An Open Letter Regarding Mainstream Christian Traditions

Imagine that you want to travel to somewhere you have never been before, and assume the following conditions are true:


  1. There is only one way to arrive at your destination safely.
  2. There is only one person who knows the safe way.
  3. You have hired that one person as your guide.


If, at a certain point in your journey, your guide instructs you to proceed in a particular direction, is it possible to refuse him and still arrive at your desired location? Logically, it would be impossible unless at least one of the above conditions is false, wouldn’t it?


Arriving at the correct answer to the above basic logic problem would be of the utmost importance to you if your life depended on your ability to reach the desired destination, wouldn’t it? Have you ever given thought to the fact, then, that if you profess to be a Christian, as it pertains to the Kingdom of God and salvation — your potential eternal life —  those three statements are all unequivocally true? For Jesus once said:



Notice that Jesus did not say he is a way to eternal life — he is the way, which is singular. Therefore, by taking upon yourself the title of Christian, you are making the claim that Jesus is the guide you are following, and that you trust that he alone is able to lead you into eternal life in the Kingdom of God. And if we acknowledge that Jesus modeled for us the way of life that leads to salvation, would we be justified for consciously living in a manner that was inconsistent with his example? Shouldn’t the religion we practice be the same as the religion he practiced and preached? With that in mind, can you prove the Sabbath is Sunday using only the Bible? What day did Jesus observe the Sabbath on? What about the apostles? What Holy days did they keep?


If you set aside everything you have learned from others and use the Bible alone to establish your standard of practice, you will find that the weekly Sabbath was never observed on Sunday anywhere in the Bible — from Genesis to Revelation the command has always been to observe it on Saturday, the seventh day of the week. Additionally, the “mainstream Christian” holiday traditions that are broadly accepted as true practices of Christianity are also different from what the Lord and his apostles did and taught. Christmas and Easter were nowhere celebrated by the early Christian church. So when did the Biblically supported teachings change regarding the Sabbath and Holy days? Why did they change? The answers to those questions are well documented and can be easily researched by anyone, so it is not the purpose of this article to chronicle the history of those changes. Instead, since many are already aware of these things and yet still find reasons to justify continuing their practice, the focus will be on examining the validity of the arguments made for maintaining tradition.


To begin, some say it doesn’t matter which day you worship God because God should be worshipped every day. On the surface, that seems to be a compelling argument, because God should indeed be worshipped continuously in a person’s heart. But the problem with that reasoning is that it isn’t consistent with God’s own instructions. In order to highlight that fact, let’s start by turning to the first Scripture where the Sabbath is mentioned and established:




Notice first that God did not bless every day, he only blessed the seventh one. In doing so, he set it apart and made a distinction between it and the preceding six days. In blessing the seventh day alone, God made it known that the day and the purpose he established it for are both special to him. So focus on who it was who blessed the seventh day and made it holy: it was God. If God alone is Holy, then God alone can make something holy — man, therefore, cannot.  And if God states that a day is set apart as sacred and holy to him, and you say it is no different than any other day, how is that worship? Furthermore, given the fact that God himself unambiguously declared the seventh day alone to be holy, and commanded its observance, if you decide to set aside a different day for worshipping him, have you not placed your own authority higher than God’s?


Next, here are just a few of the many Scriptures that establish that it was God who ordained the Sabbath, and that clearly state it is to be observed on the seventh day of the week:




 ‘Observe my Sabbaths and have reverence for my sanctuary. I am the Lord (Leviticus 19:30).’”




“ ‘There are six days when you may work, but the seventh day is a day of sabbath rest, a day of sacred assembly. You are not to do any work; wherever you live, it is a sabbath to the Lord (Leviticus 23:3).’”


I’ll make a final minor point regarding the passage from Leviticus 23:3, because it relates to the rationale of being able to worship God on any given day: if God declared the sabbath to be a day of sacred assembly, what would happen if everyone just decided for themself which day they would observe the sabbath on? How would everyone be able to come together for a common assembly?


Before moving on, here is one last Scripture to illustrate that observance of the Sabbath as the fourth Commandment in the Law is an acknowledgement that the One who made the day holy is the same One who created all things. As it was a sign of the covenant that exists between God and His people, the seventh day Sabbath and the annual Holy days have always been associated with the proper worship of the One, true God:


“I said to their children in the wilderness, “Do not follow the statutes of your parents or keep their laws or defile yourselves with their idols. I am the Lord your God; follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. Keep my Sabbaths holy, that they may be a sign between us. Then you will know that I am the Lord your God (Ezekiel 20:18‭-‬20).”


