Influence

it is always a joy to be here to fellowshipwith r.c., whom i love and appreciate and with the others who are part of ligonier ministriesand see friends and particularly to be with you. i do feel like the poor, you always haveme with you, and that's okay. if it's okay with you, it's certainly fine with me. i thinki understand my subject -- oh, thank you -- i think i understand that my subject on "themyth of influence." you'll be a better judge of that, or somebody will when i'm finished,than you will be able to be now. i think i understand what was in the mind of the peoplewho crafted that subject, having read through the edition of tabletalks in which that wasaddressed. but at the same time, i'm going to come at it from my own heart and my ownperspective and hope that it will prove to

be helpful to you. you know, when i came out of seminary i knewthere would be battles to be fought, and my dad was and still is a warrior for the truth,and i think i inherited that from his example and the pattern of his life and ministry.and i really thought there would be battles to fight, there would be battles over inerrancy,there would be battles over the authority of the word of god, there would be battlesover the deity of jesus christ which was under liberal assault. i could already anticipatebattles over spiritual areas such as the doctrine of the holy spirit, paradigms for sanctification,those kinds of things. i expected that. what i didn't expect was to spend most of my ministrylife battling to rescue the gospel from evangelicals.

that really has been a shock to me, and itis seemingly getting worse all the time as the gospel sinks below the radar. and if you'llpardon me, i think it is going to be in my heart through this message to call us backto a true understanding of the gospel. let me just see if i can't start out witha point and then we'll go from there to see how that fleshes out in a particular text.the myth of influence is that the gospel advances on the back of public favor. the myth of influenceis that we can somehow influence people into the kingdom of god if we can create a popgospel, a designer gospel, if we can create alliances, if we can posture ourselves andposition ourselves in places of influence and authority and impact in the world aroundus, if we can stylize our churches to eliminate

consumer resistance, we can sort of influencepeople into the kingdom. that's the scheme, and a myriad of compromises are made in thatprocess. you know them, i don't need to chronicle all of the compromises in developing a non-threateningmessage, an inclusive kind of salvation in trying to eliminate everybody's offences,making the church look, sound, and feel like a big starbucks, trying to craft all kindsof things to make people feel comfortable, and all offensive elements being set asidewe can sort of subtly lure people into the kingdom. there's only one way into the kingdom, andit is through the gate of the gospel and the gospel alone. the cruel irony is that aftereverybody has done all of that and created

all those machinations and all those marketingthings, at the end of the day people will only enter the kingdom when they understandand believe the true gospel, the word of the cross as revealed in scripture. the gospeldoes not advance on the back of public favor; it advances on the back of the holy spiritin spite of public hostility. the myth of influence is sort of, "if they think we'recool, they'll think jesus is cool too." serious worship disappears along with the public ordinances.biblical-theological exposition of scripture vanishes. transcendence and profundity areexchanged for mimicking, shallow, worldly styles, church discipline is non-existent,holiness minimized, and sin normalized. and the myth is somehow that this is going toget people into the kingdom.

now, i want to get people into the kingdom.i understand what was in the heart of john knox when he said, "give me scotland, or idie." i understand what henry martyn meant when he walked out of that terrible hindutemple in india and weeping wrote in his diary, "i cannot endure existence if jesus is tobe so dishonored." i understand that. i want to see the world changed. i want to see societychanged. i want to see righteousness prevail. but the only way that it can be changed isthrough the power of the gospel, and we have to go back to that gospel. and the good news,frankly, no matter how you sugarcoat it, is scandalous. it is offensive, it is shameful,and it is hard to believe. in fact, that's the title of a book i'm in the process ofwriting, "hard to believe." it's very hard

to believe. to believe the gospel goes against everythingthat is natural in man -- everything. and that's why the word of the cross is so shameful,so shameful, so antagonizing that even faithful christians struggle to proclaim the true gospelbecause of the rejection, the ridicule, and the embarrassment it brings. i think manypeople alter the gospel not to make it easier for people for believe, but they alter thegospel to take the heat off themselves for presenting it. martyn lloyd-jones once said,"if you have never been ashamed of the gospel in your life, it's not because you're sucha great christian, it's because you don't understand the gospel." it produces hostility.that's why it's hard for some christian leaders,

