Sunday Morning Greek Blog

September 13, 2026

Love Over Judgment: Romans 14

I forgot to bring my voice recorder to the pulpit, and I tried videoing my sermon using the Reels app, but evidently Reels has a 15-minute limit, so Meta didn’t save my video at all. So I offer my apologies for not having an audio file. Enjoy the read! Message presented September 13, 2026, at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE.

Good morning! The Lord be with you!

Well, I had forgotten I was doing the rest of the Sundays in September, so here I am with one more chance to share some insights from Paul’s letter to the Roman church with you. As we read through the passage this morning, I’m sure there were a couple words or concepts that stuck out to you: judging, despising, quarrelling stick out to me, in a negative way. Since the concept of passing judgment is so prevalent in this passage, I think it’s important to take a few moments to dig into the biblical meanings of these concepts.

The word Paul uses for “judgment” (κρίνω krinō) is also the root of our English words “critic,” “critical,” “criticize,” “critique,” and so on. It is also the root in words like “hypocrite” The word can refer to formal verdict from an approved court; discernment between two or more options; an informed opinion about a matter; or a statement of rebuke, whether justified or not, against another individual. One of the definitions for the word in Merriam-Webster is “the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing.”[1]

The most basic teaching we have about judgment in the Bible comes from Jesus’s own mouth in Matthew 7:1: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.” That passage comes from the Sermon on the Mount, so you may be familiar with what comes after it. Here’s Matthew 7:1–6 in full:

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. [2]

This is the kind of judgment, I believe, that Paul addresses in Romans 14. But the gospels and Paul also deal with a legitimate form of judgment, church discipline. I don’t want to spend a lot of time on that this morning, but it is important we have a fuller scope of understanding the concept.

Jesus addresses this in Matthew 18:15ff:

15 “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ d 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. [3]

Although the word for “judgment” doesn’t occur in this passage, the implication of such is quite clear. It may start as a one-on-one encounter, but any final decision about ostracizing the offending member for a credible charge of sin must ultimate rest with the local church body.

Paul addresses this as well in 1 Corinthians 5:9–13:

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister a but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”[4]

Of course, as a church, we hope we never have to employ this kind of discipline. I’ve had enough experience as a pastor in my career to have seen the sequence of Matthew 18 played out on a few occasions.

But as I said above, Paul isn’t really addressing church discipline issues in Romans 14. What he’s dealing with is a clash of Jewish and Gentile cultures, as I’ve discussed all along in Romans. Let’s take a closer look at that passage.

Paul sets the context of his comments with the first verse of chapter 14: “Welcome those who are weak in faith, but not for the purpose of quarreling over opinions”[5] as the version in the bulletin says. First of all, the word for “quarreling” (διάκρισις diakrisis) is based on the word for judgment. This reflects the aspect of judgment about having used your own critical thinking skills to form your own opinion about something. It also carries with it the idea of “distinguishing” between good and evil (Hebrews 5:14) and “discernment” of spirits in 1 Corinthians 12:10.

The word for “opinion” (διαλογισμός dialogismos)[6] is an intensified form of our word for “dialogue.” The NIV translates the word “disputable matters.” In other words, the idea or concept has been thoroughly discussed or thought through, whether in your own mind or by interacting with others, so it’s likely each side is thoroughly convinced of their own view and not open to reconsidering it.

Now if these “opinions” were a matter of faith or proper doctrine, then arguing about them might be a worthwhile exercise, if done peaceably. But the nature of the issues Paul addresses are not matters of faith or orthodoxy. They all seem to be matters related to their respective cultures.

Notice also that Paul is keeping this within the body of Christ in Rome: “Accept the one whose faith is weak.”[7] He’s not saying they have to accept people in their midst who want to work against the mission of the church. Nor does Paul explicitly define which view he considers “weak.” Your diet doesn’t save or condemn you. The days you consider special (or not) don’t save or condemn you. Whether you eat meat or not is not a matter of salvation. Paul’s only admonition here is that, whatever you believe about these things, you should be “fully persuaded” in what you believe. That reflects the word in verse 1 translated “opinion.” It’s a well-thought position that you’re unlikely to be dissuaded from.

Paul emphasizes another attitude that believers should avoid. This is the idea of “contempt” (ἐξουθενέω exoutheneō)[8] in vv. 3 and 10. The reading in the bulletin uses the word “despise.” Paul puts this word in the mouths of his opponents in 2 Corinthians 10:10 when they describe his message as something that “amounts to nothing.” It carries with it not only the idea of a lower status, but also of rejection and ridicule as well, in effect, a form of ostracism. We should not treat our brothers and sisters in Christ in this way over matters that have nothing to do with our faith or salvation.

Paul closes out the first twelve verses by emphasizing what is truly important: our fellowship with one another made possible by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Each one of us is responsible for our own beliefs and behaviors. Yet we also must realize that we live to encourage and love one another as well. Paul goes on to suggest in verse 13 that acting in these inappropriate ways toward one another is akin to putting stumbling blocks in the way of those who may be weak or wavering in their faith.

Paul defends his own positions on these matters but also concedes that if someone believes differently than he does, then that’s okay too. What matters is that we love one another.

I will close this message with Romans 14:17–19, because I think that is the perfect way to send us out into the mission field today.

17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.[9]

Peace to you this day. Amen.

My views are my own.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.


[1] Merriam-Webster, Inc. 2003. In Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary., Eleventh ed. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version. 1989. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

[6] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[7] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[8] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[9] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

August 31, 2026

Podcast Episode: “God’s Gifts and His Call Are Irrevocable”: Romans 9–11 (Part 6)

Pip: Sunday Morning Greek Blog, where the lectionary waits for no one — and apparently, neither did the previous two preachers.

Mara: Scott Stocking steps in to cover Romans 9 through 11 in a single message, which means we’re looking at the whole question of Jews, Gentiles, and what God’s mercy actually requires of either group.

Pip: Let’s start with the olive tree.

“God’s Gifts and His Call Are Irrevocable”: Romans 9–11

Mara: The tension Paul is navigating in Romans 9 through 11 is a social one: Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome, each convinced they have the stronger claim on God’s favor, and Paul trying to referee.

Pip: The Gentiles had kept the churches running during the Jewish exile. The Jews were the ethnic and religious home of the Messiah. Both sides had a case, and both sides were apparently making it loudly.

Mara: The post frames it this way: “It would seem from Paul’s comments in chapters 9–10 especially that each group felt they had one-up on the other.” Paul’s answer is the olive tree metaphor — Jews as the original root, Gentiles grafted in.

Pip: So neither side gets to spike the ball. The Gentiles were welcomed into something they didn’t plant, and the Jews can’t claim exclusive ownership of a tree that now has new branches.

Mara: And the theological grounding for that is Romans 9:15, where Paul quotes God speaking to Moses: “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” Salvation isn’t ethnic arithmetic.

Pip: Which means all the scorekeeping is beside the point. God’s mercy operates on terms neither side gets to set.

Mara: The post walks through the warnings in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 to explain why some Israelites were the branches cut from the tree — disobedience, not ethnicity, is what separates people from God’s promises.

Pip: Those warning passages are, by the post’s own account, considerably longer than the promises for obedience that precede them. The Torah apparently believed in thorough consequences.

Mara: Romans 10 then offers the way through — the Romans Road passage: “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” Confession and belief, not lineage.

Pip: And Romans 11 closes the loop. Verse 29’s promise that “God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable” applies to Israel and Gentiles alike — God’s love for his chosen people doesn’t expire even when they’re in disobedience.

Mara: The post ties it back to Romans 3: no one is righteous on their own. The whole arc of chapters 1 through 11 lands on grace as the only operative category, which sets up Romans 12 and the practical ethics that follow.

