The Christian Family — Part Three

Video Statistics and Information

Video
Captions Word Cloud
Reddit Comments
Captions
Well, I invite you to turn with me to the New  Testament and to Colossians and chapter 3.   And let’s just read from here initially,  and then a couple of other passages to set   a wider context. Colossians 3:18:   “Wives, submit to your husbands, as  is fitting in the Lord. Husbands,   love your wives, and do not be harsh with them.  Children, obey your parents in everything,   for this pleases the Lord. Fathers, do not provoke  your children, lest they become discouraged.”   And then let’s turn back to Ephesians and to  chapter 5 and read again a similar exhortation   by Paul when he writes to the church in  Ephesus. Ephesians 5 and from verse 22:   “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as  to the Lord. For the husband is the head   of the wife even as Christ is the head of the  church, his body, and is himself its Savior.   Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives  should submit in everything to their husbands.   “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved  the church and gave himself up for her,   that he might sanctify her, having cleansed  her by the washing of water with the word,   so that he might present the church to himself  in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such   thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.  In the same way husbands should love their wives   as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves  himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but   nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does  the church, because we are members of his body.   ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother  and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall   become one flesh.’ This mystery is profound, and I  am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.   However, let each one of you love his  wife as himself, and let the wife see   that she respects her husband.” And then, finally, in 1 Peter and in chapter 3.   And here’s Peter on the same theme. First Peter 3:1:   “Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands,   so that even if some do not obey the word,  they may be won [over] without a word   by the conduct of their wives, when they  see your respectful and pure conduct.   Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding  of [the] hair and the putting on of gold jewelry,   or the clothing you wear—but let your  adorning be the hidden person of the heart   with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet  spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.   For this is how the holy women who  hoped in God used to adorn themselves,   by submitting to their own husbands, as  Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord.   And you are her children, if you do good and  do not fear anything that is frightening.   “Likewise, husbands, live with your wives  in an understanding way, showing honor to   the woman as the weaker vessel, since they  are heirs with you of the grace of life,   so that your prayers may not be hindered.”   Amen. May God bless to us  the reading of his Word.   And our text tonight is just as short and as  clear as our text this morning. This morning,   in the eighteenth verse: “Wives, submit to  your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.”   And tonight: “Husbands, love your wives, and do  not be harsh with them.” Or, as J. B. Phillips   paraphrases the second half of that, “Don’t let  bitterness or resentment spoil your marriage.”   We are in this position, in studying in familiar  territory, because—and I say this for the benefit   of some who may just have come in this evening—we  paused for a couple of weeks, a few weeks,   in our studies in 2 Samuel out of a concern  for the well-being of our children and the   parental exercise of control by the parents  of these same children, so that we might   be clearly together in our desire to see them  understanding the Bible and being conformed   to the image of Jesus. And that then led us to  a consideration of the family itself, setting   the understanding of God’s specific instructions  for the physical family in light of his spiritual   family—namely, the church—which has caused us to  think significantly about what it means to be the   church, to be members of the church, and so on. And we saw this morning—and it’s important that we   remind ourselves of it this evening—that our  understanding of these specific instructions,   either here in Colossians or elsewhere  as we’ve read it, these understandings   directly as it relates to marriage must be  viewed in the context of the gospel, must be   understood in light of God’s ultimate purpose  in seeing men and women conformed to the image   of his Son. And that is why, for example, in  Ephesians 5, Paul speaks about this immense   mystery, which is usually mentioned when that  passage is read at the services of a marriage,   and he says, “And I am talking about  Christ and the church”—which, of course,   should cause people to say, “But I thought we were  here for a wedding. Why would he be talking about   Christ and the church?” Well, because marriage  has to be understood in those terms. And as we   said this morning, the chief end of marriage is  “to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.”   