Posts

Posted on

Submit to One Another

Summary of my sermon, based on Ephesians 5:15-21. Preached at Greenhills Christian Fellowship Toronto on Sunday, 3 May 2026.

The concept of submitting is viewed a lot as a negative in our day. In modern society, it is associated with negative obligations, such as submitting assignments to a professor or clicking to submit a payment for bills. The most controversial association involves being forced to submit by someone who has greater power, much like a physical submission in martial arts or Brazilian jiu-jitsu.

Because of this cultural lens, subsequent verses like Ephesians 5:22 (“Wives, submit to your own husbands”) are frequently dismissed as an archaic and misogynistic concept. However, this ignores the preceding foundational command in verse 21: “submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.” To understand this directive, we must redeem the modern idea of submission by examining its surrounding biblical context.

Walking in Love and Wisdom
The primary exhortation of this passage is found in verse 15: “Look carefully then how you walk, not as the unwise but as wise.” This directive is a direct echo of Ephesians 5:2, which commands believers to “walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us.”

The ultimate reason we are able to submit to one another is what Jesus did on the cross. Submission in view of the cross is not a manipulation tactic; it is voluntarily done in love.

Biblical wisdom is distinct from human wisdom. Worldly wisdom relies strictly on human reason and the capacity for information. Biblical wisdom has its source directly in God (Proverbs 1:7; James 1:5) and involves the capacity to act on that information appropriately.

Time Management and Quiet Competence
Ephesians 5:16 commands “making the best use of the time, because the days are evil.” In a world where people constantly attempt to dominate each other and force their will onto others, submitting to one another is a highly efficient use of time. It frees us from the time wasted on trying to one-up one another.

Rather than expending time and energy to make yourself look better than someone else, believers can demonstrate quiet competence. Obeying God against the grain of our evil world allows believers to stand out as light in the surrounding darkness. Understanding and obeying the will of God is true wisdom, even if the world dismisses it as foolishness.

The Antithesis of Spirit-Filling
Verse 18 provides a critical contrast: “And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit.”

To understand what it means to be filled with the Spirit, it is instructive to look at its exact opposite: being drunk. Intoxication involves losing physical control, emotional outbursts, disorientation, and confusion. Historically, some movements, such as the 1990s Toronto Blessing, falsely equated inebriation with spiritual filling. Practices such as “falling in the spirit,” hysterical “holy laughter,” “holy animal sounds” (barking like dogs), and staggering as if “drunk in the spirit” are the antithesis of the Apostle Paul’s instruction. God is a God of peace, not confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33).

The Marks of a Spirit-Filled Community
Rather than disorientation, being filled with the Spirit is marked by specific, orderly practices within the community:

Addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs: Singing is explicitly commanded in the New Testament. Music elevates our communication and stirs up our affection for God, acting as a genuine way to show care and concern for each other.

Grounded Communication: Parallel texts like Colossians 3:16 mandate that the “word of Christ richly dwell in you.” The content of our communication must be steeped in the Word of God.

Giving thanks always for everything: Expressing constant gratitude to God serves as the baseline for all actions. Recognizing that everything comes from God makes it easier to look at the needs of one another and respond with generosity—with our time, words, and effort.

Conclusion
The passage culminates with the command to voluntarily submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. If believers successfully value others above themselves, they will fundamentally contrast with a world obsessed with selfish gain. This requires modeling the mindset found in Philippians 2:5-8: humbling ourselves like Christ, who became obedient to the point of death, even death on the cross.

Posted on

The Kingdom Demand for Integrity

Summary of my sermon, based on Luke 16:14-18. Preached at Greenhills Christian Fellowship Toronto on Good Friday – April 26, 2026.

In the preceding verses of Luke 16, Jesus teaches His disciples about the proper way to steward resources, culminating in a definitive truth: “You cannot serve God and money.” This absolute statement immediately triggers a confrontation with the religious establishment, setting the stage for a devastating critique on what it means to have true integrity as a redeemed people.

The Root of the Ridicule
Luke 16:14 states, “The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all these things, and they ridiculed him.” This gives us direct insight into why the Pharisees constantly bumped up against Jesus. The word used for “ridiculed” is severe; it is the exact same word translated as “scoffed” to describe the crowds mocking Jesus while He lay on the cross. The Pharisees were scoffing because they were trying to “have their cake and eat it too”—they wanted to serve God while holding onto their desire for money.

