Will you open your Bibles to the book of Mark chapter 12? Thanks, kid. Yesterday I was sitting in my parents' living room celebrating my mom's 66th birthday. Around 5 PM, I opened up Basecamp and saw that the discussion there and decided that I needed to drive back to Kansas City and write a new sermon. I left a whole bag of fireworks there, mostly in response to the fireworks I saw on base camp. So I'm gonna read a lot of this message to you. I'm not gonna pray because this sermon is my prayer. It's the most sincere prayer I can pray.
Our text today is found in Mark's Gospel, chapter 12, verse 31, in which Jesus says, 'The second is this: you shall love your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these.' Today we're going to discuss the proper and the improper ways of fulfilling this commandment.
And we'll begin by discussing the improper ways. Yes, there are improper ways to fulfill this commandment. Firstly, let me say, when someone tells me how in a very particular way I must love my neighbor, they've already lost me. At best, this sort of thing is reductionistic, it is probably also legalistic, and it could be, perhaps even without realizing it, fascistic. The idea of 'if you love me, you will do X' is the kind of creepy language boyfriends use on their girlfriends after prom night. It is not the language of a follower of Jesus Christ.
I've been married 25 years. The last 3 years of my marriage have been the most difficult. It's all relative. I've had a relatively easy marriage. Don't freak out. The last 3 years have been the most difficult precisely for this reason. At the age of 45, I actually realize now how I prefer to be loved. I had no clue about myself for most of my life. I didn't know how I wanted to be loved. I certainly didn't have any clarity about it in a way that I could articulate it. But now in this grand midlife crisis in which my kids are all growing and I don't need to focus on them in the same way, I now have time to think about how I want to be loved. And that time has made more trouble in my marriage than any other season in my life because right now You have two 45-year-olds who've been married for 25 years who for the first time in their lives both have articulated clarity on how they want to be loved. And I can tell you right now, if we use that conversation point, if we use that as the functional guidelines for our marriage, we will not make it another 5 years.
'If you love me, you will do X' is terminal. It will lead to the death of your family, of this church, of this country. That's not the way forward. Secondly, this verse 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself' is something you must apply to yourself and not something you can weaponize to get others to act the way they should. This verse is for you to mull it over in your heart, consider it, and obey the Spirit's leading. That's what it's for.
Thirdly, well, my third point is so countercultural that I have to sit down to say it. I need to ease you into it because it violates almost every presupposition that you're carrying as a byproduct of the culture that you live in.
6 · Oswald introduces the Gospel Coalition article as a case study in improper application of Mark 12:31, carefully distinguishing his critique of the argument from his affection for those in the congregation who posted or affirmed it
Someone shared an article from The Gospel Coalition on Basecamp about loving your neighbor. Reductive formulation of that article was that loving your neighbor means, in this case, wearing a mask. I want to be clear that I feel genuine, easy— meaning not forced— respect for the person who posted that article. I don't talk to this person very often, but I watch her from afar and think, that's a pretty cool lady. This has nothing to do with those who posted the article or liked it. I, I'm not— I don't have to even coax affection for these people in my heart. It's, it's easy and it's there. The article is, from a theological perspective, a failure. It is also a failure from a logical perspective. And so I'm going to use this article as a means of discussing How to improperly apply this commandment which Jesus gives us to love our neighbor as ourselves. I'm sure the man who wrote the article is a good man, by the way. It should not have been published.
7 · Oswald dissects the rhetorical structure of the Gospel Coalition article, exposing its virtue-signaling opening ('I don't like masks but
Just tell you that point-blank, and let me tell you why. The basic outline of the article begins with the rhetorical equivalent of American cheese. It's smooth, it's melty, but it's cheap. And the way it begins is, honestly, can I just say this? Let's, let's, let's, let's make sure that we can resensitize ourselves to recognize virtue signaling when we see it. The formulation of this article is as follows: I don't like masks. They're uncomfortable. They're itchy. Insert a few sentences that make us relate to him as the folksy guy that I'm sure he is. But the article pivots. I have determined that I should wear a mask because the Bible tells me I should love my neighbor as I love myself.
8 · Oswald demonstrates the logical failure of the Gospel Coalition article by writing three satirical counter-articles using the exact same rhetorical formula to arrive at three contradictory conclusions: wear a mask for the health-concerned, don't wear a mask for the liberty-concerned, don't wear a mask for the herd-immunity advocates
Now, I wrote a very quick— not going to torture you with a long article— but I wrote a very quick article following the exact same patterns. I'm just going to read you just a couple sentences. This isn't for publication, this is just for your edification. Here's my article: I really believe it is important for people to know that I love them by my visible actions. And I really dislike feeling judged or thought of as selfish. I also dislike defying the government. Now here's my folksy part that I'll say so you can relate to me and know that I'm a good guy. When I go on long trips, I set my car on cruise control at the speed limit because I desire to enjoy the easy psychological benefit of compliance versus the ongoing give and take of speeding and slowing down when I think I see a policeman. So given the current climate, I would prefer to wear a mask. But there are people in my church and neighborhood who are sincerely worried about the United States government encroaching on their personal liberty. These people believe that the coronavirus is serious, but that government mandates like the closing of churches or the requirement to wear a mask are real examples of what they believe to be a shift towards tyranny. So even though it would be easier to wear a mask and be thought of as loving, I am making a sacrifice and seeking to serve these brothers concerned about governmental encroachment because I want them to know that I love them and value their concerns. I wrote a third article, same formula, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Folks, do you like me? I'm a nice guy. Wearing a mask would be easier and more socially acceptable, but some in my church and neighborhood that believe that developing a herd immunity is essential and the time-tested solution to overcoming viral epidemics. In order to serve these people, Even though it will be more expedient for me, I will not wear a mask.
