Rev. Brent L. White

“Rejoice in the Lord always,” Paul says. Does always really mean always? I’s easy to rejoice when things are going our way, but what about when they’re not? How can we be thankful in all circumstances? In today’s sermon, Brent tackles these questions head-on.

Sermon Text: Philippians 4:4-9

The following is my original sermon manuscript.

So… Slow news week this past week, huh? Just kidding. As is the case whenever there’s a presidential election, some of us are disappointed; some of us are happy. That’s understandable. The good news is that our hope doesn’t rest on the shoulders of whatever fallible human being happens to win the presidential election; our hope is rooted in our King Jesus, who at this very moment is reigning at the right hand of God the Father. The future is in his hands; we’ve seen our own future in his resurrection; and we know that, through him, our future is bright. Can I get an Amen? Regardless of whether our guy won or not, I hope we can all appreciate Governor Romney’s very gracious concession speech early Wednesday morning. It was a short speech, but one that was overflowing with this thing that we’re talking about this month: gratitude.

He thanked his running mate. He thanked his wife. He thanked his sons who worked hard on his campaign, and their wives and children who picked up the slack while they were campaigning. He thanked his campaign workers, volunteers, and donors. But at the end of the speech, he also acknowledged his deep disappointment: He really wanted to win. But he encouraged us to join him and his in praying for President Obama, for his success, and for our nation. Not bad! Read the rest of this entry »

Last Sunday, I preached on a gratitude-themed scripture, Philippians 4:4-9. Paul wrote his letter to the Philippians primarily as a way of thanking them for a financial gift they sent him while he was in prison. This video features AFUMC people talking about letters of gratitude.

I preached this sermon on All Saints Sunday, the traditional day on which the church celebrates the lives of saints who have gone on to be with the Lord. I tackle the problem of death head-on, and our hope for heaven. “Brothers and sisters, the gospel is this: In this world of tears, in this world of sin and suffering, in this world in which death seems to win, our Lord Jesus Christ assures us, ‘I will make this right!'”

Sermon Text: Revelation 7:9-17

The following is my original sermon manuscript.

Heaven has been back in the news recently. A couple of weeks ago, Newsweek magazine featured a cover story on the subject—a first-person account written by a highly respected neurosurgeon named Eben Alexander. Several years ago, Dr. Alexander contracted bacterial meningitis. He was in a coma for seven days. During that time, monitors measured brainwave activity, and we know for sure that his cortex—the part of the brain that controls thoughts and emotions; the part of the brain that makes us human—was shut off. For all practical purposes, he was braid-dead. Yet somehow, during this time, he was fully conscious. And he had what he believes was an experience of heaven.

Dr. Alexander was nominally Christian before, but he didn’t put much stock in the many reports of near-death experiences. He believed they were caused by the cortex malfunctioning. In this case, however, his cortex wasn’t functioning at all. So how is it possible that he had this experience? He’s now not only a believer in life after death; this experience has brought him back to his Christian faith and back to church.  Read the rest of this entry »

For the first week of our “Attitude of Gratitude” sermon series, a few Vinebranchers offered testimonies about saints in their lives for whom they’re grateful.

Say what you will about the devil, Underwood deviled ham is delicious!

Eight years ago, I had to attend a five-day retreat called “License to Preach School” as one part of the lengthy licensing and ordination process in our denomination. For one assignment, we had to preach a sermon in front of our peers, all of whom were also going into ministry. One of them preached on Job. She referred several times to the wager that Satan—the one and only devil from hell—made with God.

The sermon raised many questions in my mind, the foremost of which was, Why would God grant Satan an audience in his heavenly court, much less entertain a wager from him? Why are God and Satan on such friendly terms? Besides, while I hadn’t yet been to seminary, I did read a lot. I took Disciple Bible study. I knew a few things. I shared my concerns with another classmate, who had already completed his first year of seminary.

I told him, “My understanding is that ‘Satan’ in Job is not a proper noun; it’s ‘the satan,’ the accuser. He’s an angel alongside other angels in God’s heavenly court.” My classmate simply said, “I wouldn’t rest too comfortably in that understanding”—which was kind of a jerky thing to say. Tell me why I’m wrong, if you think I’m wrong!

It’s eight years later. I’ve now been to seminary. I’ve read even more. And I’m no less convinced that the accuser mentioned in Job is not Satan of the New Testament. By all means, our English translations do us a disservice by capitalizing the name (and omitting the definite article). But still…

I’m happy, therefore, that a blogger at Scot McKnight’s blog has taken up the cause, using a couple of theologically conservative evangelical commentaries to back him up. Of this “satan,” he writes:

The setting is a divine assembly where God as the supreme king is consulting with his court. Heaven is described in analogy with an ancient Near Eastern royal court. Most English translations translate “the accuser” as Satan, capitalized to indicate a proper name. The dramatized audio I listened to cast the voice as a stereotypical diabolical Satan. Both Walton and Longman point out that this is wrong. Walton prefers to use the term “Challenger” while Longman calls him the accuser. Not only is the accuser not Satan, but there is nothing particularly diabolical about the exchange. The accuser is not out to destroy mankind in general or Job in particular. Rather he is challenging the policy of reward and retribution.

Walton summarizes his conclusions about the Challenger (p. 74 – Walton):

He is one of the “sons of God” (a member of the divine council)

He serves as a policy watchdog.

He uses the ambiguity of Job’s motives and concept of God to challenge God’s policies.

He does not act independently.

He is not inherently evil.

He cannot confidently be identified with Satan in the New Testament.

All of this accords well with everything else I’ve read and studied. I have a friend who got a Ph.D. from Emory. Her dissertation was on Job. She agrees with all of the above as well.