In Sunday’s sermon, “The Life of the Church in the Last Days,” Ryan unpacked the significance of several words, including self-control, seriousness, love, and hospitality. As those who are living in the last days, these are the qualities that should characterize our life together.

From his article, “Create a Contrast Culture in your Church,” here’s a helpful reflection by Jonathan Leeman on how our citizenship in heaven transforms our life together as God’s people.

Think about the local church as an embassy from the future. It’s a formally constituted gathering of Spirit-indwelt kingdom citizens who proclaim and display Christ’s end-time rule. They gather to declare their king’s warnings and promises, and they gather to formally affirm one another as kingdom citizens through the keys given by their king, which they do with baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Here are the laws, and here are the passport holders.

What’s more, these eschatological embassies on earth, spread out like pins on a map, should be characterized by an unworldly culture. It’s not a culture imported from another place, but from a future age. It’s not defined by sushi, cricket, or burqas, but by the habits of holiness and love and the ambassadorial work of discipling, evangelism, hospitality, and caring for the needy.

Citizenship, mind you, is an office. And activities like discipling, evangelism, and hospitality constitute a Christian’s basic office responsibilities. “Go and make disciples,” Jesus says. “Share with God’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality,” Paul says. These are what Christians do by virtue of being citizens of Christ’s kingdom. We “live as citizens worthy of the gospel,” which means “striving side by side for the faith of the gospel” (Phil. 1:27, my translation; cf. 3:20).

The local church, in short, is the embassy where we show up for work, where we learn to be ambassadors who evangelize and disciple, and where we display an otherworldly culture that shines like stars in the dark night sky (Phil. 2:15).

Leeman continues with 12 ways churches can cultivate such a culture.

At last night’s Lord’s Supper service, we looked at a familiar story from Genesis 11:1-9, in the sermon, “The Tower of Babel and the Triumph of Christ.”

Here’s an interesting insight from John Piper on God’s restraining grace in the division of language:

God’s division of the world into different languages hinders the rise of a global, monolithic anti-Christian state that would have the power to simply wipe out all Christians. We often think that the diversity of languages and cultures and peoples and political states is a hindrance to world evangelization—the spread of Christ’s glory. That’s not the way God sees it. God is more concerned about the dangers of human uniformity than he is about human diversity. We humans are far too evil to be allowed to unite in one language or one government. The gospel of the glory of Christ spreads better and flourishes more becauseof 6,500 languages, not just in spite of it.

In Sunday’s sermon, “A Word to the Wives,” Ryan preached from 1 Peter 3:1-6, a passage with important instructions concerning the privileges and responsibilities that God has invested in wives.

Some sermons raise questions and issues that can’t be unpacked in full in the course of the sermon. Well, that’s most sermons, but some sermons are especially dense with issues that could be clarified and explored further, given more time. Sunday’s sermon was one of those.

So, here are some great resources in follow up to Sunday:

• “Sarah and Her Daughters,” a sermon by Charles Spurgeon
• “Saturday Seminar: Modesty,” a three hour seminar by Ryan Kelly
• “In Search of a Spouse, as a Potential Spouse,” A sermon from Proverbs 31 by Ryan Kelly
• “Don’t Take It from Me: Reasons You Should Not Marry an Unbeliever,” an article by Kathy Keller
• Feminine Appeal, a great book by Carolyn Mahaney available at the Book Nook

Like Peter in 1 Peter 2:13-18, Paul in Romans 13 writes in rather absolute and seemingly unqualified ways about civil authorities and the Christian response to them: “Be subject to the governing authorities. …whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed. …he is God’s servant for good.” But why write in these such absolute and seemingly unqualified ways? Why emphasize the right of government and the need for submission, and leave out any and all exceptions? Perhaps we can query a couple of sermons from John Piper for answers to these and similar questions.

In a sermon on Romans 13, Piper explains why Paul wrote Romans 13 as he did:

He is more concerned with our humility and self-denial and trust in Christ, than he is about our civil liberties. In other words, Paul risked being misunderstood on the side of submission because he saw pride as a greater danger to Christians than government injustice. I cannot imagine Paul writing this way if Paul thought that the ultimate thing was being treated fairly by the government. But I can imagine him writing this way if faith and humility and self-denial and readiness to suffer for Christ is the main thing.

Or, in other words:

[Paul] wants us to know that the danger to our soul from unjust governments is nowhere near as great as the danger to our soul from the pride that kicks against submission. No mistreatment or unjust law has ever sent anyone to hell. But pride and rebellion is what sends everyone to hell who doesn’t have a Savior.