Pip: Doctrine first, then dishes — sounds like Romans has a structure after all.

Mara: The sermon closes with the doxology from Romans 11:33–36, and that’s where the post ends too: “For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen.”


Pip: Mercy that doesn’t check your ancestry, grace that outlasts disobedience — Paul was writing to one fractious church in Rome and somehow addressed every fractious community since.

Mara: Next week it’s Romans 12, where the theology meets the neighbor. That’s worth coming back for.

August 30, 2026

Unhypocritical Love (Romans 12:9–21)

I preached this message on August 30, 2026, at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, Nebraska. This is my last Sunday to preach on Romans for this year’s liturgical calendar. Romans 13 and 14 are on the calendar for the next couple weeks when I’m on a short road trip and out of the pulpit, but when I’m in the pulpit again, I’ll either be addressing Philippians 1 or a Gospel passage.

Good morning! The Lord be with you!

At first glance, when you hear or read this passage, I can imagine you have a thousand thoughts going through your mind. On the surface, it sounds like we’ve just read a whole list of commands, by my count 25 in all from verses 9–21. It’s easy to see then, how the pastor at my home church was able to take 12 weeks this summer to work through Romans 12. Each of the would-be commands are great subjects by themselves for sermons. But alas, I do not have 12 straight weeks to do that with you, nor would I want to “borrow” my pastor’s sermons to accomplish such a task. “Twelve on Romans Twelve”; that would make a nice sermon series title.

As I looked at the passage and began to ponder how I might be able to organize my thoughts, it seemed like the paragraph breaks in my version might do for a convenient and simple organizing structure. But as I’m wont to do, especially with a passage that’s a bit challenging, I looked into my Greek text to make sure the paragraph breaks were justified by the text, and I was not disappointed. So, here’s how I’ll approach the text this morning to respect the way Paul wrote it.

The text is divided into three main sections, each beginning with a direct statement that indicates the theme for each section. Beginning in verse 9, we have the statement about love and what that looks like. We might think that could be kind of squishy, but it’s not. We’ll look at the intensity of the concept when we get there.

The next section starts in verse 14, digs a little deeper into our souls, and challenges us to do some things that might be really difficult: “Bless those who persecute you.”[1] Kind of makes you want to squirm a little bit in your seat, right?

Finally, Paul cuts to the heart of the matter directly in verses 17: “Do not repay anyone evil for evil.”[2] Paul gets pretty intense in that last section. So, let’s get started this morning and break this down.

The first three statements in verse 9 are actually summaries of what I’ve just described above, but Paul doesn’t lay them out in the same order. Let’s take a look under the hood here and break down what’s going on.

The lead-statement sets the tone of the rest of the passage. In the original language it is a simple, three-word sentence that makes a statement of fact:[3] “Love is unhypocritical.” This should be a straightforward translation in most cases, but our English translations have interpreted what follows as a series of short commands about things we should or shouldn’t do. [4] So they have transferred that understanding to this first phrase as well: “Let love be genuine” or “Let love be sincere” as some translations have it.

This is completely acceptable when it comes to Bible translation, because the goal is to make it understandable to average English reader. Also, sometimes we have a mindset as Christians that we just want God to tell us what we’re supposed to do and how we’re supposed to live. Then we can just check off the boxes and grade ourselves on how well we think we’re doing. But we also know that living for Christ isn’t just about checking off behavioral boxes and those with a passing grade get into heaven. In fact, it isn’t about checking off boxes at all, really, because we’ve already seen that when we’re “in Christ,” we already have the victory. Christ has checked off all the boxes, so to speak, and has imparted his righteousness to us.

Paul knows this as well, and I think in this case, especially with a mixed group of Jews and Gentiles, I would suggest that instead of giving us a checklist, he’s giving a definition of unhypocritical love. Again, the governing statement is “Love is genuine.” That is an absolute statement of truth. He’s setting a standard, much like he does in 1 Corinthians 13, but customized for the Corinthian culture and church. In fact, what he’s probably doing here in Romans is defining ἀγάπη (agapē) love for both Jews and Gentiles. What follows then is a description of actions that demonstrate what unhypocritical love looks like. So, in some respects it is still a checklist of sorts, but Paul doesn’t want you to see it as a checklist. He wants you to see love as a default setting for your heart and mind.

It is important to note, then, that many of the things that follow this statement are descriptions of other-centered behaviors. Several of the key words in this list are words that are rarely found in the NT, in a few cases only once or twice, so these are worth noting. I won’t go into detail on each one; as the pastor of my home church demonstrated, each one of the concepts is worthy of its own sermon.

I want to save the last two phrases in verse 9 for a little later, so let’s look at verse 10. “Be devoted to one another in love” is how the NIV translates it. Our reading has “love one another with mutual affection.”[5] First of all, the word for “mutual affection” here (“love” in the NIV) is not agapē, but φιλαδελφία (philadelphia)[6], that’s right, “brotherly love.” This of course refers to real love and mutual affection, not the kind of “love” you might get from a Philadelphia Eagles fans, who’ve been known to boo Santa Claus.[7]

The word for “love” in our bulletin reading (“devoted” in the NIV) is a compound of two words that mean two different kinds of love in Greek (φιλόστοργος philostorgos). The first part of the compound is the same as the φιλία (philia) in Philadelphia; the second part of the compound is a word that C.S. Lewis describes as familial love, especially that kind of love a mother and child share.[8] It’s easy to see, then, how the concepts of devotion from the NIV and mutual affection from the NRSV are appropriate for this passage. We’re called to love our brothers and sisters in Christ like we love our own families. If we do that, then the rest of the items in that first paragraph—zeal, spiritual fervor, honor, hope, patience, etc.—fall into place. That’s why “love your neighbor as yourself” is the second greatest command in Scripture.

I want to return to the second phrase in vs. 9, “Hate what is evil.” I must point out that this is first phrase Paul uses to describe unhypocritical love. Love doesn’t overlook evil. Love doesn’t tolerate evil. This verse would seem to tie into verses 17–21, since “evil” seems to be a prominent theme there, although it is a different Greek word [κακός (kakos)] that emphasizes evil deeds and actions specifically. In verse 9, “evil” refers to an evil thing, not an evil person as it does in the Lord’s prayer.[9]

The word for “hate” is another one of those words that only appears once in the New Testament. It is not based on the typical word for “hate” that is used in the New Testament. It derives from the root of our modern English word “stigma.” The Greek word has a prefix added to it that implies your hatred of evil should be so strong that you run away from, much like Paul often warns his audiences to flee sexual immorality, idolatry, and greed.

While physically removing yourselves from situations that could cause you to stumble greatly, the practicality of that may not always be expedient. If you see someone in danger, for example, you might be inclined to help, up to and including self defense if necessary. That would be a noble act as well, especially if you can avoid returning evil for evil as verse 17 says. You may have training in conflict resolution or deescalation of a situation that would prove beneficial for all involved. So, it’s not just about fleeing evil things, but about figuring out how you can do the right thing, the good thing, to overcome evil when it comes your way. Unhypocritical love overcomes evil.

