[Transcript represents full sermon's text]

       Today we conclude the series of messages from Colossians. It certainly has been a good run, and we’ve covered a vast variety of things. Truth be told, Colossian’s is the speaker’s favorite epistle in the New Testament. When really considering it, it does seem to cover the basics—the fundamentals—of the Christian faith, from Paul’s showing that Jesus is God in chapter 1, to the proper balance in living presented in chapter 2, to correct having characters in chapter 3, to the importance of the church in chapter 4. The book really is complete, and it holds a great deal of importance for us, as Christians, in twenty-first century America, truly, just as much importance as it held for the Colossians almost two thousand years ago.

       Nevertheless, in finishing up the series today, we are going to go through areas of discussion that have cropped up as we’ve gone over chapters 3 and 4. Like last time, these are appendices and elaborations based on what has already been stated.

       Getting started. It was discussed at the beginning of Colossians 3 how we are to seek the things which are above and to set our minds on them, that all earthly relationships are just that, earthly. Admittedly, that seems kind of cold. Can this be discussed further and about how it relates to those we are close to in this life?

       This is the call for everyone, really, to be in relationship with God, with the true God of the Universe. And, for us who have become Christians, it looks like that that is where we have found ourselves after some time, that we are very happy that we are now on right terms with God. We find that we love spending time with him, whether we call that mediation or prayer. We want to be close to God, and we discover that what James told us in his epistle, that we must draw near to God in order for him to draw near to us, we find that’s experientially true. The beautiful thing about that is that it shows us that God values human freedom. He wants us to actually draw near to him first, and then he will in turn draw near to us. It isn’t, as has often been taught, that the Father draws us to him, and then we are close to him, It is as Jesus told the Pharisees in John, when he said, “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day” (John 6:40, ESV). Note that this is the same passage where, just a couple verses later, Jesus says the Father draws people to himself. Though, this drawing can’t be without a person’s will, for Jesus just told us it is the will of God that everyone comes to him. Accordingly, if it was that the Father draw people outside of their individual wills, then everyone would come to God because God would draw all to himself, Obviously, we know that’s not the case.

       We do know, or should know by now, that God is the only One who is unchanging in our lives. So, this is a second reason, in that not only do we want to be close to God, but actually, he is the only one who is certain for us. It was mentioned how Paul only had Luke with him by the end of his life, that everyone else had gone somewhere else. But Jesus has also told us in Luke, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26, ESV). Therefore, he draws a firm line. He shows that our love for God will be far greater than for anyone else. It’s not that we must love God, but it seems better to say that we automatically will if we are a true believer. It will well-up from our hearts. It feels plausible there’s some natural dispensation within us to do so anyway. That’s often referred to as the God-shaped vacuum or hole in our heart. We have to remember in all of this, however, that while we do love God greatly, and grow in our love for God over time, it’s also true that Jesus, as well as the other New Testament writers, often told us to love our brothers, and even those who aren’t. Thus, God himself clearly has it in mind that we will, and should, love other humans. And, we know, that in Heaven, a large amount of them are going to be there with God and us throughout all eternity. In that respect then, while we may love God greater, it is true we will always have fellow humans around us whom we love.

       It has not been taught in our Colossians series that those who don’t know God when they depart this world will be with God anyway, or will end up being with God. That’s not taught here. If we believe are actions as individuals matter, and that all souls are not predetermined in one direction or another, then that puts a greater emphasis for us on sharing the Gospel with others as we want more and more human beings to be with God and with us in Heaven. We can make friends for eternity. And, as some of the New Testament writers tell us, and even Jesus pointed out a minute ago, God desires everyone to be saved. It isn’t that he specifically determines that ahead of time, but a lot of times it is dependent upon their personal choice as well as people’s choice to share the message. Thus, many of us get to be partakers in sharing how one can become saved so that more and more of those we love will hopefully be saved. So, if you look at it that way, it’s not a cold-setup that God has left us with. It’s a great setup where there is hope for anyone who doesn’t believe yet but is still living.

       The next area of discussion. Sexual immorality was discussed in Colossians 3. What are some ways that singles and even dating couples can avoid sexual immorality?

