Kaleo San Diego Church > Sermons > Jesus is Our True Story

Jesus is Our True Story

David Fairchild
Dec 2, 2007
Series: Topical

Luke 1:1-4: "Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught."

Luke 24:18-27: "Then one of them, named Cleopas, answered him, ‘Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?' 19 And he said to them, ‘What things?' And they said to him, ‘Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, a man who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 and how our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him. 21 But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened. 22 Moreover, some women of our company amazed us. They were at the tomb early in the morning, 23 and when they did not find his body, they came back saying that they had even seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive. 24 Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see.' 25 And he said to them, ‘O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?' 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself."

INTRODUCTION

The two most universal and well-known celebrations in the church have been Christmas and Easter. For hundreds of years it has been a tradition for the church to take these two times of the year and look straight at Jesus. We spend a few weeks leading up to Christmas learning about and reflecting on the person of Christ, who He was and is. We spend a few weeks leading up to Easter celebrating what He's done and is doing. In this we come to see both the person and work of Christ. Who is the One that came, and what did He come to do?

During the next four Sundays we're going to be looking at Christ and considering who He is and thinking about the significance of Christ's coming to get involved in our broken world.

In some ways we're building a biography of Jesus as we look at who He is from His Word. But as soon as we begin to undertake the task of discussing Christ from His Word, the questions from our particular cultural context begin to emerge.

From the very beginning of Luke's gospel, you begin to see his purpose in writing this gospel.

You get a sense of his tone as he addresses his letter to "most excellent Theophilus" (v. 3). This is a sign of respect and clearly an indication of Luke's desire to speak clearly and thoughtfully to this man who, I'm sure Luke assumes, will then read it to other well-educated and cultured friends and relatives.

Luke immediately begins to tackle the objections that most educated people had then and still have today. The questions that usually emerge are, "Where did you get information and how can we trust that it's reliable"?

Today, in San Diego, the most common comments we receive when we begin to talk with others about Jesus is a view that says, "The accounts of Jesus are not reliable. They're legends and can't be trusted. Nobody actually takes these stories literally. It's impossible to really know what He said or did, who He was or claimed to be. We simply can not know because the Bible wasn't written to be taken literally."

This is a significant question and it presents a pretty formidable obstacle for us to move forward in our discussions of Jesus.

Thankfully Luke, the physician, starts off by addressing this issue and takes this issue head on as he tells us that Jesus is our true story.

STUDY

I. JESUS is Our True Story

The first thing we want look at in Luke's opening address of this gospel is that Jesus is our true story. This may sound pretty obvious, and hopefully it is, but I do think there is a bit more to it than meets the eye.

Luke tells us that he took on the task of compiling, "a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us" (v. 1).

This might sound pretty insignificant at first pass. But this is a really weighted comment and a somewhat unique way to structure this phrase.

The "things...among us" are historical events. Luke's saying that the rest of his letter is about the things ________ among us. You'd assume that he would simply put the things that "happened" among us. This would be the normal construction of a letter of this sort. But he didn't. He wrote that this is about, "the things that have been accomplished among us," or you could use the word "fulfilled" in its place since it basically has the same meaning.

Basically what he's saying is that in Jesus Christ, history has been fulfilled. Jesus, in Luke's thinking, is the proof of God breaking into our world and working to fulfill and accomplish His plan among us.

An argument or a person?

This is really important to nail down. Some of you are here today and have been looking for an infallible, inescapable, water-tight, unquestionable argument to prove who Jesus is. Then, then, you'd believe in Him. If only you could find it!

What if God hasn't provided for you an infallible, inescapable, water-tight, unquestionable argument that chases away all lingering doubts? You see, we are not beings who take in arguments or evidences in a vacuum. We take everything in with a particular grid to filter and organize information. There are many who simply refuse to believe in certain laws of physics. How can someone jump off a building and think they can fly when all evidence demonstrates otherwise? Because at the moment of their jump, they believe the laws of gravity don't apply to them and they can actually beat these laws.

We write off certain things as untrue in our past simply because they are too horrible to admit and too troubling to face. The facts and evidences are there, but we take them in through our emotions and beliefs. There is no such thing as bare-facts. No facts are bare because they all have to be interpreted by someone.