The exhortations here are again positive: Do what is right, live at peace if you can, don’t take revenge. So again, Paul is speaking to our mindset, encouraging us to develop default behaviors. It’s all about practice and training, getting that “muscle memory” firmly ensconced in us. Doing the right thing speaks volumes in our culture that increasingly, as I said last week, sees violence as an acceptable solution. Certain Proverbs come to mind here:

12:25: Anxiety weighs down the heart, but a kind word cheers it up.[10]

15:1: A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.[11]

16:14: A king’s wrath is a messenger of death, but the wise will appease it.[12]

20:3: It is to one’s honor to avoid strife, but every fool is quick to quarrel.[13]

I’ll close by looking at the third phrase in verse 9: “Hold fast to what is good.” The word for “hold fast” there is another rare word in the New Testament. It’s used to describe the sexual relationship between a man and a woman, in the opposite contexts of marriage and prostitution. Peter uses the word in Acts 10 when he speaks of his call to go share the Gospel (and a meal) at the Gentile Cornelius’s home. Like the other descriptions throughout our passage today, the focus is other-centered, even when the “other” is one who is persecuting you.

The word for “persecute” (διώκω diōkō) here is interesting because it is the same Greek word that is translated as “pursue” in the previous verse in reference to hospitality. In other words, the word has the positive meaning of pursuing good things for others but the negative meaning of pursuing someone for whom you intend harm. The latter negative meaning is made obvious in the context when Paul emphasizes blessing the persecutors, not cursing them. In Paul’s context, a curse was a various serious thing, essentially wishing death on the one cursed.

Verses 14–16 also have a strong undertone of humility as well. Know your place; know your limits. Live together in harmony. That may be easier to do when you’re all of the same mindset. But remember Paul is addressing a mixed group here of Jews and Gentile Romans. I’m sure they had to put forth significant effort to make things work in their ethnically diverse house churches.

Romans 12 is certainly a strong contender for the best chapter on love in the New Testament. In some areas, it seems to cover a little more ground as far as the dos and don’ts of love in the Christian setting. But again, the cultural differences between Rome and Corinth can’t be ignored. Paul had to deal extensively with the speaking in tongues issue in Corinth, but there wasn’t a word about that in Paul’s gift list in the first part of Romans 12. On the other hand, Paul doesn’t deal very much with evil in 1 Corinthians 12–14, while in Romans 12, we see a great deal about that. Corinthians deals more with church order and practice, while Romans seems to focus on some larger cultural and societal issues that impacted the Roman churches.

We won’t settle the “best chapter on love” debate here, but I think we can all agree that, when we practice loving our neighbor as ourselves and loving God with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind, we are doing our part to advance the kingdom of God and bring about that great day of redemption and reward, when sin finally will be defeated. May the peace of God go with today and the rest of the week. Amen.

My opinions are my own.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

To read and hear the previous week’s message on the first half of Romans 12: Life as a “Living Sacrifice”: Finding Your Gifts (Romans 12:1–8) | Sunday Morning Greek Blog.


[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Formally known as indicative voice; in this case the “to be” copulative verb “is” is implied, as is often the case with simple Greek copulative sentences.

[4] In the Greek text, what follows is a series of participial phrases through the end of verse 13. Participles typically take on the aspect of the main verb, which in this case would be the implied copulative. If the translators think the implied copulative is imperative, then translators would interpret all the participles linked to that main verb as imperative, as seems to be the case in modern translations. As you will see, I am taking a different approach.

[5] The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version. 1989. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

[6] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[7] Ranking the Nicest (to the Nastiest) NFL Fanbases – The Quick Report

[8] C.S. Lewis: Four Loves – 1. Storge (Affection)

[9] In the Lord’s Prayer, the adjective πονηρός (ponēros) is masculine. Here in Romans 12, it is neuter.

[10] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[11] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[12] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[13] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

August 4, 2026

Podcast Episode: Baptism And Christian Life (Romans Podcast Part 4)

Pip: Sunday Morning Greek Blog, where the footnotes go six layers deep and the baptismal theology is somehow more soaking wet than you’d expect.

Mara: Scott Stocking has been doing a deep dive into Romans, and what surfaces is a case that baptism and the call to be a living sacrifice are more tightly connected than most readings let on. That’s the territory we’re covering today.

Pip: Let’s start with that connection — baptism as theology, not ceremony.

Baptism as Living Sacrifice: Romans 6 and 12:1

Mara: The central claim here is that Romans 6 and Romans 12:1 are not two separate ideas — they are one continuous argument, and baptism is the hinge between them.

Pip: And the evidence for that hinge is a single Greek word that shows up five times in Romans 6 and then reappears exactly when Paul says what he means by a living sacrifice.

Mara: Right — the word is paristēmi, translated “offer.” It appears throughout Romans 6 as Paul urges believers to offer themselves to God and then surfaces again in 12:1: “Offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God — this is your true and proper worship.”

Pip: So the living sacrifice of chapter 12 is not a new instruction — it is a callback to what baptism already accomplished.

Mara: Exactly. And to understand why, you have to follow Paul’s logic from the earlier part of Romans 6. The setup is verses 3 through 5: “Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his.”

Mara: What that means in practice is that baptism is not primarily a public declaration — it is the moment of union with Christ’s death and resurrection. The believer does not merely symbolize something; they participate in it.

Pip: Which reframes the famous last verse of Romans 6 considerably. “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” — usually read as a warning — is actually, on this reading, an affirmation for people who have already come through baptism.

Mara: That is precisely the argument. Because Christ paid the wages of sin on the cross, and because baptism unites the believer with that crucifixion, the verse functions as a confirmation of what has already happened, not a threat about what might.

Pip: The obedience Paul keeps returning to — his stated theme from Romans 1:5 all the way to 16:26 — is not a checklist. It is what life in Christ’s presence actually looks like after baptism.

Mara: And that reading is reinforced in the earlier post on the mystery of immersion, which makes a closely related case: that immersion is “the glue that ties the two pillars of the faith — Christ’s death and his subsequent resurrection — together.” That post works through the benefits linked to each pillar separately, from justification and reconciliation on the death side, to bearing fruit and victory over death on the resurrection side.

Pip: Both posts land in the same place — baptism is not peripheral, not merely a work of the flesh, not optional color commentary on the real theology happening elsewhere.

Mara: The phrase from the immersion post is worth sitting with: immersion is “a near-complete picture of who we are and what we have in Christ.”


Pip: Romans as a unified argument, baptism as the hinge, and the living sacrifice not as a new ask but as a return to the starting point.

Mara: There is more in Romans to surface. We will be back when the next posts land.

July 16, 2026

Life in the Spirit (Romans 8:1–11)

I preached this message on July 12, 2026, at Mount View Presbyterian Church. Although my mom wasn’t there, as I say in my opening remarks, my dad decided at the last minute he would come hear me speak. I’m so grateful to still have both my parents around.

Good morning! May the Lord be with you.

I’m feeling kind of bittersweet this morning. I think this is first time I’ve preached here that my mom isn’t in the audience. She and my sister have had a great time at Niagara Falls and will be flying back this evening.

Well, it seems like I started something a few weeks ago when I decided to preach on Romans chapter 5. I understand Al preached on Romans 7 last week, so I’m back to keep it going. One of the reasons I’ve come to love studying, teaching, and preaching on Romans is that the more I study it, the more structure I see to the whole letter. As Christ-followers, sometimes we forget that when we’re reading the epistles, we’re reading the author’s response to a story of the church and its members in a community we may not know much about. The author knows the stories and histories of his audience, but he rarely lets on what that entails. Unless we have evidence from elsewhere, like say, from the Book of Acts that detail much of Paul’s ministry activity, we’re often guessing at the context or trying to understand why Paul and the other writers are saying what they’re saying, and sometimes even how they’re saying it.

It’s important, then, to pay attention to how the epistle is organized. Paul isn’t just putting together a random set of platitudes in Romans with a few memory verses for his readers. He’s crafting an argument, by way of storytelling in some spots, to address the concerns he has for the two communities who have recently reunited in Rome. The Gentiles have been permanent residents there, but the Jews had been kicked out Rome a few years before Paul wrote Romans and had only recently returned, perhaps within the last two years, at the time he’s writing this letter to them. In a situation like that, you might expect there’s going to be some tension!

