"The Son: Light of Light" Revelation 21:23 Sunday Evening Worship Service

We'll eventually get to Revelation 21 tonight.

Uh you can open there if you want.

The other verses until there will be on the screen.

But it'll be at the end when we get to Revelation 21.

As I mentioned, this is our fourth sermon at the Nicene Creed.

We began by looking at what it means to confess we believe.

And then from there we looked at what it means to believe in one God.

And if you recall, I said God is one and three, but he's not one and three in the same ways, or that would be nonsense.

And so we spent a message looking at what it means that God is one.

And then last week we looked at how that oneness is seen in the Father, that the totality of God in that sense is residence and subsisting as Father, that God exists as Father.

And if you recall, I said there is not some fourth thing in God.

There's not the Father, Son, Spirit, and then God, and God is all of those things.

The essence of God subsists as Father.

God exists as Father.

But the creed, the majority of the creed, is about the Son.

The Nicene Creed is 32 lines long.

Each line has an attestation to it.

It's declaring something.

Every line is declaring something.

When you start to outline the creed, you recognize that four of the attestations or four of the declarations are about the Father.

Four are about the Holy Spirit.

And even half of those are kind of about the Son.

They kind of sneak him in there on the Holy Spirit one.

And four of them are about the church.

So four, four, four.

That leaves you with twenty lines of the creed that are about the Son.

The Son takes up the majority of the creed.

Those 20 lines, they themselves are divided in half.

Half of them are about the Son, as theologians say, ad intra, or the Son as he is towards God.

In other words, the first half of the declarations about the Son are true about God in and of himself.

They don't require creation to be seen or to be revealed.

And then the second half of the declarations about the Son are all what theologians call ad extra.

They are outside of God.

They reveal themselves in time.

And we'll look at those next week.

But for tonight we look at the part of the creed that declares, we believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, God as he is truly towards Himself, begotten of the Father, the only begotten, that is from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten and not made, of one substance with the Father.

Now, as it's on the screen, it would make sense that this would be the longest and most complicated part of the Creed, because this is the unique contribution of Christianity to theology.

It is the revelation of God in the person of the Son.

That's why the doctrine of the sonship of the second person of the Trinity is at the heart of the Nicene Creed.

In many ways, the Nicene Creed came out of a fight against Arianism.

Arianism was an early, we would call it now a cult, but an early false teaching.

And there was a period of time in the second and third centuries where it seemed, even in the fourth century, where it seemed like Arianism would be the dominant theology of the day.

Sometimes we describe it as a cult, and it might give you the wrong impression that it's like, you know, 10 churches over here, 20 churches over there.

No, it was a dominant stream of Christianity during the 200s and the 300s.

It was often taught.

It was called Arianism because it followed the teachings of a man named Arius.

And, you know, there's whole books and research done in Arius' theology, but you can boil it down to this.

Arius taught that the Son of God was not the eternal Son of God.

He was not eternal.

That was the essence of his teaching.

That the Son of God existed, Jesus as the Son of God existed, but he was not eternal.

He was made by the Father.

Arius wasn't that specific about how the Father made the Son, but he definitely declared there was a time when the Son was not.

They had their own songs.

We have Show Us Christ that we just sang.

They had there was a time when he was not.

I don't know what tune that would be, too.

They said he was not equal to the Father.

They said the Son was a product of the Father, but a product of the Father's creative power.

They exalted the Son.

They said he was the highest of all of God's works.

He was the capstone or the zenith, the summit of God's creation, that the sun displays God's creative power and God's love and God's attributes and God's characteristics beyond any other part of creation.

And so if you were to listen to an Arian talk, they would make it sound like they were worshiping the sun.

And they would argue that they could worship the sun better than Trinitarians, because Trinitarians are stuck on trying to kind of downplay the Father to bring the Father down.

But not so the Arians, they said.

They're always lifting the Father up by showing how his power and his attributes are on display in the creative work in making the Son.

The Son was certainly high and exalted for the Arians.

Arius taught that the Son was made of a different substance than the Father.

Because the Father was not duplicatable.

You couldn't make a copy of the Father, you couldn't imitate him.

There's only one God, Arius taught, and that God was the Father.

Since the Son could not be God, he had to be a high part of creation.