The Devastating Reality of Pretend Righteousness
Jesus’s response to their scoffing is absolutely devastating, yet He does not even mention money. Instead, He addresses the wider issue of kingdom integrity: “You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts” (Luke 16:15).

The main problem of the Pharisees is that they are attempting to appear more righteous than they really are in front of the people around them. As Jesus declares in Matthew 23, they are like “whitewashed tombs.” Just as a cemetery might look beautiful on the outside—with neatly cut grass and clean tombstones—underneath the surface, it is full of dead flesh and decomposing bones. The Pharisees looked beautiful on the outside, but God saw the rotten decay at their core.

They performed this pretend righteousness solely to receive the praise of the people around them. Jesus calls this purpose “an abomination in the sight of God.” An abomination is not just a minor misstep; it is the complete opposite of what is acceptable to God. Saying and doing the right things in public is not enough if the heart remains untouched.

A New Era of Salvation
In verses 16 and 17, Jesus outlines a shift in God’s story of salvation: “The law and the prophets were until John; since then, the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone forces his way into it.”

Since the very beginning of the need for salvation in Genesis 3 (the protoevangelium), God promised a Savior. Jesus’s arrival marks the fulfillment of that promise. The phrase “everyone forces his way into it” conveys the active acceptance required to enter the kingdom. It is a decision so radical—turning away from the things the world values, like money and public praise—that it requires forceful, decisive action.

However, this new era does not negate the moral law. Jesus clarifies, “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the law to become void.” The moral components of the law continue to reflect God’s holy character.

The Standard of Integrity
To prove His point that the moral law remains, Jesus makes what seems like a weird right turn by providing an example regarding divorce (verse 18). While this is not a comprehensive teaching on the subject—Matthew 19 expands on biblical exceptions such as sexual immorality, alongside other justified reasons like abuse or abandonment—He uses it to demonstrate that the Kingdom of God does not lower its moral expectations.

The Kingdom demand for integrity moves us past simple black-and-white, rule-based concepts. For instance, the New Testament standard for giving shifts from a strict 10% tithe to genuine generosity. The standard for morality aligns with Philippians 4:8: whatever is true, honorable, just, pure, and commendable.

Because our hearts are naturally “rotten to the core,” this standard is unattainable on our own. True righteousness is only possible through a transformation of the heart—a heart of stone replaced with a heart of flesh—accomplished entirely through the saving work of Christ on the cross.

Posted on

Embracing what the Resurrection Means

Summary of my sermon, based on Luke 24:1-12. Preached at Greenhills Christian Fellowship Toronto on Resurrection Sunday – April 5, 2026.

Every Easter, believers across the globe—from our local congregations to those gathering in Honduras, and even the persecuted church operating in secret—declare the exact same truth: He is risen. Yet, year after year, skeptics and cable television documentaries attempt to explain away the empty tomb with naturalistic theories. One of the most persistent is the “swoon theory,” which suggests Jesus did not actually die on the cross but merely passed out, only to revive later in the cool of the tomb. Historically and medically, this is an absurd proposition. The Romans were professional executioners. Under Roman law, a guard who failed to carry out an execution was subject to “vicarious liability”—meaning they would suffer the execution themselves. The soldiers ensuring Jesus was dead were highly motivated to get it right.

The crucifixion is an established historical reality. What is truly in dispute for the skeptic is what happened on Sunday morning. When we examine Luke’s account of the resurrection, we have to ask a critical question: Is this just a “believable” story crafted to start a religion, or is it a record of something real?

If a first-century author were fabricating a story and trying to make it believable to a Greco-Roman or Jewish audience, they would have left out specific details that Luke actively includes. By looking at these “embarrassing” details, we see the absolute authenticity of the gospel narrative.

Detail 1: The First Witnesses Were Women

Luke 24 tells us that the first people to discover the empty tomb and receive the angelic message were women—specifically Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James.

If you were inventing a story in the first century and wanted people to believe it, this is the absolute last detail you would include. In ancient patriarchal societies, women were treated as second-class citizens. Their testimony was generally considered invalid in a court of law. The first-century Jewish historian Josephus specifically wrote that the testimony of women should not be admitted due to the “levity and boldness of their sex.”