I’ve hinted at some of this in my past messages, but it bears repeating here, that Paul’s letter can be divided into two main sections. In chapters 1 through 11, Paul builds a theological case for salvation for both the Gentiles and the Jews. Chapters 12 through 16 are the practical chapters: how do you live for Jesus in such a diverse culture.

We can break up chapters 1 through 11 into three subparts. In chapters 1 through 4, Paul speaks of the importance of faithfulness, even to the point of contextualizing it a bit for the Romans. The Romans, as pagans, would have had a deep respect for nature and thus what some call “natural philosophy” or “natural theology.” That’s why Paul makes the argument in chapter 1 that nature itself reveals the very character of God, but then he challenges these Gentiles by saying one of their biggest “sins” is that men and women have corrupted and abandoned their own natures, something that would have been quite contrary to their natural philosophy. They were “unfaithful” to their natures.

But then Paul turns to the Jews and essentially says to them they’re in the same boat. They’re doing some of the same things the Gentiles are doing and ignoring the foundations of the Jewish law, that is, the Ten Commandments, that had been their heritage. That’s why Paul can say to them in the first part of chapter 3, “There is no one righteous, no not one.” Paul then brings in the big guns in the last part of chapter 3 and explains how the work of Christ on the cross has won salvation for Jew and Gentile alike. Then he wraps up that first section in chapter 4 with a story about Abraham’s faithfulness.

I’ll come back to chapters 5 through 8 in a moment, but I just wanted to say that chapters 9 through 11 speak of how God is reconciling both Gentiles and the Jews back to himself. Those are probably the toughest chapters to read and follow, but they do have a purpose of sealing the bond between Jews and Gentiles in the body of Christ.

To the degree that chapters 1 through 4 were about “faith” and “faithfulness,” chapters 5 through 8 are about being “alive” in Christ and the “life” that we have in him, especially through the Holy Spirit as our passage today discusses. I said it a few weeks ago and I’ll say it again here: chapters 1 through 4 have over 25 occurrences of the word for “faith” and “faithfulness” and only two occurrences of the words that mean “life” or “alive.” But chapters 5 through 8 flip those numbers around with words for “life” and “alive” used about 25 times while “faith” and “faithfulness” are only used twice in the first two verses of chapter 5.

This theme of life becomes obvious as we start reading chapter 6 that this life is represented by baptism our connection with the death of Jesus and his resurrection. Chapter 6 is the central chapter in chapters 1 through 11, literally and logically. And here’s where I think the structure of Romans takes his argument to the next level. He’s not changing subjects from chapter 6 to chapter 7. Remember what the last verse of Romans 6 is: “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” That verse is not just a summary of chapter 6 as I said a couple weeks ago, but it also states the subject of chapters 7 and 8 to tie those four chapters in a nice, neat bow.

In chapter 7, we see how destructive sin is to our lives if we continue to be slaves to it. The “I” of last weeks passage from Romans 7 is not Paul specifically, but the “I” is I. The “I” is you. The “I” is anyone who understands what it means to try and live a faithful life in the midst of a sinful world. But even with that expression of struggle, Paul still finds a way at the end of 7 to say, “Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!”[1]

The very last part of Romans 7:25 is our transition into chapter 8, then. “So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.”[2] He summarizes chapter 7 and sets up the dichotomy he’s experiencing, by setting us up for the only thing that can truly transform our sinful nature and get our hearts and spirits in sync with our brain that knows Jesus is Lord: the Holy Spirit.

This why again we see Paul use the word “Therefore” at the beginning of chapter 8. We’ve seen how baptism works in the spiritual realm in chapter 6. Paul makes the first connection of this event with the Spirit in Romans 7:6, looking forward to chapter 8. Chapter 8 has, in some respects, the same purpose for the Romans as John 14 through 16 had for the disciples at the Last Supper: teaching about the Holy Spirit and how he works in the life of the believer.

When Paul says, “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,” he’s following up on what he said in chapter 7. The condemnation that would have been ours under the Law has been swallowed up in Christ’s redemptive act on the cross. As Jesus promised at the Last Supper and reaffirmed at his ascension, the Holy Spirit has come and given us life, completely dispensing with the law of sin and death. That law never offered the chance to bring life; it was always about punishment.

Paul goes on to say that the righteous requirement of the Law, which we could not earn because our flesh was weak and we faltered, is fully met in us because we live in the Spirit. Thus, there is now only affirmation and assurance of our salvation, not condemnation.

Although our salvation is by grace and we can do nothing to earn it, it does always require our mindful attention. In verses 5 though 8, Paul gives a great deal of attention to where our minds are dwelling. There’s likely a subtle reference here to Deuteronomy, where Moses repeatedly exhorts the Israelites to “be careful.” For example, in Deuteronomy 4:9, Moses says this to the Israelites, shortly before they repeat the recitation of the Ten Commandments:

Only be careful, and watch yourselves closely so that you do not forget the things your eyes have seen or let them fade from your heart as long as you live. Teach them to your children and to their children after them. [3]

Paul uses a similar exhortation to the Ephesians, in 5:15–17:

15 Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, 16 making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. 17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord’s will is.[4]

God never expects us to rest on the laurels of our salvation and faith. When Paul says some have their minds set on what the flesh desires, he’s essentially saying that those people are living on pure instinct. Get what you can while you can. Go for the gusto. It’s a selfish way of life if you’re only looking out for number 1. Paul has even defined the works of the flesh in Galatians 5:19–21:

19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.[5]

But those who have their minds set on the Spirit have a completely different focus in mind for how to live their lives, a focus that puts God and others first and trusts God to provide for their needs. Paul goes on in Galatians 5 to describe the results of a mind focused on the Spirit, and you’ll recognize this passage I’m sure:

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.[6]

Before I get back to the rest of Romans, I want to take a moment and talk about why the NIV used “forbearance” instead of the word most of us are used to: “patience.” When that word (μακροθυμία makrothymia)[7] is used of God, it typically refers to God “holding back” his judgment on unbelievers. In Romans 2:4, it’s used in parallel with different word that’s translated forbearance: “Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?”[8] In fact, the word is translated “patience” in every other occurrence in the NT. I bring this up primarily because of the challenges we see in our world today. We see a lot of angry people in the news these days. “Patience” or “forbearance” doesn’t mean we have set our anger aside at the evils in the world. In fact, one of the roots of the Greek word means “anger” or “rage.” It refers to a higher form of anger that isn’t controlled by our flesh and our instinct. Another way to look at it is that it is anger that keeps its distance from the situation. It calls us to have the same patience and forbearance that God himself has for the sinful, no matter how awful things may be. It’s scary to see the surveys out there where people increasingly think violence is the answer to get their way. We have a higher calling as Christ-followers, but we shouldn’t be patsies either.

Paul closes out the last half of our passage this morning by essentially repeating the same thing in different ways and drills down to make the relationship increasingly more personal and familial with each step. If we live by the Spirit, then we belong to Christ and have access not just to living a life of love here on earth, but to that eternal life we eagerly await in the heavenly realms. He repeats the connection to the resurrection of Christ as well. Because Christ lives, we also will live.

He also repeats the warning of chapter 7 as well in verse 13: “For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.”[9] Those misdeeds are the do’s and do-nots of Paul’s subtle lament about the flesh in chapter 7.