when they get on television in certain secularsettings, to really speak the gospel. sometimes, they can't get the word "jesus" out. it justwon't come out. paul said to timothy in 2 timothy 1:8, "do not be ashamed of the lord."what a bizarre statement to make to a preacher. do not be ashamed of the lord? but you seethe gospel is so hard to believe that the sinner who should feel the shame turns theshame on the preacher, on the evangel. paul said in romans 1:16, "for i am not,"what? "ashamed of the gospel of christ." that just didn't drop out of the air. he didn'tjust say that without a context. why did he say that? i mean, would a person for examplewho found the cure for aids say, "boy, i just have to overcome shame to proclaim this"?would a person who found the cure for cancer

somehow have to overcome shame to presentthat cure? why is it, then, that when we have the cure for sin in the truth of the gospel,there is shame associated with it? shame that silences us, shame that makes us literallytwist the gospel into something easy, something acceptable, something that produces no hostility?it's always been that way and paul had, by the power of the holy spirit, come to a placein his life where he said, "i am not ashamed. i am not ashamed. i will not be ashamed."and he said that in the context of a culture where shame and honor were critical matters. shame and honor in the ancient greek and romanworld were preeminent. homer wrote this, "the chief good is to be well spoken of. the chiefevil is to be badly spoken of by one's society.

avoid shame and seek honor." paul preachedin that shame-sensitive culture, shamelessly proclaiming what people thought was a shamefulmessage about a shamed man. it was foolish, it was scandalous, it was offensive, it wasshameful, but it was the only way that sinners could come into the kingdom. i want you to turn in your bible to 1 corinthianschapter 1, and i am going to take you to a familiar passage. as r.c. said a moment ago,we go back to some of these passages we know so well. this is one of those, but i wantto look at this passage both this morning and tomorrow morning. i couldn't get thisinto one message and frankly i don't know if i can get it into two, but we'll go asfar as we can. i want you to look at chapter

1 and listen to the word of god starting inverse 18: "for the word of the cross is to those whoare perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of god. for itis written, 'i will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the cleveri will set aside.' where is the wise man? where is the scribe? where is the debaterof this age? has not god made foolish the wisdom of the world? for since in the wisdomof god the world through its wisdom did not come to know god, god was well-pleased throughthe foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe." i'm going to stop there for a moment. there'sthe key half of a verse, "god was well pleased

through the foolishness of the message preachedto save those who believed." god determined that entrance into his kingdom and salvationwould come by means of this message, which is called in verse 18, "the word of the cross,"which is the power of god to those who are being saved. now, what i want to do is lookat this passage this morning and tomorrow morning, and i want to show you the shamefulgospel of the cross and why it is that all of the posturing and all of the religiousalliances and all of the positions of power and influence in our world that might be availableto christians don't take us any place where ultimately we can do any eternal good untilwherever we are the gospel is proclaimed, and there is no way to lessen the shame andthe scandal of that message.

now, i just want to unfold a few things. firstof all, the shameful stigma of the cross. now, i don't know everything i'm going tosay, so this is kind of an adventure for me too. the shameful stigma of the cross, buti want you to notice first of all, verse 18, "the word of the cross is to those who areperishing foolishness." then drop down to verses 22 and 23, "for indeed jews ask forsigns and greeks search for wisdom; but we preach christ crucified, to jews a stumblingblock and to gentiles foolishness." go back to verse 18, "the word of the cross,"the message of the cross, the gospel is to those who are perishing (moria in the greek)idiotic, insane. it is the word from which we get "moron." and it's a repeated articlethere "the word of the cross" turns that second

