This is a sermon that was preached on June 27, 2021 and was based on three stories in the book of Daniel - Chapters 1, 3, and 6. It discusses the need for believers to live their faith according to true convictions based on God's Word rather than simply living according to whatever is convenient. A video recording of the worship service in which this sermon was given can be viewed by clicking here.
Written Excerpts:
Introduction:
I found this story on the website “sermonillustrations.com.” It was
quoted by B. Clayton Bell, in the periodical, Preaching, May-June,
1986 issue.
A number of years ago Norman Cousins wrote an editorial in Saturday
Review in which he reported a conversation he had on a trip in India. He was
talking with a Hindu priest named Satis Prasad. The man said he wanted to come
to our country to work as a missionary among the Americans. Cousins assumed
that he meant that he wanted to convert Americans to the Hindu religion, but
when asked, Satis Prasad said, "Oh no, I would like to convert them to the
Christian religion. Christianity cannot survive in the abstract. It needs not
membership, but believers. The people of your country may claim they believe in
Christianity, but from what I read at this distance, Christianity is more a
custom than anything else. I would ask that either you accept the teachings of
Jesus in your everyday life and in your affairs as a nation or stop invoking
His name as sanction for everything you do. I want to help save Christianity
for the Christian."
This account emphasizes for us the need for Christians to live out
their faith with conviction rather than by convenience.
The passage of Scripture that was read today is one of two miracle stories in the book of Daniel that most, if not all, of us learned as children. – The “Three Hebrew Children” (Men) in the fiery furnace, and “Daniel in the Lion’s Den.” We could also include another miracle recorded in chapter one – the Hebrews choice to refuse the king’s menu plan.
All of these stories have several things in common. One common part of each story is the miraculous deliverance that God gave to them in response to their bold faith. Another common characteristic the fact that the individuals demonstrated their willingness to follow their convictions about their duties to God regardless of the consequences.
As we take the time this morning to reexamine these miracle accounts in
Daniel, I want us to notice some of the characteristics that are similar for all
of them.
I. The Socio-Political
Conditions
A. Conditions were antagonistic.
They were political prisoners or war captives. They were immersed in a strange culture with pagan religious beliefs and practices.
(A.R. Fausset, Jamieson,
Fausset, and Brown Commentary) Ancient idolaters thought that each nation
had its own gods, and that, in addition to these, foreign gods might be
worshipped. The Jewish religion was the only exclusive one that claimed all
homage for Jehovah as the only true God. Men will in times of trouble confess
God, if they are allowed to retain their favorite heart-idols.
That is why the king can declare, “Therefore I make a decree that any people, nation, or language which speaks anything amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made an ash heap; because there is no other God who can deliver like this." (Dan. 3:39) And yet, he could still believe in pagan deities even after making such a decree.
They were given different names to further distance them from their
Hebrew identity and heritage.
The image that was erected is believed by some authors to be an attempt
“To consolidate his empire through
a common religion.” (See Willmington's
Guide to the Bible)
B. Conditions were dangerous.
Because they were “slaves” and war captives, their lives were
dispensable.
The conditions were not only dangerous because they were slaves, but
also because of the disregard the king had for human life in general. (e.g., See
ch. 2 where he was willing to execute ALL of the wise men/ magicians for not
being able to tell him his dream.)
King had authority and power to execute anyone he pleased.
II. Their Faithful
Commitments
A. Commitments were based on convictions.
In spite of the fact that these Hebrew men were living and working in antagonistic and dangerous conditions, they were committed to live according to their convictions. Their convictions were not mere personal preferences, but they were practices that were based on God’s law.
In chapter 1, regarding the menu ordered by the king, they considered
the diet to be defiling.
Daniel 1:8 (NKJV) But
Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion
of the king's delicacies, nor with the wine which he drank...
It is not clear how the king’s food would defile the men. Various
commentators offer several possibilities, none of which provide a conclusive
answer.
·
Levitical
dietary restrictions (clean/unclean)? Maybe, but those restrictions didn’t
apply to wine.