Arius taught that to say the Son was God would slide into polytheism.

So the Son must be derived from the Father and lesser than the Father.

Arius had no problem calling the Son divine.

He would say the Son was divine in the same way that we are all partakers of the divine nature.

There were many Arians that signed the Nicene Creed, believe it or not.

And they went away and just said what we mean by that is the Son is divine, like people are divine.

We all have God's nature in us.

We're all, the creed says that the Son is in the image of the Father, and they would say, yeah, 2 Corinthians says we're all being transformed into the image of the Son.

It's just a way of saying the Son is a person like us.

Arius taught that the Son's power came from the Father.

But that he was less than the Father, and he was dependent upon the Father.

And here I'm going beyond the metaphysics of the third century, but as logic and philosophy developed, it's pretty fair to say that metaphysically the Arians had this concept of the Son existing by a free act of God.

They wouldn't say the Son's existence was essential.

They would say that the Father made the Son by a free act of the Father's will.

That's not Trinitarianism, though.

Trinitarians have always taught that the Son exists by a necessary act of God.

That there's no possible universe in which the Son doesn't exist.

That the Son exists essentially in God.

In other words, it's necessary.

The Father didn't choose to beget the Son.

The Father didn't choose to make the Son, which is what the Arians taught.

But the Father and Son exist necessarily.

What we mean by that, and the easiest way to explain that, I know when you hear the word metaphysics, you can tune out real quick.

But let me bring you back.

What we mean by that is to call God a father means he has a son.

You know, you can make it more complicated if you want, but the bottom line is a father has an offspring.

And so to say that God is eternally the father means that he eternally has a son and essentially has a son and necessarily has a son, and if he did not have a son, he would not be father.

And so to say that the father created the son would mean that the father was not eternally the father.

That's what we mean when we say the son's existence is necessary.

And so the Nicene Creed, in many ways, the Nicene Council was called by Emperor Constantine to put down this rebellion, put down this fight inside of Christianity.

Constantine, I don't really, he might have had a preference.

Maybe he even preferred Arianism over Trinitarianism.

That's likely.

Some church historians say that that's true.

Constantine was certainly eager to receive Arius and all of the bishops that followed him and the churches that were under his leadership back into communion with the church after the Council of Nicaea when he was kind of exiled.

Constantine was eager to see him return.

So maybe Constantine was even rooting for him.

Who knows?

But Constantine had called the Council of Nicaea to try to get Christians to agree on this issue.

And perhaps Constantine was even surprised when the Nicene Creed was finally formalized and adopted that it seemed to exclude Arianism.

But that's why the Creed, the longest section, is about the identity of the Son.

It's because of the historical context in which it was written.

They were fighting over the eternality of the Son.

They were fighting over the identity of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, what that even means.

We'll look at the ones on your screen tonight and we'll pick up where we don't get to next week, Lord willing.

The first part of this declaration I want to draw your attention to is that we believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and what they mean by that is that he's begotten of the Father, the only begotten.

The Creed uses this term begotten, which is a word that is used in both the Old Testament and the New Testament.

In the Old Testament, Psalm 2, verse 7, Yahweh says, You are my son.

Psalms 2:7

Today I have begotten you.

Begotten is the language of giving life.

It is a word that is no longer in the English Bibles, but if you grew up in the King James, you have it all over the Bible.

If you uh, you know, some sometimes kids' Sunday schools will sing the begat song where everybody memorizes the begats.

I know some people on church staff that have them memorized and could sing them if I called on them tonight, but though tempting, I am resisting.

It's a common language throughout the Old Testament.

All the begats, all the family trees and the lineages, everyone comes from someone.

The word begat is not a word that we use in English anymore.

It has fallen out of use, but it's the father's role in giving life.

The mother births, the father begets.

It's not only people that are said to begat in the Old Testament, animals beget other animals.

There's a cool verse in Job where the winds beget storms.

That becomes the expression you reap the whirlwind.

Begets is different than creates, though.

A father doesn't create a child.

Animals don't create other animals.

They beget them.

One of the most important usages of this word is in Proverbs 8.25.

Wisdom says, before the mountains were established, before the mountains had been shaped, and before the hills, I was brought forth.

That's wisdom's declaration.