You may notice that the above passages are all from the Old Testament, and claim that the fact that the sabbath is mentioned so little in the New Testament is an indication that the sabbath was done away with. In reality, though, all it illustrates is that the Sabbath wasn’t a subject of dispute in the New Testament. There was no disagreement or confusion as to which was the proper day to worship God. Even after Jesus was crucified and raised from the dead, the Christian church continued to observe the sabbath from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. This will be shown further on, in the discussion of New Testament scriptures. In preparation for that discussion, I invite the reader to assemble all the Scriptures they can which say that God has at any point changed his mind, and that the Sabbath and Holy days are no longer important.


Let’s shift the focus now from the sabbath to the mainstream “holidays” that have been substituted for the true Holy days from God’s Word, with the understanding that the principles which applied to the discussion of the weekly sabbath apply to annual sabbaths also. Many people are willing to acknowledge that the origins of Christmas, Easter and Halloween stem from pagan customs, but practice them anyway because they rationalize that their reasons for observation are different than those of the heathen. But are they really? To examine that idea we can start by defining what “heathen” or “pagan” meant to the biblical writers who used those terms. Here is the word and the definitions for “heathen” in the Old Testament Hebrew:


Original: גּי גּוי
Transliteration: gôy gôy
Phonetic: go’-ee

BDB Definition:

nation, people (noun masculine)
nation, people
usually of non-Hebrew people
Goyim? = ” nations” (noun proper masculine)

Strong’s Definition: Apparently from the same root as H1465 (in the sense of massing); a foreign nation ; hence a Gentile ; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts: – Gentile, heathen, nation, people.


And now here is the word alternately translated as “heathen” or “Gentile” in the New Testament Greek:


Original: ἔθνος
Transliteration: ethnos
Phonetic: eth’-nos


Thayer Definition:

the human family
a tribe, nation, people group

Strong’s Definition: Probably from G1486; a race (as of the same habit), that is, a tribe ; specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan):Gentile, heathen, nation, people.


The point I would like to draw out from this is that in both the Old Testament and the New, the term “heathen” or “pagan” broadly referred to any individual or group of individuals who were not worshipping the One, true God. Here is an example of the use of the word in the Old Testament (The word for גּי גּוי follows in bold):



And here is an example of the use of ἔθνος, from the New Testament (again in bold):




How is all of this relevant to the discussion of holiday traditions? When you think of the word “pagan,” what associations come to mind? To our modern day thinking, when we read of pagan sacrificial practices and worship, perhaps we imagine a person or people who is/are wholeheartedly evil, bloodthirsty, or savage, and certainly far different than ourself or anyone we know or associate with. After all, we are a civil society; one far removed from being so primitive as to worship idols! But ask yourself this: when all the people of various nations were worshipping their false gods, do you think they consciously knew they were worshipping false gods? Which do you think is more likely: that when they offered their sacrifices, they knew they were sacrificing to devils, or that they had simply been deceived into believing they were worshipping the true God? Now if the entire ancient world, excluding Israel, had been deceived as to the identity of the One, true God, and were therefore passing down false traditions that actually worshipped devils, and we can trace the origins of Christmas, Easter, and Halloween back to the same ancient pagan practices, how are we different than them, if we are doing as they did?


Next, consider that question in light of how many Scriptures warn that false teachings would come into the church (Matt. 7:15 & 24:11, Mark 13:22, Galatians 2:4, 1 Timothy 1:3, 2 Timothy 4:4, 2 Peter 2:1, etc.) Given that the true church was warned by the New Testament writers that false teachings would eventually gain acceptance and alter what true Christianity was (and is still intended to be), is it inconceivable to imagine that the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, and the holiday traditions mainstream “christianity” observes are both a part of the false teachings which were foretold to come?


Some may attempt to dismiss those questions by saying that God will accept our worship because the meanings of and purposes for our traditions have been changed, and if we are trying to honor him, then God will honor our intention. That’s a common argument, but it is one that is made based upon a mere opinion: a self-serving notion unsubstantiated by God’s Word. God is a God of truth, not a father of lies. Why would God be pleased with worship that is founded upon a falsehood? If he accepts a false standard, he would no longer be holy! (The beliefs that the weekly Sabbath is Sunday, that Jesus was born on December 25, and that he was raised from the dead on “Easter Sunday” are just three examples of falsehoods which are currently taught as christian truth.) Even if a person believes they are trying to worship God with the best of intentions, if there is a discrepancy between what God has commanded and what a person actually does, would God be pleased with their intention more than he would be with their obedience? That question was answered very early on in human history:




If Cain’s offering had adhered to what God had instructed regarding how to make it and what it was to consist of, both he and it would have been accepted — as was Abel and his offering. But since it did not follow God’s regulations, notice that not only was his offering rejected, but Cain also found himself to be out of favor with God.