Finally, we have the wonderfully reassuring promise that not only are we in Christ when we walk in the Spirit, but we are in fact called “children of God.” We’re no longer slaves; we’re sons and daughters of God, family. And God does not stand aloof in his relationship to us. He tells us to cry out, “Abba, Father!” Abba is essentially the baby word for “da-da” in Hebrew. It’s an intimate and emotional connection each of us can have with God to experience the unconditional love he has for each of us. As family, we are also heirs of God and coheirs with Christ. We share in his sufferings and glory, not just in our baptism experience, but in daily life as we walk faithfully with God and experience the victory that is in Christ.

I pray that each of you will have some experience of that victory in the weeks to come. God is good, even when life is challenging. The Spirit brings us life by reassuring us of the peace and presence of God in our lives, especially in the difficult times. May the peace of God go with you this morning. Amen.


[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[8] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[9] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

March 1, 2026

Lectionary Help: The Woman at the Well (John 4:5–42; Romans 5:1–11)

Lectionary Help for Third Sunday in Lent, March 8, 2026, Year A.

Taking a look at the literary context and historical setting of the account of Jesus speaking to the woman at the well in Samaria can help answer a few questions people may have about this passage. For example, why was Jesus so insistent that he “had” to go through Samaria? Consider the following points.

John begins his gospel by saying Jesus is the light of the world and has been around “from the beginning.”

Jesus shows his earthly authority over the Temple at Jerusalem by overturning the tables of the money changers, yet that doesn’t seem to be enough for him to insist that Jerusalem is the proper (or only) place of worship.

The well where he meets the woman is Jacob’s well. Jacob, of course, is one of Jesus’s earthly ancestors, so Jesus is in the land of his ancestors when he first reveals (at least in John’s gospel) he is the Messiah. That fact shouldn’t be overlooked.

The following is a passage from my message on this passage [A Woman, a Well, and Worshipping God (John 4; Romans 5:1–11)] three years ago.

“He establishes Jesus is fully divine and that God is his Father. Since he’s God’s “only begotten” on Earth, Jesus then is the primary authority in the Temple, which the Jews believed was home of God’s presence. Finally, Jesus, having been established as the authority for the Jewish religion, essentially abolishes the long-standing prejudice against Samaria by going to the place where his ancestor Judah’s father, Jacob (renamed Israel) first established himself in the Promised Land after returning from Laban’s home. I think this aspect of the story lends to its credibility and to the principle of worship he puts forth.”

The epistles passage is Romans 5:1–11. This is where Paul makes the point that Christ died for us “while we were still sinners.” This ties in nicely with the woman at the well story, of course, as Jesus is offering the woman living water in spite of her current social and relationship status.

A few Old Testament passages can provide some background for the “living water” Jesus speaks of. Isaiah 49 (esp. vv. 6 & 10) speaks of springs of fresh water, while Jeremiah 2:13 and 17:13 both describe the Lord as the Jews’ “spring of living water.” Of course, we can’t forget Ezekiel’s prophecy in 14:8–9:

“On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter. The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one Lord, and his name the only name.”

I pray this helps you prepare this week. I’m updating my previous message, which includes both NT passages, to reflect some of the things I’ve learned or rediscovered in my recent work in Romans.

Peace to you all this season!

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My views are my own.

February 22, 2026

Lectionary Help (John 3:1–17; Second Sunday in Lent)

For Lectionary Help on Option B in the March 1, 2026, Year A Lectionary gospel passage, see the post from Transfiguration Sunday: Lectionary Help: Transfiguration Sunday (Matthew 17:1–9) | Sunday Morning Greek Blog

Option A is John 3:1–17, which I’ll cover in this post.

On “born again” in John 3:3, 3:7:

A word study of ἄνωθεν (anōthen) along with the context of the discussion between vv. 3 & 7 suggests that the more likely meaning here would be as an adverb of place (“born from above”) as opposed to an adverb of time (“born again” or “born anew”). “Born of water” (vs. 5) most likely refers to natural birth, while “[born of] the Spirit” refers to being renewed by Spirit through his infilling, which of course can only come from above.

Regarding the Serpent on the pole:

God told Moses to fashion what in Hebrew is called a saraph (שָׂרָף śārāp̄), a bronze serpent that itself must have had a fiery appearance in the desert sun and put it on a pole so the Israelites who were bitten could look upon it and live. However, it did nothing for those who had already died. This bronze serpent was not an idol originally[1] but rather something akin to a sign of judgment on the Israelites. It couldn’t save them from the pain of being bitten by the snakes, but it would save them from the poison that had entered their bodies. Something else was absorbing the fatal penalty of their disbelief. It’s a bit of a mystery why the word for the winged angels, or seraphim, of Isaiah 6 is also translated snake or serpent elsewhere. Regardless of the specifics of what it looked like, it must have fostered some measure of fear among the Israelites. “You can look at the scary bronze snake, or you can die from the real ones.”[2]

The serpents were cursing the Israelites with death, but if they would look upon the image of the curse, they would live. Jesus took on the curse of sin for us by being lifted up on a cross. We need to look to Jesus to be saved.

May God bless your sermon and lesson preparation this week as we settle into the season of Lent.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My views are my own.


[1] See 2 Kings 18:4 where Hezekiah destroys the bronze serpent because the Israelites had been burning incense to it.

[2] Sermon excerpt from How God Loved the World: John 3:14–21; Numbers 21:4–9 | Sunday Morning Greek Blog

Walking in Jesus’s Righteousness (Matthew 4:1–11; Romans 5:12–19)

I preached this message on February 22, 2026, the First Sunday in Lent, Year A.

When you think about it, Satanism, the worship of Satan, is an oxymoron. I know what you’re thinking, and you’re right. “That’s a weird way to start a sermon, preacher!” Yep, guilty as charged. But seriously, why would anyone want to put their “faith” in Satan when all the evidence points his core nature? He’s pure evil. He’s deceptive. He hates those who worship God. I would dare say he’s more interested in getting you to not worship and serve God than he is having people worship him. But he can ignore those people, because they’re already solidly in his camp.

John says this about the devil when he confronts the Pharisees in the Temple in John 8:

44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? [1]*

Adam and Eve had a first-hand encounter with Satan in the very beginning. He lied about what eating the fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil could do for them. Yes, after eating the apple, they did experience the shame of their nakedness, so at least that much of what Satan said was true, but it was a half-truth at best. The lie that Satan told Eve was “You will be like God.” That was a lie in so many ways, and here’s why:

God is not just omniscient, knowing all that can be known, but he is omnipotent and omnipresent as well. Adam and Eve, relatively speaking, only got a fraction of the knowledge that God had about such things and NONE of the power or presence that God had. Their shame at disobeying caused them to fear the presence of God when God had designed Eden and the world for them to live in his presence. They lost power, because at that point, death became a necessity for survival. An animal would have to die to clothe them. Blood sacrifices became necessary for temporary atonement. And God’s son would have to die to redeem them forever from the curse.

Satan won that first round with God’s precious new creation, but out of that came the first prophecy of Satan’s defeat at the hands and feet of God’s son. It’s no wonder, then, that he thought he could try and pull that off when God’s one and only son came on the scene. If he could get Jesus to stumble, the world would be his, or so he thought.

In the garden, Eve had become convinced somehow that the forbidden fruit “was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom.” It shouldn’t surprise us that Satan used those same three categories to tempt Jesus in the desert as in our Gospel passage this morning. “I know you’re hungry for some food, Jesus. Go ahead and turn these stones into bread.” But Jesus knew, unlike Adam and Eve, that there was more to God than producing a little supernatural “manna” to satisfy what must have been an intense human experience of hunger. “Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.”