So even if we're provided with a lengthy syllogism, keeping all rules of logic intact, we have already chosen on the outset, based upon how we see the world and ourselves, whether or not we will take in an argument as true or not. It isn't logic alone that wins the day, or we'd all look and speak like Spock!

Instead of giving us such an argument, God has provided for us something far better. He's given us an infallible, inescapable, water-tight, and unquestionable person with no holes, no errors, and no fallibility in Him. There is no escaping Him!

As you look at Jesus' life you see someone who was constantly seeking out the broken and curious and welcoming them into fellowship with him. He seems to be the most inclusive human that ever lived. He welcomed the poor, the marginalized, women, children, prostitutes, tax-collectors, lepers, gentiles, drunks, and those spurned by society as the dregs.

When we look at Jesus' life, we should be utterly fascinated by His gracious inclusivity. Not only would these actions be incredible today, they were scandalous back then.

Yet at the same that time He opens his arms to welcome in, he also makes startling and, what appears to be, blasphemous and incredulous claims about Himself. By anyone's standard, He had an utter God complex.

He claims that He's going to judge the world. He claims to be both the author and giver or life. He claims that He alone has the authority to forgive sins. He claims that He is equal with the Father.

He dares to say to the world, "I am the bread of life. I am the light of the world. I am the door. I am the good shepherd. I am the resurrection and the life. I am the way, the truth, and the life. I am the true vine," and if that weren't enough, He says that He is the great I AM which is to say that He's God come in the flesh.

Now, this is way off the charts of megalomania if you're truly hearing what He's saying and don't believe Him. We are so used to hearing these claims that we take them for granted.

This is way beyond what anyone has ever said of themselves, even in a mental institution. So why do we love Him? His claims are outrageous, yet no one's life has ever been so beautiful, so loving, so compassionate, so kind and so humble. We look at Him and can't turn away. Why?

The Story of Charles Templeton

There is a story in the book Case for Faith by Lee Stobel, where Lee interviews a man who was an evangelist and contemporary of Billy Graham. This man actually gathered larger crowds and was considered a better preacher than Mr. Graham. But after a few years preaching, he was still looking for an inescapable, infallible, water-tight argument for the claims Jesus made. He didn't get the answers he was seeking, so he eventually quit the ministry and became an agnostic.

He then spent the rest of his years attacking Christianity as an implausible faith. He wanted to chip away at the arguments of Christianity, so he devoted his life, until his recent death from Alzheimer's, try to disprove the arguments of Christianity.

Yet, when Lee Stobel, who was a Chicago Tribune writer and past atheist, came to interview him for the book and to ask why he was no longer a Christian, something happened in the interview with this 83-year-old man that caught Lee off guard. As Lee was asking Mr. Templeton about his intellectual reasons for disbelief in God, the response he received from this man was startling:

"The atheist says there is no God," he replied. "The Christian and Jew say there is a God. The agnostic says, 'I cannot know.' Not do not know, but cannot know. I never would presume to say flatly that there is no God. I don't know everything; I'm not the embodiment of wisdom. But it is not possible for me to believe in God."

I hesitated to ask the next question. "As you get older," I began in a tentative tone, "and you're facing a disease that's always fatal, do you - "

"Worry about being wrong?" he interjected. He smiled. "No, I don't."

"Why not?"

"Because I have spent a lifetime thinking about it. If this were a simplistic conclusion reached on a whim, that would be different. But it's impossible for me - impossible - to believe that there is any thing, or person, or being that could be described as a loving God who could allow what happens in our world daily."

"Would you like to believe?" I asked.

"Of course!" he exclaimed. "If I could, I would. I'm eighty-three years old. I've got Alzheimer's. I'm dying, for goodness sake. But I've spent my life thinking about it and I'm not going to change now.

Lee Strobel then switches the topic from arguments about Jesus to the person of Jesus Himself.

And what about Jesus? I wanted to know what Templeton thought of the cornerstone of Christianity. "Do you believe Jesus ever lived?" I asked.

"No question," came the quick reply.

"Did he think he was God?"

He shook his head. "That would have been the last thought that would have entered his mind."

"And his teaching - did you admire what he taught?"