Also, God had told King Saul,


“Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ (1 Samuel 15:3).”






Saul tried to frame the situation in the most flattering light, by claiming they spared the best of the sheep and cattle so that they could sacrifice them in order to honor God. Was God, or even Samuel, swayed by Saul’s justifications for disobedience? Not at all! The fact that they “pounced on the plunder” indicates they coveted it for their own enjoyment, and God labelled their action as rebellion and arrogance — and isn’t that what it indeed was? If you are given a specific command, and you do not obey it (whatever your reasons may be), have you not rebelled against the command? And if you imagine you can improve upon God’s own instructions, is that not arrogance? The answer to those questions should be obvious to most, if not all. But in order to understand the mind of God more fully, it is important to also understand how rebellion and arrogance can be equated with divination and idolatry.


Divination is an attempt to communicate with the spirit realm with the purpose of obtaining knowledge of the future. It is rebellion against God because it is an attempt to make decisions that will procure favorable outcomes for oneself, or avoid unfavorable ones, without being constrained by having to obtain God’s favor or approval for one’s desired action; and it indicates a willingness to attempt to circumvent his will if only one might be able to accomplish one’s own. Also, idolatry occurs whenever God is displaced as the highest object of our worship, adulation and desire, so the belief that one knows better than God, or that one can add to or subtract from God’s commands, is not only arrogant, it is indeed like idolatry because it places one’s own understanding or authority above that of God’s, essentially exalting the Self as god.


So, if God made it clear that Saul’s disobedience displeased him, and he called it evil, comparing it to divination and idolatry, one should ask themself, ‘Is my observance of a Sunday sabbath, along with Christmas and Easter, either adding to or subtracting from the Word of God?’ If the answer is yes, how am I any less guilty of what God rebuked Cain and Saul for?


Here is one additional Scripture from the Old Testament as evidence of how God feels about false worship:


“Therefore, son of man, speak to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: In this also your ancestors blasphemed me by being unfaithful to me: When I brought them into the land I had sworn to give them and they saw any high hill or any leafy tree, there they offered their sacrifices, made offerings that aroused my anger, presented their fragrant incense and poured out their drink offerings. Then I said to them: What is this high place you go to?’” (Ezekiel 20:27‭-‬29)


When Israel attempted to worship God on their own terms, offering sacrifices on any high hill, or by any leafy tree, did God simply resign himself to accept it? No, he rebuked them for it and confronted them with their unfaithfulness. When he asked them ‘What is this high place you go to,’ he was effectively asking ‘Are you truly worshipping me, if I have already made known to you that what you are doing there displeases me? If you apply the same question and principle to any of your religious traditions, and then discover that they are based on falsehood, what should you do about it? If you choose to believe that it doesn’t matter what sabbaths or holy days you observe, why do you observe any at all? And is it reasonable to conclude that God is now indifferent toward how he is worshipped, when he previously took it so seriously? Is God so fickle? Has he not said, “I the Lord do not change.”? (Malachi 3:6)


So there is certainly sufficient evidence from the Old Testament indicating that religious intention is not an acceptable substitute for obedience. But what about the New Testament? If tradition conflicts with the commands of God, what does it teach? The Pharisees were very confident that their religious customs and practices were correct and pleasing to God, but here is what the Son of God told them:




“He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:  “ ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.” And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!” (Mark 7:6‭, ‬8‭-‬9)




Jesus said that his true disciples would hold to his teaching, not someone else’s. So, once again, where did the traditions of Christmas, Easter, and Sunday observance come from? Were they ever a part of the Lord’s teaching? If they were not, you have been deceived into following what someone else has taught; and that observation leads to an examination of the predominant teaching that is used to justify the abandonment of the Biblically supported Sabbath and Holy days in favor of present day mainstream traditions. Before getting to it, however, here is a brief summary of the arguments covered so far:


Some say it doesn’t matter which day you worship God because every day is the day to worship. Some say God will accept our worship because the meanings of and purposes for our traditions have been changed, and if we are trying to honor him, then God will honor our intention. The Scriptures we have considered thus far do not support those ideas.


And so now let’s move on to the most common argument of all: which is that the Sabbath and the Holy days no longer apply because the law has been done away with. Anyone who claims that the Law has been done away with contradicts the Lord, and makes Jesus out to be a liar, for he said:




Jesus perfectly fulfilled the Law, then he died and was raised from the dead. If his fulfillment of the Law and subsequent death was intended to mean that everything was then accomplished, did heaven and earth disappear when he ascended to the Father? Are they not both still here? Since heaven and earth have not yet disappeared, can it get any more clear that the Law has not been done away with? Do not allow yourself to continue to be deceived, because here is what Jesus said about those who profess him to be their Lord, but who live as though the Law no longer applies:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven [in other words, those who acknowledge him with their lips alone will not enter], but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

[How can one do the will of the Father unless one first knows what His will is? And how is His will made known, except through His Law? And if you answer that all one needs to know is to “Love,”  how can one even learn what God’s definition of love is apart from the Law, since His Law is the Law of love?]

