Christ Church

  • Our Church
  • Get Involved
  • Resources
  • Worship With Us
  • Give
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Douglas Wilson

The Zeal of the Lord (Advent 2025) (Christ Church)

Christ Church on December 12, 2025

INTRODUCTION

On a number of different occasions, we have considered the importance of having our times and seasons defined in relation to Jesus Christ. The only alternative to this is to have them defined in reference to someone or something else, and this is obviously an unacceptable alternative to all faithful Christians. You will either be oriented to Christmas, or to Labor Day.

So Jesus Christ really has been established as the king of all heaven and earth. The federal building downtown has a stone embedded in the wall that tells us the building was put up in the administration of Richard Nixon, 1973. The dating of Christmas 2025 tells us the same kind of thing, which is that the new heavens and the new earth are under construction, and have been for just over 2,000 years.

THE TEXT

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this (Is. 9: 6-7).

SUMMARY OF THE TEXT

There are many things to note in this glorious text, and it is right that we are reminded of this on many Christmas cards. The message of Christmas is politically incendiary, when you come to think about it, and it is not for nothing that secularists are trying to get us to forget Jesus with their C.E. (Common Era) and B.C.E. (Before Common Era), and seasonal conifers instead of Christmas trees. Nice try, but we aren’t buying any.

To us a child is born, a son is given (v. 6). Taken in context this is clearly the same child typified by Immanuel, two chapters earlier. This one to come will be a ruler, and the government will be on his shoulder (v. 6). We learned earlier that His name is Immanuel, and Jesus, but there is more (v. 6). Wonderful. Counselor. Mighty God. Everlasting Father. Prince of Peace (v. 6). In order to be worthy of all these names, He must indeed be Immanuel—fully God, confessed a thousand years before Nicea. The growth of His government and peace will be inexorable. It will never cease growing (v. 7). This will be a Davidic throne, which is Nicea again—He will be fully man, a son of David. Over time, He will establish His kingdom and set it in order. This will be done in accordance with the zeal of the Lord (v. 7).

NOT A DIVINE ATTEMPT

We were not given a son who aspired to have the government be on His shoulder. The result of His coming is promised just as surely as His coming was, and that result was that the “government shall be upon his shoulder.” This government will be established in fact (as it was 2,000 years ago), and the growth and increase of that government will necessarily be inexorable. “Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end.” His government will not be manifested all at once because the prophecy describes it as needing to be ordered and established with judgment and justice. But this will happen, and we have the assurance that God is zealous to accomplish this. And so this is Christmas—a cornerstone in the building of a new humanity, a new heaven and a new earth.

“INSIGNIFICANT” FAITHFULNESS

A moment’s reflection should reveal that the new calendar system was not instituted by Herod the Great just after the wise men got away, or by Caesar Augustus. When did this thing happen? And who did it? Anyone who has read Herodotus knows that the Scythians were a rough bunch, a reputation that may be reflected in the New Testament (Col. 3:11). But by the 5th century, there was a thriving Christian church in Scythia, and at that time there was a Scythian monk named Dennis. The ancient form of that name would have been Dionysus. Because that name was so common back then, he took the nickname of Exiguus. And so you are now introduced to Dennis the Insignificant, who, as the providence of God would have it, was one of the most significant figures of church history. He moved to Rome around 500 A.D. and he was the one who proposed that the calendar system be changed to date from the birth of Jesus Christ.

In his calendar, the New Year was the 25th of March (the Feast of the Annunciation), ninth months before Christmas. After all, that is when the Incarnation happened. So for a thousand years, the Christian new year was March 25, and it was not moved to January 1 until Pope Gregory XIII reformed the calendar once more in 1582. And of course, we now know that Jesus was likely born in 4 B.C. and not four years later. But the issue is symbol, not simple reenactment, and Dennis did a good job with the materials he had.