9 · Oswald names the logical fallacy: a sound argument cannot produce contradictory conclusions from the same premises
The reason I say this article is logical rubbish, and I don't have time to go into formal logic, but I actually am studied in it, is I shouldn't be able to use the exact same formula that the writer uses and arrive at the exact opposite conclusion. And there's a bunch of rules in formal logic that explain why this is so. I shouldn't be able to use the exact same formula and produce the completely contradictory response. And so in that case, it fails. It fails the simple test of logical consistency.
10 · Oswald tells a personal story from high school: he defended a bullied classmate named Phil and suffered a broken nose as a consequence
My nose, if it gets hit hard enough, will bleed. Not very hard at all. That's because when I was in 9th grade, my nose got broken by someone's fist. And I wouldn't admit to my doctor why I broke it, and my stubborn, old, long-dead family family physician who delivered me, looked me in the eye and said, 'How did you break your nose?' And I said, 'I fell on some stairs.' And he said, 'Well, we can't fix noses that are broken that way. Now we could fix, if you had been punched, we could fix them. But we can't fix a broken nose that way.' And we just had this moment of enduring awkwardness where he stared me down and I stared him down and neither one of us budged and I walked out of that room with a broken nose that never got set right. My nose got broke because there was this kid in my class named Phil who was fat and awkward and wore the whitey tighty underwear that made him look like Homer Simpson in his underwear. Phil was not especially adept at navigating the complexities of high school, and there was a kid who decided that he would kind of make a name for himself by picking on Phil regularly. Relentlessly. And I just couldn't handle it any longer, and I told this kid that, in probably some incredibly cheesy Karate Kid way, Phil's my friend, and if you mess with him, you mess with me. In which case, at the end of that conversation, I got my nose broke.
11 · Oswald recounts a second story of defending the marginalized: his church absorbed significant relational cost to include a drug-using atheist teenager in a homeschool co-op, even after being rejected by other Christians
About 6 7 years ago, a young man was kicked out of school for drug possession, and through a bunch of really considerate care in our local church at the time, we elected to, as a church in some sense, homeschool this young man. His family were new believers in our church, his parents were. He was not a believer. He was a pothead. Atheist. And we decided we would homeschool this kid kind of collectively, and he was totally ungrateful for it, by the way. We were part of a very significant cooperative, homeschool cooperative in the area, and one of the things that we did as a church— we all kind of used the same curriculum, it was just easier that way— and one of the things we did was we would put all of our kids together in classes twice a week to discuss their material. Many of you are familiar with this concept. A group of Christians from the more important Reformed church in town decided they did not want an unbeliever, let alone a pothead, attending. I just couldn't let that go. I tried I tried my best, and maybe some of you suspect I wouldn't have been that successful, but I tried my best to be meek and patient, but I couldn't let go this idea that a bunch of people were saying, 'You don't belong here.' And we burned a lot of bridges. We left that co-op, our church left that co-op, it was messy. That kid never did realize that we'd done any of that for him. He's still an atheist as far as I know.
12 · Oswald pivots from establishing his credibility to making his central accusation: the Gospel Coalition article and those who affirm it are selectively applying the 'weaker brother' principle only to the health-concerned, while dismissing the liberty-concerned as kooks
So I have a question for you: are people who worry about governmental intrusion weaker brothers at the very least? Or are the only weaker brothers that we're considering those who have concerns about contracting COVID? Are people who believe that herd immunity is the way through, do they matter? Because according to the article, we don't think about those people. We are not called to love those people. I'll tell you what we do with those people. We dismiss them as kooks. And I say, to our own great peril. It seems like a terrible idea to me to find a group of people who sincerely would give up their lives to keep liberty as a concept intact. It seems incredibly foolish of me to disregard, dismiss, and reject those people from the larger conversation. Those people 244 years ago made this moment possible. 'Give me liberty or give me death' is why we are freely assembled here this morning.