It is that same emphasis which caused Martyn  Lloyd-Jones in one of his books to—actually,   in one of his sermons, which then, of course, was  eventually in a book—to say to his congregation,   preaching along these lines,  “How many of us,” he asks,   “have realized that we are to think of the married  state in terms of the doctrine of the atonement?   Books on marriage are found in a library under  ethics. But,” he says, “they do not belong there.   We must consider marriage in terms of  doctrine, and that doctrine primarily   of the atonement, of the seeking love of God  for rebels, whom he woos and wins to himself   and upon whom he pours out his Spirit and who  he loves with an exclusive affection. That,”   says Lloyd-Jones—which is just really speaking  the Bible—“that gives us our bigger context.”   Now, with that said, let’s just be very  honest about things, as we must be,   and recognize that we may embrace that; we may  affirm it; we may say, “Yes, of course we believe   the Bible to be authoritative and clear in  this regard”; and yet we live our lives in the   mainstream of a contemporary culture which seems  to pay scant attention to that and in many cases   is actually opposed to it. Men and  women in coming into our homes,   in meeting us in common conversation, in accepting  an invitation to dinner, or in engaging with us   in a sporting event, if we are very honest, many  of them who do not share our convictions and our   faith could be forgiven for concluding  that we have no higher view of marriage   than that which is common in our culture. They  could be forgiven for concluding that. I’m not   suggesting that they would be right in concluding  it, but I’m saying they could be forgiven.   Because our contemporary view of marriage is  vastly different from what we have just read.   It is a union that is based, if you like, on  fluctuating human experience: the kind of thing   you used to do in the first flush of love when  you have fastened your affection on some girl,   and you picked up one of those dandelions, and  you walked down the road with it, blowing on it—   “She loves me, she loves me not, she loves  me”—and hoping desperately that it would end   up at the right point, you know. That’s so much  the view, isn’t it? “She loves me. I love her.   Maybe I don’t. Maybe she does. Maybe we stick.  Maybe we leave. Maybe we twist. Maybe we turn.”   You say, “But wait a minute. That’s not what we  believe.” No, I didn’t say it’s what we believe.   I said our pagan friends could be forgiven  for thinking it is what we believe   because of the way we are tempted to behave—in   other words, to make our own adjudication on these  things not on the strength of the instruction of   the Bible but on the shifting shadows and  changing affections of passing time. And   recognizing, then, when we turn to a section like  this, that we are dealing with the divine will,   and we are dealing with the divine Word, and  that the express reality of what is involved   is, as from the very beginning of  creation, that “the two shall become   one flesh.” They will “become one flesh.” In other words, it is saying something that   is vastly different from just a kind  of mutual engagement with one another.   It’s something vastly different from “hooking  up.” It is very, very different. In fact,   it has little to do with a contractual obligation.  It has everything to do with a divine covenant.   And that is why the marriage ceremony itself and  the way marriage is approached and the vows that   are made by both husband and wife in marriage  is important. It matters how it takes place,   it matters where it takes place, and  it matters among whom it takes place.   Because if you think about it, the marriage bond  is, number one, exclusive. Right? It is that there   will be one man and one woman. There will be a man  and his wife. It doesn’t involve anybody else—none   of this nonsense about “two and three involved  in the process” of contemporary thought.   Secondly, it is publicly acknowledged. You say,  “Well, how would it be publicly acknowledged?”   Well, because the person leaves. Leaves where?  Leaves their house. Leaves their family.   Ceases to be what they were and becomes  something absolutely different.   I came on a marriage the other day with my  children. We were in Utica, New York. Not my   children; three of the grandchildren. And we came  on a wedding, and it was out in the square. And I   turned to Sue, and I said, “You know, years ago,  this would have been a treasure trove.” Because   in Scotland, one of the things that happened  when the bride and groom and the wedding party   left the church was that they threw money out of  the windows. Now, this is Scotland, understand!   Scottish people don’t throw money away—not by  nature. But they threw money out of the windows.   