SYMBOLS AND FAILED SYMBOLS

Several centuries before Dionysus, the emperor Diocletian revealed himself as a serious megalomaniac by trying to change the dating system to count from the year he became emperor. The Jewish false Messiah, Simeon Bar-Kochba, did the same thing. The devotees of the French Revolution attempted the same trick, dating the events of the whole world from 1792. But of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end. But these clowns at least knew how important this issue is, which is more than we can say of many Christians. The Anti-Christian Liberties Union (ACLU) knows that getting Christmas trees off public property is well worth fighting for.

“MERRY CHRISTMAS” AS INSURRECTION

How do we define our lives within the flow of history? More than this, how do we define our lives as a people? Far from retreating into a minimalist celebration, or no celebration at all, we as Christians must take far greater advantage of the opportunity we have in all of this. Now the Lord Jesus is on His throne. And His government will continue to increase. But He works through instruments, and one of His central instruments for establishing His kingdom on earth is the faith of His people.

Celebrating Christmas is celebrating a holiday, but it is not a holiday away from kingdom building. Rather, the kingdom is being built on this holiday.

Read Full Article

Immanuel (Advent 2025) (Christ Church)

Christ Church on December 3, 2025

INTRODUCTION

We are now in Advent, and so we naturally look forward to celebrating the birth of the Messiah. But we must do so as biblically based Christians—always building on the bedrock of the Word.

THE TEXT

“Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings” (Is. 7:10-16).

SUMMARY OF THE TEXT

Through the prophet Isaiah, God invited King Ahaz to request a sign that he would in fact be delivered (vv. 10-11). But Ahaz shook his head, and adopted a posture of faux humility. He said that he would not tempt the Lord (v. 12). But refusing a gracious invitation is certainly tempting the Lord. Isaiah responded by pointing out that Ahaz was doing more than wearying men, but he was being tedious with God also (v. 13). So God decided to give the sign that Ahaz refused to ask for. A young woman will conceive, and bring forth a son named Immanuel (v. 14). He will be nourished on butter and honey, which will teach him discernment (v. 15). And before he comes to an age of ethical discernment, the kings that so worried Ahaz would both be out of the picture (v. 16).

BACKGROUND

King Ahaz of Judah was distressed over threats of a confederacy of Syria and Israel (vv. 1-2). Isaiah the prophet was sent to him with a message of encouragement. But before he gave his second oracle, he invited Ahaz to set some terms for it—to specify a sign. A prophet of God invited Ahaz to stipulate a sign, and Ahaz refused to do so because he said that this would be tempting God. Isaiah responded that his refusal, if it was not tempting God, was certainly wearying Him. And so then Isaiah gave the sign, which was that a virgin would conceive, have a son, be called Immanuel, and that before this boy grew to years of ethical discernment, the kings that Ahaz was so worried about would both be gone.

TYPOLOGY

Clearly the sign that Isaiah gave to Ahaz was a sign that was intended to be helpful to him. If this prophecy were about the birth of the Messiah only, this sign being a help would be difficult to see. The Messiah was to be born about 700 years later. What good did it do Ahaz to be told that by a particular point, many centuries later, the two threatening kings would be dead? So would Ahaz, and Isaiah, and lots of other people. So it is obvious that Isaiah was prophesying that a woman at that time would conceive, would name her son Immanuel, and that by the time this boy was weaned, the kings would no longer be a threat.

But this means that the situation back then was a type of the Christ who was to come. Isaiah prophesied then, the fulfillment happened then, and that fulfillment was itself a typological prophecy.

ON THE AUTHORITY OF MATTHEW

What does Isaiah mean? How are we to take this prophecy? We should consider the words of Matthew (1:18ff). Matthew will tell us what it means.

“Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS” (Matt. 1:18-25).

What are we to learn from this?

First, the prophecy is applied by Matthew, unambiguously, to Mary and Jesus. Whatever the initial fulfillment centuries before, the primary fulfillment is here.