       Admittedly, talking about sexual purity among individuals seems sometimes like it’s almost talking about an alien topic in that, it has been witnessed recently, surprisingly among some who call themselves Christians, that purity in dating is not practiced. It can be disheartening at times to see that. Of all the things that Satan has focused on in our world, this area may be the greatest area. Satan knows, and we probably know too, that sexual immorality leads to the hardening of the heart. The hardening of the heart. This is probably, for instance, why in the Old Testament God had no choice but to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah—for their hearts had become so hardened, and this by the practice specifically of homosexuality and probably even other worser things. Interestingly, on this topic Jesus did say that if the miracles that had been performed during his time would have been able to have been preformed back during the times of Sodom and Gomorrah, that at least some individuals would have believed (see Matthew 11:23). That’s interesting since he is basically saying that the people during his time had even harder hearts. Now, obviously, those miracles couldn’t be performed back then because the time hadn’t come for Christ to come down. We know the people ended up having hard-hearts because they ended up crucifying Jesus, and most of them didn’t come to believe. And later comes the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

       Anyway, we got a little off track there, but, as it has often been said, it seems good for Christians to have rules in place for themselves before they find themselves in any kind of tempting situation. Some might want to limit things to just holding hands, and that seems good. Some might want to go so far as not even doing that, though, that might not be realistic. Kissing probably is best left for marriage, at least, on the lips. Maybe a hand or forehead kiss would be okay. But it appears it’s better to be prepared, and even strict if one needs to be, in order to avoid unwanted behavior. It is also believed, if it is possible (and this will depend on each individual situation), that people marry sooner and not date so long. It’s best to marry say, six months or perhaps a year into it, it would seem. Of course, numbers are just be thrown out here, but it’s best not to date forever, That’s just probably going to lead to problems, unless it’s long-distance perhaps. Anyway, it seems good too, if the individuals are mature, to go ahead and marry young if the opportunity avails. A couple was known recently, for example, where the guy was nineteen and the girl twenty when they got married. And they seemed really happy about it. Obviously, this will depend on maturity. Some people don’t reach a good level of maturity, say, till the mid-twenties. It just depends on the people in question.

       As far as who to actually date, and besides the obvious fact that the person should be a born-again Christian, a beneficial thing that the speaker affirms, coming from the realm of psychology (remember, the speaker’s degree is in psychology), is that of attachment theory, and specifically the theory as it relates to dating relationships. That is, in selecting one’s partner. First, of course, it has to be determined what attachment style the individual is who is seeking a partner, and then it needs to be discerned what attachment style the individual in question is—the perspective date, if you will. It appears upon further understanding that attachment style has some kind of inborn or genetic characteristic to it, though, a person’s environment and experiences also plays a pivotal role. But in point of fact, attachment theory, as it pertains to the dating relationship, seems to provide a relational calculus, or relational shortcut, or hack, if you will, in trying to find a good person to date or court, and then marry. Of course, good selections appear to be fewer and fewer the older one gets, and there is some explanation found in attachment theory. Nonetheless, it appears there are basically four attachment styles, and the whole populace falls into one of these four when it comes to dating someone. It is not common practice to do this, but the speaker knows of a fascinating book on the subject written in 2010 (and be warned, it is a secular book written by secular psychologists with secular examples). It is called ‘Attached: The New Science of Adult Attachment and How It Can Help You Find—And Keep—Love” by Amir Levine and Rachel S.F. Heller. The general message of this book is groundbreaking and profound.

       Moving on. The use of substances was mentioned, and how a Christian is to use discernment when it comes to substances. Does this mean that, say, for instance, smoking cigarettes is wrong?