And so, it was a phenomenal afternoon when I was  riding my bike home from school, and I came on the   Presbyterian church just round the corner from  my home, and the cars were there. Oh, I parked   the bike, and I waited! I didn’t care how long the  service lasted. I waited. And then the small crowd   assembled, and eventually, they shared their joy  in marriage and their largesse. And it was very,   very clear what had happened. They had been in  their home. The man had come from his home; the   wife had come from her home. They’d come into the  church. They’d now been united with one another,   and they were going away entirely different.  We understood that. That was what had happened.   It was something far more significant  than often what we see now.   So that the nature of it is exclusive; it is  publicly acknowledged; it is absolutely permanent.   “And he will cleave to his wife; she will cleave  to her husband.” The picture is sticking with it,   superglued together. And it is consummated—consummated—by   sexual intercourse. That is biblical marriage.   Do you hear that, young people? Do you hear that,  teenagers? As you listen to all the voices in   your ears, understand this. And understand this,  too: that God who made you knows how it works,   and how it works properly, and the disaster  that accompanies it when we decide to try   it on our own. This is the word of God. It  is valid. It is permanent. It is universal.   And when entered upon as God intends, as we  said this morning, it is an advertisement   for the Christian faith. And how we need  this advertisement for the Christian faith!   Do you realize that it was in 1964, when I was  twelve years old, that the Sexuality Information   and Education Council of the United States of  America was set up to deliver sex education in   schools? And in 1964, it supported ideas  such as merging or reversing sex roles,   liberating children from their parents, and  abolishing the traditional value—a government   organization established so that children may  be impacted in this way. Goodness gracious,   how long is it since I was twelve? It’s, what,  fifty-seven years? Half a century! Are you   surprised by where we are today? You shouldn’t  be. Nineteen seventy-nine, the Gay Liberation   Front Manifesto reads, “We must aim at the  abolition of the family” founded on the “archaic   and irrational teachings” of Christianity. Make no mistake about it: “We do not wrestle   against flesh and blood, but against … spiritual  [wickedness] in the heavenly places.” And the   absolute point of contact in contemporary culture  is right here, in the realm of sex and marriage   and family. You have to be dead not to know that,  and you have to be of the most naive of people   not to take seriously our real need to cry to God  to revive the church in the midst of these years,   and so that it might be that our marriages, our  homes, our kids are an attractive alternative—are   an adventure that is labeled “Following Jesus.” Now, at the time of Paul’s writing,   there were in existence both Judaistic and Greek  and Roman codes of ethics that related to family   living, related to the life of the house. And  so it is no surprise that Paul himself, given   that kind of framework, would, under the direction  of the Holy Spirit, be providing, if you like, the   rules or the codes or the framework for marriage  within the context of the gospel. And so,   when you think about that, and you think about  the people living in the contemporary world,   the Greco-Roman world, who knew what it was—that  the husband was supposed to be this, the wife was   supposed to be that—they would say, “Yes, well,  this seems to make absolutely perfect sense.”   But what they wouldn’t get is what is at the  heart of what Paul is saying. Because the heart   of what Paul is saying is that the execution of  these principles is under the lordship of Jesus   Christ—that Jesus Christ is Lord. He is Lord  as creator of the universe. He is Lord as the   one who has redeemed his people from our sins.  He is the Lord who reigns in heaven. He is the   Lord who will return again. He is the Lord who  will reign in a new heaven and in a new earth.   And so, the lordship of Jesus Christ is then to be  on display not simply in the church as it gathers   but is to be on display in the home life of the  members of the church. That’s the hard part!   You can get away with a lot here on a Sunday  or whatever day you want to be together—and   quite frankly, so can I. But I have to go home.  I said to somebody tonight, “I don’t know whether   it’d be better to have no wife than to have a wife  and to have to preach on the role of a husband.”   You don’t think I get up here, like,  “Yeah, I get a free pass.” No, I go home,   and I came from a home. And so do you.   Because at home, for better or  for worse, one is oneself. Yeah.   I’ve been greatly challenged just recently.  Crossway came out with a wonderful new copy,   an abridged version, of The Reformed Pastor  by Richard Baxter, which was written in the   seventeenth century. The original book is hundreds  and hundreds of pages. It’s just very hard to   read. And so this individual has done us a great  favor by reducing it in a quite masterful way.   And Baxter’s exhortations are based on Acts  20:28, which reads, “Pay careful attention   to yourselves and to … the flock.”  No, first of all, “to yourselves.”   