"Well, he wasn't a very good preacher. What he said was too simple. He hadn't thought about it. He hadn't agonized over the biggest question there is to ask."

"Which is . . ."

"Is there a God? How could anyone believe in a God who does, or allows, what goes on in the world?"

"And so how do you assess this Jesus?" It seemed like the next logical question - but I wasn't ready for the response it would evoke.

Templeton's body language softened. It was as if he suddenly felt relaxed and comfortable in talking about an old and dear friend. His voice, which at times had displayed such a sharp and insistent edge, now took on a melancholy and reflective tone. His guard seemingly down, he spoke in an unhurried pace, almost nostalgically, carefully choosing his words as he talked about Jesus.

"He was," Templeton began, "the greatest human being who has ever lived. He was a moral genius. His ethical sense was unique. He was the intrinsically wisest person that I've ever encountered in my life or in my readings. His commitment was total and led to his own death, much to the detriment of the world. What could one say about him except that this was a form of greatness?"

I was taken aback. "You sound like you really care about him," I said.

"Well, yes, he's the most important thing in my life," came his reply. "I . . . I . . . I," he stuttered, searching for the right word, "I know it may sound strange, but I have to say. . . I adore him."

I wasn't sure how to respond. "You say that with some emotion," I said.

"Well, yes. Everything good I know, everything decent I know, everything pure I know, I learned from Jesus. Yes . . . yes. And tough! Just look at Jesus. He castigated people. He was angry. People don't think of him that way, but they don't read the Bible. He had a righteous anger. He cared for the oppressed and exploited. There's no question that he had the highest moral standard, the least duplicity, the greatest compassion, of any human being in history. There have been many other wonderful people, but Jesus is Jesus."

"And so the world would do well to emulate him?"

"Oh, my goodness, yes! I have tried - and try is as far as I can go - to act as I have believed he would act. That doesn't mean I could read his mind, because one of the most fascinating things about him was that he often did the opposite thing you'd expect - "

Abruptly, Templeton cut short his thoughts. There was a pause. He glanced up, he looked across the room, he seemed to want to focus anywhere but on me. He was suddenly self-conscious, almost embarrassed, apparently uncertain whether he should continue.

He sighed. "But, no," he said slowly, "in my view. . . ."

Now there was a catch in his voice; he inhaled deeply to try to stop from crying. But as he turned toward me, I watched as tears flooded his eyes.

"In my view," he struggled to say, "he is the most important human being who has ever existed." His voice cracking, he uttered the words I never expected to hear him say: "And if I may put it this way - I . . . miss . . . him." With that, he broke down sobbing. He turned his head and looked downward, raising his left hand to shield his face from me. His shoulders bobbed; his right hand wiped away tears.

What was going on? Was this an unguarded glimpse into his soul? I felt drawn to him and wanted to comfort him; at the same time, the journalist in me wanted to dig to the core of what was prompting this reaction. Missed him why? Missed him how?

In a gentle voice, I asked, "In what way?"

Templeton fought to compose himself. I could tell it wasn't like him to lose control in front of a stranger. He breathed deeply. After a few more awkward moments, he waved his hand dismissively.

"Well," he whispered, as much to himself as to me. Again he halted, then drew a deep breath. "Enough of that."

He sniffed and cleared his throat, then leaned forward to pick up his coffee. More quietly and yet more adamantly, he murmured again: "Enough of that."

He took a sip, holding the cup tightly in both hands as if drawing warmth from it. It was clear that he wanted to pretend this unvarnished look into his soul had never happened.

Over the centuries many have looked at Jesus and examined Him again and again and came away worshipping Him. They understood that He must have been who He claimed to be. He was utterly inescapable for them.

If you're standing on a hill on a clear day with the noon-day sun, in all its glory, warming your face and someone comes along and says, "I can prove to you the sun exists and is hot," you'd simply say, "Great, but I already know. I don't need your long chain of reasoning. I know it, I see it myself."

How do you know there is a glorious God? How do you know that God is at work in history? How do you know that His Word is true? Luke shows us that it's not through an infallible and inescapable argument, but through an infallible and inescapable person. And in the end, there can be no argument against Him.

As the Apostle Paul said:

2 Corinthians 4:6: "For God, who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness,' has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."