       This subject matter can be considered briefly. People probably aren’t going to like the answer to this one, and that is, that fifty or a hundred years ago, it doesn’t seem it would have been wrong. That would be primarily due to the fact that the people back then didn’t know of the harmful effects to smoking cigarettes. Nowadays, we obviously do. And knowing that, the speaker certainly doesn’t see how it could be a regular practice of a Christian. It should also be noted that it would appear that cigarettes could be a ‘gateway drug’, if you will, to other more serious substances. That only seems likely. In that case, it may be best to avoid cigarettes altogether for that reason. Cigarettes, in and of themselves, it is understood do not really cause a change in one’s mental state, like drinking too much alcohol. Consequently, smoking a cigarette may be more like a heavy dose of caffeine or something like that versus the actual drinking of too much alcohol. Therefore, any substance, like alcohol in getting drunk, that causes a change to one’s mental state would be wrong because we are called, as Christians, to have self-control. Zoning out on some substance would be a violation of that Fruit of the Spirit, that of self-control. We don’t need an artificial peace of mind, but a real peace of mind through obedience to the Scriptures (a clear conscience), and the practice of good thinking habits and skills.

       The next area of discussion. Worship and church services were brought up, and it was spoken that a lot of churches have been visited by the speaker. Can it be described what the most Biblically accurate service looks like, or that has been attended in one’s journeying?

       The best way, it would seem, to answer this question is to ask another question back, and that is “What is the focus of the service? Or, is the service focused heavenward?” If we look at a church service through those eye glasses, then we come to see what is genuinely important, and what is at the heart of God. The most accurate services ever attended, bar none, would be those attended at the Amish-Mennonite church last year, and the year before, and those at her sister churches (for basically, the services are pretty much the same wherever one attends, from State to State). At this point, it is necessary to provide an understanding of what an Amish-Mennonite service looks like, since probably most listening have not attended one. It begins when one enters the church building and there is a great silence as the holiness of God is emphasized in this moment. One approaches the entrance to the sanctuary, and it will be observed that folks are divided down the middle, with the ladies on one side and the gentlemen on the other. This is because Heaven is emphasized, and not the earthly relationship of marriage and families. So, one is seated by the usher in accordance whether male or female. Silence mostly ensues until the start of the service, at which point, there is acapella singing that occurs from hymn books. Three songs. No instruments. No glamour from worldly instruments. Then there is a small, ten-minute or so message delivered by one of the male members. Next the church breaks up into Bible studies, at least two but usually more, for the males and for the females.

       Within the Bible studies, which generally last about a half-hour, each person is expected to read from the passage, and then hopefully provide comments on a turn-by-turn basis. After that is more singing followed by the actual sermon (about forty to fifty minutes in length) from one of the ministers or the Bishop. After the sermon, there are public comments, and then singing again. Finally, once the service is dismissed, it is customary to stand and talk with individuals, those around oneself, for at least ten or fifteen minutes, and then one may roam around the sanctuary talking to others on the same side for say another fifteen minutes or so. Under this practice, fellowship every Sunday is guaranteed. You will talk to a least a couple people, and it will be lengthy, unless one simply ups and leaves, which would be considered rude. Finally, for the visitors, usually the host will invite that individual or family to dine at their house for lunch with other church members. Therefore, even more fellowship is had, and sometimes deeper fellowship, at lunch. It is a terrific setup, and contrasts greatly with most kinds of church services throughout the country.

       Now let’s consider the setup of a modern Evangelical church service. Generally one enters the church, and is usually greeted by someone at the door. People will be found to be fellowshipping in the foyer area. One enters the sanctuary, on one’s own accord toward service time, and then is presented usually with very glamorous music that is loud. The songs generally are more basic, and not very theologically deep. They tend to focus on emotion, and even have a preference for the individual, with the use of the pronoun “I” instead of a focus on God a lot of times. There often is an attitude of ‘getting,’ as in what can the person get out of this service. When the sermon comes, it is generally short, say twenty to thirty minutes, and is usually pretty basic. It will have Scripture and modern examples, which is good, but typically wont be too deep. Unfortunately, one is usually told throughout the sermon that one needs to be evangelizing to the lost, within family, work, and while out and about in the world. That guilt-trip is built up very high, as if each person within the body has been given the gift of evangelism. (Yet, as an aside, the Apostle Paul lists it as a gift, and does not seem to think that universally everyone has it). Obviously, there is nothing wrong with witnessing, but it is usually greatly emphasized. And following the sermon, signing occurs again, probably one song, and finally the body is dismissed, It is everyone person for him or herself. There is great emphasis on individuality, and making one’s fellowship happen of one’s own accord.