Now, in doing that, we have to take seriously  what the Bible is conveying. Earlier,   this morning, for some of us, we noted that for  the wife to submit to her husband in this way   is somewhat necessarily conditioned, if you like,   and conditioned significantly by the demand  which then follows here in verse 19. So, “Wives,   you submit to your husbands as is fitting in the  Lord. And husbands, you love your wives, and don’t   be harsh with them.” This is the two pieces,  if you like, of the puzzle. That’s why we read   1 Peter 3. That’s why we read Ephesians chapter  5. So, you have submission, and you have love.   Now, we might ponder why it is that these things  are set in juxtaposition to one another in this   way. I think it may be because if we are honest,  we understand the particular susceptibility   of each member in marriage—namely, the  susceptibility of the wife to chafe and   push back under the leadership of her husband and  the susceptibility of the husband to seek to abuse   his leadership role in giving direction to  the family and seeking to love his wife.   Now, again, I’m going to keep saying  this, because it is so vitally important:   that these admonitions are not culturally  bound; they are permanently valid. And the   countercultural element to what Paul is  writing here—countercultural in his day,   before we even think about it in our own—is what  he has to say concerning the love that a husband   is to show. All of those ethical codes,  whether Greco or Roman or Judaistic,   would all have very clear building blocks for how  the family should fit together. What would be so   striking to people who were familiar with these  kind of ethical demands was what he says here:   “This is what husbands are to do: husbands, you  are to love your wives. To love your wives.”   “You who are the beloved of God,” up there in  verse 12: “Put on then, as God’s chosen ones,   holy and beloved…” That’s the same  verb, actually: agapáō. It’s agape.   “You who are beloved are to put on love,” in verse  14, “and if you want to really know where the   hit will come, why don’t you put it on  in relationship to your wife, at home.”   Now, let’s just say, let’s just acknowledge that  he puts this both positively and negatively.   Positively, to love your wife means that we  must do sacrificially. Sacrificially. The model,   the measure of a husband’s love is  to be Jesus’ love for his people.   Couldn’t we have made it a little harder?   “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved  the church.” When Paul writes in Philippians 2,   in that amazing passage about Christ, who did  not think equality with God something to be   grasped but made himself of no reputation —in  that context, Paul makes these exhortations:   “In humility count others better than yourselves.  Look out for the interests of others rather than   your own. And remember when you’re tempted to say,  ‘But I don’t want to do that,’ that your example   is Jesus, who was prepared to give up himself  sacrificially, even to death on a cross.”   So in other words, the love—the love  that a husband is to give to his wife—is   actually extending the love that he  has for himself to embrace her as well.   Now, we have to think that out, because this  comes back again to the Genesis 2 passage,   doesn’t it? That in some profound way, a man’s  wife is part and parcel of his living frame.   Yes, she has a unique personality. Yes, she  is a separate entity and so on. But somehow,   in a way that is both mystical and yet  real, this reality that exists between us   is like nothing else in the entire world, and the  closest thing that we can come to it is when we   think in gospel terms, in atonement terms, in  terms of the union of Christ with his people.   This, of course, has huge ramifications for all of  our fiddling around with divorces and separations   and trying to find excuse clauses and  escape clauses, to run away from things,   as if somehow or another we just have joined  in a casual relationship with each other which,   if it goes south on us, we can always break it  up and move on to someone else. Oh no you can’t!   Oh no you can’t! And the reason that Jesus makes  an exception is so that we would understand that   he is not providing loopholes in every other  area that we try to contrive. That’s why he says,   “You’ve got one shot at it, and this is it.” One  flesh. One flesh. Some kind of mystical reality.   Now, what do we mean when we say that  we love as we love our own flesh? Well,   listen to this: “No one, unless he is psychotic  or at least unbalanced, hates his own body.” True!   I mean, you don’t get up in the morning, take your  shaving razor, and try and cut yourself with it.   I mean, if you cut yourself, you go, “That  was a mistake,” then you call for your wife:   “Could you please help me?” So… “Could  you please submit by getting me…”   All right? To which she says, “Is that  an order, or suggestion?” We’ll just   leave that alone for now. “No one, unless he’s  psychotic or at least unbalanced, hates his own   body. For a husband not to love his wife, who has  become one flesh with him, is not simply to be   a poor husband. It is to be a dysfunctional  Christian.” That pretty well says it, doesn’t it?   