13 · Oswald names the deeper spiritual danger: dismissing the liberty-concerned is not just a tactical error but capitulation to the idols of this age
What you're doing if you're dismissing those people is you're falling for a con. And that con is you are repositioning your piety to be in perfect line with the gods of this age. If you dismiss those people, you are falling for a con. I haven't made a single comment about masks or no masks. I haven't made a single comment about whether or not your concerns, if you have them, or those listening online, are valuable or viable or so forth. I have right now in my head this tension, and this is a line, by the way, because this is— every once in a while a pastor preaches a sermon that lets people decide whether they want me to be their pastor or not, and this is the moment. I am not going to show preference for one category of weaker brothers and dismiss the others. I love all of the saints in this church. I'm called to figure out a way to walk with all of them. I'm called to figure out a way to see the value in each perspective and knit those values together into a unified local body that represents the diverse excellencies of Christ. So if you want me to choose, I won't.
14 · Oswald diagnoses why the Gospel Coalition article excludes the liberty-concerned: not because of theological rigor but because it aligns with the spirit of the age
Why aren't we accommodating these other perspectives? Why didn't The Gospel Coalition article include these other formulations? As valuable, as viable as they are, is it because we think that the liberty-concerned brother is overreacting? Well, my goodness, kettle, pot, black. Is it because we think there's just a very small, minuscule chance that this United States democracy veers toward totalitarianism? Is it smaller than 0.05%? Do you think we have a 0.05% of becoming a totalitarian state? Is it because we think that those people are unworthy of our patience, our love, and our consideration? As best I can see, as I've really tried to understand how it could be that that article could be published when it fails simple logical tests and makes a mess of the scriptures. And as best as I can see, I believe that is simply because that article is more or less complementary to the gods of this age.
15 · Oswald acknowledges that liberty can be idolized but argues that the dominant idol of this age is comfort, not liberty
The gods of the age 244 years ago were liberty. Make no mistake. I'm not going to preach a sermon about the idolatry of liberty today, but liberty can be idolized. I grant this. And 244 years ago, if I was in a church and you had a bunch of patriots in one corner rousting about for revolution, and you had some mothers and some older men in the other corner who said, I don't want to die for this, I would sit here and I would tell those men who say, 'Give me liberty or give me death,' there's a group of weaker brothers over here and we need to figure out a way to walk with them too. Right now, it is my assessment that the gods of this age veer more toward comfort than toward Give me liberty or give me death. And that's why I'm talking about what I'm talking about.
16 · Oswald explains his pastoral decision-making process: the mask issue is theologically irresolvable via the Second Commandment or weaker-brother logic, so his guiding question became ecclesiological—can I biblically justify sending someone away for not wearing a mask? Since exclusion from worship is church discipline (Matthew 18) reserved for serious sin, and since mask-wearing does not qualify, the church must accommodate both masked and unmasked believers
Why would that article work? I can't come up with any other explanation other than it unknowingly flows along with the gods of this age. Now, The mask issue is simply an unavoidable disagreement. There isn't a way out of it that actually honors the Second Commandment or the weaker brother arguments, and any attempt to use those texts to give you a clear prescription is reductionistic, legalistic, and possibly worse. Those texts won't won't get you there. Not in a prescriptive way. They may get you there individually, but they certainly won't set the rule for how a church must act. Now, let me speak about that for a moment. The decision we made, decision I made, was So simple for me. And it simply came down to this: if someone arrives at my church without a mask on, will I send them away? If someone has these convictions, either toward herd immunity or toward liberty, fear of tyranny, If someone has those convictions, will I accommodate them or will I send them away? To send someone— see, that's what— I would love it if we could get a quick upload of understanding the fundamental distinctions between businesses and churches. If a business sends you away, which I got turned away at Menards because I didn't have a mask, I would have worn a mask, I didn't have one. I didn't need— and by the way, Lowe's didn't require a mask, and I would prefer not to, so I went to Lowe's. If Menard sends me away because I don't have a mask, that's a simple decision based on the levels of simple commerce. In the government's perspective, churches and businesses have almost these days— this is not constitutional, this is not historic— in a government's perspective, churches and businesses are equivalent. That cannot— saints, that cannot be your reflexive way of processing this information. There is no theological, or not much theological consequence to Menard's sending me away because I don't have a mask. But for me to send someone away, that's the functional— that is church discipline. That's the endpoint of Matthew 18, to say you cannot worship with us because of this choice you have made. And friends, the list of reasons why I would send someone away are very, and rightfully so, very short. And one day you might have a minority conviction, and you wouldn't want to be sent away either.
17 · Oswald pauses to directly address listeners who are processing the sermon as a pro-mask or anti-mask argument, warning them that this reductionistic framework makes them part of the problem
So there is no easy way way forward. And there certainly is no reductionistic, if you love me, you will do X version of this situation. But I do think I know how we get out of this. So let me say before I get into that, if you are caught up in a pro-mask, anti-mask horse race perception as you're listening to this, and you process everything I say through that simple lens, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. This isn't about that, not really.