Many will say to me on that day [the Day of Judgment] , ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’  Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’” (Matthew 7:21‭-‬23)


The word translated as “evildoers” is:


Original: ἀνομία
Transliteration: anomia
Phonetic: an-om-ee’-ah

Thayer Definition:

the condition of being without law
contempt and violation of law, iniquity, wickedness

Strong’s Definition: From G459; illegality, that is, violation of law or (generally) wickedness: – iniquity, X transgress (-ion of) the law, unrighteousness.


From this, it can be seen that Jesus taught that anyone who has disavowed the Law by belief is also in a condition of being without law by practice, and that he would therefore disavow them on the Day of Judgment.


So if Jesus didn’t teach that the law has been done away, where did the notion come from? Was it what the apostles taught, perhaps?




John wrote those words near the end of his life, and by that time the Christian church had already been in existence for around half a century. Does that passage sound like he taught the law was done away with? How can someone break a law if it does not exist?




Would Peter have encouraged the early church to recall the words of the prophets if he believed the Old Testament no longer had any authority under the New Covenant?




He not only warned the church to be on guard against the error of lawlessness, but he also alludes to people distorting the writings of Paul. This fact is also highlighted in the Book of Acts:


“When we arrived at Jerusalem, the brothers and sisters received us warmly. The next day Paul and the rest of us went to see James, and all the elders were present. Paul greeted them and reported in detail what God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.  When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. They have been informed that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs. What shall we do? They will certainly hear that you have come, so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow. Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law. As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality (Acts 21:17‭-‬25).”


So there was a perception sewn by Paul’s adversaries that he taught against the Law, which continues to this very day, but the church in Jerusalem testified that there was no truth in those reports. As Peter acknowledged, though, Paul’s letters contain some things which have been distorted and are hard to understand, so let’s turn to what his letters actually say about the law and grace.


“And where there is no law there is no transgression (Romans 4:15).”

“To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law (Romans 5:13).”

No one is punished for breaking a law that doesn’t exist. If God wanted to take away sins, why didn’t he simply do away with all laws? If he had, then Jesus would not have had to die! But God didn’t just do away with His law, because the law, itself, is good; but the outcome — the penalty for breaking it (which is death) — is bad, and is not the outcome God desires.

If the law — the 10 Commandments — is good, and if it is only the death penalty for transgressing them that needed to be removed (and Romans 5 points out that people still died even if they didn’t violate a direct command), why would God ever do away with them? Indeed, since the first and greatest Commandment is to love God with all your heart, if the law has been done away with, it isn’t even necessary to love or obey God! And if the Sabbath is part of that law (since it is the 4th Commandment), why would God do away with it, and yet still leave the rest?


“Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst. But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his immense patience as an example for those who would believe in him and receive eternal life (1 Timothy 1:15‭-‬16).” If Paul believed and taught that the law was nullified or removed by Jesus’s death on the cross, then sin would no longer exist, because if there is no law to violate, there can be no transgression. So if Paul believed he was a sinner, by necessity he would also have to believe that the law remained in effect. He also wrote:




The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 5:20‭-‬21).” (The law existed to teach us and make us more aware of what sin is.)








Clearly, Paul believes it is still possible to sin. How then can anyone claim that he taught that the law has been done away with? Being set free from the law of sin and death doesn’t mean the Law no longer applies. What it means is that under the requirements of the Law, the penalty for sin (transgression of the law) was death. So in order to avoid the penalty of death, the only way to salvation was by merit: the only way to prove that you deserved to live forever was by living without ever sinning. But with the exception of the Son of God, no one has ever been able to do that. God knows that we have all been born into a world where sin exists, and that we are also not born with perfect knowledge and perfect character. That is the weakness of the flesh; and so even though the Law was intended to lead us to eternal life by teaching us what sin is (so that sin and its penalty could be avoided), it was rendered powerless to accomplish its purpose by our inability to fulfill its requirement of perfection. Since it is inevitable that we will all sin in some way during the process of learning what sin is, we all are subject to the penalty of death as soon as we do: and since everyone who has ever lived has sinned, everyone who has ever lived has had to die. However, God did not create man just to live for a brief moment, suffer in a world of sin, and then die — never to exist again — He intended man to become His sons and daughters, comprising His eternal family; and everything He purposes, He is also able to do. Therefore, God gave his one and only Son to pay the penalty for sin on our behalf. When the Messiah lived a perfect, sinless life, he fulfilled every requirement of the law, and therefore proved himself worthy of eternal life. In doing so, he did what no one else ever has been or could be able to do. Therefore, just as he did not deserve to die, we do not deserve to live; but when he willingly died for all of mankind, he was offering himself up as a sacrifice for us. As our Savior, he made a petition to God, asking Him  to substitute his own worthiness to live for our unworthiness; and to apply that same worthiness to all who will acknowledge him as their rightful Lord and Master. And his petition was acceptable in God’s sight, as it was consistent with what God himself desired, since “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him (John 3:‬17).”