·
Foods
offered/consecrated to idols and considered to be connected to the idol, as
Paul described to Corinthian Christians in the NT. Maybe, but no OT
prohibitions against it. Plus, we’re told that virtually all food in these
pagan nations were so dedicated.
·
Accepting
the king’s food implied allegiance and loyalty to the king. They wanted to
demonstrate their “independence” from the king and exclusive loyalty/allegiance
to God.
·
The
meal “test” proposed by Daniel was a way to demonstrate that their health and
appearance was solely dependent upon God, not the king.
·
Summary: Each one of these suggestions could have
been a factor, but the point is, these men made their choice in order to remain
true to their God-given convictions, even at great risk.
In chapter 3, the command to bow and worship the image was a direct violation of the second commandment. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image... Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them..." (Ex. 20:4, 5).
In chapter 6, the command / decree outlawing any prayers to any god or man except the king clearly disregards the very first commandment. Exodus 20:3 (NKJV) You shall have no other gods before Me.
In all of these examples, the men were acting on convictions that were
grounded in the explicit words of God.
B. Commitments were uncompromising.
Look at all of these stories in chapters 1, 3, & 6. In every
example, the Hebrew men did not give any indication that they were willing to
compromise or change their stand.
(Willmington’s Guide to the Bible) - The three youths were no doubt aware of the many excuses available to
them for bowing down at this private meeting. For example:
4. Daniel our leader is not here to make the
right decision for us.
We all know that whenever we are faced with a decision such as these
men were, there always seems to be plenty of “reasons” why we may not have to
be as strict, rigid, or uncompromising as originally thought.
III. The Unusual
Consequences
A. Consequences included unusual suffering.
In two of these stories that we have been considering, the men had to go through tremendous suffering. I can’t prove from Scripture that they actually suffered physical pain. However, they still suffered – bound, cast into fire, fell down, etc. Daniel – bound, cast into den…
Point? God ultimately delivered them, but He didn’t exempt them from
all the unpleasant or harsh circumstances.
B. Consequences included unusual deliverance.
In all cases, God provided a miraculous and unusual deliverance. God delivered the three men from the fire without even the smell of smoke, or a hair singed. God delivered Daniel from the lions without a single nibble!
Yet, in all of these examples, the men made their position clear either
verbally or by their actions: Even
if God chooses not to deliver us, we still refuse to give in to the decrees of
godless pagans and defy the commands of our God.
Conclusion:
The Bohemian [Czech]
reformer John Hus was a man who believed the Scriptures to be the infallible
and supreme authority in all matters. He [was burned] at the stake for
that belief in Constance, Germany, on his forty-second birthday. As he refused
a final plea to renounce his faith, Hus's last words were, "What I taught
with my lips, I seal with my blood." (www.sermonillustrations.com)
In other words, Hus declared, “My death in these flames is a testimony
to my commitment to my faith and my loyalty to my God.”
I believe God allows every believer to be tested at some point. Think of Abraham. God said, “Now I know that you fear God since you have not withheld your son…” God already knew what Abraham would do, but the test was given to demonstrate the kind of faithful loyalty Abraham had.
God will allow us to be tested to reveal how loyal we are willing to be to the things we say we believe. I am a firm believer that Christians here in America will be tested just like believers in many other countries around the world. I don’t profess to know how severe that testing will be, but I can tell you that many professing Christians have already demonstrated their willingness to change their beliefs and practices even without severe threats, because they have already done it for convenience.
For example, some countries have experienced the prohibition of church attendance by
tyrannical, totalitarian governments (at least for those churches not
registered by the government), but many Christians in America have demonstrated
their willingness to give up church attendance for far less reasons than
government edict.
So, on the basis of the Bible passage we have considered today, I ask
you, “What aspects of your faith and religious practice are you willing to go
to prison for?” “What are you willing to die for?”
I pray that God will help me and everyone of us to stand like Shadrach,
Meshach, Abednego and Daniel!
Closing Song: Dare to Be a Daniel
No comments:
Post a Comment