Body of Christ: Standing for Truth

1^st Kings 22:13-23; John 9:24-34; Acts 4:8-20

Rev. Chris Harbin, Rocks Baptist Church—Pamplin, VA

07 March 2004

Truth is a tricky thing. One the one hand, truth is a reality. On the other hand, humanity is too finite to grasp its complexities. There are truths we can depend on, but we cannot always be sure that we have understood the truth in its fullest sense. When we face the uncertainties and complexities of life, how can we be sure that we stand upon truth, rather than our misconceptions of it? As the presence of Christ, how are we to stand for the truth of the gospel we don’t fully understand?

When Micaiah was called to prophesy before the king of Israel, he was given disturbing instructions. They told him that his word needed to agree with what all the other prophets were saying. These others claimed to be Yahweh’s prophets, just as Micaiah. They all spoke in one accord, encouraging the King of Israel to proceed in war against Ramoth-gilead. Micaiah had to make a decision. He had to decide whether to speak in agreement with the other prophets or to be true to the message of Yahweh. It was a difficult position. Standing faithfully for God is often a difficult task. It requires courage to match one’s convictions, as well as the humility to discern between one’s own thoughts and the thoughts of God.

The generally expected word from Yahweh should have been in agreement with the other prophets. Yahweh had spoken innumerous times of giving victory over Israel’s enemies. Victory was to be expected, for that was Yahweh’s promise. There were other issues at hand, however. There was the question of the king’s ambition, greed, and materialism. There was the question of dependence upon Yahweh for victory, versus dependence upon the strength of the Israelite army. Even so, standing to speak against victory would appear as taking a traitorous position. Micaiah knew that the message he was to deliver would not be well received. He knew he might suffer for standing true to God. He took the risk, was slapped, and sent to prison. En route he affirmed that if the king returned in peace they would know that Yahweh had not spoken through him.

The blind man of John 9 faced a difficult situation. He had been blind since birth and Jesus had given him sight. His own parents were afraid to answer the synagogue authorities regarding how his sight had been restored. On being confronted by these leaders, he had to choose how he would answer them. They had already declared Jesus a heretic and that any who declared Jesus to be the Messiah would be thrown out of the synagogue. Any positive confession he might make regarding Jesus would be unacceptable to them. Standing for the truth would reflect negatively on his own parents, who were afraid to take a stand.

He chose to confront these leaders with the truth as he knew it. He did not delve into matters of speculation and uncertainties. He simply addressed the issue from the standpoint of what he knew with certainty. He testified of what he knew. He shared his experience without making unnecessary explanations. In so doing, he forced others to face the issues for themselves. He accepted that their reactions might not be positive. He recognized that he might suffer consequences for his stance. He took the risk, trusting the resulting reactions of others to God.

For Peter and John, standing true for Christ placed them in an uncomfortable situation. They were fully aware that the Temple authorities wanted to silence and punish them for speaking in the name of Jesus. That had been stated openly. They knew that they were enjoying momentary popular support in the wake of a healing. They also knew that continuing to stand for Jesus would increase their difficulties with Jewish authorities. They had to define their allegiance to Christ—was standing firm for their convictions worth ridicule, suffering, and even death?

Authorities of their day had the right to use corporal punish rather freely. Jewish authorities had the right to condemn non-Romans to death for reasons other than sedition. While they were under Rome’s watchful eye, they could still mete out punishment by flogging, beating, or stoning. As far as the Romans were concerned, beatings were useful tools to verify the accuracy of one’s testimony. Standing against the will of the Jewish authorities of the day was not a simple matter to brush aside. Their threats were not empty words designed to bully those over whom they had no real power. They had plenty of power to wield among their own people. The Romans might wield supreme political power, but Jewish authorities still had plenty of room to exercise their own will and muscle.

Faith and conviction mattered to them. It mattered enough to confront a nation and its rulers with the truth of Jesus Christ. It mattered enough to take a solid stance before those who opposed them. This stance was not made in anger or antagonism. It was taken in sincerity, honesty, and with courage. They set aside issues of personal comfort, popularity of their position, and their own “pursuit of happiness.” They recognized that faith and standing for their faith might bring conflict with those who would not accept their witness. Standing for the truth of the gospel was not optional for them. Failing to make a solid stance would be to turn their backs on Christ. That was not an acceptable option.

Micaiah faced prison for truthfully proclaiming God’s word. The blind man faced rejection from the synagogue and estrangement from his own family. Peter and John faced the wrath of the Jewish authorities of their day. Daniel faced plots against his life and a den of hungry lions. Samuel faced an off-balance, angry king. Elijah faced 450 false prophets supported by a powerful queen. Moses faced the Pharaoh of Egypt. Stephen faced Jews that were angry over declarations of Jesus as Messiah and God incarnate. Paul faced crowds of plotting Jews of which he had been a part.

They all recognized that faith demanded taking a stand that included risk. They accepted that being true to God has a price tag. They were willing to pay the price. They did not march out to attack the world, but they stood to defend God’s Word in honesty and integrity. They stood firm to bear witness of what God had done for them and to affirm God’s message through them to the world.

Are we willing to make the same kind of stand for our own faith? The truth of the gospel requires that Jesus’ followers stand openly for Him. The gospel took Jesus to the cross, there to proclaim God’s love in the face of human sin. Being the body of Christ demands that we make the same stand for the truth of the gospel we have accepted.

Will we make the necessary stand for God’s truth, or just sidestep the issues we face? We may well find ourselves in a difficult situation. Is standing for the truth worth it? Shall we stand against it instead? Whom shall we call “Lord?” Isn’t that the real question?

—©2004 Christopher B. Harbin

This sermon in pdf