18 · Oswald pivots from critique to prescription: the solution to the mask crisis and every other crisis is not better application of the Second Commandment but ruthless obedience to the First—abandoning idols and pursuing pure devotion to Christ
As you listen to this, I am begging you to become an individual standing before a holy God and trust that every solution to every problem begins to be untied in the way that God says it does, and that is by standing before him, abandoning our idols, and recommitting ourselves to a pure and sincere devotion to Christ. So I believe wholeheartedly that the solution to every problem, even the ones that seem unfixable, begin by not assuming that I'm obeying the first commandment. Let me say that a different way. The solution to every problem, including marriage problems and church problems and country problems, is this: I am looking at the first commandment, which I'm gonna get to in a minute, and I'm assuming I have something I need to deal with there. Think of it this way: Arnold Schwarzenegger, get to the choppa!
19 · Oswald uses generational differences (smoking in teacher's lounges) to illustrate that older generations perceive cultural threats differently than younger ones
We're in this moment culturally where it is not excessive, it is not alarmist to say that things are dynamically changing. My dad and I drove past our old high school, we both went to the same high school, and we decided that the test for whether or not you were afraid of communism was this: if when you passed the teacher's lounge, cigarette smoke came out, you have one perspective on communism, and if you pass the teacher's lounge and there was no cigarette smoke, you have a different. That's just a date kind of thing. There was, yes, in my high school days, teachers went into the teacher's lounge and smoked cigarettes. My wife did a science experiment on whether plants thrived with CO2 levels, and she took a plant and put it in her teacher's lounge because that was where the highest CO2 levels were. All that to say, We're going to have different— based on generational values alone, we're going to have different, fundamentally different instincts here. But some of us think that this is falling down rather quickly. And those of you that don't think it's falling down rather quickly, I would encourage you to honor the Fifth Commandment: honor your father and mother so that it may go well with you and you would live long in the land. Do not dismiss my concerns as a 45-year-old man as merely alarmist cogerism. You are making a mistake. Either you're making a mistake because I'm right, or you're making a mistake because you're establishing a rhythm in which you dismiss old people, in which case you will not live long in the land.
20 · Oswald extends the 'get to the chopper' metaphor: the church is in an urgent crisis (COVID, racial unrest) requiring immediate action
So some of us think that the whole get to the chopper moment is here. I will tell you this, as your pastor, our church is at a get-to-the-chopper moment. This series of events— COVID, then the tragedy in Minneapolis and all of the sin that followed it— are tests that will result in in the sifting of Christians and non-Christians. So let's all get to the chopper. Things are getting rough. I'm officially calling myself Arnold Schwarzenegger, obviously, and I'm saying let's get to the chopper. So we all get to the chopper. God has a way for us all to lift off together. But then we get to the second scene in those action movies, and that's this: now we're all in the chopper and we can't acquire liftoff. And why can't we acquire liftoff? Because we've got too much baggage.
21 · Oswald issues the sermon's first concrete application: the congregation must ruthlessly inventory their hearts and jettison idols
We will lift off together if every one of you First of all, we will lift off together if your leaders lay down their lives and work their butts off. Secondly, we will get off the ground if every one of you is willing to ruthlessly run an inventory of your own hearts and jettison the idols that are weighing you and us down. And if you will not do that, we will not achieve achieve liftoff. We are in a moment in which we simply do not have the tailwinds to accommodate your or my baggage. And the great thing is, as painful as it is, this is an incredible blessing from God. Each one of us is being forced If we will be honest and stand before God, each one of us is being forced to make a thorough inventory of the state of our hearts and see what other gods might be there. And for the sake of ourselves, for the sake of others, throw them overboard.
22 · Oswald makes a theological promise: if the congregation jettisons their idols, the currently hidden way forward will appear
If we could all be 100% free of idols right now, a way— I promise you this— a way forward would magically appear that now seems hidden. We are in a moment in which there doesn't seem to be a clear choice, but that choice, that clear choice, has been crafted by God before the foundation of the world. It is the good work he has created for us that we might walk in it. But we can't see it right now because we are conformed to the pattern of this world. We've got to lay down our bodies as physical sacrifices and pursue the renewing of our minds so that we might know the will of God. It will magically appear if God gives us the grace this morning to throw whatever we think might be an idol overboard right now. If God would give us the grace to that, You would be shocked at how quickly that helicopter pops up into the air and how far we can go together.
23 · Oswald articulates the sermon's controlling theological claim: obedience to the Second Commandment divorced from obedience to the First produces pagan wickedness, not Christian love
So I'm talking still, pivoting, but I'm talking still about how to disobey or how to wrongly obey— sorry, how to wrongly obey the second commandment. And here's what I'm getting at: if you obey the second part to love your neighbor as yourself, but are not obeying the first commandment to love your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. If you are attempting to obey the second part, to love your neighbor as yourself, but not zealously pursuing the first part, to love God and God alone with all your being, then all you're doing when you love your neighbor as yourself even if you do so sincerely, all you're doing is sowing weeds and spreading pagan wickedness in your home, in your neighborhood, and in the church.
24 · Oswald issues a provocative application: if you will not obey the First Commandment, stop trying to obey the Second
I would ask you this: if you will not have zeal to obey the first commandment, to love God with your whole being and jettison the idols in your heart, then I would ask that you please not have any zeal to obey the second one. Because you'd just be making a mess of things.
