Why Easter is Cooler Than Christmas

It is Monday. The day after Easter. And I’m not blue.

That’s not the case usually the day after Christmas. The day after Christmas all the presents have been opened. The holiday season is coming to a close. The month of planning has come to a climax and now it’s over. It never seems to satisfy.

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy thinking about and celebrating the incarnation. Truth be told we couldn’t have Easter without Christmas. But I like Easter better. The day after Christmas feels like it is time for life to go back to normal. Time to get back to the daily grind. Time to get started.

Easter feels like victory. And it is. Because on the Monday after the Resurrection everything is different. Sin has been conquered. Death is in its grave. Hell is being overturned. This compels us to mission, to proclaim an empty tomb. But it feels different than the day after Christmas.

It is Monday. The day after Easter. And I’m not blue.

He has risen! And now everything is different. Easter is way cooler than Christmas because Christmas only leads to Easter. The resurrection is the victory, forever changing every day after.

Christ is Risen!

Happy Easter! Christ is Risen, He is Risen Indeed!

Death is Dead for a Dying Woman

“God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it” (Acts 2:24).

This past weekend my wife and I had the opportunity to spend time with her grandmother.  Her grandmother is dying of cancer.  The doctors say that she has a couple of months left to live.  Our son, Isaiah (3), understands that “grandma is sick”.  Knowing this Isaiah requested that we pray that Grandma gets feeling better. 

After praying I realized that I need to explain to Isaiah that God is probably going to answer his prayer in a way that is much different than he thinks.  I explained to him that sometimes people get so sick that in order to heal them and make them feel better God has to take them to heaven.  I then explained a little about heaven (intermediate heaven I guess you could say) and how God was eventually going to fix all of our brokenness. 

I am not certain how much of this Isaiah was able to grasp.  I am also not certain that I what I said was the best.  All I know is that at that moment what I said was the best that I could do.

As I read through Acts 2 I realize that the redemption that I was speaking of is only possible because God, through Jesus, has put death in its grave.  This is the meat of Peter’s Pentecost sermon.  Jesus has dealt a deathblow to death itself and because of this he has ushered in the new age of the Spirit. 

The conclusion from the resurrection of Christ is simply this, “Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”  Every other religious leader is dead in a grave somewhere.  Abraham. Dead. Moses. Dead. David. Dead.  Only Jesus has been resurrected thus proving that he is indeed the sovereign Lord and he is the Rescuer.  Yes, the very same Jesus that was crucified as a criminal. 

John Mark McMillen captures this well:

Yes, unless Jesus comes back before, my wife’s precious grandmother will pass into eternity.  But we know that because of the resurrection of Christ it is not death to die.  So, what I said to Isaiah still stands.  God has simply decided that it is time to redeem her completely. 

We all get sick, we all die, but it is only through Christ that death is dead in your dying.

Review of Scandalous by D.A. Carson

Author: D.A. Carson

Pages: 176pgs

Publisher: Crossway

Price: 10.39

Genre: Theology/Christian Living

Quick Summary:

Scandalous is the book version of five addresses that D.A. Carson gave at a Resurgence conference on the cross and resurrection of Jesus. The five messages (chapters) are on the ironies of the cross, the centrality of Christ in Scripture, the triumph of a slaughtered lamb, the miracle of the resurrection, and the doubting of the resurrection.

I think Mark Driscoll summarizes this book best when he says, “What happens when one of the world's preeminent theologians expounds on some of the Bible's prominent texts? This book."

What I Liked:

It is rare to find a top-notch scholar that is also a top-notch preacher that is also a top-notch writer. D.A. Carson is that rarity. You cannot go wrong reading Carson. Scandalous is typical D.A. Carson: witty, scholarly, gospel-centered, and greatly helpful. This is one of those books that you will read in a week because you are so involved in each chapter.

If this is your first exposure to D.A. Carson buy this book, read it and buy many of his other books. Carson has an amazing ability to speak relevantly to a new believer, a seminary student, a skeptic, a seasoned believer, and pretty much everyone with a heartbeat. Not only does he speak relevantly but he makes difficult truths easy to understand and he does it in such a fashion that honors and exalts Jesus. You will walk away from reading this book with a much deeper appreciation for Jesus. I truly believe this book will lead to worship.