To make matters worse for the story’s cultural credibility, Luke specifically names Mary Magdalene. Luke 8 tells us that Jesus had previously cast seven demons out of her, meaning she would have been viewed as a complete social outcast. If Luke were trying to craft a culturally acceptable, easily believable myth, he would have written that esteemed male leaders discovered the tomb. Instead, he wrote the truth exactly as it happened, regardless of the cultural stigma.

Detail 2: The Unbelief of the Disciples

When the angels speak to the women at the tomb, they say, “Remember how he told you… that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men and be crucified and on the third day rise.” The fact that they had to be reminded shows that the followers of Jesus had completely forgotten or misunderstood His teachings.

Furthermore, when the women run back to tell the eleven apostles what they saw, Luke writes, “But these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them” (Luke 24:11). The Greek word used here for “idle tale” is leros, which translates to pure nonsense or utter garbage. The men who would become the foundational leaders of the Christian church initially treated the news of the resurrection as fake news.

Throughout the gospels, the disciples are repeatedly portrayed as dense, fearful, and lacking faith. Peter rebukes Jesus for predicting His death, and later denies Him three times. If you were inventing a religion, you would not portray your founding leaders as bumbling, skeptical cowards. Luke includes their stubborn unbelief because he is recording history, not writing propaganda.

The Power of the Empty Tomb

So, what changed? What transformed these fearful, skeptical men who hid behind locked doors into bold preachers willing to be executed for their faith?

They saw the empty tomb. They witnessed the risen Christ.

In Acts 3, Peter—the same man who thought the women’s report was pure nonsense—stands boldly before a hostile crowd and declares, “You killed the author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses.”

The resurrection changed them, and it changes us. As the Apostle Paul writes in Ephesians 1, the exact same immeasurable power that God used to raise Christ from the dead is currently at work in those who believe. This is why we can confidently declare alongside the Apostle Paul in Galatians 2:20 that we have been crucified with Christ. Claiming to die with a convicted criminal only makes sense if the tomb is empty. Because He lives, we live by faith in the Son of God who loved us and gave Himself for us.

Posted on

The Heart of God’s Offer of Forgiveness

Summary of my sermon, based on Luke 23:26-49. Preached at Greenhills Christian Fellowship Toronto on Good Friday – April 3, 2026.

The crucifixion narrative in the Gospel of Luke provides a highly detailed theological and historical account of the execution of Jesus Christ. When analyzing this text alongside parallel synoptic accounts, specific details emerge that validate the historical authenticity of the event. A prominent example is the conscription of Simon of Cyrene to carry the cross. From a purely narrative perspective, this detail appears extraneous. If the gospels were fabricated theological fiction, the authors likely would have depicted the protagonist demonstrating supernatural endurance by carrying the cross the entire distance. However, physiological realities dictate that a trauma victim subjected to severe Roman scourging would be physically incapable of transporting a heavy wooden beam. The random conscription of a bystander aligns precisely with established Roman execution protocols. This behavioral realism confirms that the gospel writers were documenting objective historical events rather than constructing idealized myths.

Beyond historical validation, the crucifixion sequence underscores a central theme unique to Luke’s gospel: the deliberate inclusion of marginalized outsiders into the Kingdom of God. Throughout his documented ministry, Jesus consistently challenged the religious establishment by associating with outcasts. This trajectory culminates at the cross during his interaction with the two condemned criminals. Both men faced identical lethal circumstances, yet their responses established a definitive binary. One criminal mocked Jesus, demanding immediate physical deliverance. The other acknowledged his own culpability, recognized Jesus’s innocence, and requested entrance into his kingdom. The immediate guarantee of salvation to the repentant criminal demonstrates that justification is executed purely through faith, operating completely independently of accumulated moral works, institutional religious practices, or past behavior.

The timing of this specific conversion is frequently misinterpreted as a theological justification for delaying religious commitment until the end of life. Analytically, this is a flawed premise. The executed criminal did not systematically delay a faith response; the crucifixion likely represented his first genuine exposure to Christ. Furthermore, utilizing this narrative to plan a delayed conversion assumes guaranteed future opportunities, ignoring the statistical unpredictability of mortality. The functional purpose of the criminal’s narrative is not to endorse delayed repentance, but to illustrate that there is no neutral position regarding the cross. Observers either reject the sacrifice entirely or accept it unconditionally.