Being set free from the Law simply means that perfect fulfillment of the Law is no longer the standard by which we are considered worthy to receive eternal life, because Jesus fulfilled that requirement for us. Now, through the Messiah’s sacrifice, when we sin we are able to be forgiven, and the sentence of death which would otherwise still apply is remitted. That is what grace is. Our sins are pardoned, not by our merit, but by Christ’s. It dishonors both God and the Lord’s sacrifice to believe that grace is a license for sin.


I am a sinner just like everyone else, and I will not be anyone’s judge, so there is no one who owes me an answer to any of the questions I have posed; and if anything I say is just my opinion, my opinion should be of no consequence or value unless it is founded and established in truth. (See John 5:37‭-‬47) But a Christian is called to “demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and [to] take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:5): and that is what the Spirit of God inspires me to attempt by writing these things to you. Anyone who professes to love God and to follow the Lord should know with certainty that a Day is coming when everyone will appear before the One True Judge, and no secret will be hidden from him, no lie will deceive him, and no justification for sin will be vindicated by him. So what if that Day were today? How would you answer these questions if it were not just me posing them, but the Lord himself?


I am not saying these things to condemn anyone regarding the traditions they have learned and followed, because God knows how much He loves us, and He wants you to live and be with him forever. But His commandments test us to see how much WE love HIM, and He also will not allow sin to continue forever: which is why we must learn obedience, just as our Lord himself did. Because of the love Jesus had for the Father, he was willing to die rather than disobey God. So, in light of what God and our Savior have done for us all, if it becomes clear that a religious observation or tradition is not consistent with God’s will or instruction shouldn’t everyone be willing to change in order to obey God? The question one is left with is “Do I REALLY care about what God thinks, or do I just want to be free to continue doing whatever I want to do?” May the spirit of God inspire your reflection on these things, and lead you into all truth.

“Take Up Your Cross and Follow Me…”

A few days before he was to be crucified, Jesus declared:




Jesus was that kernel of wheat falling to the ground. He accomplished what no one else could, and through the death he died his name was glorified forever. If he had not died he would have remained a single seed, a solitary Son of God, and the family of God would not have grown to include anyone other than him and the Father. Think about that: all of the patriarchs and prophets who came before him would have lived their lives in vain. If he had not died, it would have been pointless for his disciples to have left everything behind to follow him. Abraham and Moses, who were referred to as God’s friends, would not be merely sleeping now, they would be dead, forever, with no hope for resurrection. Jesus died so that they might join him in eternal life. He died to offer you the same opportunity. But, as is true with every opportunity, there is a cost. The passage above shows that sacrifice is required of all, whether a person believes in God, or not. It is only a question of whether you choose to sacrifice the now, or the later. If you place the greatest value on the things which you can gain from the material world, your life, along with everything you acquire in it, will inevitably be lost. But those who would willingly give up their life to follow the Lord will inherit all things, for all eternity. According to the Lord’s own words, then, where are would-be disciples obligated to follow him to? What was the way to the place where he was going? Luke 9:18-23 is a Scripture which shares the theme of this passage in John, and it makes it clear that Jesus meant his disciples must be willing to figuratively follow him to the cross, so let’s read together what it says:




The interaction began with two questions, and was followed by two statements of fact. The first question (“Who do the crowds say I am?”) encompassed the world at large, in Christ’s day. The general populace regarded Jesus as a noteworthy person, someone on par with John the Baptist, Elijah, or a resurrected prophet — important, perhaps — but still just a man. As a side point, it’s worth mentioning that this whole interaction recorded in verses 18-23 occurred sometime shortly after the twelve disciples had returned from being sent out to the people to preach the kingdom of God, raise the dead, heal the sick and cast out demons. Having just recently returned from that mission, the disciples would have certainly been well qualified to report on the public’s estimation of Jesus. So Jesus then directs the same question to his disciples, as if to say, [Having now seen all that you have just seen, and having now done all that you have just done,] “who do you say I am?” Peter’s response was that Jesus was not just a man, he was the Savior of Man, sent from God. His response establishes a fundamental difference between the viewpoint and belief of the followers of Christ in contrast to that of the rest of the world. Those who believe without any reservation that Jesus is the Messiah, the only way of salvation, and who also believe that the reward of eternal life in God’s kingdom is greater than anything that can be obtained in this world, willingly forsake everything to follow him. Those who doubt hesitate to do so. Having thus established this key difference, Jesus proceeds with the first statement, disclosing the imminent reality that, as the Son of God, he was going to suffer many things, be killed, and then be resurrected. Which brings me to his follow-up statement, the second of the two realities — one that is on-going, and perpetually current — and the focal point of this message:




How much time have you spent reflecting upon what that means? I ask because the answer to that question leads to a more penetrating one: how much do you really want to know, and fully understand, what it means? To deny yourself means losing sight of your own interests; it means forsaking your very nature. But, even with the help of the spirit of God, that is not something that is easy to do. By nature, people prefer personal comfort over sacrifice, and yet the more a person understands about the sacrifice that is expected of them, the more they become responsible for offering it. So it is perhaps not unusual for people to read over the command to take up their cross without really thinking too deeply about what obeying it entails: and therefore there are few people who ever commit themself to serving God to the degree the Lord requires. To those who would say that I am being uncharitable when I state that there are few people who will fully commit themself to taking up their cross daily, I refer you to Luke 10:1‭-‬2, which states:




To paraphrase the Lord’s words, there’s a whole world out there ignorant of the true nature of God, and His Kingdom — no shortage of brothers and sisters in need of salvation — but where are the servants who are qualified and willing to do the work? Oftentimes the problem isn’t that we don’t want the kingdom of God to arrive — most people would like to reap the benefits and blessing of its peace and unity — the problem is that we don’t want it enough now to sacrifice our own desires in order to dedicate ourselves completely to its work. We hesitate to make laboring to serve God our primary purpose. But read what the apostle Paul willingly endured in order to do the work of God. It’s recorded in 2 Cor. 11:23-29. Based upon what he suffered, and how he lived his life, how confident would you be that his desire to serve God was genuine? Did his deeds reveal his faith — did they prove that his convictions about the kingdom of God were real to him? It’s easy to say ”I want to serve God,” but do your actions, does your life, supply credibility to those words? If they do not, a re-evaluation of priorities is called for. Think of everything you are currently striving for in your life, and everything you hope to gain from your efforts, in the context of Jesus’s question from Luke 9:25:




Are any of the things you’re currently working for worth more to you than your soul — than eternal life? If your answer is no, are you then living like the kingdom of God is the ultimate reality, or is your life indistinguishable from that of a citizen of this world? Jesus willingly gave his life to show that there is a greater life beyond this one, so that through faith in him we might be encouraged and inspired to follow him to that Promised Land, despite the fact that in this life “we must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22).” And as we read in John 12:27, his death was the culmination of his entire life’s purpose. Therefore, if you are called a Christian, as his follower, what is your purpose? Why were you called? Individual answers as to purpose may vary, but the word of God supplies answers which apply to every believer, every true Christian. One such answer is found in 2 Corinthians 5:15:




Anyone whom the Father calls is called to live a life of service to the Son. What, then, are the aspects of a life lived for him? One example of what the Lord’s service entails is found in 1 Peter 2:20‭-‬21:




Peter plainly states that part of the work a Christian is called to do is to be willing to suffer for doing good and to endure it for the cause of advancing the gospel of the kingdom of God. Doing so is part of taking up your cross, daily, to follow the Lord. Continuing on with verses 22-24 he provides a more specific example of how Christ suffered for the sake of righteousness:




The Greek word translated here as healed means “made whole.” A person who is ”whole” can be considered to be fully integrated — they have no internal division, no disconnected or uncoordinated aspects to their personality — everything in them is working in “oneness” for a unified purpose. Consider that in light of Peter’s statement here about the Lord: ”When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly.” If someone insults a person, what prompts the other to retaliate? Is it not because their pride has been injured, and they feel a need to answer the injury? How natural it is for us to mirror back to others the ill treatment we receive from them! But when Jesus was insulted, although he may have been grieved by the unwarranted accusations of men, he never responded in kind because he trusted fully in the just judgment of God, and was completely secure in the love his Father has for him. It is not that he did not care about what others said of him, it is more that the esteem he knew his Father had for him made him whole, and rendered every other opinion of little consequence. Now consider that passage again, not as it applied to the Christ, but in regards to yourself. Has the love of God made you whole? Are you so secure in your knowledge of the Father’s and the Son’s love for you that insults and threats no longer unsettle you, so that you cannot be goaded into retaliation? Because that is how Jesus walked, and it is the example we are to follow: as it is written, ”This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did (John 2:5-6). The loftiness of that standard does not negate it’s reality. Instead, that standard should inspire a desire for the type of inner peace that the Lord himself possessed, the type that can only be obtained through intimate communion and fellowship with God, our Father; because it is only the peace of God which enables a person to endure in the face of suffering, and to do so without sinning. And whenever we fail to live according to the Lord’s example, those failures should only drive us to our knees all the more, feeling fervently the words of the psalmist: “As the deer pants for streams of water, so my soul pants for you, my God.  My soul thirsts for God, for the living God. When can I go and meet with God? (Psalm 42:1‭-‬2)”