If you remember Proverbs 8, it's this chapter where wisdom is speaking, and wisdom is marveling how wisdom was the agent of creation.

The Father was in his shop, so to speak, to use the language of Proverbs 8, laboring to create the world, and everything he did, he did through wisdom.

And Proverbs 8 makes it clear that wisdom was alongside God.

That's the language is used later in Proverbs 8, was alongside God.

But originally it says that wisdom was begat by God.

That God begets wisdom and then creates everything else through wisdom.

Hebrews picks up this kind of language when it says, Today I have begotten you.

Hebrews quotes this twice in reference to the Father speaking to Jesus.

The eternal Father says to the eternal son, today I have begotten you.

It's a quote of Psalm 2.

It's quoted in Hebrews 13 as well.

Hebrews 13 even says, as the second psalm says, today I have begotten you.

Or sorry, Acts 13 even says, as the second Psalm says, today I have begotten you.

And so it's used three times in the New Testament, one time in the Old.

This is not some tangentible doctrine, but it is repeated in the New Testament that the eternal Son begotten by the Father is the Lord Jesus Christ.

Arius seized on the word today.

And said, Aha! Today I begot you.

So all you Trinitarians want to talk about the begottenness of the Son.

But the New Testament says it happened on a day.

That means it happened in time.

But on the contrary, if you look at the way the word today is used throughout the book of Hebrews, it always references truths that are true every day.

For example, in the book of Hebrews, today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your heart.

That doesn't mean that's only true the first time you read the book of Hebrews, and you can harden your heart tomorrow, then.

Today, as long as it is called today, don't forsake the gathering together.

Today is the day of salvation, that kind of language.

Or the probably the most well-known one, that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

It's always true.

The point is that these are truths that are true today because they're true every day.

That's what makes them true.

So it is with the begottenness of the Son.

Yes, today the Son is begotten, but that's because he is eternally begotten.

He is begotten every day.

It's a necessary and essential act of God.

And that's picked up in the New Testament.

Time and time again, the New Testament refers to Jesus as the only begotten Son of God.

John chapter 1 describes him in verse 14 as the only begotten at the Father's side or at the Father's bosom, some of the older translations say.

John 1 · chapter mention

And if you recall, when you're sitting around a meal, you would often lay down on the heart or the chest of the person next to you.

And it was the most exalted position to rest your head on the bosom of the host.

And that was the image of Peter or John laying on Jesus.

And that's the image that Jesus begins, John chapter 1, begins the Gospel of John by describing himself through John's pen as being eternally at the Father's side, in the Father's bosom.

John 1 · chapter mention

That's a reference to Proverbs chapter 8, that wisdom is at the Father's side, in the Father's heart.

Proverbs 8 · chapter mention

Before he creates anything, the Son is there.

The Son is distinct from the Father because He's begotten by the Father.

That's what generation means.

Not ordinary generation, not the way people beget people or animals, animals, but eternal generation.

An act with no beginning and no end that occurs all the time.

All the time.

One year I was asked to preach at the Baptist Convention in Haiti, the Haiti Annual Baptist Convention.

All the Haitian Baptist pastors gathered together and the Baptist Convention invited me to speak, and they asked me to speak on the doctrine of eternal generation.

And as I'm thinking about it, this is a this is a complex theological topic.

I knew I was going to be speaking in English, but translated into French and French Creole simultaneously with different translators.

I'm thinking, I don't know how I'm going to do this.

How am I going to explain generation or eternal generation to Haitian pastors, not many of whom are even literate.

And I got off the airplane in Haiti.

And if you've ever flown to Haiti, you've you know I'm talking about here.

The plane kind of lets you off on the runway.

It's not a big airport.

You can see over the fence to outside the airport right there.

There's a freeway that runs basically right by the airplane, and there's a big billboard right there advertising a new generator.

Like a massive billboard advertising a generator.

And I realized, you know, Haitians might be more equipped in their minds to understand the concept of generation than Americans are, because you have to explain to Americans what a generator even is.

You start there.

This is what a generator is.

That's something everybody grows up with in Haiti.

That's the word for this, that the Son is generated from the Father.

That the fullness of deity subsists in the Father, and the Father brings forth eternally the Son.

It's not something he chooses to do, it's not something he starts to do.