25 · Oswald pauses to reframe the sermon's pastoral intent: he is not singling anyone out or claiming that comfort is the only relevant idol, but he is diagnosing what he perceives to be the ascendant idol of this age
Those who are in disobedience to the first commandment, to love God with their entire beings, to jettison all idols, to repent of the idols and the sin which so easily entangles and weighs us down, those who will not personally as individuals standing before a holy God make it the priority of their lives to pursue pure and sincere devotion to Christ, everything they do, whether they lead or follow, whether they serve, everything a person does whose heart is polluted with idolatry is polluted with idolatry. So today I want to speak directly to those who may be violating the first commandment in a particular way. And again, I am not suggesting that this is the only way. I'm not trying to pick on anyone. I am trying to be sensitive to what I perceive to be the gods of this age, which I've already established earlier in this message.
26 · Oswald directly addresses the congregation about the idol of comfort, framing it as the most insidious threat of this moment
I want to ask you to please, as if all of our lives depended on it, I want to ask you to please consider if, in addition to your love for God, you have an idolatry of comfort. It isn't the only idol relevant in this conversation. I believe it is the most insidious in this particular moment. I want to ask you sincerely, as a brother in Christ, to zealously return to the top part of Jesus's great commandment and ask, is it possible in an insidious way that I have come to love this gift of God called comfort as a god? And I will tell you that if you don't have a category for that being possible and indeed likely, you are self-deceived. Comfort is one of the most insidious and easily adopted counterfeit gods. It happens all the time.
27 · Oswald disarms potential objections ('I've sacrificed before') by confessing that his own past faithfulness does not guarantee present freedom from the idol of comfort
And by the way, I have a very nice resume of instances in which I have given up my personal comfort for the sake of the kingdom, and it means nothing right now. It doesn't mean— because I have been faithful in the past does not mean I am not fearful now. Because I have been faithful in one area does not mean I am not fearful in another area. Because I have given up comforts in one area does not mean that I am willing to give up comfort in all areas, or that I don't actually worship comfort. So please I can't emphasize this enough. This isn't just a regular sermon. This is me pleading with you. We're in the chopper. We've got to jettison our idols. And I, as your pastor, am before you this morning believing that while I'm not imputing guilt on anyone, I'm believing that God has sent me here to ask you, are you sure? Are you sure right now that you are free from the idol of comfort?
28 · Oswald establishes the theological stakes: comfort is contrary to the way of the cross
The love of comfort is contrary to the way of the cross, and the way of the cross is the way of God. And the way of life. Is every person wearing a mask today guilty of worshiping the idol of comfort? Most certainly not. Is everybody— is every person not wearing a mask free of this idol? Certainly not. Are those who are staying home guilty of worshiping the idol of comfort? Certainly not. But again, what am I supposed to do for you? And what am I supposed to do for those who are at home?
29 · Oswald uses sheepdogs as an analogy for pastoral ministry: the pastor watches and anticipates temptations specific to each believer's circumstances
What I am supposed to do is what I saw Craig Sharp's sheepdogs do out in the field. These dogs are not pets. They sit there and they watch. I'm supposed to anticipate, aren't I, the kinds of temptations that would strike you in your particular circumstances? Isn't that what I'm supposed to do? And so I'm speaking to those right now who are at home. I love you. All of your cases are different. Each one of you has different risk factors and so forth. But I can tell all those who are home or in the parking lot and all those who are here, it would be malpractice of me not to speak into your heart and say, 'Certainly, certainly you could at least be open to the possibility that even in accidental ways, a love for health and comfort has crept into your life,' or, is crouching at your door.
30 · Oswald refuses to prescribe what repentance looks like for each individual but describes the *phenomenology* of genuine repentance from his own experience: visceral disgust, middle-of-the-night anguish, radical action, godly sorrow
I don't know how I could be faithful without saying that. Now, some of you know that this is a problem for you, and you've acknowledged this in the past. You know that your heart tends to lean on this particular idol, and you've done some work on it. Well, I would never pretend to tell you exactly what your repentance looks like in this issue. I really, I really wouldn't. That's been done to me, and it's really terrible. But I could tell you that when I've experienced repentance over these big things that kind of take up big chunks of my heart, I have felt sick to my stomach. I have woken up in the middle of the night feeling disgusted at my sin. I have loathed the trappings of my sin to where, at least temporarily, I become a legalist because I try to build like 12 fences around this sin because I hate it so much. In other words, I take radical, extreme action. I cut limbs off. I pluck eyes out. I cry tears of repentance with the eye that is left. I feel godly sorrow for it.
