I just got the chance to read the outline of the sermon you preached and the other draft you posted. I have to say I love the focus and thought that you put in this. I must say it is way more work than I would have ever done. Although I thrive under the pressure of thinking on my feet. I after all was a state impromptu speech champion in high school. All that said I think you did a fantastic job of capturing the text and placing it in a correct understanding. Love the call for us to think of how we identify false teaching as to look for real biblical teaching to model it after. The problem there is you need to hit people harder and ask the question “Do we really know how to identify true teaching, or better yet have we ever really heard true teaching that does not simply apply lip service to the Gospel but compel the sinner to respond?” I know that would not have gone over well in our Church but it needs to be said.
Over all great job I hope we are allowed to be blessed by your preaching more often.
With the love of Christ,
Thanks for your comments! I would love to be more impromptu (my parents would especially enjoy that, coming from a charismatic background). I wanted to be able to get my point in within their suggested time limit of 30 minutes. As more of these opportunities arise, I hope to get better at that...And, as I read my Bible more and more, the Holy Spirit can bring to mind those things I've meditated on.
I appreciate your positive and critical feedback. There were several things at work here. My first draft was almost too scriptural. Now, I know what you're thinking. "What?! You can't have too much Scripture!" Nigel was concerned my use of scriptures was going to exegete me completely away from the main texts and points. Dennis rightly replied that I might be speaking more for Jeff than for God. Those two comments said, I thought I would revise my first main revision and simplify it, which is what you heard today. I think the difference between the first and second revisions was the difference between keeping things logical and jumping all over the place. Frankly, the first revision was much harder to follow, anyway.
That said, I appreciate your concern about addressing the false teaching going on in our very valley. I wanted to address it terribly bad. What I am going to do is create a follow-up blog which will elaborate on the practical application of my sermon, and call out local false teacher, David M. (not the D.M. to whom I am responding), for his views on Christians not having a sin nature, Jesus interpreting scripture to him directly, and the devil supposedly having access to our thoughts, as well as a refutation on his view of repentance, which will undoubtedly include references to the law and us being guilty sinners in need of a savior who could fulfill the law on our behalf. Please let me know if I address that concern accurately.