At the 1993 annual meeting of the American Heart Association, thousands of physicians, nurses, and researchers met in Atlanta to discuss, among other things, the importance a low-fat diet plays in keeping our hearts healthy. Yet, during the mealtimes, they consumed fat-filled fast food---such as bacon cheeseburgers and fries---at about the same rate as those from other conventions. When one cardiologist was asked whether or not his partaking in high-fat meals set a bad example, he replied, “Not me, because I took my name tag off.”

Today’s passage completes our reading of the entire Sermon or Teachings on the Mount as recorded by Matthew. One of the early sermons in the series looked at the concluding verses of chapter 7 that spoke of heeding the words of Jesus would be like one wise who built his/her house on rock.

To discuss being known by the ‘fruit,’ speaks to the differences in the quality of fruit borne between those of the kingdom and non-kingdom persons. A number of things would have to be understood in deciphering the differences between the good-fruit of kingdom persons and the bad-fruit of non-kingdom persons. What seems to especially jump out from this passage is that Jesus was not comparing simply the good-religious folks versus those in a society who were labeled as evil persons. No, Jesus is comparing two sets of persons, both of whom seem to represent the same side or who would appear to be on the same team. Somehow, Jesus is again saying, “Not everyone who says, ‘Lord, Lord,’ is a kingdom-person.” And conversely, Jesus who had advised caution in making judgments against others, is rather pointedly stating judgments can be made based on the evidence---one’s or a people’s fruit-bearing; or better yet, the fruits borne indicate the tree as a good or bad tree.

Can a bad-tree, a non-kingdom person or people, really bear good fruit, the fruit of a kingdom-person? Or vice versa, will a kingdom-person, a good-tree, bear bad fruit, the kind of fruit that non-kingdom persons would bear? The obvious answer in either case is: no. To include such an indictment to what on the surface seems a simple understanding, however, must mean that ‘knowing one by his/her fruits’ could be most complex. There must be more than meets the eye. And yet, it is by the fruits one bears which is seen by others which can indicate, as well, from what kind of tree the fruit came.

In this series, we have come full circle from speaking about the crowds which were amazed at the teachings of Jesus to details of hearing how followers---kingdom persons will live. And, is not this the point here, again. Kingdom Persons, individually, or a Kingdom People, collectively, will bear genuine fruit. The standard will be by more than meets the eye and also by what a discerning eye can see. An apple painted orange does not make the apple an orange. But, what lies deeper than the surface---beyond what meets the eye, will indicate the true nature of the fruit and the tree which bore it. Of course, God in Christ is the one to final judge.

Then, to consider identifying wolves in sheep’s clothing is a challenge, is it not? Well, what does that in practical terms mean for us?

Perhaps it could mean, be cautious in what is believed as God’s truth. It is so easy, as stated in sermons delivered before, to confuse contemporary wisdom found in clichés or words that sound so upright and noble. And, as we previously had the lesson: it is not only what appears on the surface, even of the fruits borne, but what lies in the nature of the tree. If the orange outer shell of the fruit is scraped away, is it really an orange or an apple?

Nor, is the ‘good-fruit’ of Kingdom Persons only a quantitative thing, though perhaps quantity could be sometimes related. And certainly Kingdom-fruit is a qualitative thing. The fruit must have as its source the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

As we noted in one sermon in the series, Christians, Kingdom Persons, cannot help being who they are: it is their nature. And, this is really not a second-nature or the reshaping of one’s first nature---it is a Kingdom Person’s only nature---the nature of Christ’s character. Paul explained that we are new creatures, not reworked old creatures. We are not a remodeled earthly dwelling for God in Christ, we are new spiritual dwellings. Christians have new characters, where as the old nature was concerned about reputations. Someone has said if too much time is spent on polishing reputation, one’s character will become tarnished.

I grew up hearing the expression, “You can’t get blood out of a turnip.” Why? Because it is not in the character or nature for a turnip to live with a circulatory-blood system. Again, Jesus was speaking of a certain duality. One is a Kingdom-Person or one is not. And one cannot make oneself a Kingdom Person, only God in Christ can sanctify or make one a pure or genuine article. Those words ‘sanctify’ and ‘sanctification’ are good reformed-Christian words and scriptural words, though rarely used. Sanctification is the work of God, but persons in their freedom must choose to be open to being made holier.