It's in the face of Jesus Christ! When we see Him living, speaking, interacting with others we look at His life and can not run.

Are there some of you here like Charles Templeton, who are waiting for an infallible and inescapable argument when God has sent you an inescapable person? You may wait forever and end up missing Jesus like this man, and, in the face of Jesus and all His beauty, let your need for lengthy reasoning give way to the One your argument is about. This doesn't mean you shouldn't ask questions, it simply means that your questions will only be answered when you come to see Jesus for who He is.

Doesn't God have the right to send you a person instead of an argument? What if the person is the argument? What if God knew that all your speculation, conjecture, opinion, perception, and perspectives will only bring you to more questions and instead he sealed His argument in a person whom you are simply to behold and love!

Luke not only teaches us that JESUS is our true story, but that Jesus is our TRUE story.

II. Jesus is Our TRUE Story

The story is true! Luke now takes on the popular belief in our day that we can look at Jesus all we want, but we can't really trust the information. Most would be fine looking at Christ as a matter of interest. He's the most dominant figure the history of man has ever known. More books have been written about Him, more paintings have been painted of Him, more songs have been sung about Him than any other figure, ever.

We're simply told that it's okay to look at Him, but we really can't believe the information about Him. It's allegory. It's myth. It's legend, were told. Luke goes right after that in verses 2 and 3 as he tells us three things that happened.

Remember, he wants Theophilus to understand who Jesus is and what He's done. Luke interviewed all these people, traveled to gather the accounts so that he could present to Theophilus a detailed report. He tells Theophilus three things in these two verses.

There were eye witnesses

Who delivered what they saw

I have followed all things closely to deliver an account

Let's look at the first one:

1- There were eye witnesses

Verse 2: "just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses"

Jesus says that He taught openly in the synagogues and didn't keep it a secret (john 18:20). In Acts we're told that the things done weren't done in a corner. Jesus' ministry was totally public. Thousands and thousands saw what He did, both friends and enemies. There were eye witnesses...

2- Who delivered what they saw

Verse 2: "eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us"

The eyewitnesses took what they saw and delivered them. This is an interesting word, delivered. We can't really get the full meaning in our English equivalence.

The Greek word for "delivered" is the word paradidomi. This is a very interesting word, which quite of bit of study has been done over the last 25 years. It was an important practice called paradosis in which a student would learn from a teacher, commit to memory what that teacher taught, and would pass down that body of truth without any editing or altering. If a student was to be off or wrong on what the teacher had said or did, they were cast out and not allowed to be taught by the teacher any longer. It was a very important practice in this oral culture so that the truth of a person and his words were not made more or less than what they were. You couldn't add, subtract, embellish, or change the body of truth in any way.

3- I have followed all things closely to deliver an account

Verse 3: "it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you..."

Luke is saying that he has various eyewitnesses that have delivered (paradidomi) down to us these accounts and Luke's job was to cull together these accounts, verify them, and write an account from these various eye witness sources.

This smacks in the face of our modern arguments that these accounts were never written to be taken literally, they were only allegorical or legends.

Luke's point in these two verses is that they are to be understood, thought about, considered, and believed! The exact opposite of how we're told to read these words. Do you honestly think Luke would be okay with us saying to him, "Well, Luke really didn't mean this, he wrote it to be legendary"? I think the good Doctor Luke would take us to task because he's telling us what his intentions are, and he should know since he was the author! We're not allowed to read a report of some event and totally interpret that event any which way we choose without consulting the author's purpose for writing. It's insulting, and frankly we wouldn't allow it if happened to us.

The Gospel of Luke raises three reasons why this gospel can not be the result of legendary accretion. We see them here in these verses, and we'll see them again and again as we look at the person of Christ over the next several weeks. This account of Jesus can not be mere legend because...

The timing of the letter is too early

The content is too counterproductive

The style of the letter is too detailed

1- The timing is too early to be legend

Next to the Bible, the most manuscripts we have for a work of antiquity is Homer's Iliad, which is considered to be 95% accurate and the best preserved work outside of the Bible. However, these works were written some 500 years after the events. Yet, literary historians can claim its accuracy based upon 643 manuscripts which have been found.