Second, the name Immanuel is equated with Jesus, and we are told the meaning of both. Immanuel means “God with us,” and Jesus means “saving the people from their sins.” These two names must be understood together. The kings of the earth who trouble us will be no more—because God-with-us will save us from our sins.

Third, the Greek word for virgin here is parthenos, which means virgin, and nothing but virgin. The Hebrew word is almah, which is less specific. But in the LXX, a translation of Isaiah uses the word parthenos. The Bible plainly teaches the virgin birth of Christ, and the Jews prior to Bethlehem were expecting a virgin birth.

GLORY TO GOD IN THE HIGHEST

The virgin birth is an important handmaiden, pointing to the central miracle itself, which is the Incarnation. The thing that should stagger us is “God with us” part, and not the virgin birth. The virgin birth points to this great miracle. And because God is with us, thus we are saved. There is no other salvation, no other way.

Read Full Article

Almost Pulled to Pieces (Acts of the Apostles) (Christ Church)

Christ Church on December 3, 2025

INTRODUCTION

The established Jewish authorities in Jerusalem were quite adept at maintaining and curating their position of privilege, and knew how to dispense with ordinary threats. But they did not know what to do when Jesus rose from the dead. Neither did they know how to handle someone with the shrewdness and toughness of Paul. They were starting to let their incompetence show.

THE TEXT

“The chief captain commanded him to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him. And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? . . .” (Acts 22:24–23:10).

SUMMARY OF THE TEXT

So the chief captain ordered that Paul be brought in and flogged to find out what the uproar was about (22:24). As they were tying him down, Paul asked if it was okay to flog Romans without a trial (v. 25). The centurion went and gave the captain that information (v. 26), which the captain confirmed with Paul (v. 27). The captain said that his citizenship cost him a lot of money, and Paul replied that he was born to it (v. 28). The examiners stepped back and the captain was also afraid, having violated Paul’s rights as a Roman (v. 29). The next day, still wanting to find out what happened, the captain summoned the Jewish council and set Paul before them (v. 30). Paul looked at them earnestly and declared that his conscience was clear (23:1). Ananias ordered him to be struck on the mouth (v. 2). Paul responded with a charge of rank hypocrisy (v. 3). Those next to Paul asked him why he was reviling the high priest (v. 4). Paul pleaded ignorance of his status, and quoted Ex. 22:28. Paul saw the tensions in the room, and cried out that he was a Pharisee on trial because of his hope in the resurrection (v. 6). That set off a great conflict between the Sadducees and Pharisees who were there (v. 7). The Sadducees deny the resurrection, angels and spirits, and the Pharisees don’t (v. 8). The Pharisees took up Paul’s cause, vigorously (v. 9). A tumult began, and the captain was afraid that Paul would be pulled to pieces, and sent down soldiers to rescue Paul again (v. 10).

PAUL’S EYESIGHT

It is well known that Paul had what he called a “thorn in the flesh,” which was an affliction that he asked God to remove . . . three times he asked this (2 Cor. 12:7-9). God replied that His grace was sufficient for Paul, and that strength is perfected by weakness. But what was that thorn in the flesh exactly?

My suggestion is that the most likely candidate was Paul’s eyesight. We can start with this text—Paul did not know that Ananias was the high priest, which could be explained as a problem with his vision. And when speaking about how much the Galatians had loved him, he said that they would have been willing to pluck out their eyes to give them to Paul (Gal. 4:15), and the reason this was needed was because Paul had an infirmity in the flesh (Gal. 4:13). He signs off the epistle to the Galatians in his own handwriting, doing so in “large letters” (Gal. 6:11). This would have been a great grief to him—consider his concern over the “parchments” (2 Tim. 4:13)—indicating his affliction was intermittent. And remember that his Christian life had begun in blindness (Acts 9:18).