It's not something he didn't do yesterday and does today.

It's something that is constantly happening.

The Son is continually generated, brought forth, begotten by the Father, eternally begotten.

By calling it eternal generation, you mean it didn't start one day and stop.

It's always happening.

Today theologians sometimes refer to it as a psychological occurrence.

That's obviously newer language.

The third and fourth century church fathers didn't call it a psychological occurrence.

But I find the language helpful.

Jonathan Edwards used that language, and to me it's very helpful.

Jonathan Edwards asks us to imagine yourself.

Have an image of yourself.

Now your image of yourself is going to be generated by you, but it's going to be flawed.

Your image of yourself doesn't even look like you look.

My image of myself, oh man, you should see it.

Strong, handsome.

Our images are flawed and self-deceived.

But not so the Father.

God, with his perfect knowledge and power and love and the simplicity of the divine attributes, we talked about simplicity last week that all the divine attributes are united and joined.

They're not divisible in the Father.

And so God's image of himself will reveal himself perfectly and exactly with no flaws.

Not dividable.

One of God's attributes is life.

He has it in and of himself.

And so his image of himself will be alive.

The Father is a person, and so his self-image will also be a person.

Now that psychological analogy might have some flaws in it, or you might not find it helpful.

I find it helpful, and so I share it with you.

But this is the language the New Testament uses.

Colossians 1.15 speaks of the Son as the image of God, the firstborn of all creation, meaning that he precedes creation.

Arius, of course, seizes on this and says, see, he's created.

No, it means he's the firstborn over all creation.

He's the one through which the world was created.

But he is the image of God.

And notice it doesn't say image of Father, but image of God, because all that God is is resident in the Father.

And so to say image of the Father or image of God is redundant.

Similarly, in 2 Corinthians 4, verse 4, in their case, the God of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

2 Corinthians 4:4

Not a partial image of God, but a complete and total and perfect image of God.

So all that God is is resonance in God.

This is the idea that the Son represents the Father exactly.

And if you start to wrestle with this truth, it will save you from so much bad theology.

The idea that the God of the Old Testament is a vengeful God and Jesus as the Son is a merciful God.

If you start to deal with eternal generation, you recognize that's impossible.

You can't have the father with one disposition and the son with another disposition because where did the son get that disposition?

Where did the son get his love?

Where did he get his affection?

Where did he get his mercy?

And you can't say the father is less generous or less forgiving or less kind than the son, because that would create a distinction between them.

That would imply there's two different sources for them.

But there's not two different source materials.

All that God is is resident in the Father.

And the Father gives himself completely, entirely, in every part of himself to the Son.

So the Son truly represents the Father exactly.

I'm not saying this is easy to understand.

Please don't.

I'm trying to speak with confidence, but don't confuse my confidence with saying so.

You don't get this, dumb dumbhead?

No, this is hard stuff.

I understand that.

So I leave you here with Gregory of Nasianis before we keep going any further.

I don't know how well you can read that, but I'll read it for you.

Gregory asks, how then has he been begotten?

The heavenly begetting is more incomprehensible than your own, to the same extent that God is harder to trace out than man.

Drop your ideas.

Drop the habit of treating the incorporeal nature as if it were a body, and you might well get a worthy notion of God's begetting.

How has he been begotten?

I reutter the question with loathing.

God's begetting ought to have the tribute of our reverent silence.

The important point is for you to learn that he has been begotten.

As to the way it happens, we shall not concede that even angels, much less you, know that.

Shall I tell you the way?

It is a way known only to the begetting father and the begotten Son.

So should we pack up and go home then?

No, because Gregory didn't pack up and go home.

This is one of the favorite tricks of the church fathers.

They would write an answer to a theological question like they're angry at you for even asking it.

How dare you even ask this?

We can't even imagine this.

So be quiet.

Chapter 2, and then they go on to answer it.

So we'll do the same.

The Nicyn Creed does the same.

It goes on beyond only begotten to from the same substance as the Father.

Homousius is the Greek word.

Consubstantial is the Latin word.

The existence of God, the being of God subsists as Father.

The Father generates the Son.

The Son is the same substance as the Father.

So God is one and he is three, but he is not one and three in the same ways.

He is one substance.

There is one divine being.