The theological magnitude of the crucifixion is visually represented by the tearing of the temple curtain. Under the parameters of the Old Covenant, this heavy veil restricted access to the Holy of Holies, limiting direct divine interaction to the high priest. The physical tearing of this barrier at the exact moment of Christ’s death signifies the permanent obsolescence of the localized, exclusionary temple system. The Messiah’s sacrifice acted as the ultimate mediation, establishing direct, unrestricted access to God for all humanity and extending the covenant beyond the Jewish nation to the global population.

Finally, the varied reactions of the execution witnesses highlight the insufficiency of mere emotional responses to the gospel. The Roman centurion, who actively managed the execution detail, objectively recognized and declared Jesus’s innocence. Simultaneously, the assembled crowds observed the spectacle and returned home beating their breasts in profound sorrow. However, neither cognitive recognition of an unjust execution nor intense emotional distress equates to biblical salvation. The necessary response to the cross is explicit faith. For those who exercise this faith, the subsequent mandate is a life characterized by active gratitude. The cross cannot be treated as a passive historical symbol; it demands a measurable lifestyle transformation. Believers are required to mirror the humility and sacrifice demonstrated by Christ, actively reallocating their time, resources, and operational focus to serve others, thereby reflecting the reality of the crucifixion in their daily routines.

Posted on

Trusted with Little, Trusted with Much

Summary of my sermon, based on Luke 16:1-13. Preached at Greenhills Christian Fellowship Toronto on March 22, 2026.

In Luke 16, as Jesus continues His journey toward Jerusalem, His focus begins to shift. Knowing His time on earth is drawing to a close, He delivers urgent, essential teachings to His disciples—similar to a king offering his final instructions. During this time, Jesus shares what is arguably one of His most difficult teachings: the Parable of the Dishonest Manager.

The story introduces a manager caught wasting his wealthy master’s possessions. The word used for “wasting” here is the exact same Greek word used to describe how the prodigal son squandered his inheritance. This manager has committed a fireable offense. Upon learning he is about to lose his position, the manager panics. Knowing he is not strong enough for manual labor and too proud to beg, he devises a shrewd plan to secure his future. He summons his master’s debtors and drastically reduces the amounts they owe.

At first glance, this action seems to be further theft. Why, then, does the master eventually commend the dishonest manager for his shrewdness? To understand this, we have to look at the cultural context of first-century debt. It is highly likely that this manager had been engaging in usury—charging exploitative, exorbitant interest rates, a practice strictly forbidden in the Old Testament. When he slashes the debts, he is likely not cutting into his master’s principal, but rather removing his own illegal, inflated interest. In a moment of desperation, he forsakes his worldly greed to build goodwill and secure a future for himself once he is fired.

Jesus is not praising the manager’s dishonesty; He is highlighting his shrewdness. Shrewdness simply means exercising judgment with a clear understanding of the consequences. Jesus makes a profound comparison: “For the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light” (Luke 16:8, ESV). If worldly people exercise such deliberate judgment and urgency to secure their temporary, earthly futures, how much more should believers—the sons of light—exercise intentional judgment to secure eternal outcomes?

This brings us to Christ’s primary application regarding our attitude toward money. Jesus tells us to make friends by means of unrighteous wealth so that we may be welcomed into eternal dwellings. Wealth itself is morally neutral; it is simply a tool. However, the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. Jesus is urging us to hold our wealth loosely. Instead of hoarding it or using it for reckless living, we are to be generous, using our worldly resources for eternal good—such as supporting evangelism and bringing people into the family of God.

Furthermore, this parable teaches the principle of faithful stewardship. Jesus states, “One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much” (Luke 16:10, ESV). If we properly manage the resources God has given us, He can trust us with greater responsibilities. This is not the manipulative transaction taught by the prosperity gospel—where people give solely to receive a material blessing in return. True biblical stewardship means giving generously and cheerfully, recognizing that everything we have belongs to God.

Jesus concludes with an absolute truth: “No servant can serve two masters… You cannot serve God and money” (Luke 16:13, ESV). We must decide who sits on the throne of our hearts. Money is a terrible master, but it is a highly useful servant. Let us exercise true spiritual shrewdness, utilizing the time, resources, and wealth God has entrusted to us not to build a temporary earthly kingdom, but to invest deeply in the eternal kingdom of God.