article into a demonstrative pronoun. theword of the cross, the only cross, is to those who are apollumenois, those who are lost,those who are ruined, those who are unregenerate, it is moronic. it is idiotic. i don't knowthat we fully understand that. if god wanted to design a message that was going to be hardto believe, he could not have designed one more difficult than this one, because theidea of god dying on a cross was moronic, both to a jew and a gentile. the jews, according to verse 22, sought asign, some wonder, some supernatural evidence that this was the true messiah and this wasthe true savior. they sought a sign, and god gave them a stumbling block. the greeks soughtwisdom, some transcendental, elevated, esoteric

knowledge, some elevated spiritual experience.they wanted wisdom; they got foolishness. the jews wanted a sign; they got a stumblingblock. the jews received a skandalon -- a crucified messiah was bizarre, offensive,and blasphemous. and the greeks, who loved wisdom, saw this as utter stupidity, the nonsensethat the eternal creator force of the universe, crucified on a cross is idiotic. let me give a little background to the crossso you'll understand why this was true. crucifixion was a horrific form of capital punishment;it's origin in the persian empire, used by various barbarian groups, used for individualsand group executions. it came down, of course, into the roman empire and right into the landof israel as we know. but going back a little

bit in its history, darius crucified 3000babylonians, alexander the great crucified 2000 from tyre along the shore. you know,the people of tyre really irritated him because after he conquered them and they escaped tothe island offshore, he sent out a message that he wanted supplies and they basicallysaid to him, "well, you can't get to us, we're in this island, and we're not giving you anything."so, he took all the rubble of the city on the shore, he destroyed it, threw it in thewater, made a causeway, and went out there and massacred them and crucified 2000 of them. alexander jannaeus, who lived in the arearight around 100 b.c., crucified 800 pharisees while their wives and children were slaughteredat their feet while they were hanging on a

cross. this seared the horror of crucifixionin the jewish minds. rome came to power around 63 b.c. and used crucifixion extensively.felix, a familiar name, procurator of judea, a.d. 52 to 58, crucified many, many criminals,and when titus destroyed jerusalem in 70 a.d., there were mass crucifixions everywhere. infact, there were so many crucifixions in 70 a.d. that the soldiers ran out of wood. constantinefinally, in 337 or so, abolished crucifixion after a millennium of unbelievable cruelty. now, a survey like that indicates to us thatcrucifixion was common. the way the lord died was nothing notable. some historians estimatethat around the time of jesus at least 30,000 people are on record as having been crucified.the question then comes up, "how could this

jesus be anybody exceptional?" certainly,dying on a cross is not exceptional. how in the world could we assume that he is god incarnatewhen he died not only a common death but the common death of the most base kind of criminal?roman citizens, for example, were generally exempt from crucifixion. the only way a romancitizen could ever get himself crucified was if he committed treason against rome. thecross was reserved for rebellious slaves, it was reserved for conquered people, it wasused for notorious robbers and assassins. it was occasionally used for those roman citizenswho had breached in severe ways, treasonously, the security of rome. the roman empire policies on crucifixion ledromans to view crucified men with universal

contempt. anybody who was crucified was treatedwith absolute contempt. crucifixion was a systematized series of events including flogging,carrying the cross beam, a sign over your neck, naked, and of course then tied or nailedto the crossbar, hoisted to an upright post, and left there suspended, stark naked beforethe view of everyone. death could be hurried by shattering the legs but was usually prolongedby not doing that so that the sufferer suffered for days. the final indignity was leavingthe corpse to rot and be carrion for the birds. josephus describes multiple tortures and positionsof christians during the siege of jerusalem. they were crucified in every imaginable kindof position, even impaled in unmentionable ways. the gentiles viewed anybody crucifiedwith absolute contempt. crucifixion was a

virtual obscenity, not to be discussed inpolite company. the cultured world did not talk about crucifixion. cicero wrote, "thisvery word 'cross' should be removed, not only from the person of a roman citizen but fromhis thoughts, his eyes, and his ears." the deep contempt that gentiles had for thosecrucified is seen in pagan statements against christ. we were in rome recently, and in thepalatine hill near circus maximum there was discovered there graffiti scratched on a stonein a guard room, and it shows the figure of a man with the head of an ass, and this manis hanging on a cross, and below this crucified figure in a gesture of adoration is anotherman bowing before this man with the head of an ass, and the inscription reads "alexamenosworships his god," just sheer mockery. such

