith whether the gospel is popular or whether it is not.  We must do this when society believes in God and when it does not.  We must do this when it is intellectually respectable to be a Bible believer and when it is not.  We must do it when the established church hierarchy are good men committed to the truth and when they are heretical liberals who sneer at the old gospel.  We must do it when Christianity is the dominant faith in a country and when it has to jostle in the religious market-place of a pluralistic society.

 The church must do this whether it is in the midst of a rising civilisation or whether its culture is collapsing all around it.  The church must do it in a modern world of science and objectivity and in a post-modern/New Age world dominated by image and subjectivity.  The church must do it when it is in the midst of heaven-sent revival or when it is suffering, dwindling and small. 

 It’s the only way to fight truth decay.