Continuing on now with the discussion of the type of work which comprises a Christian’s purpose, if we skip forward to 1 Peter 4:1‭-‬3, we read:




The exhortation that we are to arm ourselves with the same attitude as Christ indicates that we must make a conscious resolution that no amount of suffering in the body will cause us to turn away from continuing to seek to serve God’s will. A willingness to endure suffering for the sake of advancing the gospel is something that we must maintain as a point of focus because we know it is in unity with our Father’s will. But on its own, a willing spirit is not enough to succeed, because the flesh is weak, and human focus and will lacks the constancy of an eternal perspective. Our carnal nature continually wars against the spirit of God for supremacy within us, testing us to see what we desire most.


What is our human, carnal nature, then? One answer is that it is our unexamined life, those things we do naturally, instinctively. And, instinctively, in order to preserve life, we work first to satisfy our physical needs. But we also have wants, which extend beyond our needs — and we can exhaust ourselves in the pursuit of them — due to the nature passed down to us from our common parents. In the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve had all their needs supplied, and were denied only one thing — the Tree of Knowledge — but once the seed of “want” for that one thing was sown in the heart of Eve, she yielded to it. She desired instant gratification of what she would have otherwise been given in time (knowledge), and because she believed the lie that she would not die, she consumed the fruit, which, in a spiritual sense, also consumed her: since once she ate, death entered the world. The fact that Adam was not deceived implies that he discerned her fallen state and therefore, recognizing that the cost of his continued obedience to God’s command would now eventually lead to him being deprived of her companionship, he willfully disobeyed God, consciously choosing to die with her instead, because he did not want his life without her in it. And yet they had been created perfect, whereas we are born into sin. So if our common parents, who were superior to us in every way, and who were given but a few commands to obey, could not submit their “wants” to the will of God in an environment where only one thing was withheld from them, how could it ever be natural for us to do what they could not? Through Adam and Eve, Satan prompted mankind to question the perfection of God’s will and, collectively, we have all eaten of the same fruit as they did. Their choice to follow their own will above God’s has become our nature.


The purpose behind that brief discussion of human nature was to help illustrate that it is impossible for anyone to “take up their cross daily” to follow the Lord by their own strength. Indeed, if it were natural for man to sacrifice for others in the way that Jesus did, the world would be a vastly different place than it is now. No one accomplishes anything for God apart from the work of His spirit. I think there is a proof of that intended in the fact that, due to the beatings he had endured, in a purely physical sense even the Lord himself was not able to carry his cross to its end destination under his own strength (Matt. 27:32). But if the exhortation from 1 Peter 4:1‭-‬3 (along with other similar scriptures), that we are to arm ourselves with the same attitude as Christ, indicates that the Holy Spirit doesn’t just do all the work, or completely change us overnight, what role does the spirit of God then have in our life? How does the spirit of God work in you to change your base nature?


First, it is a witness to the truth. Because we lack knowledge, and can therefore be too easily led to believe things that are harmful and false, it provides testimony as to what is true, calling to our minds the words which God has spoken on a given matter. The spirit of God is our counsellor and teacher, both informing us of what is good and bad, and providing wisdom and understanding as to why it is so. More than that, it provides the motivation to respond to and act upon the newly discerned truth by providing an awareness of greater things to come. As it supplies us with a glimpse of future perfection, our faith in that vision works to alter our values and desires, reshaping them from an inclination for temporary things to a longing for what is faultless and eternal. We begin to want bad/transient things less and less, and good/permanent things more and more, because we see them for what they are, as God himself sees them: because the spirit of God gives access to the perspective of God. The end result of this process is that we are to lose our desire to eat from the tree of knowledge because we come to know with certainty that self-reliance leads to death. It is only absolute trust in God, fostered by the spirit of God, that leads us to reject its fruit and what it produces, thereby making a different choice than our parents did. Could oneness ever be obtained through any other means than complete trust in God? What is it that prevents Satan from repenting and being restored to a right relationship with God? Is it not his unyielding belief in his “right-ness” — that he knows better than God? Is it not a similar pride within us, that by nature causes us to reach for the Tree of Knowledge, and bars access to the Tree of Life?