a depiction of the lord jesus christ, so repulsiveto believers, vividly illustrates the pagan contempt for the idea of a crucified lordand god. justin's first apology in a.d. 52 summarizesthe gentile view, "they proclaim our madness to consist in this that we give to a crucifiedman a place equal to the unchangeable and eternal god, the creator of all." that isthe summation of christian madness, nonsense, idiocy. and the jewish attitude toward crucifixionwas all of that and more. they detested the roman practice, holding it in more contemptthan the pagans did. but they went beyond that. they saw a crucified person as one whobore the curse of god, deuteronomy 21:23, "whoever hangs on a tree is cursed by god."dying a common death, dying the death of the

most wretched criminals, dying the death,bearing the curse of god, and you're telling me this is god the son, the messiah, the saviorof the world? that is scandalous! scandalous!" the jews did not crucify living people, butthey did hang up dead bodies. a second century mashal indicates that blasphemers and idolaters,after they died were put up on a cross, after they were stoned were put up on a cross andtaken down the same day to fulfill deuteronomy 21:23, showing they are accursed from god. now, where am i going with all this? thesepervasive attitudes toward crucifixion posed a massive obstacle to the gospel of the firstcentury. when we think of a cross, we think of something pretty that hangs in a churchor around your neck. it was scurrilous and

scandalous, a stumbling block, foolishness,idiocy. i'm telling you, preach that message in that first century world, and it's hardto believe, and there really is no way to make it easy. it's hard to believe. the gospelactually called the jews to surrender to the very one they considered smitten by god andafflicted, to borrow isaiah's words. it doesn't seem to me that god could have put a moreformidable barrier to faith in their way. some gentile writer said of the cross, "itis a perverse and extravagant superstition." others said, "it is a sick delusion." martin hengel has written an excellent littlebook called "crucifixion." you should get it and read it. it says, "to believe thatthe one preexistent son of the one true god,

the mediator at creation and the redeemerof the world had appeared in very recent times in out of the way galilee as a member of theobscure people of the jews and even worse had died the death of a common criminal ona cross could only be regarded as a sign of madness. the real gods of greece and romecould be distinguished from mortal men by the very fact that they were immortal. theyhad absolutely nothing in common with the one who was bound in the most ignominiousfashion and executed in the most shameful way." but this is the story. this is the truth.this is the cross. there is no seeker-friendly message here. there is nothing easy to believehere. it is both an absurdity and an obscenity. there is not only the shameful stigma of thecross, but secondly let me talk a minute about

the shameful simplicity of the cross. go backto the text. in verses 19-21, the apostle writes: "for it is written, 'i will destroy the wisdomof the wise, and the cleverness of the clever i will set aside.' where is the wise man?where is the scribe? where is the debater of this age? has not god made foolish thewisdom of the world? for since in the wisdom of god the world through its wisdom did notcome to know god, god was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached tosave those who believe." jews and gentiles were into complexity. especiallythe greeks were into their philosophical complexities, and the jews were into their rabbinic complexities.the gentiles loved philosophy, they loved

metaphysics, they loved mental gymnastics,they loved intellectual labyrinths, and they believed the truth was knowable only to thosewho had ascended knowledge, only to those who had elevated insights, only to those whotranscended the hoi polloi. they were looking for the complexities of transcendental knowledge.that was embedded in their system of life. after i was on larry king the other night,a very famous person called me and wanted to talk with me on the phone. he said, "i'msearching for religious answers," and he said, "i want to ask a question about your church."and i said, "sure." he said, "does your church understand the spiritual significance of gravity?"i said, "i don't think we do. maybe you could help me to understand this. i know that ifyou get up high enough, it has real spiritual