PAUL’S CONSCIENCE

Paul began his defense by saying that he had a clear conscience in how he conducted himself. Given what he says elsewhere about his pre-conversion state, this clearly means that he had walked in an upright way since his conversion. But that would include evading arrest, that time he escaped from Aretas the king (2 Cor. 11:32-33). That includes playing his Roman citizenship card at Philippi (Acts 16:37), and again here (v. 25). It included his careful submission to Ex. 22:28. It would include his later appeal to Caesar (Acts 25:11). It would include having Luke write a careful account of his history in a way that highlighted the legal issues. “Then said Agrippa unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar” (Acts 26:32). And it also included his off-budget approach to starting a fight between the Sadducees and Pharisees.

“Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me, while I stood before the council, Except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day” (Acts 24:20–21).

ALMOST PULLED TO PIECES

The most astonishing thing about Paul’s ploy before the Council was that it worked. Now it worked in a way that did not extract Paul from the danger—soldiers had to do that, for the second time—but it nevertheless worked. One can only guess at what the Roman captain thought about the religion of the Jews. Paul was willing to be almost pulled to pieces for the hope that was in him.

The reason the tactic worked is that the Pharisees really did believe in a resurrection at the end of human history, and Paul really was a servant of Jesus Christ, the one who rose from the dead. What the Pharisees hoped for had already begun. “And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust” (Acts 24:15). The resurrection of the dead at the end of history had somehow erupted in the middle of history, and was working its way out from there. Resurrection hope is the name of the game throughout the book of Acts.

Read Full Article

Three Accounts of the Glory on the Road (Acts of the Apostles) (Christ Church)

Christ Church on November 14, 2025

INTRODUCTION

The Lord saw fit to give us three distinct accounts of Saul’s conversion on the way to Damascus. The first (Acts 9:1-19) is a third-person narrative by Luke. The second is our passage here today, a first-person defense to an angry mob (Acts 22:1-21). The third is Paul’s first-person defense to King Agrippa (Acts 26:1-23), which we will consider in detail in due course.

THE TEXT

“Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,) I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day . . .” (Acts 22:1–23).

SUMMARY OF THE TEXT

Paul appealed to his countrymen, brothers and fathers (v. 1). When they heard him speaking Hebrew, they quieted down further (v. 2). Paul said he was a Jew from Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in Jerusalem as Gamaliel’s student. He was a good and zealous student (v. 3). He persecuted Christians to the point of death, delivering men and women both to prison (v. 4). The high priest and elders can confirm all of this, as they were the ones who gave him his letters of authorization for his Damascus raid (v. 5). Coming to Damascus at noon, suddenly there was a glorious light that surrounded him (v. 6). A voice spoke, saying, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” (v. 7) Saul answered with “who are you, Lord?” The answer was Jesus of Nazareth, the one you are persecuting (v. 8). His companions saw the light, but did not hear the voice (v. 9). Saul asked what he should do, and he was told to go into Damascus and await further instructions (v. 10). The glory had blinded him, so he was led by the hand into Damascus (v. 11). A devout Jew, respected by all the Jews there, was named Ananias (v. 12). He came to Saul and commanded “brother Saul” to receive his sight. And Saul looked on him (v. 13). He said the “God of our fathers” had chosen Saul to know His will, see the Just One, and to hear Him speak (v. 14). Saul was going to be a witness to all men of what he had seen and heard (v. 15). What are you waiting for? Get up and be baptized, wash your sins away, and call on the name of the Lord (v. 16). Years later, Saul was in Jerusalem, praying in the Temple, and was in a trance (v. 17). Jesus told him to leave Jerusalem immediately because they would not receive Saul’s testimony concerning Christ (v. 18). Saul protested . . . Lord, they know that I used to imprison Christians, and beat them in every synagogue (v. 19). When the blood of the martyr Stephen was shed, Saul approved and held the coats of the lying witnesses (v. 20). But Jesus said to leave . . . he would be sent far away to the Gentiles (v. 21). And at that word Gentiles, the crowd erupted again. “He is not fit to live!” (v. 22). They were yelling, casting off their clothes, and throwing dust in the air (v. 23).