As I said, next to the Scriptures this is considered the best preserved work of antiquity. But put side-by-side with the Bible, and you find that for the New Testament alone, the accuracy is considered 99.5% from the manuscripts and that .5% is simple spelling or grammatical errors which have absolutely no bearing upon any doctrine of our faith. The total supporting New Testament base is around 25,000 and the number of copies is about 5,600! The entire New Testament was completed within 65 years of the events. This means that many works were completed just 15-30 years after the events. Compare this to the Iliad which was written 500 years after, Aristotle which was 1,400 years after, and Caesar which was 1,000 years after, and you have the most amazing piece of historical literature ever written by man.

The timing is simply too early for the work to be legend. Otherwise, all major works of antiquity have to be discarded and never looked at with hope of any accuracy again since they start at 500 years after the events.

If I wanted to claim that in 1990 a giant snail, the size of the mall, hovered over Hotel Del and then vanished into space, and 25,000 people saw it happen, I would need to be prepared to have my claims questioned. Most everyone there would still be alive and those who claimed to be there could be questioned to verify they saw the snail.

However, if I claimed it happened in 1790 and 500 people saw it, one could not prove or disprove but only speculate that it didn't happen because we couldn't prove that it did. This long after can be legend, but not 20 years!

Legends are legends when there can be no eye-witness checks to an event that was written a few centuries after the facts. Yet Luke wrote within 25-35 years after these events and you can't just make these things up without them being open to public scrutiny. The enemies of the Gospel would have had plenty to help their case against the Gospel, but they never argued the facts of the events. That was never the problem.

We are told that Jesus fed 5,000 men, which would have been about 15,000-20,000 people without this being open to scrutiny. 20,000 people had to have something happen or it would have been quickly dismissed. Paul says in 1 Cor. 15 that 500 people saw Jesus raised from the dead at once. You don't put this in a public document unless you're willing to back it up. It would have been suicide if it was a fabrication. These things were done in the open and you could simply go up and speak to those that were there and saw Him.

II. The content is too counterproductive to be legend

One of opinions we hear about the reliability of the Scripture is that the reason we can't believe the story of Jesus is true is because those who wrote it had an agenda and wanted you to believe.

We're told you can't trust anyone who has an agenda. I believe we can trust the reliability because they had an agenda. They tried to tell of the things that were true rather than what would spread the message most easily.

Most of what Christianity claimed in its message was considered confusing, ridiculous and offensive to first century hearers. Of course they were trying to promote who Jesus was and what He did. But in doing so, they were promoting a message that would have been utterly counterproductive to those hearing it. It would have never been made up by a group trying to promote an agenda or else they would have made it far more appealing and attractive and far less offensive.

Think of the account of the death of Jesus: He's in the garden and basically asking God if it would be okay for Him to get Him off the hook. You don't make up a story of your Messiah wanting to get off the hook of the most important thing He was about to endure if you wanted Him to be seen as attractive in this time.

Then, on the cross, we're told that Jesus cried out, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?" (Mark 15:34). Who would try to promote Christianity with such counterproductive information unless it actually happened? This would have been confusing and offensive to first century ears.

Consider the birth of Jesus: He's born from an unwed mother! This would have been scandalous and not something you promoted or wanted people to know. We know from the reaction of the religious leaders of His time that He was considered an illegitimate son and therefore a disgrace.

Who were the witnesses of the birth? Shepherds, the dregs of society, whose testimony could not be trusted. They were utterly despised by decent people.

Who were the first witnesses to attest to Jesus' resurrection? Women! Women in this time were looked at with such inferiority that their testimony was not admissible evidence in court. Why would you choose women to be the first witnesses of the resurrection? You wouldn't, unless it was true. It would have been too damaging if you were writing it to be easily accepted. The only legitimate historical reason for such counterproductive statements is that it must have happened.

III. The style of the letter is too detailed to be a legend.

The Gospel stories are filled with narratively unnecessary detail.

In the story of Jesus stilling the storm, we're told that he was sleeping. Why? We don't know, it doesn't say. Just that he was sleeping. Does it move the narrative along? No. Is it necessary? No.