significance." and then he went on to say,"well, so you don't understand the multilayered, magnetic fields of the universe that reverberateagainst each other?" "no, i'm not real sure about that," but i said, "i'd love to talkwith you." so next wednesday i have an appointment. pray for me. i don't even know what he's goingto throw at me, but i know what i'm going to tell him and it's not going to be easy.it's hard to believe, especially if you're there in that esoteric never, never land. the gospel has no sensitivity to that. ithas no sensitivity and no interest in gnosticism. it has no interest in what he's into, kabbalism.it has no interest in the complex, esoteric human wisdom and insight. and it is just offensive.look what it says, "i will destroy the wisdom

of the wise." it's just too simple. "i willdestroy the cleverness of the clever," set it aside. and then these mocking statements,"where are you, wise man? where are you, scribe? where are you, debater of this age?" everythingyou have to offer is foolishness. all of your stuff, it's the same word from moraino, "allyour stuff is nonsense. you think the gospel is nonsense? everything you've got is nonsense."this is a comprehensive denunciation of all the accumulated insight, understanding, wisdomof the elite as regards any impact on true, spiritual knowledge. take all the human geniuses,get the best thinkers and the best debaters, and they all add up to absolutely nothing.nothing! so, what do you say to somebody when you goto them with the gospel? first of all, the

gospel runs against the grain of their emotionalsensibilities. the horror of crucifixion just doesn't equate with the message that thisis god the son, lord of the universe. it's more than their emotion could stand, particularlyin the first century when it was so vivid. then, when you've sort of assaulted theiremotions, we could say more about that but keep moving for time, then you go after theirmind and you say, "by the way, all the wisdom you've accumulated, all your insights andthe insights of others through all the centuries amount to absolutely nothing. all spiritualtruth is bound up in one reality, and that is faith in jesus christ." there were aroundthe time of paul, as best we can count, about 50 philosophical parties and movements inthe first century. love of wisdom was their

passion. professing themselves to be wise,they actually had become what? fools. human wisdom, all set aside. in spiritual matters,in eternal matters, in matters that relate to the kingdom of god it has absolutely nocontribution to make. and in the wisdom of god, verse 21 says, thiswasn't some concession, but in the wisdom of god, he planned it this way that throughhuman wisdom no one would come to know him. no one. jeremiah said, "the wise men are putto shame. they are dismayed and caught. they have rejected the word of the lord, so whatkind of wisdom do they have?" and so the gospel comes -- so hard to believe. it just collideswith your emotional sensibilities. it collides with your intellectual pride. it basicallysays, "i don't care what you feel about a

crucified person being the lord of the universe.i don't really care what you think about truth." in fact, the truth is hidden from the wiseand revealed to the infants. the cross is so shameful -- its shameful stigma, its shamefulsimplicity. a third point, and you can fill in a lot onthese as well, its shameful singularity, its shameful singularity. now remember, what we'reseeing here is in the end no matter how we posture ourselves politically, academically,socially, economically, athletically, theatrically to get in positions of influence, sooner orlater the only way anybody gets into the kingdom is through the gospel, and this is what wehave to preach, what we must preach, and it is what god uses. it's not the wise men, theintellectuals, the elite lawyers, writers,

philosophers who bring anything redeemingto the world of humanity, whatsoever. it is those of us who proclaim the simplicity ofthe cross, just one way. and that leads us to that third point, thesingularity of the cross. and you feel that in this text in verse 18, "the word of thecross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the powerof god." and verse 21 again he says the same thing at the end there, god saves those whobelieve through the foolishness of this message. and then verse 23, "we preach christ crucified,"and it may be "to the jews a stumbling block and to gentiles foolishness, but to thosewho are the called, both jews and greeks, christ the power of god and the wisdom ofgod. because the foolishness of god is wiser

than men, and the weakness of god is strongerthan men." so take the weakness of god, the gospel, which men deem foolish, and it ismore powerful than all the foolishness of men. so here you come to this singular message,and i know that we all believe and affirm that. let me just make a couple of commentsabout it and then go to another text for a minute. here we come at this sinner with astraightforward message, and the message is there is only one savior, that's all. there'sonly one truth, that's all. in our postmodern time that's hard to believe. i'm thinkingabout that program the other night with larry king. i was sitting next to that catholicpriest, and off camera about three times larry