Examine the fruit, scratch below any discoloration or marks, smell the fruit, even taste the fruit. Is the fruit of Christ-like quality? So, many things are passed off as Christ-like, when the truth is told, are not. Some are often believed by active church-goers who have yet to discover in study, prayer or worship the true character of Jesus Christ. For instance, I hear things sometimes said that would make me think Jesus was the Great Morals Cop on morality patrol, instead of a compassionate Savior. Christ was and is concerned about morality, but he was/is more concerned about persons’ hearts that determine their morality.

In this season of politics one has to be most discerning of the candidates phrases or clichés. Sometimes they are empty and void. Nationalistically, it can be nice to place that “God Bless America” bumper sticker on one’s car. But from a God in Christ perspective, God is no respecter of persons. There is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, American or non-American. If one seriously thinks about it, the U.S. has been greatly blessed. So, perhaps it is time to say, “May the U.S. be a blessing to God.” Is not being a blessing to God and the Kingdom more in tune with the Way of Christ?

Or take the adage often attributed to the Bible that “God helps those who help themselves.” Well, really? This is not explicitly stated in the Bible. And, where it is implicitly stated it has a totally different meaning than how I hear it used. For it is usually said to point out how much less deserving a down-and-out one is than those who have material blessings because they have earned or deserve them. “God helps those who help themselves” is a class-ism phrase used to excuse looking away from the poor or needy. But God in Christ‘s Way was the opposite--no one can help themselves enough to earn or deserve God’s help or salvation. God helps those who cannot help themselves, unconditionally, and all are included. And we are to do the same. What we believe--give mental assent to---directly relates to our fruit, lack thereof, or quality.

Regarding our fruit-bearing. I end by stating that Jesus did not expound on all the possibilities of this “good or bad tree, good or bad fruit” analogy. Could it be that a good-tree fails to bear any fruit? Could a good-tree have its fruit to rot on the vine? Could the fruit from a good-tree have the proper appearances, but be tasteless? If so, perhaps being open to the tender care of the Gardner is needed. Perhaps some pruning or nurturing must be accepted to bear-fruits worthy as praise to God in Christ.

In conclusion, what should be the characteristics of the good-tree’s fruit? Generally, it should appear with Christlikeness; meaning, full of grace, God’s grand love. Our loving-fruit should be that of unconditional love, given though not deserved, bound by no time restraints, and with generous overflowing. May we not feel compelled to remove our Christian name-tags, as did the physician at the heart conference.

Amen.



SERMON FROM AUGUST 17th

SCRIPTURE: Matt 7:13-14

We are familiar with dualities in a variety of circumstances in our way of life. The Supreme Court issues majority opinions, but also minority ones. Our Congress has an upper and lower house. Sports teams have a winner and a loser. We have a two-party political system. There are the colas and the un-colas.

No doubt, the lives of Middle Easterners in the first century saw many dualities as well. Religiously, one was either a Jew or not a Jew---in other words, Gentiles. One was part of the Roman occupation’s authority or personnel or one was of the Indigenous people.

So, Matthew tells of Jesus speaking in dualistic terms about entrance into God’s kingdom. Either one enters in or one does not. One entrance is rather suited to a herd-mentality by which many go to their destruction. Opposite, there is the less traveled road and less used entry point or gate which fewer find and follow that is the way of life.

Jesus gives a stark dualistic, almost simplistic, possibility to either entering into life or going the way of destruction. Middle ground or ‘almost’ categories are not suggested. With respect to ‘the way of life,’ there is either in or out, included or not included.

Actually, Matthew by injecting these particular words of Jesus into the Sermon on the Mount was like driving along at seventy-miles an hour, then for no apparent reason, slamming on the brakes until coming to a standstill. Sometimes we refer to such occurrences in life as “wake-up calls.” These words of Jesus amidst Matthew’s concerns about the early church, years after the crucifixion-resurrection of Jesus, were to startle the hearers/readers awake. Diverting the narrative from the ways the church could be blessed per The Beatitudes or discussing how Christians were to live and behave, this disclaimer flashes upon the screen in huge print with warning symbols to say: ‘You are in dangerous territory; the faith you have accepted is divisive as the darkest part of night is from the brightest time of day.’