What I Disliked:

It’s D.A. Carson, what’s not to like? Each chapter stands on its own so it is perfect for a five part Bible study or something. But keep in mind when you get this the purpose of the book. It will go deep, but not deeper than a typical 5 part talk on a subject. The chapters do not necessarily build on each other but they look at a different aspect of the cross and resurrection of Jesus. I found this helpful, but some may dislike that if they are expecting something else.

Should You Buy It?

If you have 10 bucks, you know how to read, and you don’t want to be a moron then I would strongly consider buying this book. It is a fun read and you will certainly have a deeper appreciation for the cross and resurrection after reading things. Go buy it.

Rating: 5 out of 5 stars

Catering Church

Yesterday we asked this question: what should the church look like to an unbeliever on a Sunday morning?  Should it be a catering church—primarily for the unbeliever, or should it be a comprehensible—primarily for the believer, but understandable to the unbeliever?

The Catering Church

The catering church can come in all shapes and sizes.  There are the obvious attractional churches—like the church that has decided to celebrate Easter with a million dollar giveaway.  But there are more subtle variations of this.  In my opinion the SBC’s GPS program falls into this category.  You can read more here and here.  If you are still not convinced then read their training manual. 

To be a catering church you do not have to have the 2 Timothy 4 “itching ears” type of preaching.  It often morphs into that, but that is not a necessity.  You are a catering church when your messages are primarily geared to the unbeliever and the edification of believers is a by-product.  Often catering churches hope to train and teach believers throughout the week in small groups or before the worship service in Sunday School. 

Certainly the Lord uses catering churches to further his kingdom.  I would be hard pressed to find biblical examples that a catering church is not a valid option.  (What I mean saying that is that I would be hard pressed to find anything in Scripture that says “do not make your service cater to the unbeliever).  Obviously in its more extreme forms there is a real danger of subverting the gospel.  Even in its most subtle forms I think there are inherent dangers that should cause us to pause.  However, before look at the dangers we should ask a couple of questions to build a foundation.  We must consider what is the church?  And then we must ask what is the purpose of the church gathering? 

The Church/The Church Gathering

There are a good amount of images given of the church in the Scriptures (body, bride, temple, to name a few).  Scouring through numerous books on ecclesiology you will inevitably come across a myriad of definitions; some lengthy, some simple.  The one that I have come up with (and it may be unintentionally stole) is this: A church is a blood-bought community of redeemed believers, brought together for the purpose of displaying the glory of God through their united joyous surrender to Him. 

I am certain that my definition could be improved, but it has several of the key components in it.  For instance:

• The church is bought by Christ. 
• The church is a community (fellowship, koinonia). 
• The church is made up of believers. 
• The church is on mission. 
• The church is to be united. 
• The church is a people and not a place. 
• The church is primarily for the sake of glorifying God
• The church is to be holy and surrendered to her Head
• The church is to be joyous in her surrender

This, then, is how I would define the church.  We know from the New Testament that this group of believers is to gather together (Hebrews 10:25).  And it was the practice of the early church do just that; see Acts 20:7.  What did they do when they gathered together?  It appears to me that when they gathered together it was for the purpose of worship, edification, and fellowship around the breaking of bread. 

It is possible that I am reading the New Testament wrongly and simply missing something.  But what I see is that when the church gathered it was primarily for the edification of believers through the worship of God and rehearsing the gospel in the breaking of bread together.  I see the early believers doing evangelism, such evangelism that shames my practice.  I do not see them locking their doors to unbelievers, but I also do not see their primary focus being evangelism during their gathering together. 

Now, even if I am correct about the New Testament practice that does not mean that we have to do it this way in our day and age.  There are many things in the practice of the New Testament church that is descriptive and not prescriptive.  This could be one of them.  But I believe there are a few inherent dangers in a catering church; to those we now turn. 

Dangers of Catering Church

By no means will these be true of all churches that would be defined as a “catering church”.  Some churches are able to be a catering church without falling into many of these pitfalls.  But what often happens is that the small local churches try to mimic some of these larger congregations and are often negligent of their calling as a church.