Satan tried to trick him by twisting a promise of God into a perversion of wisdom. “Come on Jesus. You know God will catch you if you jump off the top of the Temple here! Imagine the scene when the crowd watches the angels swoop you up at the last second! You’ll be a superhero!” But Jesus knows it is foolish to put God to the test like that, and rebuked Satan with that fact in no uncertain terms.

Satan had one more chance. He took Jesus to a high mountain where he had a “pleasing sight” awaiting him—”all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.” But once again, Jesus knew the price was too high to go along with Satan’s schemes, and he knew none of them would bring about what God had promised him when he fulfilled his mission. “You know the commandment, Satan. I will have no other gods before me. He was there to “worship the Lord God and serve him only.” The liar failed at trying to fool the one in whom there was no lie and only truth.

And that was the beginning of the end for Satan. Jesus won that battle, but Satan didn’t give up that easily. He had to switch his focus to others, and most of you know who that would be: someone from his inner circle. The signs would be there early on that something wasn’t quite right with Judas. Even Peter gets some of the blame, but that, it seems, may have been more to his impetuous nature at times, and Jesus had other plans for him anyway.

The power of death was defeated at the cross. I’m sure that was something that Satan actually felt. Jesus had even told Peter that the gates of hell could not withstand the coming of God’s kingdom, and I think for a while anyway, as the church began to coalesce after Pentecost, God and Jesus kept Satan at bay to give the fledgling believers a head start at getting the gospel out.

I want to turn now to Romans 5:12–19, the other New Testament passage in the Lectionary readings today, to look at the results, if you will, of Jesus’s victory over death and how he, as the New Adam, broke the curse brought on by the First Adam, who through passivity allowed his wife to give in to the serpent and joined her in her disobedience. Romans 5 has a powerful message about how you and I can be strengthened in our own faith walk because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross and in his resurrection from the dead.

Hear what Paul has to say:

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

13 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. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.

15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.[2]

Even though Paul says plainly in 1 Timothy 2:14 that it was Eve who was deceived and sinned first (sorry, ladies, I’m just the messenger here), Paul considers the blame for “original sin” to be squarely on Adam’s shoulders. Adam had one command, and he (and Eve) blew it. But because it was a single command and the Law had not come yet, God could not permanently charge Adam with a violation of his law. Instead, they were expelled from the garden because they could not be trusted. That doesn’t mean they weren’t loved, though. God would declare even as he announced their punishment that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent.

Paul demonstrates that Jesus fulfilled the role that Adam never could. Adam’s disobedience or lack of faithfulness brought sin into the world, but Jesus’s one act of faithful obedience, submitting to crucifixion, is the only act that could defeat the power of sin once for all and bring righteousness to all who would follow him. It took one sin by Adam to mess up things for everybody, but one faithfully obedient savior to restore us to God in his righteousness.

Romans says that Jesus Christ is our righteousness. He earned that designation by fulfilling the whole Law of God. But God still needed that once-for-all blood sacrifice that would make the animal and grain sacrifices of the Old Testament completely obsolete. Jesus was the only one who could be that spotless lamb. But it wasn’t just because of his 100% obedience to the law. The crucifixion had one more element that made it absolutely effective and impossible for the devil to challenge or destroy: It was love, pure and simple.

“For God so loved the world.” Only a perfect man with a fully divine nature who showed us beyond a shadow of doubt how he and his Father loved us in person and face to face could make that sacrifice. The bulls and goats and birds that were sacrificed under the Old Covenant could not ever love us the way Jesus did and does, which is why his sacrifice stands not only above the old sacrificial system, but above every other religion as well. Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, was a real person, but he never loved anything about the world that should have mattered to him. He just tried to obtain a state of nothingness, a very selfish goal that no one else, by definition, could help him achieve. There’s no personal connection there and no promise of any help from the supernatural realm. Jesus’s sacrifice was by far the most superior of any that could have happened on this world God created with love, and the only one that can guarantee us eternal life in God’s glorious new kingdom.

As believers, then, know that you are “in Christ” in every sense of the concept. We are baptized “into Christ,” which means we are baptized into his death. So we share in his death so we can be free of the requirements of the law, beneficiaries of grace, and servants of righteousness. As you go forth in the world from here, declare God’s word unashamedly to those who need to hear the hope of his good news. Amen.


[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. *I didn’t say it in my message, but I sure thought about adding: “The Pharisees must have had Jesus Derangement Syndrome.”

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

January 25, 2026

Desiring the Presence of God (Psalm 27; Matthew 4:12–23)

I presented this message on January 25, 2026, at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE. On the liturgical calendar, it was the third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year A.

Good morning! The Lord be with you!

Much of today’s gospel passage from Matthew is very similar to the events and themes we covered in last week’s Gospel passage from John. As such, I’m not going to spend much time in that passage today and instead want to look at our Old Testament reading, Psalm 27.

However, I will say a just a few words about the Matthew passage because there is a story in Matthew 4 that appears at first blush to disagree with John’s account about a similar encounter. Last week you may remember that Andrew was the first one of the disciples to want to follow Jesus, and he had meet Jesus at the place John the Baptist was baptizing in the Jordan River. He in turn went and got his brother, Simon Peter, to share the news that he had found the Messiah. After Peter met Jesus, John says they went and spent the day with Jesus.

Matthew’s account, as you heard, also has to do with the calling of Andrew and Peter, along with James and John, the sons of Zebedee as they’re fishing in the Sea of Galilee. However, in Matthew’s story, this comes immediately after Jesus spends 40 days fasting, praying, and being tempted in the wilderness. It seems clear then, that one of the things Jesus was praying about was who, among all the people he had met and interacted with during John’s “baptism revival,” would make the best choice for his band of 12 disciples. After all, Jesus had been in the wilderness 40 days, so it’s possible Andrew and Peter may have wondered what happened to him by that point. I’m guessing the four of them were pleasantly surprised to get the call from him, even if they didn’t yet understand the kind of commitment they were making.

The important takeaway for us in the choosing of Matthew is that Jesus wasn’t apparently looking for the well-educated scribes and well-respected, Pharisees, and Sadducees to be his followers. They surely would have argued with him the whole time given what we learn about them in the gospels and Jesus wouldn’t have gotten anything done. Although Jesus did come to preach repentance and a proper understanding of what our relationship to the Law and eventually Grace would look like, he was even more concerned about bringing people eternal hope, love, and joy in the midst of a religious structure that had grown increasingly legalistic and impersonal. The religious leadership of the Jews seemed to have a stranglehold on what the Jewish faith should look like, with hundreds of extra rules in place to keep you from even coming close to breaking the law.

This is where Psalm 27, a psalm of David, comes in. David’s leadership helped establish the nation of Israel as a regional powerhouse after 40 years of wandering in the wilderness and a few hundred years of rule by regional judges. It was during the period of Joshua and Judges where they conquered and in some cases wiped out nations that had “earned” the wrath of God for their wicked practices and animosity toward God’s chosen and beloved people.

Psalm 27 is filled with confident assertions and positive desires from David that he and perhaps the rest of Israel are in a right relationship with God. The Israelites were still adjusting to being a unified “kingdom,” not just scattered tribes ruled by local judges. But the attitude and the joy expressed by David in Psalm 27 seems to reflect a different mind set in his day than what comes across in the gospels. After all, you don’t see any of the Herods writing these kinds of psalms of praise! On the contrary, we get the impression that the Herodian Dynasty, which had descended from the Maccabees who had overthrown Greek rule almost 200 years prior to Jesus’s ministry, had become corrupt and heartless toward their own people in trying to appease their Roman overlords.

Our reading this morning left out a few verses from Psalm 27 this morning, so I would like to read through the whole Psalm a few verses at a time to talk about what it has to say to us this morning. We’ll start with vv. 1–3:

The Lord is my light and my salvation—

whom shall I fear?