Returning now to the question of how the spirit of God works in us to convert us from being physically-minded to spiritually-minded beings, consider how, in the Scriptures, water symbolically represents baptism and cleansing, while the holy spirit is described as a refining fire (John 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21, Matt. 3:11, Acts 2:3, Numbers 31:23, 2 Peter 3:3-7). Baptism is a figurative acknowledgement of our willingness to die to ourself, submerging our human nature in a watery grave to become immersed in a new life of obedience to God’s will. When we emerge from the water, through the laying on of hands we are symbolically touched by God, and we receive an earnest of the fire of God, burning within. The fire represents our new nature, a nature that enables us to live a new life governed by the power of God. In this sense, the Holy Spirit provides a power that far surpasses human limits, to enable a person to overcome their inherent weakness. The water represents our old nature; and it is important to note that water and fire oppose each other, they do not merge. In this symbolism, fire is pictured arising out of water, to be separate and distinct from it. And, by nature, if they mingle, when fire preponderates over water, the water evaporates; but if the volume of water is greater than the flames, the fire is extinguished. Similarly, the spirit of God within you will either work to burn away your old nature, or your human nature will douse the Holy Spirit’s flame. The principle is discussed in the parable Jesus told, recorded in Matthew 13:33:



The parable indicates that the spark of God’s spirit, which is kindled through baptism and the laying on of hands, is intended to grow within, like yeast working in dough, until our old nature is fully consumed by it. But if it is true that it is also possible for our old nature to quench the holy spirit, it is then important to know how that occurs. The apostle Paul spoke regarding this when he was inspired to write:




A “set” mind is one where thoughts are fixed on something, to the exclusion of considering things that are contrary to it, so that it cannot be moved. Such a mind maintains an unchanging position. So if our mind is set on what the flesh desires it ceases to be attuned to the voice of the Spirit — it will not hear or entertain what it has to say. Conversely, living in accordance with the Spirit means having a lack of preoccupation with physical concerns. It means that a person’s foremost interest and focus is both to discern and do the will of God. But fixing our minds on what the Spirit desires requires that an effort be made on our part — God doesn’t just do it all for us —

“For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, mutual affection; and to mutual affection, love. Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble … (2 Peter 1:5‭-‬7‭, ‬10)”

Making an effort to add those attributes is not a  is not a one time action, it is a continuous practice. A single action does not establish a pattern. An action must be performed repeatedly before it becomes a behavior; and the character that God desires to build in us goes even beyond behaviors. God is love, which indicates a state of being. Everything He does is motivated by love, and He would be disavowing himself if He ever behaved in any other manner. If we are to grow to be like our Father, practicing His love, and the right behaviors associated with it, is what we are to work toward, until it becomes a state of being. That is the process of how we become transformed.


But why doesn’t God just do all this work for you? If He did, how would you show Him how much you value holy character? God tests us all to bring our values and priorities into the light. How you use your time is one of those tests. Has the thought ever occurred to you, that any and every day you do not willingly take up your cross to follow the Lord, you are quenching the work of the holy spirit? We have been instructed to “Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness.” Reflect on how you used your time this week/month/year. Was seeking to advance the interests of the kingdom of God your first pursuit? The second? What were the thoughts that most occupied your mind? Do you want to serve God more than you want to have fun and enjoy yourself, or is taking up your cross a mere afterthought, buried under a mountain of self interests?


All of us will one day stand before God’s judgment seat, and each of us will give an account of ourselves to Him (Romans 14:10‭-‬12). If honest reflection on the questions I have just posed prompts anyone to acknowledge that they have been living more for self than for God, know that I have not asked them as anyone’s judge. Instead, my hope is that you will take encouragement from those questions — because it is far better to consider such things now, while you still have time left to choose to live differently, if need be, than it is to stand ashamed before the Lord after our account has been given. If your life thus far has only been lived as a hearer of the Word, my prayer is that you become a doer as well. My prayer is that God will indeed send workers into the harvest. I pray that God will supply every one of us with what we need in order to truly take up our crosses and follow Christ, and that these words may inspire every one of you to join me in that prayer. I’ve said before that I believe all service to God begins with humility, and that’s really what the essence of taking up your cross is: humility. So I’ll conclude with the apostle Paul’s words about the humility of our Lord and Savior, and its end result:




Open Study Discussion: Judgement