They made it themselves in order to try to eliminate the Arians from signing the creed.

They understood that the Arians were using biblical language to teach unbiblical truths, so they had to use extra-biblical words to fight off that extra-biblical teaching.

And this is one of those words.

This idea that the Son is the same substance, this is a key distinction between begottenness and created.

When you create something, it's not the same as you.

But if you begot a chair, that would make you a chair.

You make something of like nature.

You create something of a different nature.

Or to say it this way, this is not original with me, but ants beget other ants, but they make ant hills.

God creates people, God creates a universe, but he begets himself.

So when the father begets the son, it is a second person, but of the same substance and essence as himself.

And this happens all the time.

That's the eternal part of eternal generation.

The Father has always begat the Son.

The Son is eternal because the Father is eternal.

They're co-eternal, but the same being, the same substance, the same essence, but it subsists as Father and as Son.

You see this a little bit in Hebrews 1:3.

Hebrews 1:3

He being the Son is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature.

That word radiance is trying to communicate to you that it is the same essence.

All that God is is begotten.

All that God is is generated to the Son.

The exact imprint.

Meaning, if you were to look at the Father and Son together, so to speak, you would not be able to tell them apart.

It's not that one is taller and one is shorter or anything like that.

I know they're incorporeal, they don't have bodies.

But the principle still stands.

You can't distinguish them based upon that.

The father and son are, in a true sense, identical, the exact imprint of his nature.

It's just that one is father and one is the son.

One is the source and one is the image.

This guards the oneness of God because there's only one being, there's only one center of consciousness, there's only one simple being, there's only one divine being with the attributes of God.

But that divine being subsists as father and then simultaneously as son.

And this leads you to the phrase to borrow from the creed again: God from God.

The Son is God from God.

Do you see how the creed is building these blocks here?

He's eternally begotten of the same substance.

When you get that, that means he is God from God.

One God from one God.

And so you can ask yourself, how is God described?

The Bible describes God as righteous, so the Son is righteous.

God is full of grace and truth, so the Son is full of grace and truth.

God is life, and so the Son is said to have life in and of himself.

That's the doctrine of a seity, that God exists on his own.

And this is very hard to understand with the Son because you would think eternal generation would negate a seity.

You would think that eternal, if somebody is eternally generated, that they don't have life in and of themselves because they're generated.

But not true, because a seity is an attribute of God that he gives to the Son.

This is why John 5.26 is probably the best verse on this.

As the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.

Well, how can you grant somebody something to have it in themselves?

That doesn't make any sense.

An eternal generation, that's what happens.

The father has life in himself on his own, and he is continually granting, giving the son to also have life in himself.

And so the son is life.

John concludes 1 John 5 with this.

Wraps up his book.

We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, and his son Jesus Christ, he is the true God and eternal life.

Or Jesus says it this way: eternal life is to know the Father and the Son whom he sent.

Eternal, the Father is life, and the Father gives life to the Son, so to know the Son is to know eternal life.

The word Yahweh means I am that I am.

God is life in and of himself, and so to say that the Son has eternal life is to say that the Son is begotten of the Father.

It's not just that he's God from God with life from life, but this phrase, he's light from light.

And here is where we finally get to Revelation 21.

The very end of the Bible.

Revelation 21 is describing heaven.

And if you're familiar with this part of scripture, most of the descriptions of heaven are negative.

They're not positive descriptions.

They're telling you what heaven is not.

There's no sea, meaning no division.

There's no tears, meaning no mourning.

There's no death.

There's no suffering.

John describes heaven based upon what's not there.

He has some positive descriptions too, the building, descending, and all of that.

But even when he gets to verse 22, I saw no temple in the city.

Notice that's just in keeping with the way he's been describing heaven this whole time.

It's by negation.

There's not this, there's not that.

And now he's looking.

This is different than the millennial kingdom.

When Christ is reigning on the world, on the earth, over the nations, of course there's a temple.

But when the new Jerusalem descends, wrapping up the kingdom age, John notices the temple is gone.

What happened to the temple?

It's been replaced.

It's been replaced because the Lord God, the Almighty, and the Lamb is there.

The city has no need for sun or moon to shine on it.

It's more negation language.

No need for the sun or moon to shine on it.

Why not?

How disorienting would it be if there was no sun?