said to him, "now, do you believe that yourreligion is true?" "oh, yes." "well, if you believe that yours is true,then all of those who say something other than what you say must be wrong." "oh, no." and he would say, "that's inconsistent. youcan't say that yours is true and everybody else's is true when they say something different."he said that about three times off camera. and all the answer, "oh, the jesus i know,he just wants unity." and it was just like you couldn't get there from where he was.there was no connect. it's like he was in outer space. i mean, we all know jesus said, "i am theway, the truth, and the life. no man comes

to the father but by me. there is no salvationin any other." we all understand that. but let's go a little deeper, okay? we would agreethere's only one way to be saved, although that's not necessarily what all these evangelicalsare saying today. you can be saved without the gospel. you can be saved without the bible.you can be saved without even knowing who the true god is, ever hearing the name ofjesus. but what does it really mean? if you're going to come down to the real singularityof the gospel, where does that take you? i want you to turn in your bible to just a veryimportant passage, luke 9. let's get it in perspective here. we all understand it's jesus,it's his gospel, death and resurrection, etc. but what are the terms by which one embracesthat?

luke 9:23, "jesus was saying to them all,"this is this sort of spectrum of people called mathetes, learners, disciples of jesus whoare everywhere on the spectrum. but he is saying to them, here is the point of clarification,"if anyone wishes to come after me," okay, you want to follow me, "let him deny himself,and take up his cross daily and follow me." the cross assaults your emotional sensibilities.then the cross collides with your intellectual pride, and then it crushes your self-determiningwill. you want to be a christian, do you? it's the end of you. you're done. try to sellthat. this is not -- listen, this is not the gospel of self-fulfillment. this is the gospelof self-denial. it's not about you becoming all you can be. this isn't the army. thisis about the end of you.

the statement here, really very important,"if anyone wishes to come after me let him deny himself." arnesastho is a greek verbused to deny oneself. it's a very strong word. it means to disown or to refuse associationwith. you want to come to me? refuse any further association with yourself. that's what itis saying. literally, disown yourself. this isn't about tweaking your life to make youmore successful or to help you hit more home runs. this is about the end of you. this isabout, "woe is me, for i am undone," isaiah 6 right? this is the beatitude attitude, "blessedare the bankrupt in spirit, mourning over their sin, meek over their condition, starvedspiritually and hungering for a righteousness they don't have." this is philippians 3. thisis paul saying, "i've spent my whole life

up till now accumulating all this stuff inthe 'gain' column." you know, "i'm of the nation of israel." points. "of the tribe ofbenjamin." points. "i'm racking them up. hebrew of hebrews, kosher to the core. zealous forthe law. blameless in terms of the public." and he said it was all gain to me until isaw christ, and then it was all manure. this is total desire to disconnect from what youare. that is the attitude of the penitent. it's luke 18, where you don't lift your eyes.you just look down and pound your breast and cry out for god to be merciful to such a wretchedsinner. that's the man who goes home justified. this isn't about self-fulfillment. this isabout self-suicide. let me learn by paradox that the way down is the way up. that to below is to be high. that the broken heart is

the healed heart. that the contrite spiritis the rejoicing spirit. that the repenting soul is the triumphant soul. that to havenothing is to possess everything. that to bear the cross is to wear the crown. thatto give up everything is to receive all. it's the prayer, "lord, let me find your lightin my darkness, your joy in my sorrow, your grace in my sin, your riches in my poverty,your glory in my humiliation, your life in my death." that's a hard thing to accept. the cross crashes into my emotional sensibilities.it crashes into my intellectual pride and wipes away all human wisdom, and then it assaultsmy self-determining will and all my plans and dreams and schemes and hopes and ambitions,it obliterates them and says, "fall down at

my feet and deny yourself." not only that,to the degree that you take up your cross every day. please that's not some mystical,spiritual statement. it's not talking about ascending to the second level of spiritualityor the deeper life. jesus was not a keswick teacher. what is he saying here? they knewwhat a cross was. i just explained what they were. if you say to somebody, "take up yourcross," whoa! what is jesus saying? self-denial to the point of martyrdom, ifthat's what i ask. "you mean to tell me you just don't want to, you know, give me somethingto fix my life. what you want me to do is give you all my life?" now you're gettingit. now you're getting it. and you've got to do this every day. paul said, "i die daily."every day i wake up, i know it could be the

