The Sutherby’s Ministry with InFaith

06/10/2026

I know many solid Christians who attribute Paul’s experience in Romans 7 to his life before Christ. But that interpretation has never sat well with me.

He is speaking in the present tense throughout the passage, with no indication of a shift to his past experience. In fact, Paul uses the present tense roughly 40 times in Romans 7:14–25.

Additionally, he has already made clear earlier in Romans that those without Christ do no good—“no, not one”—and do not even desire God. It’s difficult for me to imagine Paul describing himself as an unsaved person who “joyfully concurs with the law of God.” Throughout Romans 7, he repeatedly says, “I want to do good,” yet “I do the very thing I hate.” Would an unregenerate person truly say they hate their sin and desire to do good? That seems inconsistent with the universal sinfulness Paul describes in Romans 3.

Yes, he calls himself “wretched,” but that word doesn’t necessarily mean utterly depraved, sinful, and without Christ. In modern Christian vernacular, it has taken on that stronger sense. Originally, however, it simply conveyed the idea of someone who is conflicted or enduring a trial, test, or inner struggle—which is exactly what Paul is describing in Romans 7.

I think our pre-determined biases sometimes shade how we interpret the text. Either Paul is unsaved in Romans 7 but experiencing a conflict between his flesh and some inner desire to serve and live for God (which seems unlikely given how he has already described unregenerate humanity). Or Paul is saved in Romans 7 and is experiencing the conflict between his new inner man in Christ and his flesh—something every Christian faces.

06/08/2026

I have always been of the mind that “speaking the truth” is, by default, always done in love because telling someone when they are in error is better for them than allowing them to continue in error—especially if that error has eternal ramifications.

While it may be loving to always tell the truth, often that shades into being unkind in how we deliver the truth. This is especially true on social media (where I am often the most guilty). The rationale is something like this: “Facts don’t care about your feelings. I am telling you the truth though, and your feelings are irrelevant.” But often we don’t take care to try to mitigate the hurt as much as possible. The truth hurts, so why care if we hurt people with the truth?

But the Scriptures say, “If possible, as much as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18). If someone is hurt by the truth, but we’ve not done all we could to make sure it’s delivered peacefully, then we’re in the wrong also.

Colossians 4:6 says, “Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt.”

Ephesians 4:29 says, “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.”

1 Peter 3:15 says, “But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.”

In a similar situation, the Scriptures say, “Be angry, and yet do not sin.” It’s not that Christians aren’t supposed to be angry. We’re actually commanded here to be angry. But anger is a volatile emotion and it’s so easy to sin while being angry.

Truth is also volatile, especially to those who, by nature, reject truth. Maybe we could say, “Speak truth, and yet do not sin.”

We’re commanded, as believers, to speak the truth in love and be gracious, kind, gentle, and peaceful. In other words, speak the truth and display the fruit of the Spirit. If speaking the truth was, by default, done in love, then the Scriptures wouldn’t add all of these qualifiers.

I wonder if sometimes people reject truth because it’s delivered by our flesh and not by the Spirit.

06/08/2026

Grace+Legalism=Legalism

From episode 200 of “Faith in Focus”

06/03/2026

🎙️ Episode 200 of “Faith in Focus!”

❓ I had asked some people what topic I should cover for this milestone episode and one suggestion was the topic of legalism. I thought that was a great topic to discuss

In looking at Matthew 23 (and other passages) I focused on this definition of legalism that I came up with:

“Legalism is a set of rules—man-made or even biblical—applied in such a way that it muddies the Gospel of Grace, turns acceptance with God into something earned by works, and hinders the spiritual growth of ourselves and others.”

How has legalism impacted your relationship with Christ and with His people?

(Links in comments)

In episode 200, Dennis Sutherby discusses the harmful effects of le...

05/30/2026

Attended my first Pride event today. A few weeks ago I believe Jesus was calling me to simply go to this event. I didn’t know why and never got a clear answer but wanted to be obedient. So I did what I figured I could and that’s to simply talk to people there and ask them some questions and just listen to their stories and their history with Jesus and the Church

I had the chance to listen to a dozen or so people on the Pride side of the event and a half dozen Christians with signs on the other side of the street.

I had the pleasure of hearing some people’s stories, see a couple old friends, and share the Gospel with a few people willing to hear.

I’ll be doing a full podcast episode in a little bit as I process some of the interview clips

05/25/2026

Check it out InFaith peeps and supporters! Maybe I can get the author on “Faith in Focus”

05/23/2026

I found both of these books at the thrift store and they’ve both given voice to a truth that the Lord has been teaching me over the past few years.

