Discussion Questions

The speaker imagines Mary with the alabaster jar realizing, “He owes me nothing and I owe him everything”; what does that picture suggest about Jesus’s worth and our posture toward him, and what would have to change in your life for that kind of “wasteful” devotion to feel reasonable? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Mary’s “He owes me nothing and I owe him everything” show about how valuable Jesus is and how we should treat him? What would need to change in your life for that kind of “too much” devotion to make sense to you?

The speaker insists we should read “Christ” as “the Anointed King,” not as Jesus’s last name; how does that translation reshape what you think “the gospel of Christ” actually announces, and how does it confront privatized “Jesus-and-me” Christianity? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “Christ” means “the Anointed King,” how does that change what you think “the gospel of Christ” is saying? How does it challenge a private “just me and Jesus” kind of faith?

Walking through the Old Testament leadership eras (patriarchs, prophets/judges, kings, priests), the speaker says none was ideal and each foreshadowed Jesus as the “patriarch of patriarchs,” perfect prophet, merciful high priest, righteous king/judge; what does this argument reveal about God’s long-term purpose in history, and what kind of ruler God is determined to be for his people? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does it show about God’s plan that every Old Testament leader type fell short but pointed forward to Jesus? What does that tell you about the kind of ruler God wants to be for his people?

Using 1 Samuel 8 and Hosea 13, the speaker claims Israel’s desire for an earthly king was rejecting God as King and that “God is restoring his rule in Jesus”; where do you see modern Christian ways of “asking for a king” (seeking rival authorities), and how does that show up in what we excuse, fear, or defend? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What are some ways Christians today still “ask for a king” by trusting other authorities more than God? How do you see that in what we excuse, fear, or fiercely defend?

The speaker contrasts “the gospel of the kingdom” with what he calls the “save-me gospel,” pointing to Jesus’s repeated kingdom preaching and the relative scarcity of “saved” language in the gospels; what parts of your evangelism, church culture, or personal assurance might need to be re-evaluated if the centerpiece is King and Kingdom rather than individual afterlife security? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the main message is God’s Kingdom and Jesus as King, not just “how to be saved,” what might need to change in your evangelism, church culture, or what makes you feel secure with God? What have you been putting at the center that might not belong there?

He describes a pattern of preachers “nullifying” Jesus’s teachings (especially the Sermon on the Mount) by making exceptions or pushing them to “another time,” then asks, “What if Jesus really meant everything he said?”—what specific teachings of Jesus do you most feel tempted to treat as ideals instead of commands, and what reasons do you use to justify that move? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What if Jesus really meant what he said in his teachings, like the Sermon on the Mount? Which commands do you most want to treat as “nice ideals,” and what excuses do you use for that?

The speaker uses Matthew 5:19 (“relaxes… teaches others… least in the kingdom”) and 2 John 1:9 (“does not abide in the teachings of Christ does not have God”) to make obedience to Jesus’s teaching a dividing line; how does that sit with common evangelical ideas about grace and assurance, and what would a church look like that actually feared being “least” for relaxing Jesus’s commands? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How do you feel about the idea that obeying Jesus’s teaching is a big dividing line for who truly belongs to God? What would a church look like that seriously feared becoming “least in the kingdom” by loosening Jesus’s commands?

He appeals to Polycarp (a disciple of John) to show early Christians assumed Jesus’s teachings were meant to be practiced (forgiving, refusing retaliation, mercy, poverty/persecution beatitudes); what does that early post-apostolic witness suggest about how the first generations understood discipleship, and where do you think we would label their ethic as “extreme” today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Polycarp and other early Christians show about how the first believers thought Jesus’s teachings should be lived out? Which parts of their way of life would people today call “too extreme,” and why?

The speaker argues the kingdom is “at least a part… now” (kingdom “in your midst,” sons of the kingdom, “engage in business until I come,” and the warning of enemies being “slaughtered”); how does this “present reign” emphasis challenge comfortable Christianity that delays obedience until later, and what “we do not want this man to reign over us” attitudes might exist in supposedly Christian hearts? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Jesus’s reign is already happening in some way right now, how does that push back on “I’ll obey later” Christianity? Where might we secretly think, “I don’t want him to rule over me,” even if we call ourselves Christian?

In the final section, the speaker claims grace “trains” us to renounce ungodliness (Titus 2), that gifts can have conditions (China apartment analogy), and that belief is inseparable from obedience (John 3:36; Hebrews 3:18); what conditions did he list for receiving the gift (belief, repentance, forgiving, walking in the light, obeying, baptism, communion, not continuing in disqualifying sins), and which of those most exposes where you’ve separated “faith” from concrete obedience? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What “conditions” did he say go with receiving God’s gift (like belief, repentance, forgiving, obeying, baptism, communion, walking in the light, and not staying in serious sin)? Which one most shows where you’ve separated “faith” from actually obeying Jesus?