In John 21, after they see the risen Christ on the shore, they come ashore and bring there 153 fish with them. Yep, 153. What does that have to do with the story? Nothing. It's unnecessary detail unless there were...yep, 153 fish. Why do we need to know there were 153 fish? We don't, it's just there.

The New Testament is filled with this unnecessary detail. Why don't we see this when we read stories of Hercules? Why don't we read this in the stories of King Arthur? Because this style of writing didn't come about until about 250-300 years ago when we began to write realistic fiction and started adding details to give an air of realism. However, in the time of the gospels, this kind of writing was simply not heard of unless the unnecessary detail was true and the author remembered it.

Legends simply weren't written like this. C.S. Lewis, a literary professor at Cambridge, put it like this to the critics of the Bible:

If he [the Bible critic] tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance, I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavour, not how many years he has spent on that Gospel...I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life. I know what they are like. I know that not one of them are like this...Of the Gospel texts, there are only two possible views; either this is reportage, or else, some unknown ancient writer without known predecessors or successors suddenly anticipated the whole technique of modernistic, novelistic, realistic narrative. The reader who doesn't see this simply has not learned to read.

This simply can not be legend. The timing is too early, the content is too counterproductive, and the literary style is too detailed.

Luke is going through tremendous pains to tell excellent Theophilus that it's true! Don't believe because it's exciting, though it is. Don't believe the Gospel because it will meet your needs, though it will. Don't believe the Gospel because it will give you a personal relationship with God, though it will. Believe the Gospel because it's true!

If the story of Jesus isn't true, it is of no real help for you. It might be a touching story for you. It might be intellectually stimulating. It might be moving. But if it's not true, it won't help you.

Most San Diegans will hear this and say, "Wait a minute, it does touch me and make me feel close to God. It does move me. It works for me. Whether it's true for someone else doesn't matter, it's true for me."

If it's not true for everyone it can't work at all. How? Well, JESUS is our true story. Jesus is our TRUE story. Now, we see that Jesus is our true STORY.

III. Jesus is Our True STORY

Verse 1: "Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us"

Luke is putting together a "narrative." The Greek word is di_gesis and means "story." Luke is saying that his purpose is not to compile a list of the teachings of Jesus. It's not to create a mix tape of the greatest hits of Jesus. When we look at other religions, that's what we get.

But this is not a compendium of the teachings of Jesus. It's not an account of the sayings of Jesus. It's not little portraits of his actions as a moral example for us to follow. The Gospel is a story.

In our day, "story" has connotations of fiction attached to it. We just said that this story is about Jesus and that it's true. But it is a story. This is significant.

The fact that it's a story means that it's not the teachings of Jesus but the actions and accomplishments of Jesus that save you. If it's the teachings of Jesus that save you, then basically what saves you is how you live. But if this is a story of the actions and accomplishments of Jesus, then you can be saved by grace.

All other religions' founders essentially base your following them upon what they taught. It doesn't really matter if their miracles happened or not. It doesn't really matter whether they could do this or that. What mattered was their teaching. It's not what they accomplished that saves you but their teaching that saves you. In these religions you're saved by how you live. If you live up to their teaching, then you are accepted. The religion really isn't based upon the person but the teaching of the person. They're not calling you to look at them as your security, but look at what they said and to go do it.

If you really read the teachings of Jesus and let the weight of what He said we should do sink in, it doesn't become inspirational, encouraging, or moving, it becomes horrific and frightening. If you think Jesus' teaching is morally uplifting, you've never really understood it.

Most of us have read the Sermon on the Mount. How does it make you feel when you read it? Inspired? Or, do you cringe at what Jesus is saying about our hearts and how we've murdered if we've ever hated, we've committed adultery if we've ever lusted? It is a call to be perfect like Him, and we see that we're not.

Jesus doesn't just require that you give all your money away, but to do it joyfully. He doesn't just forbid our killing someone; He forbids our disdaining someone, belittling someone, or treating someone with indifference. Jesus doesn't just tell us that we can't act in revenge to our enemies, but that we have to love them and pray for them. Jesus doesn't just forbid worrying; He says we are to be happy and content with whatever situation we're in.

What is so devastating about this teaching is that we want to live by people who are like this. This is how we want our world to be. This is how we should live. But, this is not me, and it is impossible to do so in the way He's requiring.