Taking the opinions of scholars, who have given much thought and textual critiquing to this passage, they do not believe that the “many” and “few” per the way of destruction versus the way of life is an emphasis upon numbers or to be informational. Rather, the emphasis is on the urgency at hand. To be about the business of Christ--reaching others with the good news of salvation---could be labeled an “impossible mission, if followers of Christ have decided to accept it.”

Certainly there was an eschatological or end-time theme portrayed here by Matthew. Certainly the early Church was faithfully-hopeful that Jesus Christ would return within their lifetimes to redeem the followers to eternal joys. Therefore, these words would have been even more shocking than how you or I may perceive them these two-thousand years removed from the physical Jesus Christ.

The notation of “the many who were going the way of destruction versus the few finding the way of life” was a call to live faithfully as Christians---disciple-followers of Christ. Their lives were to be lived surrounded by the importance of urgency to their having been chosen or called.

Jim Wallis, contemporary author of the book The Awakening, stated when growing up as a young man in an evangelical congregation, he never heard a sermon from the Sermon on the Mount. Wallis now is both a minister and one involved in many social activisms as a Christian, even being interviewed on major networks and cable news for his input on politics in the U.S. from the left of the aisle.

The point of mentioning his observation from his early years is to help make poignant another dualism or dilemma of understanding to this passage. One first could think Wallis’ early years of being saturated hearing only evangelism messages would capture what Jesus through Matthew’s gospel was saying. Was Jesus not saying that it was urgent to help persons be prepared for that great end-of-time separation where the herd would wander onward to destruction while a smaller number of strays would find life eternal?

Well, ‘yes,’ but ‘no,’ as well.

Obviously, if Matthew, who could take liberties with the words of Jesus to create certain emphases, had truly believed this to be the totality of Christ’s teachings, the Sermon would have been much shorter as a fifteen-second sound-bite or a lengthy repetitious stating of only ‘believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved. . .’

But this is not what we read or hear from the Sermon. There are teachings on how to live as followers of Christ---to avoid letting anger rule, to avoid being taken to court over disagreements, to avoid divorce and adultery, to be motivated by love and true relationship with God in one’s piety, to be salt and light to the world, to even love enemies, and to be bearers of good-fruit.

Perhaps then the urgency is two-fold, also. Certainly the underwriter of the Christians’ faith is the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and that it is in Christ and Christ through a believing person or a body of believers that life-abundant will be received and lived. But from these compiled teachings of Christ detailing how to live as Christ’s disciples, we have been called to live with crucial urgency. There cannot be the one urgency without the other. There is no witness to introduce one to Christ if no love or compassion has been seen in the life and character of the witness. If the follower of Christ seems to think or behave no differently than do the non-believers by being wrapped up in revenge, power, might or control, the message of Christ’s salvation and love is voided. So, knowing God’s kingdom is here and not yet complete, we are to live with urgency as Jesus lived.

To view from the flip-side: for a church and individual believers to live with highly distinguishing characteristics opposite of how those only of this-world live, opens wide the doors and windows of hearts to share the good-news of Jesus. And by “distinguishing,” we would not mean obnoxious distinctions. However, to share the good news of Christ in words should become easier when living the teachings of Jesus with a sense of urgency. For such a life gives authenticity and genuineness to one’s witness.

It may be implausible to put ourselves today into the same circumstances of those first century Christian readers and hearers of the evangelist Matthew. Those small bands of followers were identified not initially as Christians but persons of the Way. The symbol of the fish which we often see on the rear of vehicles was sometimes used following the inception of Christianity as a secret code. A Christian speaking with a stranger would draw one of the two curvy-lines of the fish--perhaps in sand or dirt. And, if the other were a Christian, that one would then add the other curvy-line to create the image of a fish. This was a tool used to avoid saying too much to an unknown person who could have hurt, harmed, or had one arrested for being a Christian. It seems extinction was a real possibility to the newly formed Christianity or ‘the Way’ for many decades.

While we may not identify with such urgency in our culture or society, yet, we do live with such urgency for the sake of this church and its witness of Christ on this street corner or wherever we as the church may be or go in our daily lives.

We are reminded today that there is the way of the ‘many’ and there is the way of the ‘few,’ and we are not talking numbers.