HARMONIZING THEM

The three accounts are not identical accounts. They are consistent, with no contradictions, but there are discrepancies that have to be addressed. The most obvious is that in Acts 9:7, it says that Saul’s companions “heard the voice” but didn’t see anyone. In our passage, they saw light, but did not hear the voice (Acts 22:9). But the Greek word akouo, used in both places means both to hear and to understand. The men heard sound, but nothing intelligible.

“And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man” (Acts 9:7). “And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me . . .” (Acts 26:14). They all fell at the first flash of light, but his companions stood up again while the Lord was speaking to Saul.

As the saying goes, Scripture is an anvil that has worn out many hammers.

ONE NEW MAN OUT OF TWO

One of the central things that Christ came to do was to abolish the enmity between Jew and Gentile. We can see in this passage how much enmity there was. The angry mob listened to Paul talk about his former persecution of Christians. They listened to him describe a great miracle on the Damascus road. They could deal with miracles. They heard him out when he described his baptism. They accepted the good report that Ananias had among all the Jews of Damascus. They listened in silence until he said the fatal word Gentiles, and they went up in a sheet of flame.

“For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace” (Eph. 2:14–15).

The one new man is the Christian man. The center of this project was the enmity between Jew and Gentile, but all others were included as well. Remember all the nations represented on that first Pentecost (Acts 2:8-11). The tearing down of the middle wall of partition is a principle that extends to all other groups at daggers drawn.

“Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all” (Col. 3:11).

But don’t fall into a category mistake. The wall that must come down in the wall of enmity. It is no sin to have a front door on your house, or a secure border for your country, or turnstiles down in the subway. That is simply a matter of good order. Good fences make good neighbors. So the only ethnic opinions you hold that need to be repented of are the ones that smell like sulfur.

Read Full Article

Just Like Ephesus (Acts of the Apostles) (Christ Church)

Christ Church on November 5, 2025

INTRODUCTION

As it happened, all the warnings that Paul had received on the way to Jerusalem came true, almost immediately. If the thing was going to happen, there was apparently no sense in delaying it. We have before us the account of Paul’s attempt at conciliation, and the riot and arrest that happened anyway.

THE TEXT

“And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord . . . (Acts 21:17–40).

SUMMARY OF THE TEXT

They were received at Jerusalem gladly (v. 17). The next day Paul and his group met with James and all the elders (v. 18), greeted them, and reported all that God was doing among the Gentiles (v. 19). The response was to glorify God for all of that, and to point out how many zealous-for-the-law Jewish believers there were (v. 20). These folks had been misinformed; they had heard that Paul was teaching Jews to abandon Moses, reject circumcision, and reject the customs (v. 21). So this Jerusalem congregation will hear you have come. What then (v. 22)? They had four men there who had taken a Nazarite vow (v. 23). Paul should “adopt” them, pay their expenses, join them in the vow, and shave his head with them (v. 24). That way everyone will know the charge is false, and that Paul himself walked as a faithful Jew (v. 25). As far as the Gentiles go, the previous Acts 15 letter dealt with that (v. 25). And so Paul did what they suggested (v. 26), and they were coming up on the seventh day when they should each one of them present their offering (v. 26). They were almost done when some Jews from Asia grabbed Paul and started the riot (vv. 27-28). They had seen Trophimus, an Ephesian, from their neck of the woods, and had jumped to the conclusion that Paul had brought him into the Temple (v. 29). The whole city was stirred, Paul was dragged out, and the Temple went into lockdown (v. 30). As they were in the process of killing Paul, the Roman officer on site got the word (v. 31). He immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran to the scene. When they showed up, the crowd stopped beating Paul (v. 32). The Roman officer took Paul into custody (with two chains) and asked “What all this?” (v. 33). Some people shouted one thing, and some another, and so he ordered that Paul be taken back to the fortress (v. 34). When he got to the stairs, Paul had to be carried because of the violence (v. 35). The whole crowd followed after, shouting “away with him” (v. 36). As they were about to go inside, Paul asked if he could speak. The officer was surprised that he could speak Greek (v. 37). He assumed that he was an Egyptian rebel-leader who had earlier caused an uproar, and had led away four thousand men (v. 38). Paul said no—he was a Jew from Tarsus, a notable city, and he asked to speak to the crowd (v. 39). He was given permission, and so he stood and motioned with his hand. There was a great silence, and Paul spoke to them in Hebrew (v. 40). This was most likely Aramaic, a dialect of Hebrew.