last day i live. he wasn't speaking aboutsome mystical thing. every day he woke up, he knew one of the plots of the jews or thegentiles that had been hatched in their minds could have come to fruition, every day. heprobably went through his own funeral thousands of times, anticipating death. that's a wayof life that you're willing to die. so, next time you give the gospel to somebody, givethem the same message jesus gave them, and if they turn away like the rich, young rulerthen they aren't desperate enough, right? it's hard to believe. it's hard to believe. verses 24 and 25 of luke 9, "whoever wishesto save his life shall" what? it doesn't mean you give away a little of it. you abandonit. you want in the kingdom? it's the end

of you. it's over. you're done. you're history.the story's over. "but whoever loses his life for my sake, he's the one who will save it."how much is that worth? what's the profit if he gains the whole world and loses or forfeitshimself? or as it says in the other gospel, "his own soul." luther understood this. youknow, i just continue to be amazed at what he understood. luther, in 1517, put his 95theses on the door of the church, and the fourth of his protesting assertions may haveescaped you or you have forgotten it. the fourth of his protesting assertions was thata penitent heart is characterized by self-hatred. here's a quote, "so penance remains whileself-hate remains. namely, right up to the entrance into the kingdom of heaven."

you know, if you're coming into the kingdom,you're coming in with an attitude that says, "i don't ever want to be associated with meanymore." and even when you're saved, you're going to have a measure of that same self-hateso that you understand exactly what paul meant when he said, "oh, wretched man that i" what'sthe next word? "am." and when i think about heaven, i don't think about, "oh, wow! streetsof gold, pearl, big pearl." that's nice. i think about getting rid of the wretchedness.this is about self-hate. so you want to be a christian, do you? it's hard. it goes against your naturalinclinations. it goes against your natural emotions. it goes against your natural intellect.it goes against your natural will. self-suicide is the polar opposite of the feel-good message,isn't it? "you come to jesus and you get all

you want." what is that? you say, "well, isn't this an isolated versehere? are you sure this is -- there's some balance here?" well, let me show you someother ones. one would be enough for me. this is, after all, the word of god. how many timesdoes he have to say it before we get it? but matthew 10, "do not think that i came to bringpeace on the earth. i didn't come to bring peace, but a sword. i came to set a man againsthis father and daughter against her mother, daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.a man's enemies will be the members of his household. he who loves father or mother morethan me is not worthy of me. he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthyof me. he who does not take up his cross and

follow after me is not worthy of me. he whohas found his life shall lose it. he who has lost his life for my sake shall find it."part of self-denial means the denial of those relationships which are most precious to you.how desperately do you want to come into the kingdom of god? how desperately do you wanteternal life? how desperately do you want forgiveness? do you want it enough to denythe relationships that are most natural and most precious? now, this thing is assaultingmy emotions, it's assaulting my mind, it's assaulting my will, and it's assaulting myrelationships. and it could even attack your economics. inmark chapter 10, just to touch base with what i commented on a minute ago, the rich youngruler. you know the story, well you can read

it in matthew 19 as well. jesus said to theyoung man, "so, you want eternal life? well, let's talk about something else before wetalk about that. let's talk about sin," and of course he wouldn't admit that he sinned,"all these commandments i have kept from my youth, and then of course jesus followed itup saying, "well, let's talk about authority. let's talk about who's in charge, let's talkabout self-denial. take all your money and give it to the poor." hmm, he would not denyhis self-righteousness, and he would not deny his possessions. and he went away as lostas when he showed up, even though he asked the right question. it's in luke 9 and verse 57, a very familiarportion. this man comes along and says to