       On this last point, regarding fellowship as it pertains to attending church, it will be stated that it seems like, what has been called by one author, the “Extrovert Ideal” has become the focus of the Evangelical church. This needs explanation for further clarification. The secular author Susan Cain, to reference another secular work, wrote an excellent section in her 2012 book titled ‘Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop Talking.” She basically explains that the modern Evangelical church puts a great emphasis on one being outgoing, and the reason for this noted is that because if someone doesn’t witness, another person could end up in Hell (see pages 62 to 70). Yet, she also points out elsewhere in her book that people are designed differently, we would say created by God differently, some to be extroverts and some to be introverts. Even the Apostle Paul himself alludes to this when he talks about the different giftings from the Holy Spirit given to believers. So, within a lot of churches then, the need to be super outgoing is emphasized regardless of how God has created a person, and regardless of one’s gifting from the Spirit. The eagerness to witness to every person on the face of the planet regardless of natural and spiritual tendencies is truly, in reality, a fear-based doctrine, that really, at the end of the day, has no foundation in the New Testament. Many folks, then, within the body of believers are left feeling uncomfortable, since they are asked to go against how God created them, to go against what is natural. Of course, the rebuttal argument against this would be people should feel uncomfortable, and on and on we go.

       Now for the final area of discussion. In Colossians 4, prayer was talked about at length. It does seem like a lot of prayer goes unanswered. Is there anything further that can be said in regard to this?

       Several things can be noted here. First, it has probably been heard before, and it’s something a lot of people don’t want to hear, is that often there is a time delay from the day we ask God to do something to the day it actually happens. We, in our American mindsets, wish for everything to happen very quickly. So, oftentimes from the day we pray to the day it actually happens, we may not even see a connection because we might have stopped praying in between. Remember in Daniel 10, when Daniel prayed, God answered it on the first asking, but it took 21 days for the answer to manifest itself. That, truth be told, isn’t a real long time. And it could be too that Jesus told us at the beginning of Luke 18 to keep praying and never give up as the circumstances may change wherein at the beginning of our praying for something, perhaps Satan has a stronghold. Then, later on, Satan no longer has as strong of a hold, and God is able to breakthrough doing whatever it is. See, if we had stopped praying after whatever amount of time, then we wouldn’t have asked at the right time where Satan was in a weak spot. That’s one way to look at it. Another thing is that by our continuing prayer, we could actually change God’s mind over time, wherein originally he didn’t want to do whatever it is for whatever the reason, and after our continual prayer, he has changed his mind and decided to go ahead and accomplish whatever it that we want.

       Therefore, it’s for the three reasons just mentioned that sometimes it looks like prayer isn’t answered, but the truth is that often there is that time delay and often we don’t make the connection that God has done this or that because of prayer, due to the time-delay. But, if we stop and think about it, if Jesus told us to keep praying and never give up, there has to be good reason for that. It’s not some vain ritual that we are doing to make God happy, but there has to be real, true beneficial things that can happen from our continual prayer, whether that’s over weeks, months, years, or even decades. And we should note that the answer provided here surely isn’t Calvinism-friendly since, under a Calvinistic approach to prayer, it really can’t change God’s mind, as then, his foreknowledge would have changed. One could say he had foreknowledge he would change his mind, but then, he really didn’t change his mind. What has been noticed, and this point will close the message, is that Calvinism seems to work for people until bad things happen to ‘them.’ You see, Calvinism is very comfortable and makes life comfortable until something particularly bad happens to someone and they have to say it was supposed to happen. Often, people’s Calvinism gets shaken and rattled when really bad things happen. The minister will say, “Well, God has something for you to learn with your son dying.” And all one needs to ask the minister in response is, “And what did God have for the son to learn who is now dead?” Thus, the folly of such an answer presents itself. Calvinism is a well-structured and well thought-out system of theology, but people truly need to consider carefully what has been said here, and whether what they believe really, at the end of the day, lines up with what the Bible actually says.

- Daniel Litton