The Lord is the stronghold of my life—

of whom shall I be afraid?

When the wicked advance against me

to devour me,

it is my enemies and my foes

who will stumble and fall.

Though an army besiege me,

my heart will not fear;

though war break out against me,

even then I will be confident.[1]

David didn’t have Pharisees and Sadducees telling him how to interpret God’s word and who added a “hedge” around the law. The “hedge” was a set of rules that rabbis had established much later in Israel’s history, probably sometime around 200 B.C. They were not strictly biblical commands, but they were guidelines intended to keep you out of situations that might increase the temptation to sin. It’s sort of like how some denominations today don’t want their members to dance because it might lead to “other things.” One such example from the Bible is when Jesus criticized the Pharisees because they tithed their mint, dill, and cumin—the smallest spices they knew about—but did nothing about justice, mercy, and faithfulness (Matthew 23:23).

David knew where his power and protection came from in Psalm 27: it came straight from God. He is emphatic that he has no need to fear. He knows his enemies will stumble and fall regardless of who comes after him. That is true faith, true confidence in God’s sovereignty. It’s no wonder he was called a man after God’s own heart.

One thing I ask from the Lord,

this only do I seek:

that I may dwell in the house of the Lord

all the days of my life,

to gaze on the beauty of the Lord

and to seek him in his temple.

For in the day of trouble

he will keep me safe in his dwelling;

he will hide me in the shelter of his sacred tent

and set me high upon a rock.

Then my head will be exalted

above the enemies who surround me;

at his sacred tent I will sacrifice with shouts of joy;

I will sing and make music to the Lord. [2]

These three verses are interesting in that David speaks of God’s dwelling, his temple. Yet at this time, the first Temple had not been built yet. But twice, David references God’s “sacred tent.” This is a reference to the Tabernacle that the Jews had carried around in the wilderness for 40 years and was in use by David and the priests right up to the time Solomon built the Temple (1 Chronicles 6:32; 2 Chronicles 1:5)[3].

David understood the importance of a leader being present at worship regularly as an example to the people. David had brought the Ark of the Covenant back to Jerusalem, so had been in the visible presence of God at least one time in his life. That is how he knows how awesome it is to gaze on the beauty of the Lord.

How does that apply to us today? We know when Christ died that the veil was torn in two, from top to bottom, so God’s presence no longer “hid” behind a thick curtain. God’s new way of working in his people after the death and resurrection of Jesus was to give each of us the Holy Spirit. So we most likely will not see a manifestation of the presence of God inside our four walls here, but we can see how the Holy Spirit is working in each of us as we fellowship, worship, and serve together in his name and for his glory.

Hear my voice when I call, Lord;

be merciful to me and answer me.

My heart says of you, “Seek his face!”

Your face, Lord, I will seek.

Do not hide your face from me,

do not turn your servant away in anger;

you have been my helper.

Do not reject me or forsake me,

God my Savior.

10 Though my father and mother forsake me,

the Lord will receive me.

11 Teach me your way, Lord;

lead me in a straight path

because of my oppressors.

12 Do not turn me over to the desire of my foes,

for false witnesses rise up against me,

spouting malicious accusations. [4]

David also realized in times of trouble that being in God’s presence allows him to call upon the Lord for mercy, protection, and strength. He asks God to “hear my voice” and for God not to “hid your face from me.” He desires to be taught continually so he is better able to serve God and lead his people away from and protect them from the dangers of the surrounding nations. He knows that people are out to get him. He knows God is the only one who can protect him from those aggressors.

We do this as well on Sunday mornings here, and throughout the week, by praying together for those things that are on our hearts. As a fellowship we can seek support from one another to receive comfort and strength. In all my years as a minister, I’ve lost track of how many people have told me they don’t have to go to church to be a Christian. Technically, that may be true, but it sure makes the Christian walk much easier when you have others around you who share the struggles and joys of human existence.

Finally, we have vv. 13–14:

13 I remain confident of this:

I will see the goodness of the Lord

in the land of the living.

14 Wait for the Lord;

be strong and take heart

and wait for the Lord. [5]

This is David’s concluding benediction, which seems to serve the same purpose in worship as something like our “Gloria Patri” or the Doxology choruses. David reaffirms the confidence he had in vs. 3. He calls on all the worshipers to “Wait for the Lord.” The most common translation for the Hebrew word translated “wait” [קָוָה  wā(h)] is “hope.” David is waiting, hoping with confidence that the Lord himself will act to keep him and his people safe in the land of the living. David also calls the worshipers to “be strong and take heart,” something both Joshua and Jesus said in their respective ministries.

Early in Joshua’s account of taking the Promised Land, he writes to his fellow Israelites:

Be strong and courageous, because you will lead these people to inherit the land I swore to their ancestors to give them.

“Be strong and very courageous. Be careful to obey all the law my servant Moses gave you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, that you may be successful wherever you go.

……….

Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged, for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you go.” [6]

Jesus said in his final instructions to his disciples just before his prayer at the end of the Last Supper:

33 “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”[7]

So I leave you with those words of encouragement this morning. May the peace of God reign in your hearts as you go from this place. Amen.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My views are my own.


[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] In 1 Chronicle 23:26, David relieved the Levites of their responsibility to carry the Tabernacle since Israel was permanently settled in Jerusalem.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. Joshua 1:6–7, 9. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] The New International Version. John 16:33. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

May 7, 2025

Sowbelly Elegy: The Majesty of God in Exegesis

With apologies to VP JD Vance for mimicking his title.

I do not do much personal reflection in this blog. I’m mostly about exegesis (studying the text of the Bible in its original languages), hermeneutics (applying the results of exegesis to the understanding and meaning of the Bible), and lately homiletics (declaring the understanding and meaning of the Bible, especially as a sermon or homily, or in this case, a blog post). This ties in with the taglines for my blog that I put on my “business” card: “Dig deeper. Read Smarter. Draw Closer.” This past weekend, I took the opportunity to go to Fort Robinson State Park in northwest Nebraska to share in a fly fishing expedition with several guys (and the wife of one of them) from our church, including our pastor. The Fort Robinson area has several excellent fishing areas, including several streams and creeks; the first ten miles or so of the White River, which ultimately runs through the Badlands in South Dakota and empties into the Missouri River; and several ponds. Many of these locations are stocked by the State fisheries with trout and other popular species of freshwater fish.

I had never done fly fishing before, but the chance to get away and spend some time with friends old and new outweighed any anxiety I may have had about that. I only spent a few hours fishing at a couple ponds and in the White River, but it was long enough for me to observe others doing it, and I got pretty good at the casting part. I had a few curious little fish check out my fly, but never did land anything, which was okay by me. I was just grateful to be there.

Putting the Pieces Together

Part 1: Reflecting on Exegesis

The timing of the trip was divinely appointed for me as it coincided with some serious reflection I’ve been doing about the relationship between the depth of Bible study I typically do (“Dig Deeper”) and what I expect from the small groups I attend or help lead. That reflection was prompted by a recent post from one of the other pastor-bloggers on WordPress, Veritas Domain, and his short article about his “simplified” exegetical method. His method is similar to mine in that there is a heavy focus on the text itself, which is not unusual. I’m trained in Greek and Hebrew, so I start with those texts first, or at least have them open in parallel with the English translation so I can take note of key words (“Read Smarter”). If I’ve done those first two steps, the “Draw Closer” principle usually follows quite nicely.