jesus, "i'll follow you wherever you go."jesus said, "well, i'm not going to the ritz carlton. the foxes have holes, the birds ofthe air have nests, but the son of man has nowhere to lay his head." this doesn't soundtoo good. "i'm really interested, and i would like to follow you." "well, you've got toknow, you're going to have to sacrifice a comfortable place to live and i don't haveanything to offer you of material things." he said to another, "follow me." he said,"hmm, permit me to first go and bury my father." why did he say that? his father wasn't dead.why did he say that? he just heard the prior conversation. "let me go home, and i'll waittill my dad dies and leaves me the inheritance, and then i'll come and follow you. after all,you just said you don't have any money." and he said to him, "allow the dead to bury

their own dead, and as for you, go and proclaimeverywhere the kingdom of god." you've got to leave all that behind: inheritances, parents,family. another one said, "i'll follow you, lord,but i need to go home and say goodbye." you know what that goodbye would be a goodbye,and you know he doesn't have any money, and could you give me a little, and by the timehe said goodbye to everybody in the extended family he's ready. he's loaded. jesus said,"you do that, and you're not fit for the kingdom of god. it's about self-denial." this is notthe gospel that gives you all you want in this world. this is the gospel that takeseverything you are and everything you have. and then the lord gives you back what he deemsappropriate.

in fact, in john 12:25 jesus said, "he whohates his life in this world will keep it to life eternal." he who hates his life. thisis not easy. it's a narrow gate, matthew 7. it's a narrow gate, it's hard to find andfew there be that find it. luke 13, this is so significant a statement, luke 13:24-25,"strive to enter by the narrow door." strive, agonize, it's not easy. agonize. then thisamazing statement, "for many i tell you will seek to enter and will not be able." it'sso hard that you can't find it. if you find it, you can't get through it. what in theworld? why is it so hard? i would think living in evangelical climate in america that becominga christian is easy. no, it's not easy; it's hard. how hard? impossible. did you know iwas going there? it's impossible! i mean,

this is just massacring everything there isabout us. when you look at evangelicalism, what arethey doing? they are trying to create something that appeals to the emotion, the mind, thewill, the relationships of people so they can hold onto all of that stuff and stillcome into the kingdom, and somehow we'll influence them in. no, the only way into the kingdom,forget the influence, nobody gets saved by influence. they get saved by the gospel, andthis is the gospel. the gospel is a gospel of self-denial. the message is clear. whyis it so hard? why do many seek to enter and they can't? because self-denial is so hard.because self is all the sinner knows and all the sinner loves.

you say, "well, this could discourage personalevangelism." well, this is friday. saturday's tomorrow. if you're not here tomorrow to hearthe rest of this, god have mercy on your sin-sick, shriveled-up soul because i'm going somewherebut i'm not there. i mean, let me just close with this, matthew 13. a man sees a treasurein a field. jesus said he sells everything to buy it. a man sees a pearl of great price,sells everything to buy it. that's what we're talking about, the singularity of the gospel.not only is it about christ and christ alone, and we know that. not only is it that exclusivegospel. there is no salvation in any other. no salvation apart from christ. not only isit that exclusive gospel, but it is the singularity of this utter and total self-denial and submissionto the christ of that gospel. it's a shameful

message. it just assaults the natural man.shameful stigma, shameful simplicity, shameful singularity, and the rest i'll leave tilltomorrow. you're going to like where we end up. we're going to end up in the great doctrineof election. pray with me: father we thank you for yourwonderful, powerful word and we just are so blessed to have the privilege of being inthis great conference and being exposed to those gifted and faithful men of god who proclaimyour word. we do pray, lord, that we might understand what doug wilson said in the lastsession that your theology comes out your fingertips, that the truth of what we reallybelieve shows up in how we live. we pray, o god, that you will take the truth of thisgospel and may we not only believe it so that

we live lives of utter submission to christ,but having believed it in our own lives may we be faithful to proclaim it in this waythat others may come to this place of impossibility and see the mighty hand of god. draw themthrough their natural resistance into the glorious light of the gospel of christ. andwe ask that you would bless us to that end that the kingdom may advance as we faithfullyproclaim the truth. in christ's name, amen.

Share this :