31 · Oswald escalates his language to counter cultural narratives that minimize the gravity of the idol of comfort
And I would tell you, the idol of comfort is a woeful, evil, nasty sin. And I have to say it that strongly because the culture tells you exactly the opposite. So that in the past, if you have identified this as an issue in your life, you may have been sorry for it but also relatively practically accommodating, because after all, it's not like you're killing somebody. Sin doesn't work that way. So if you have a category for what I'm saying and you think you do see that at a heart level you may struggle with the idol of comfort, then I am pleased pleading with you, don't be patient or tolerant of this sin. Not right now. That's what this moment is about for you. It may be about something else for someone else, but that's what this moment is about for you.
32 · Oswald issues concrete instructions: plead with God for disgust and godly sorrow
Plead with God for a genuine disgust of it. Plead with God for godly sorrow over the time you have wasted mixing your affections for what should have been sincere and pure toward Christ with the love of His gifts, the worship of His gifts, the addiction to His gifts, the clinging to His gifts, the exchange of His gifts over the Giver.
33 · Oswald explains the mechanics of idolatry: idols function as interpretive lenses through which all human interactions are filtered
I want to show you, in an effort to help you hate this sin, how much of a mess it makes in your life. When someone has an idol, I want you to think about how an idol affects all of your interactions with other people. When someone has an idol of pride, they wind up evaluating every human interaction and every possible human interaction by how they are perceived. That's what the idol of pride will do to you in your human interactions. The question always winds up being, how am I being perceived? Not that I would know from any firsthand experience. When someone has an idol of money, they tend to evaluate every human interaction or every potential human interaction by how those interactions will make or cost them money. See, that's how an idol works. An idol always colors every human interaction.
34 · Oswald applies the idol-as-lens framework to comfort: those who worship comfort will seek comfort as the outcome of every relationship rather than seeking God
When someone has an idol of comfort, They seek comfort in their interactions, and this prevents them, friends, this prevents them from having truly godly relationships. Because truly godly relationships have God as their desired outcome and not comfort. I am so concerned I'm so concerned that some of us are so blinded by our idolatry of comfort that we don't even know what true friendship is anymore. My hands are shaking by saying that. It really is a concern.
35 · Oswald uses his dog as an analogy to expose the counterfeit version of friendship produced by the idol of comfort: uncritical affirmation and emotional validation
When I got home last night, my dog, who is mostly deaf, a little blind, and very arthritic, ran up to me hopping and wagging her tail and absolutely giddy that I was home. My dog worships me. She basically is always telling me, all the time, she's always telling me how awesome I am. Friends, that is not human friendship, and it is most certainly not Christian friendship. But if you want worship, if you have an idol of comfort, You might think, I think you probably do think, that friendship consists of this. Listen, younger people. You will think that friendship consists mostly of this. Acting really excited when you see your friend and superly supporting them in everything they do. No, that's a dog. That's not a Christian friend. And the idol of comfort will cause a confusion. It would be such a waste of the incredible gifts God has placed in your life to be someone's dog instead of their friend. It would be such a waste of the deep treasures of gospel truth he has sown into your heart to be someone's dog instead of being their friend.
36 · Oswald advances the argument: the idol of comfort not only distorts individual relationships but warps the very definition of love itself
So if you have the idol of comfort, it's going to stain, it's going to color your understanding of what successful human interaction looks like. It's going to always wind up veering toward seeking comfort as the outcome, maybe for yourself, maybe for the other, but it's always going to be in the mix. But friends, it gets worse. Your love of comfort will warp your definition of love. This is another thing idols do. Idols actually distort our definition of love, and when our definition of love gets distorted, every relationship in our lives gets broken and messed up.
37 · Oswald identifies the core distortion produced by the idol of comfort: love becomes redefined as making people comfortable
But if you have an idol of comfort, then for you, love always involves What? Making people feel comfortable. To love your neighbor as yourself, for you, if you're broken in the first commandment and have comfort as an idol, to love your neighbor as yourself means for you not to lead people to God, but to lead people to God and comfort. Sometimes those two things are compatible. They are eternally and ultimately compatible. But many times on the front end, those two things stand at odds with one another, and you cannot— very often, very often, in order for you to be faithful, you will not be able to lead someone, you will not be able to love someone in a way that both leads them to God and comfort in the short term. And if you have an idol of comfort, you will not be able to love people.
38 · Oswald closes the loop on the Gospel Coalition article: the idol of comfort produces Pharisaism
And here's the kicker: And this is why I was provoked by that Gospel Coalition article. You will start defining everyone else's love in a way that God would never do to an individual. Well, God would do it, but he would do it privately, personally, individually, subjectively. When you have other idols, idols aren't as understanding as God. They're fascist, they're rigid, they always come with rules. And if you have an idol of comfort, you're gonna begin to see love differently, and that's gonna affect how you love, but it's also going to affect your capacity to miss being a Pharisee entirely. You're gonna miss what you're doing, but what you're gonna be doing is you're gonna be evaluating other people's actions not based on whether they're loving God, Not based on whether they're being loving in a way that is faithful to God, but based on whether they are being loving in a way that is faithful to your idol of comfort.