In my comment back to “SlimJim,” I mentioned that my method was similar, but along with that, I’m finding that my experience with the two small groups I’m connected with at my church and even with my preaching is that having the knowledge that comes from that kind of in-depth study may not always go over well with those who don’t have that specialized training. In our men’s group, I can typically get away with sharing that when I feel it adds something to the discussion, but even then, one of my friends in the group (who happens to be a preacher’s kid) will sometimes say “All that is nice to know, but I want to know what makes me a better Christian, a better man of God.” That is, he wants to get to the “Draw Closer” part.

This brought to mind an article I read a number of years ago (a 1997 issue of Leadership magazine) by Haddon Robinson, in which he’s quoted as saying, “More heresy is preached in application than in exegesis.” In other words, some of us preachers may be pretty good at exegeting and interpreting God’s word, but how are we doing about translating that into action for our respective audiences? Does it really matter if a divine command is in the aorist tense versus the perfect tense if we don’t follow the command ourselves or encourage our audiences to follow the command, or worse, manipulate the command with malicious intent?

Part 2: The Fort Robinson Retreat

I had decided I would drive to Fort Robinson from Omaha, where I live, by way of Nebraska State Highways 92 (first half) and 2 (second half). Together, those two routes take you through the heart of the State, east to west. In addition, Highway 2 runs through the heart of the Sandhills. If you look at a satellite view of Earth along Highway 2, you’ll see that these Sandhills look like a bunch of sand dunes, but they all have grass growing on them, and several small ponds or lakes are scattered throughout. As I was driving through the Sandhills and listening to Rich Mullins and the Passion CDs (yeah, those date me), I began to understand what the Holy Spirit was trying to teach me. But he was only getting started.

I arrived at Fort Robinson State Park after dark, but not so late that I didn’t get to connect with my church friends who had already been there for a full day. We had breakfast the next morning at a small café in nearby Crawford, then struck out to fish. I went with a friend who had been in my small group when I moved back to Nebraska in 2010 and two of his (now grown) sons whom I hadn’t seen in quite some time. It was my first time fly fishing, so my goal was to get the hang of casting and extending my line. We tried the Ice House pond and then walked about a mile to couple bends in the White River (only about 10 miles from its headwater at that point, so no more than about eight feet wide if that. I had a few nibbles at the pond, but nothing in the river. From there we went back to the Grabel ponds, where I finished out the morning having developed a pretty good technique to cast and extend my line, even landing it on top of a 12-inch fish and spooking it away for a moment.

While I was at the section of the White River, I couldn’t help but think and marvel about how God created a means for distributing life-giving water throughout a continent (I knew the term “hydrology,” but I had to look up “limnology” as I was writing this paragraph), especially since, at the end of this month, my brother and I will be at the other end of the White River in South Dakota where it flows through the Badlands (and earns the name “White” from its sediment) and into the Missouri River south of Chamberlain for another fishing trip. God’s creation is an amazing and wonderful thing. That was what the Holy Spirit was continuing to show me, but not for the reason you might think.

Part 3: Sowbelly Canyon Road

One of the sights I had heard about from the guys who had gone up the previous year was Sowbelly Canyon, just north of Harrison, Nebraska. I had no idea what to expect from a “canyon” in Nebraska; certainly nothing like Poudre River Canyon in Colorado where my wife’s family has a cabin. Poudre Canyon is about 50 miles long, and the Poudre River is relatively wide in the canyon. Sow Belly is unique in its own way and was surprisingly beautiful and “cool” in more ways than one. I wish my wife would have been able to come along on this trip.

As you’re driving west on US 20 toward Harrison, you see nothing but a bunch of gently rolling hills on either side of the highway. One would never expect a place of such beauty was just beyond those rolling hills. Even as you crest the top of the canyon, you see an amazing sight below: a single lane dirt road running under a canopy of trees, with unusual rock formations atop the buttes, some of which have formed at right angles. The descent is moderately steep, and at times you have a wall of the canyon on your right (descending) and your left (ascending). At the bottom of the canyon is a small, babbling brook that must have taken a few centuries to form the canyon.

Just before you get to the end of Sowbelly Road on the east end (where it joins Pants Butte Road; no, I’m not making that name up), there’s a spot where you can see at least 80 miles to the north to the Black Hills in South Dakota (the dark mound in the far horizon). Something special happened between God and me via the Holy Spirit on that road, and especially with this particular view. I gained a whole new appreciation for the beauty, majesty, and grandeur of God’s creation. I’d expect something like that in Colorado; I never expected that in seemingly plain old northwestern Nebraska. Boy, was I wrong. What God had started teaching me in the Sandhills came to full fruition at the top of Sowbelly Road.

Part 4: Worldview, Wonder, and Wisdom

So let me bring this all together now. You might remember I started out talking about exegetical methods, methods that were heavily focused on the textual features like grammar, syntax, verb mood and tense, etc. Then it hit me: nothing in my exegetical method intentionally accounts for the majesty and glory of God and his creation. I knew I had to work that in somehow. But God still had one more piece to show me, and it hit me last night at our last small group of the season. Our senior pastor had been with us on this trip, but Sunday morning, one of the teaching pastors was preaching on the trauma Job experienced. I had tried to listen to it Sunday morning while driving through the remotest part of western Nebraska, but just couldn’t get a steady signal.

Fortunately, our Tuesday night group covered it in the study last night, and it was when we were talking about the ending of the book of Job that everything God had been teaching me finally made sense. Job had been arguing with God and his friends about how righteous he was and how he had always given God glory and so on, but God put him in his place. God recounts for Job all that He did by questioning Job: Did you lay the foundations of the earth? Did you create Leviathan and Behemoth? Who are you to tell me how I should act toward you?

That’s when I realized that I’m like Job in that moment. I think I have such a great exegetical method that will keep my doctrine sound and shred every stronghold that tries to set itself against God Almighty, but God’s word is more than the text and the grammar and verb moods and tenses and the participles and the conditional clauses. Those things are static, unchanging. But what does Hebrews 4:12 say? “For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.”[1] Can grammar and syntax do that? I think not.

The other thing that occurred to me is the backstory of how the Jews would understand God’s word versus us gentile Christians. I’ll use just one example here: Communion, or as some call it, the Lord’s Supper or the Eucharist. When we look at the elements (“substantiational” leanings aside), we are meant to experience Christ in some way by “remembering” him. We see one man crucified and risen. But what do Jews remember at Passover? Not one man dying, but ALL the firstborn dying who weren’t protected by the blood of the lamb that they themselves applied to their doorways. They remember God parting the Red Sea so the Israelites could escape the oncoming Egyptians. The disciples didn’t understand immediately that Christ’s death had won them forgiveness and freedom. The Jews DID understand that immediately, with hearts pounding witnessing the very miracles of God at work to rescue them, even as they would tell the stories year after year to their descendants.

Conclusion

In other words, when I exegete and interpret Scripture, I need to look beyond the text and the grammar and all the other “in-the-weeds” details to comprehend a grand vision of a great God and all that he has done and made. That’s where the “draw closer” takes place, as it did for me this past weekend, when I understood who I am in God’s kingdom and that, in spite of his greatness and grandeur, he looks with love at the least of us, at the humblest of us, at our faithfulness. He looks with compassion at those who are lost and searching and even at those who may be angry with him or agnostic toward him, prompting us to share God’s “living and active” word with those who have not yet comprehended that greater vision.

From this point forward, then, I’m adding a couple permanent elements of my “principlizing bridge” (to use Grasping God’s Word’s language) will be to ask first, “How does this passage reveal the glory and majesty and mystery of God to the world?” and second, “How is this passage ‘alive and active’ not only to me but to those I encounter as well?” I feel like I drew a little closer to God this weekend. I pray that my testimony here will do the same for you.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

All contents herein are the creative and intellectual property of this author unless otherwise attributed.


[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.