Now, if you want it more quaintly, in the  nineteenth century—and whether you do or you   don’t, you’re about to receive it—this is Charles  Hodge: “Married love … is as much a dictative   nature as self-love; and it is just as unnatural  for a man to hate his wife as it would be for   him to hate himself or his own body. A man may  have a body which does not altogether suit him.”   Okay. He may wish it were handsomer,   healthier, stronger, or more active. [But] still,  it is his body, it is himself, and he feeds it and   cherishes it as tenderly as if it were the best  and most lovely in the world. So a man may have   a wife whom he could wish to be better or more  beautiful or more agreeable; still she is his wife   and, by the constitution of nature and  the ordinance of God, a part of himself.   In [rejecting her] or abusing her, he violates  the laws of nature as well as the laws of God.   Sacrificially, and also exclusively:   “For a husband to love his wife in this way  involves sacrifice, and it also recognizes the   exclusive nature of what’s going on. In the same  way that the love of Jesus for the church is an   exclusive love, so the husband’s affection for  his wife is also to be marked by exclusivity.”   In other words, the relationship I have  with my wife I sustain with no one else.   And neither must any one of us. Richard Baxter—I  mentioned him already—in the middle of that big   book, he gives directions both to husbands and  wives. He says it is our common duty to maintain   these things and, he says, “to keep conjugal  chastity and fidelity, and to avoid all unseemly   and immodest [conduct].” Boy, if that isn’t a kind  of… Anybody under the age of 112 is looking for   a dictionary in relationship to those words:  the idea of “conjugal chastity and fidelity”   being a “common duty” and the notion of “unseemly  and immodest” conduct. It’s almost… It’s amazing,   isn’t it? I mean, the entire advertising world  is based on unseemly and immodest conduct.   I say that with great respect to all the  advertising people who are here. I don’t mean   to throw you all under the bus. But we can go from   Baxter in the seventeenth century  to the Men’s Health magazine   in 1996. You see why it’s important to keep files?  Can you believe this? Listen to this. This is   Men’s Health, 1996. He’s writing to men, whoever  he is: “The key is to make your mind monogamous ….   When you’ve promised to drink only from  one spring, its water will be sweet.   Surely, when a woman knows that she is it for  you—that she is the alpha and omega of your erotic   world—[she will] be emboldened by [it].” So, whether you want seventeenth-century   Baxter or twentieth-century Men’s Health, let’s  be absolutely clear that the exclusivity of the   marriage bond is not up for debate or for option.  And it is imperative that we recognize this.   I know that you’re not impressed  by most of my quotes, but   this is… This is from… I think this is… “Baby,  I’m down to my last teardrop this time,”   by that little lady who was involved with  Glen Campbell for a while. Can’t remember   her name. Doesn’t matter. But it begins like  this: “They said your love life’s in trouble,   in a magazine I read, when the one you love  is hanging off of his side of the bed.”   Okay. That’s that little lady. This is  Charles Bridges: “Tender, well-regulated,   domestic affection is the best defence against  the vagrant desires of unlawful passion.”   Now, you don’t need me to interpret that for you.  This is biblical. You can read it in 1 Corinthians   7 for yourselves, in the first five verses. And  in the time that I’ve been in pastoral ministry,   it is not an uncommon story to discover  that the seeds and the roots of declension,   not simply in the physical realm but in the entire  notion of a one-flesh union within marriage,   can be traced to a downright selfishness  in relationship to that very area of life.   So, Men’s Health gets it. The seventeenth century  gets it. And if we’re honest, we get it too.   Now, I spent too long on that. Just  a word or two on the negative side.   “Husbands, love your wives.” How  shall we do it? Well, we’ll do it   sacrificially, we must do it exclusively, and we  mustn’t be harsh with them. The basic verb here   means to make bitter or to make sour,  hence the paraphrase that I quoted earlier   from J. B. Phillips: “Don’t [allow] bitterness  or resentment [to] spoil your marriage.”   Now, it’s an important word, isn’t it? Because  if we’re not alert to this, or even if we are   alert to it but tempted to disregard it, it  is possible for us as husbands to cultivate,   amongst other things that we would like  to be rid of, a harsh tone. A harsh tone,   fueled by bitterness; a sourness which may  stem from a sense of disappointment—often   a disappointment with ourselves that is  disguised by explaining how disappointed we   are with everything else and everyone else. I’m  disappointed with life. I’m disappointed with   expectations. I have unrealistic ideals for my  wife and how she should be. And before we know it,   suddenly, we have slipped into a tone that  is certainly not conducive to anybody saying,   “Wow! Look how these people love each other.” Now, this requirement, of course, is necessary.   