“Discipled by Jesus” emphasizes the reality that Jesus is still alive and with us today. He’s not a dead figure we look back upon and emulate. We don’t have to see his interaction with the woman at the well and try to extract timeless wisdom and attempt to model those practices in our lives today (although God’s word still offers wisdom and this is perfectly acceptable). But, rather, Jesus can disciple us today as a resurrected Teacher and Pastor in how to live with those around us.

“The Forgotten Church” caught my eye because I did grow up on a rural, small town church. I’m a part of InFaith in which a large percentage of missionaries pastor small, rural churches. Some so small that they can’t afford a part-time, let alone a full-time pastor.

I recall, several years ago, noticing the fact that all of the hype and energy seemed to focus on urban ministry and inner city church plants. Resource and energy all funneled to those ministries and the rural, small town ministries suffered and were neglected.

Rural church Christians are always encouraged to care for the homeless and be racially diverse in their congregations (translation: don’t be so white). But, by and large, small town churches don’t face issues of homelessness (not that it doesn’t happen, just not at scale) and they tend to be racially homogenous. Why should small, rural churches and Christians be condemned for not being Christlike just because they issues they face are different than those in urban settings?

Likewise, there is an unspoken expectation that money, missionary support, and outreach should go from rural churches to “the real work God is doing” in the city. That thinking never seems to go the other way.

That always (and still does) bother me.

One of the lines in “the Forgotten Church” introduction says, “Just as the rural church needs the contribution of the urban church, so also the urban church needs the input and strength of the rural church.”

Rural churches may be able to provide able bodies, willing to give their time to help with inner city ministries and urban churches should be willing to provide finances to help support the practical needs of rural churches. I look forward to seeing other practical ways urban and rural churches can, and should, partner together as I read

05/20/2026

What’s the deal with Lordship Salvation? (You must read that in your best Jerry Seinfeld voice.)

Lordship Salvation posits that as a requirement for justification—to be born again—a person must submit to Jesus as Lord, not just as Savior. That sounds innocent enough; Jesus is Lord, after all.

But the devil (perhaps literally?) is in the details.
A summary of Lordship Salvation states: “genuine faith in Jesus Christ inherently involves not only trusting Him as Savior (for forgiveness of sins) but also submitting to Him as Lord (Master or Sovereign) of one’s life. This submission includes repentance from sin and a commitment to obedience.”

It defines repentance as more than just a change of mind; rather, it is “a turning from sin and self-rule… a willingness to abandon one’s former life.”

As Christians, we believe that salvation is by faith alone. Our works play absolutely no role in our salvation. Yet, Lordship Salvation equates saving faith with pledging a commitment to abandon our sin (ceasing negative works) and serving Jesus (actively doing good works).
This becomes utter nonsense when you read one of the pivotal verses on justification through the lens of the Lordship paradigm.

Romans 4:5 says, “But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.” In the realm of justification and obtaining righteousness, works and faith are polar opposites.

Under the Lordship framework, however, Romans 4:5 would essentially read: “But to the one who does not work, but pledges to work for Him who justifies the ungodly, his commitment to work is credited as righteousness.”

How is this fundamentally different from a works-based Gospel? "Salvation isn’t based on your works, but it is based on your promise to work?"

That’s like giving someone a car and telling them they don’t have to work at all to get it—it’s totally free—but they must make a commitment up front to pay for it later.

And that is my problem with Lordship Salvation.

05/12/2026

There’s a real danger in proof-texting, a practice in which a person cherry picks a verse to support their opinion.

Sometimes the verse may not mean what is being claimed, but the overall point may still be correct and biblical. Does that make it Ok, though?

In this episode I address an example in which Mark Driscoll does this with 1 Timothy 5:8

(Links in comments to other podcast platforms)

In this episode, Dennis delves into the interpretation of biblical passages, focusing on Mark Driscoll's use of 1 Timothy 5:8 and the dangers of misinterpret...

05/12/2026

If there are aliens somewhere out there in the Universe, does it change anything about Christianity?

God is still the Creator. Jesus is still sovereign over everything in heaven and earth, visible and invisible. The Gospel is still true. The Great Commission still stands.

However, focusing on and obsessing over UAPs or UFOs , at the expense of the Gospel, is misguided and a distraction.

Links to Spotify and Apple Podcast in the comments

Ep. 198 Lights in the Sky vs. The Light of the World

Dennis delves into the topic of UFO files and the theological implications of alien life. He explores the impact of UFO sightings on theology, the vastness o...