39 · Oswald reiterates the sermon's central theological claim with stark clarity: comfort and the cross are incompatible
Love of comfort is not the way of the cross. Say it again: the love of comfort is not the way of the cross, and the way of the cross is the way of God. This is why you can come out— you can't practice the second commandment without getting the first one right. Because whatever idol is distorting your sincere and pure devotion of Christ will distort your keeping of the second commandment.
40 · Oswald anticipates objections ('what about the idol of liberty?') and refuses to be derailed
Could I talk about liberty as an idol? You betcha. I'm choosing not to emphasize that right now. For the same reason that I advocated for the kid who got kicked out of high school and Phil in gym class. I just don't think those people right now need to hear the same thing. Please don't waste your time this morning by wondering if I'm going to work on the other guy. I've been actually criticized after a sermon by someone who was committing X sin, and the person made their first— the first beeline to me was to tell me that I should have talked about Y sin too. Please don't waste this time by doing that. Be grateful if you have an idolatry of comfort. Be grateful God has brought light to you today and he's shown you a real way. By the way, a really dignified way, because this is going to be between you and God and not the extortion of the crowd, and you're not going to have to make penance to anybody. In some showy kind of way. You can literally stand before your Maker, your Father, who is super kind and super caring, and do this business with God. Be grateful that God has provided that opportunity to you today. Please don't waste this by asking why I didn't give more time to talking about the Idol of Liberty. You want to know the answer to that? The answer to that in the shortest term, and I don't mean this to be glib, but the answer in the shortest term is because I'm the pastor.
41 · Oswald affirms the goodness of life and health while simultaneously exposing their inadequacy as gods
Prince, your life and health are good, but they are not God. Does your health matter? Does your life matter? Yes. And you have not heard anything from me in the way of judgment or impatience as you've processed your decisions for how to react to the realities of COVID-19. You haven't heard any judgment from me. And by the way, I haven't felt it. Does your life matter? Does your health matter? They do, but they make lousy gods. Is it possible that you love these things in a way that only belongs to God? Absolutely. The Bible is full of people who have found— fallen into that particular hole of loving God and comfort as co-equals.
42 · Oswald transitions to practical application by addressing fear
So I ask you this: be humble, be zealous for the cleaning of your own hearts. And report back what you see. Let me conclude with a few practical points of application. Firstly, when you are afraid, the best thing you can do is to obey Mark 12:29-31, the text we just read. When you are afraid, first thing you need to do is love God with everything you've got. Some of your fears will reduce immediately as you reconsolidate all of your hopes on Christ. Because some of your fears are related to losing things that are, to be sure, good. And if you lost them, they would hurt. But they are not God's. First thing to do when you're afraid is to run to the great commandment and say, God, I want to love you and you alone. With all of my heart, with all of my mind, with all of my soul, with all of my strength. Please make that so. That is my passion. If you have to use this crisis to make it true of me that I love you with my whole being, then so be it. I want you and you alone. And you will find some of your fears dissipate because some of your fears were rooted in idolatry.
43 · Oswald offers the second application: after repenting of idols and consolidating affections on God, love your neighbor
But the second part of this commandment is also a wonderful anecdote for people who are struggling with fear. After you have asserted the essential ultimacy of, 'God, I want to love you and you alone. Please make it so. Let me repent of any idols that are present in my heart.' Well, then you're freed up to go love your neighbor in a way that will actually do some good. And friends, the long-running antidote to fear is to care for the soldier to your left or right. Every soldier has been taught this for thousands of years, that cowardice will creep up on you in the moment of battle, and the way you overcome that cowardice is to look to the man on your left and say, 'I have to come through.' for him. And here's what I'd like to ask you to do. We are on different sides of some of these issues, but none of you are going to get anywhere by demanding that you be served. The way out of this is to think of the person— trust me on this— the way out of this is to think of the person on the other end of the spectrum and take practical steps to love that person. Love the person who thinks completely differently than you in a practical way. And let that practical way, by the way, be of your own conviction, of your own invention, of your own decision.
44 · Oswald identifies the fear of man as a companion idol to the love of comfort, explaining why many pastors avoid this conversation
Secondly, The love of comfort is often coexistent with the fear of man. And I could tell you right away that one of the reasons why people aren't talking this way that I'm talking now about this issue is not because it hasn't occurred to pastors, but because pastors are so concerned about provoking those with heightened fears related to COVID to— about making them think that we're singling them out. And there's this real viable concern that says, 'I don't want a person to feel singled out. They're already dealing with enough stress,' and so forth. Apparently, we're okay with singling out the liberty lovers, and we're okay with— I mean, but that's a digression. The point I would say is this: that love of comfort is often coexistent with the fear of man. And now is not the time for hurt feelings. And you choose whether you'll be hurt.
45 · Oswald asserts a theological principle: diversity in the body is providentially ordained, not a problem to be solved by factionalism
Third, the diversity of the body is never an accident, an inconvenience, or a problem. It is always an asset. The diversity of perspectives in our church right now, from God's perspective, in God's providential and eternal wisdom, is an asset and not a liability, the answer is not to break off into factions, all of us according to our own particular preferences or convictions. Let me tell you this point blank: if the American church bites and devours one another over this, I absolutely guarantee you that we will lose both liberty and health. Bumbled that. I want to say that really clear. If the American church bites and devours one another over this issue, I guarantee you, I bet the farm, that we will lose both liberty and health.