But is there ever a proper place for civil disobedience? From the same sermon, Piper answers:

…some Christians have come to the point in history where they believed laws were so unjust and so evil, and political means of change had been frustrated so long, that peaceful, non-violent, civil disobedience seemed right.

What factors would be involved in consideration of civil disobedience? Piper suggests that “it would be a combination of at least these four things.”

1. The grievousness of the action sanctioned by law. How atrocious is it? Is it a traffic pattern that you think is dumb? Or is the law sanctioning killing?
2. The extent of the unjust law’s effect. Is it a person affected here or there? Or is it millions? Does the law have an incidental inconsistency? Or is it putting a whole group of people into bondage because of their ethnic origin?
3. The potential of civil disobedience for clear and effective witness to the truth. This is the question of strategy, and there will certainly be room here for differing judgments about whether a particular act of civil disobedience will be a clear and effective statement of what is just.
4. The movement of the spirit of courage and conviction in God in people’s lives that indicates the time is right. Historically, there appears to be a flash point of moral indignation. An evil exists for years, or perhaps generations, and then something strange happens. One person, and then tens of thousands of people, can no longer just get up and go to work and say, “I wish it weren’t this way.” A flash point is reached, and what had hung in the air for years as tolerable evil explodes with an overwhelming sense that this state of affairs simply can no longer be!

So, if and when that time comes, what should civil disobedience look like? What is its tenor and heartbeat? Piper looks to the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:38-48), which contrasts retaliation and love in response to enemies. Then he concludes with these guidelines:

The words of Jesus rule out all vindictiveness and all action based on the mere expediency of personal safety. The Lord cuts away our love for possessions, and our love for convenience. That’s the point of Matthew 5:38-42. Don’t act merely out of concern for your own private benefit, your clothes, your convenience, your possessions, your safety.

Instead, by trusting Christ, become the kind of person who is utterly free from these things to live for others (both the oppressed and the oppressors; both the persecuted and the persecutors; both the dying children and the killing abortionists). The tone and demeanor of this Christian civil disobedience will be the opposite of strident, belligerent, rock-throwing, screaming, swearing, violent demonstrations.

We are people of the cross. Our Lord submitted to crucifixion willingly to save his enemies. We owe our eternal life to him. We are forgiven sinners. This takes the swagger out of our protest. It takes the arrogance out of our resistance. And if, after every other means has failed, we must disobey for the sake of love and justice, we will first remove the log from our own eye, which will cause enough pain and tears to soften our indignation into a humble, quiet, but unshakeable, NO. The greatest battle we face is not overcoming unjust laws, but becoming this kind of people.

Church, let’s pray to that end!

Here are a few resources in follow up to Sunday’s message, “Dual Citizenship,” from 1 Peter 2:11-17.

• Collin Hansen’s article, “Pay Your Taxes But Trust in Christ,” reflects on and summarizes a great message by Mark Dever, “Jesus Paid Taxes,” from Mark 12:13-17. This message on how Christians relate to the state is a helpful complement to Sunday’s message.
• While preaching through Romans, John Piper unpacked the meaning and implications of Romans 13 across four messages, “Subjection to God and Subjection to the State” (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4).
• John Piper also has several messages on Sunday’s passage of 1 Peter 2:”Slaves of God: Free from All to Honor All,” “Good Deeds and the Glory of God,” “Being Pro-Life Christians Under a Pro-Choice President,” “Christ, Culture, and Abortion.”
• Jonathan Leeman’s article, “Love and the Inhumanity of Same-Sex Marriage,” is a careful reflection and exhortation for all of us as we consider how to navigate the waters ahead on this issue. David Murray’s article, “Prepare for Gay Marriage,” is along the same lines.
• Tim Keller’s article, “Old Testament Law and The Charge of Inconsistency,” helps us think about how to think and feel about being mischaracterized by the surrounding culture.
• D.A. Carson’s recent book, The Intolerance of Tolerance, explores the cultural and philosophical shifts that have landed us where we are today. Here’s an interview with Carson on this book.
• For a little reading on the subject and for a constructive reflection on how Christians can positively approach political engagement, read Michael Gerson and Peter Wehner’s City of Man: Religion and Politics in a New Era.
• For clear analysis of the nature and consequences of the sexual ethic embraced by our culture, read Desire and Deceit: The Real Cost of the New Sexual Tolerance , by R. Albert Mohler, Jr. Dr. Mohler writes about the issues we discussed on Sunday regularly at his blog and in his audio podcast, The Briefing.