This Good Friday sermon, preached by Rev Greg Matthews at Hamilton Presbyterian Church, is grounded in Numbers 21:4–9. It offers a solid and faithful exposition of a challenging Old Testament passage that typologically points to Christ’s crucifixion. It deserves recognition for its clear biblical foundation, doctrinal soundness, and pastoral earnestness. At the same time, there are opportunities to deepen the sermon’s theological and experiential impact of the necessity of the new birth by balancing the emphasis on original sin with a fuller exposition of personal sin, by pressing more forcefully the seriousness of complaining against God’s providential care.
The sermon begins by recounting the Israelites’ journey through the wilderness, focusing on their impatience and rebellion as they spoke against God and Moses, complaining about the lack of bread, water, and the quality of their food. The preacher rightly identifies this as a failure to trust God’s providence despite His repeated miraculous provisions: the deliverance from Egypt, the defeat of enemies, the provision of water from the rock, and manna from heaven.
This failure to trust is not merely a surface complaint but a fundamental breach of covenant relationship with a holy and sovereign God.
The preacher’s emphasis on original sin as the root cause of Israel’s rebellion is theologically sound and consistent with Reformed orthodoxy. He traces the distrust of God back to Adam and Eve’s fall in the Garden of Eden, where they believed Satan’s lie that God was withholding something good from them. This foundational distrust corrupted human nature, making sin automatic and pervasive. The sermon rightly teaches that sin flows from a lack of faith and trust in God’s goodness and wisdom, which aligns with the Westminster Standards’ teaching on original sin as hereditary corruption and guilt affecting all mankind.
However, this strong emphasis on original sin tends to overshadow the concrete personal sins of the Israelites in the Numbers episode. The sermon mentions their impatience and complaints but does not fully unpack the specific nature and gravity of their sin in its covenantal context. The rebellion was a direct rejection of God’s covenant promises and providential care, a willful ingratitude and distrust that deserved the severe judgment of a snake plague. This personal sin was not a mere symptom of a sinful nature but a serious covenant breach with deadly consequences.
Reformed theology insists on the seriousness and aggravations of sin, including ingratitude, impatience, and distrust, which the sermon could have pressed more forcefully. By doing so, the preacher would better awaken hearers to the gravity of their own complaining and distrust in God’s providence today. Complaining against God’s providential care in our walk is a serious personal sin that spoils God’s good creation and incurs His just wrath. The sermon’s pastoral force would be strengthened by a clearer application of this truth, helping hearers see their own sins as not only natural but also culpable and deserving of judgment. God’s providential governing of the world, including that of his people, is frequently ascribed to “good luck” or “bad luck” for instance. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time, bad circumstances and many other terms, are terms that are frequently employed when events do not turn out the way we expected. In reality, such language robs God of his reigning purposes and assumes we deserve a better deal. This sermon had the framework to bring this state of the heart before the congregation but it failed to make that link.
However, the sermon’s typological connection between the bronze serpent lifted up by Moses and Christ lifted up on the cross is a highlight of its doctrinal fidelity. The preacher correctly teaches that the bronze serpent symbolized the punishment for sin and that looking to it in faith brought healing and life. This points forward to Christ’s atoning sacrifice, who bore the punishment for sin and was lifted up on the cross so that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life. This Christ-centered exposition aligns with the Westminster Confession’s teaching on Christ as the only mediator who satisfies divine justice and grants salvation to the elect.
The sermon calls hearers to faith and repentance, emphasizing that trust in Christ is the means of salvation. It warns against rejecting this simple faith, paralleling those Israelites who refused to look at the bronze serpent and died. This call to conscience-level application is pastorally appropriate and experientially vital, confronting hearers with the realities of God’s holiness, human guilt, and divine judgment.
While the sermon implies the necessity of regeneration through faith, it would benefit from a more explicit teaching on the new birth and union with Christ. Defining regeneration more clearly would deepen the experiential theological force, helping hearers understand that faith is not merely intellectual assent but a spiritual rebirth wrought by the Holy Spirit. Likewise, a clearer distinction between justification and sanctification would avoid any potential confusion and enrich the pastoral application. Unpacking the similarities between the Israelite’s grumbling and our own “hidden” grumbling would clearly have shown the problem to be universal and thus requiring a person to be born again.
The sermon’s forensic structure is strong, maintaining the biblical categories of sin’s guilt, punishment, and Christ’s substitutionary atonement. It avoids therapeutic or moralistic reductionism, focusing instead on the forensic realities of sin and salvation. The preacher’s use of vivid illustrations, such as the camping story with snakes, effectively engages the audience and makes the spiritual truths concrete without resorting to sensationalism.
To enhance the sermon’s covenantal and experiential depth, the preacher might also incorporate the moral law’s convicting use, showing how God’s law exposes sin and drives sinners to Christ. This would help hearers see their complaining and distrust not only as symptoms of a sinful nature but as personal violations of God’s righteous law, calling for repentance and faith.
In summary, this Good Friday sermon is an encouraging example of faithful biblical exposition and Reformed doctrinal teaching. It rightly emphasizes the seriousness of sin as distrust and rebellion against a holy God, the just punishment of death, and the gracious provision of salvation through faith in Christ crucified. Its Christ-centered typology and call to faith are pastorally sound and experientially significant.
At the same time, the sermon would be strengthened by a more balanced emphasis that includes a fuller exposition of the personal sin of Israel’s rebellion, pressing the seriousness of complaining against God’s providence today. Explicit teaching on regeneration and union with Christ, along with a clearer distinction between justification and sanctification, would deepen the experiential impact. Incorporating the convicting use of the moral law would also enhance the sermon’s covenantal coherence and pastoral effectiveness.
Such improvements would bring the sermon into even closer alignment with the Westminster Standards and classic Reformed theology, enriching its theological precision, experiential seriousness, and pastoral usefulness. Nevertheless, as it stands, the sermon is a faithful and sober proclamation of the gospel on Good Friday, calling sinners to look to Jesus crucified and find life. For this series of “The New Birth in Exile”, this sermon has not exiled the new birth, but it has not pressed its necessity either.