46 · Oswald addresses both constituencies directly, affirming the liberty-concerned and the health-concerned in turn
To my liberty-loving brothers who would gladly die to make this country even a little more free, I say, 'You have a good sense of the times, and I do not diminish you or castigate you or call you a conspiratorialist or an overreactionary. I value you. I am appreciative of your instincts.' I would not have said that to you so nicely 244 years ago when you would have been on the other side of the coin. I still would have loved you, I would have been harder on you. To those who have serious concerns about the consequence of this disease, I say, and I have said this privately to a number of them, I weigh the total time of their belonging to this church up against a few short months of absence, and I am under no illusions about where their heart lies. I don't, I don't measure people's lives by months. So to those who have serious concerns about the consequences of the disease, firstly, you need to understand you are part of us and we want to honor you. We don't know how in every instance to honor both sides. But we commit to both categories.
47 · Oswald makes a personal commitment and models the application he is calling for: zealously seeking the Lord to reconsolidate all loves on Him
We commit to saying this: I will personally, as a result of this time together this morning, I will personally and zealously seek the Lord and ask that he reconsolidate all of my loves, all of my desires back on him, because We don't see the way forward. We don't. But we know it will appear. We know we will achieve liftoff when we have made a proper repentance of our idols.
48 · Oswald offers a concrete pastoral accommodation to those staying home: he will visit them in person with whatever protective measures they require
Also, to those who are concerned who are not gathering with us, I will tell you this: if you confuse these words as a lack of love, I ask you to listen to the sermon again. I also say this: if you would like me to visit you in your home even though you don't feel comfortable visiting church, I am happy to do so. I will find an N95 mask and I will slather myself in hand sanitizer and I'll keep as much distance as you would like, like, and so forth. And I will be happy to personally bring the Word of God into your living room to fellowship with you and pray with you.
49 · Oswald outlines his leadership plan: the elders will first examine their own hearts for idols before making tactical decisions
In terms of our public meetings, I have some plans on how to lead us forward. I'm meeting with the elders and deacons tomorrow, and the first thing we will do, first and foremost, is sincerely call one another to examine our hearts for any idols which might be coloring our leadership. And I will also present more actions to them which I believe to be wise next steps. I have a clear conscience about the degree to which I'm collaborating with the other leaders of this church. I have a clear conscience about the feedback I'm seeking. And now I will also say with a clear conscience that for whatever crazy reason in God's plan, I'm the senior pastor of this church. And I'll make sure we give that reality proper weight as well. I want to be clear that we will continue, as we see opportunity to do so, look for practical ways to serve everybody involved. We will keep making changes as we see the opportunity to make changes which result in substantial care for anyone. And some of those changes— well, friends, all those changes are going to mean more work. And we are happy to live out our faith, our salvation, in fear and trembling by doing the work. That's gonna— what's what I'm gonna do. That's what the leaders of this church are gonna do. We're gonna joyfully take that load.
50 · Oswald issues the final charge: the congregation must joyfully and zealously examine their hearts for the idol of comfort
And here's what I need you to do. I need you to take the load that I've given you this morning. I need you to go joyfully, zealously hunting in your own heart for any indication that you worship comfort. And if you will do this and we do our part, then God will present a way forward that allows us to stay together and display the glories of Jesus. To the world.
51 · Oswald's closing prayer rehearses the sermon's central claims: idols are abominations unworthy of worship, only God deserves the heart's exclusive devotion, and the congregation must lean hard into the First Commandment rather than attempting the Second while compromised
Let me pray. Gracious God, we praise your holy name for your faithfulness and care for us. We praise you, Lord, for your patience with us. Lord, any idol Whether it be liberty or comfort or pride or money, any idol is a disgusting abomination of your holy place. You should never, and you do not, but you should never share the space of our hearts with any of these other gifts that you have created. For in comparison to you, the best of those gifts are Disgusting. These gifts, Lord, are unworthy of our worship. They are unworthy of any glory given them. They are unworthy of our trust. They're unworthy of our affections. They're unworthy of our worship. And so we ask, God, that you would do the work that we can't do. We ask, God, that you would reveal the idols of our hearts and that you would Set us to the task of repenting. And God, I ask that You would help us to know that we are repenting, that You would help us to feel it, that You would help us to see ourselves repenting so that we can enjoy, Lord, we can acknowledge the work of Your Spirit in our hearts. Maybe it's been a while since we've been broken over the reality of our sin. Blessed is the man whose sins are forgiven, whose trespasses the Lord does not count against him. Lord, thank You for offering us a way forward. We lean hard, Lord, not into the second part of that commandment, not right now. We lean hard, Lord, into the first part, and we ask God, Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, with all your soul, with all your strength. Lord God, please make it so. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.