The only reasonable response to a book of Jesus' teaching in the Sermon on the Mount is, "God save me from the Sermon on the Mount. It exposes me, it condemns me, it shows me that I can't do it." Jesus teaching is nothing but an eternal horror unless it is connected to His story.

We don't need more information on how to live the right kind of life. We need the actions and accomplishments of Jesus who in this story breaks into history and lives the life we should have lived, and dies the death we deserve and should have died. We don't just need a teacher; we need a Savior! We don't need someone who just tells us what to do, but Someone who's done it for us!

This is why the story of Jesus has to be true for everyone or it doesn't work for anyone. The accounts of Buddha or Mohammed work for their followers whether what they did in history was true or not. They work because in their system, the purpose of their miracles is teach us to live a certain way and tell us to do certain things.

But with Jesus, His miracles are not there to simply inspire us; they're there to save us! His miraculous birth, life, and resurrection have to have happened or they can never save us.

How in the birth of Jesus are we inspired? Does it inspire you to be a shepherd? Does it inspire us to live in a manger? Does it inspire us to give birth outdoors? Does it inspire us to become pregnant teenagers and have children outside of marriage? Seriously, does this miracle teach us something or accomplish history and therefore save us? As an inspiring story it's useless; but as a fact it changes everything we know.

If it's a true story, it means God has landed and there's hope that one day death and injustice will be gone because the King has come.

If you know that you're saved not by the teachings of Jesus but by the actions of Jesus then you know you're saved by grace. This changes everything. It is the true story of Jesus that saves you.

Why is it being a story so important? Because a story has a hero. It has a villain that is against the characters of the story, and a hero steps in to save the character. If this is true, who's the hero of your story? Then who is the hero of your friend's story, your family's story, or your spouse's story? Yes, the only hero of their story has to be Jesus. He's the only true hero in history.

At the end of Luke, in chapter 24, we see the story of Jesus on the road to Emmaus as he comes along two men as a mysterious stranger and begins to talk with them. They're totally downcast and depressed and have utterly given up hope. They even snap at him in v. 18.

They had hoped that this Messiah whom they had put their trust would be their hero, and instead he died.

Jesus then opens the Scriptures to them and teaches them from Moses and all the Prophets everything concerning Himself (v. 27).

Do you know why you're despondent? Do you know why you've almost given up hope? Do you know why you're so confused about your life and yourself? Because you've read the Bible but you don't know who the Hero is.

Who is the Bible about? You or the Hero, Jesus? Are all the stories in the Bible about us or about Jesus? The reason we get so screwed up is because we think Jesus came to teach and this made the Bible basically about us following this teaching.

The two most widely read authors in the English speaking language were JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis. It's interesting that these men were dear friends.

One day, Tolkien and Lewis were walking at Oxford and Lewis was telling Tolkien how much he loved the heroes of stories and he wished they weren't all myths.

Tolkien responded by telling him they're not all myths. Lewis wanted to know what he meant and Tolkien told him that the story of Sleeping Beauty points to the truth that true, untainted love can break the most powerful evil spell. The story of Beauty and the Beast points to the truth that sacrificial love can transform the most hideous horror. Then consider Jesus, a story of a child born to a virgin, hunted down by an insane king who wanted to murder Him. He grows up to be the true King of Kings and Lord of Lords and He's taken by the rulers of the world and killed. But, He doesn't stay in the grave, He rises again to defeat His enemies and lives victoriously to this day! Isn't that a great story?

But this story isn't just another story in a succession of stories. Jesus Christ is the truth to which all great stories point. Jesus is the prince, who can break the spell with his kiss. Jesus is the beauty that can transform horror. Jesus is the hero of heroes. He's come into the world's story and has promised to slay every dragon, and remove every evil spell, and one day every tear will be wiped away by His loving hand. He says, "Come with Me," and He'll enter into our lives and be the Hero of our stories as we are all taken up into His great drama of history.

Do you believe this? It's true.

This message was developed in large part from Dr. Tim Keller's series on "The Meaning of Jesus" part I. Dr. Keller is pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City. I strongly suggest getting his messages on the person of Christ through www.redeemer2.com