You get up, you get you wake up in the morning.

Some of you maybe have this experience, not those who work at the Pentagon, but the rest of the world, you might wake up and you can judge what time it is outside by how bright it is.

Teenagers have this experience.

You can walk outside any time of the day and figure out what time it is just by how you instinctively can see the sun and know what's happening.

Not in heaven.

The sun is gone.

There's no need to pace yourself.

But it's been replaced.

Not with darkness, of course, there's no darkness there.

But the glory of God gives it its light.

The glory of God, that's the essence, the being of God, gives heaven its light.

And the light is coming from the Lamb.

God does not share his glory with anyone.

God is life, and he shares life with the Son.

God is light, and the Son is the lamp.

The Son is the one illuminating, revealing God.

This speaks of the eternal begottenness of the Son, that all of the divine essence and nature is resident in him.

So much so that to see the Son is to say, I see the Father.

To see the light of the Son is to see the light of God.

Then light reveals.

Light is showing you what's in front of you.

God reveals himself to us through the Son.

He is the lamp.

The point is that in heaven, Jesus is no longer simply vice regent.

He's not the Messiah on the throne reigning over the nations like he was in the kingdom, like is prophesied throughout the book of Revelation.

Even Jesus is promoted beyond even that in the eternal state.

He goes from being the Messiah reigning on the throne to being the lamp of the glory of God forever and ever.

Coequal with God.

The exact representation of his glory.

This is the crescendo of worship, not just in one book of the Bible.

This is the crescendo of worship in the Bible.

This is your window, this phrase right here, into the eternal state.

Where we will worship forever and ever and ever.

There's no way a Jewish person would have described heaven with anyone as the light of God other than Yahweh, by the way.

But that's how John ends, Revelation, and that's how the Bible ends.

Longing for the day when all the redeemed gather around and worship at the light of God revealed through Jesus Christ.

He's light of light.

He is the lamb who was slain.

Of course he is.

He's the lion who, though a lamb was slain, has resurrected and rules the nations.

He's worthy to open the scroll.

All the imagery in the book of Revelation, that's all true, but notice that's all add extra.

That's all towards us.

He is the lamb slain towards us.

Revelation wraps it up with a picture of him as he is within the Trinity.

Light of light.

True God of true God.

And this next phrase just repeats it for you again.

Because the Nicene Creed writers knew this is tough stuff, so they just repeat it again.

Begotten, not made, and of one substance with the Father.

We said that earlier, but we're repeating it.

We meant it.

Three times the word begotten is used in the Creed.

Twice the word one substance is used in the Creed.

It's driving home that God exists in simple essence, undivided essence, subsists as Father, revealed entirely, completely, and perfectly in the eternal Son of God.

Lord, we're grateful that you are the triune God, one being and three persons.

This is not a fiction.

This would not even be possible to be designed by men as men cannot understand it.

We grapple with it.

So Lord, we pray that you would help us conceive of the Trinity even better and more powerfully and accurately so that we can worship you more truly.

Lord, we are weak and you are strong.

We have limited knowledge.

You have infinite knowledge.

So we recognize we don't understand you like we ought.

We see as though dimly in a mirror we're at a distance.

We just want to go up the mountain further, get closer to you in our mind's eye, knowing that one day we will see you face to face.

Until then, Lord, just help us worship you better.

And we know you're not disappointed with us or frustrated with us at our lack of ability to understand you because we're creatures.

And you're the creator.

And so we know that you give us grace and you show us mercy and you fuel our best efforts and are patient with the rest.

And so we're so thankful for that.

We give you thanks for the study tonight in Jesus' name.

Amen.

And now, for a parting word for Pastor Jesse Johnson.

If you have any questions about what you heard today, or if you want to learn more about what it means to follow Christ, please visit our church website, iBC.church.

If you want more information about the Master Seminary or our location here in Washington, D.C., please go to tms.edu.

Now, if you're not a member of a local church and you live in the Washington, D.C.

area, we'd love to have you worship with us here at Emmanuel.

I hope to personally meet you this Sunday after our service.

But no matter where you live, it's our hope that everyone who uses this resource is involved in their own local church.

Now may God bless you this week as you seek Jesus constantly, serve the Lord faithfully, and share the gospel boldly.