TRANSITION AND HAND-OFF

The Temple worship, with its blood sacrifices, was in the process of fading away, but the definitive rejection of 70 A.D. had not yet come. This is why it was not inappropriate for Paul to take a Nazarite vow, and to conclude that vow with the requisite blood sacrifices (Num. 6:13-21). This included a male lamb, a ewe lamb, and a ram. So for Paul and the other four men, this would mean five of each. In addition, there was a grain offering and a drink offering (Num. 6:15). The hair of the Nazarite was also shaved off and offered to God.

“In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (Hebrews 8:13).

The period between the Ascension of Christ and the Destruction of Jerusalem was a forty-year period. This was the church’s wilderness period. The Judaic aeon was coming to a close, and the Christian aeon had already been inaugurated. Think of this time as the part of a relay race where both runners are running. There is overlap.

EPHESUS AND JERUSALEM

Now I believe that Luke is clearly intending for us to notice certain parallels between Ephesus and Jerusalem. There was a big riot in both cities (Acts 21:30; Acts 19:28). Both of them were instigated by citizens of Asia (Acts 21:27; Acts 19:24). Both riots had a religious point of origin (Acts 21:28; Acts 19: 26-27). Neither of the rioting crowds knew why they were there (Acts 21:34; Acts 19:32). And both riots were calmed down by Roman intervention (Acts 21:32; Acts 19:35ff). Paul wanted to speak at both (Acts 21:39; Acts 19:30-31).

THE WISDOM OF THE CARNAL MAN

Remember the first three chapters of Romans. The first chapter teaches us that the pagan Gentiles had a problem. The second chapter addresses the Jews—they had a sin problem also. And then in chapter three, Paul ties it all together, and we learn that Jews and Gentiles had exactly the same problem—that problem being the heart of stone.

“A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh” (Ezekiel 36:26).

The wisdom of the carnal man, however religious, and however true that religion is, will always and necessarily gravitate to the externals. And the only one who can deliver us from our addiction to externals is the Lord Jesus Christ.

Read Full Article

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • …
  • 185
  • Next Page »
  • Worship With Us
  • Our Staff & Leadership
  • Our Mission
  • Our Distinctives
  • Our Constitution
  • Our Book of Worship, Faith, & Practice
  • Our Philosophy of Missions
Sermons
Events
Worship With Us
Get Involved

Our Church

  • Worship With Us
  • Our Staff & Leadership
  • Our Mission
  • Our Distinctives

Ministries

  • Center For Biblical Counseling
  • Collegiate Reformed Fellowship
  • International Student Fellowship
  • Ladies Outreach
  • Mercy Ministry
  • Bakwé Mission
  • Huguenot Heritage
  • Grace Agenda
  • Greyfriars Hall
  • New Saint Andrews College

Resources

  • Sermons
  • Bible Reading Challenge
  • Blog
  • Music Library
  • Weekly Bulletins
  • Hymn of the Month
  • Letter from Elders Regarding Relocating

Get Involved

  • Membership
  • Parish Discipleship Groups
  • Christ Church Downtown
  • Church Community Builder

Contact Us:

403 S Jackson St
Moscow, ID 83843
208-882-2034
office@christkirk.com
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© Copyright Christ Church 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright © 2026 · Genesis Framework · WordPress