C. S. Lewis: “If the home  is to be a means of grace   it must be a place of rules …. The  alternative to rule is not freedom   but the … often unconscious … tyranny of  the most selfish member [in the house].”   “[Oh,] and may I say not in a shy way. No,   no, [no,] not me. I did it my way.”  Yeah, there’s the problem for some of us.   Our husbandly role of loving our wives is  not to be exercised harshly, selfishly,   but lovingly—which will mean at least in part  being prepared to put my wife’s interests ahead of   my own , being prepared to recognize that I don’t  need to have the last word in every conversation,   and recognizing that we come to this as  husbands, as do our wives in verse 18,   in the awareness that the  framework is laid out in such a way   that entering into it by God’s  help, we may rejoice in it.   It’s a biblical framework. It’s a permanent  framework. It’s a universal framework. And   one of the reasons that we need the big  family to help us with our wee family   is because of our own personal blind  spots. Our own personal blind spots.   We all have them. We don’t really  want to deal with them, and so we   are adept at hiding them—until somebody might be  prepared to come along and point them out to us.   This kind of thing. This is just from a  novel. I made a note of it a long time ago.   And this is an observation that is being  made by a character in the novel, the wife.   A real relationship’s based on trust and  understanding, the sharing of little things.   Moments of happiness and laughter. Realising  you’ve both just had the same thought,   or were about to say the same thing. James and I— That’s her husband in the novel.   James and I shared nothing … except for the  same space. And even that, less and less often.   I grew to realise that his emotions were without  substance. His obsession was with himself, not me.   He’d be telling me about some big contract  he’d signed, some export deal to the US,   and I’d realise he was watching his own  reflection in the window as he told me.   Playing to his own imagined gallery. Posing  for photographs that weren’t being taken. He   was in love with the idea of me, but I was just  another trophy in a life that was all about him.   “Oh,” you say, “there you have it, huh?”  Yeah, well, we all have it, if we’re honest.   I’m loathe to tell you this. Maybe I told  you before, in which case it won’t matter,   ’cause I’ve already done it. But talking in  terms of blind spots, I can’t forget—it’s a   long time ago now, and a long way away from  here—I was out playing golf with somebody.   And in the course of the conversation, in  just routine conversation, he said to me,   “Alistair, can I say something to you?”  Which is usually—that’s not usually gonna be   something like “Hey, you’re the finest person  I’ve ever met.” So you gotta be prepared,   if you’re gonna say yes to it, to be  prepared for it. And so I said, “Yeah.”   He said, “Well, I gotta tell you this.  You’re awfully hard on your wife.”   I said, “Really?” He said, “Yeah.”  He said, “You finish her sentences.   When you’re in the room,  her personality is quashed.   When you are out of the room, we all realize  who she is, what she has, and what she means.”   He said, “I’m telling you that ’cause I care  about you and I care about her.” And I tell you,   I don’t share that with you to  impress you. It pains me yet.   I say to you again, I don’t know if it would be  easier to have no wife or to have a wife and have   to deal with Colossians 3:19. Well, let’s pray:   Our gracious God, we thank you that as we  make our journey down the pathway of life,   that we have a Shepherd who  loves and cares for the sheep;   that we have one who, when we wander  and stray, woos us and brings us back;   that we have one who, when we’ve made a royal mess  of things, comes to pick us up, to restore us,   to forgive us, to enable us to get up and get  on. And Lord, as we think about what it means   to live out the principles of your Word,  not just in the big place, in the crowd,   but in the small place—in the kitchen, in the  bedroom—Lord, who is sufficient for these things,   save that you come by the Holy Spirit  to quicken us, to renew us, to help us?   And thank you that when we read these  exhortations, they are not there as some list of   that which we should strive to become  but that they are the very outworkings   of those who are your beloved, who are learning  progressively to put on love, and learning to   do so at the places where it demands the  most, takes the most, often hurts the most,   and yet reveals, often, the most of  your work of grace within our lives.   Help us, Lord, to this end. Thank you for the  promise of your grace. In Jesus’ name. Amen.
Info
Channel: Parkside Church
Views: 3,725
Rating: 4.8961039 out of 5
Keywords: Church, Parkside, Bible, Teaching, Alistair Begg, God, Jesus, Sermon, Christian Life, Husbands, Marriage
Id: vtpQOHQa9_E
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 40min 59sec (2459 seconds)
Published: Mon Aug 09 2021
Related Videos
Note
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.