When the primary focus of a local gathering becomes evangelization of unbelievers we begin asking the wrong questions as a church.  The worship gathering is often geared around what will “draw” the unbeliever.  As a result believers are often woefully undiscipled.  The theology is often very weak in these churches.  Certainly you do not have to have a Ph.D. in theology to be in a great relationship with the Lord.  But what often happens is that those who are shallow theologically get tossed to and fro by all sorts of strange doctrines. 

You would think that after hearing “the gospel” in its most basic form week after week that believers in these churches would be solid in gospel understanding.  Ironically, what typically happens is that these believers can lead someone down the “Romans Road” but are not quite certain what the gospel message has to say about their finances, child rearing, work, anxiety, fears, and death. 

Another danger is that evangelism is often stale.  Rather than training believers to do evangelism throughout the week, evangelism often becomes attractional.  Rather than preaching the gospel in the community we often give invitations to come to our church.  The church starts marketing.  There are numerous resources out there about the dangers of attractional models, church marketing, church growth, seeker-sensitive approaches etc.  It would not be for our benefit to rehash all that is spoken of there.  Research on your own. 

I am mentioning all of this simply to point to what I envision as a better way.  The point of these articles is not to be needlessly divisive, to tear down churches, or to discourage faithful believers.  My hope is that if there is a more faithful God honoring way that we will embrace it.  If I am wrong and you disagree, then so be it.  

What If…There Had Been No Resurrection

I used to collect comic books.  One of the particular series that I liked was the “What If…” series.  What If…Daredevil Killed the Kingpin?  What If…the Fantastic Four All Had the Same Power?  What If…Kraven the Hunter Had Killed Spider-man?  This past Sunday evening I had the opportunity to preach.  I recycled an Easter sermon from last year:  What If…Jesus Was Not Resurrected.  The text is from 1 Corinthians 15:12-20.  Here are the points and sub-points:

I.  What If…Christ is Not Resurrected?

1. Christian preaching (proclamation) is in vain
2. The faith of Christians is in vain
3. The writers of the New Testament cannot be trusted; they are false witnesses and guilty of misrepresenting God. 
4. Christians, believing they are forgiven, are in fact still in their sins
5. Those that have died have no hope (there is no hope of an after-life)
6. Christians are people to be most pitied

II.  What If…Christ is Resurrected?

1. Christian preaching is NOT in vain
2. The faith of Christians is NOT in vain
3. The writers of the NT are reliable (at least this goes a long way in proving that)
4. The sins of believers has indeed been removed; we have newness of life
5. We do have hope of an after-life
6. Rather than being pitied believers have hope and meaning in their lives

The resurrection is vital to our faith.  It is worth noting that what is being addressed in Corinth is not a denial of the resurrection of Jesus but resurrection altogether.  Even so, to deny the resurrection is to deny the Christian faith. 

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 02/19

Are we still under the Law? Nathan Busenitz attempts to answer that question. Today we are treated to Part 1 in his series. His thesis will be that the apostlic saints saw that we are "no longer under any part of the Mosaic law". He will prove this by making four points. We are treated to his first point today; "the biblical saints saw the Mosaic law as a solitary unit." Check it out, here. You can also read the introductory post, here.

Trevin Wax is asking his readers to come up with Gospel Definitions. How would you define the gospel? He also offers advice on How the older gen. can mentor the younger.

In the category of This is What Happens When We Make Man the Center: the Daily Dose delivers an article about Easter. Joshua responds to a church marketing flier that says, "Easter: It's All About You". I understand what they are attempting to say. But whenever we make that which is secondary, the primary thing, we run the risk of idolatry.

Ed Stetzer has a great article on Ethnicity in the SBC.

Michael Patton continues his series on the Emerging Church. Today he tries to tack jello to the wall, or in other words, define the emerging church.

John Piper posts his son Karsten's poem on Luke 18:25. It is phenomenal.

Phil Johnson continues his discussion on total depravity. Today he asks, How did we Inherit Adam's Sinfulness?

If this guy is serious, then I apologize; it deserves not laughter but rebuke. If it's a joke, then it's a really good one. Because I am giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, and do not see how it cannot be a joke, I post it. (HT: Reformed Mafia)



Along the same lines John Piper discusses his hatred of the prosperity "gospel". (HT: purgatorio)