Set Your Face with Christ, Part 1 - Sep. 27th, 2026

[FORMAL ELEMENTS / DESCRIPTIVE DATA]

Passage/boundaries: Luke 9:51–56, KJV; TR 1894 requested for Greek. Verses 57–62 supply context only.

Subject: Following Christ when His direction occasions rejection.

Title: Set Your Face with Christ.

CIT: Jesus set His face toward Jerusalem, rebuked James and John’s proposal to destroy the rejecting Samaritan villagers, declared His saving mission, and continued to another village.

CPT: Christ’s saving mission governed His resolve, His correction of His disciples, and His response to rejection.

EPT: Christ’s followers must submit both their direction and their response to His authority.

Purpose Bridge: Consecrative. This is the owner’s settled pastoral choice; the gospel appeal supports rather than replaces it.

MO: Consecrative.

SO: I want my hearers to set their faces with Christ and continue obediently when rejected.

EPS/CPS: Christ’s purpose must govern both our direction and our response when we are rejected.

Theme: Following Christ through rejection.

Thrust: Set your face with Christ, receive His correction, and continue with His saving intention.

[INFORMAL ELEMENTS / RHETORICAL DATA]

Know/feel/do: Know that Jesus’ Jerusalem direction occasions this refusal and His saving mission governs His correction. Feel gratitude, humility, and concern for rejecters. Surrender retaliation, pray for their good and salvation, and continue faithfully.

Genre/rhetorical situation: Narrative: resolve, refusal, proposed retaliation, rebuke, continued journey. Jesus corrects insiders while the outsiders’ refusal remains serious.

Form/order/disclosure: Approved recovered manuscript: deductive exposition in narrative order. Proposition follows the six-verse reading; three movements lead to one consecrative response. No new template ID, eight-sermon comparison, or formal template vote is claimed.

Audience/occasion: General Sunday adults; September 27, 2026, Sunday AM, FBC Westminster; Luke Prime Time Volume Three, opening message. Familiarity with Scripture makes the brothers’ example searching. Do not imply an invented local conflict.

Introduction: Begin with what Christ requires before what I do about them. Introduce the new volume’s Jerusalem journey with Christ’s resolve before ours.

Body/persuasion: Direction, Luke 9:51–53: appointed horizon and the exodus at Luke 9:31; distinguish Christ’s unique saving work. Correction, verses 54–55: actual 2 Kings 1 precedent requires Christ’s present commission. Intention, verse 56: His saving purpose explains the rebuke and continued journey.

Hinge/climax: Hinge: The very course He was obediently pursuing became the occasion of their rejection. Climax: Will we let the Lord we are defending correct the way we defend Him?

Application/warrant: Necessary: truth and precedent remain under Christ’s authority; real refusal does not excuse retaliation. Probable: surrender vengeance at home, in church, and in witness while retaining truth and legitimate responsibility. Possible: confess a wrong manner, withhold retaliation, pray for a particular person’s salvation, and continue faithful witness. Do not call personal preference persecution or diagnose hidden motives.

Illustration/canonical controls: The traveler looking back at a closed door is explicitly imagined. Moses and Elijah are real men; encouragement is qualified as possible. Use 2 Kings 1 rather than Carmel; retain mercy and judgment in both Testaments. John 4 and Acts 8 show a wider Samaritan horizon without claiming this same village.

Response/gospel: One consecrative response: receive Christ’s correction and continue obediently. Christ went to Jerusalem, died for our sins, and rose again. Unbelievers need forgiveness through His finished work, not self-improvement. The gospel appeal serves the settled purpose.

Oral recovery: Follow His settled direction; receive His searching correction; continue with His saving intention. Final recovery: Set your face with Christ. Let His purpose govern your direction. Let His word govern your spirit. And keep following Him. End: And they went to another village.

Duration/repetition: Approved spoken source: 4,370 words; estimated 38–43 pulpit minutes or 31–35 continuous narration. Plan: opening 4, direction 12, correction 14, intention/response 10 minutes. Renew attention near minutes 7, 14, 21, 28, and 35. If long, compress secondary that-Prophet discussion and the traveler before cutting the core. Human rehearsal remains pending.

Public derivatives: Eleven slides: five approved graphics (title; Follow His Settled Direction; Receive His Searching Correction; Continue with His Saving Intention; Truth Without Vengeance) and six native Scripture slides, Luke 9:51–56, on the matching blank background. No doubled text overlays. Substantive public Handout paragraphs selected; Questions intentionally empty. C. J. owns Proclaim service selection and export.

Evidence/release boundary: Use the approved v2 manuscript and Brief. The inherited Triad has 53 evidence records; W22 patristic work remains unsealed and excluded from the sermon. No fresh Startup seal or independent final audit is claimed. Final native QA and human rehearsal are distinct gates.

——————————

It is one thing to decide that we will follow the Lord. It is another thing to keep following Him when somebody does not welcome us along the way.

We can begin a work with a clear purpose and a willing heart. We know what the Bible says. We understand the responsibility. We are ready to go. Then somebody closes a door. Somebody questions our motives. Somebody refuses what we had hoped they would receive. And before long, the response of that person is occupying more of our attention than the command of our Lord.

The question becomes, What am I going to do about them?

But there is a question that must come first: What does Christ require of me?

As we open this next volume in our study of Luke, we come to a decisive turn in the account. Jesus sets His face toward Jerusalem. We will hear Him teach along the way. We will watch Him deal with the self-sufficient and the needy, the outwardly religious and the openly sinful. Again and again, we will be confronted with what it means to follow Him. But Luke begins this stretch of the journey by directing our eyes to the Lord Himself.

Before we think about our determination, look at His. Before we weigh the opposition to our service, consider the road He chose. Before we defend the way we have responded to people, listen to the way He corrects His disciples.

Let us read the passage.

Luke 9:51–56 KJV 1900

51 And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, 52 And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. 53 And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. 54 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? 55 But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. 56 For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

Here is the truth I want us to carry through this passage: Christ’s purpose must govern both our direction and our response when we are rejected.

We must keep going where He leads, and we must let Him correct how we go.

Notice three movements in the text. Follow His settled direction. Receive His searching correction. Continue with His saving intention.

First, follow His settled direction. Verses fifty-one through fifty-three.

Luke begins with the time: “when the time was come that he should be received up.”

The events ahead of Jesus are not a series of unfortunate surprises. He is moving toward the accomplishment of the Father’s purpose. The expression “received up” looks ahead to His ascension, with the suffering, death, and resurrection that lie on the way. Luke is giving us the larger horizon. The cross is before Him, but the cross will not be the end of His story.

We do not have to guess whether Jesus understands that suffering is ahead. Earlier in this same chapter, He said, “The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.”

Look back for a moment at verse thirty-one. Moses and Elias spoke with Him of “his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.” The word behind “decease” is exodus, a departure. When I was in Greece recently, I saw that word on exit signs. That familiar sign gives us a simple doorway into the word. The meaning here comes from what Luke tells us about Christ, whose departure He would accomplish at Jerusalem.

Notice “accomplish.” He was going to Jerusalem to complete the saving work. His death would not be an interruption that left His mission unfinished. Through His death and resurrection, and then His being received up, the Father’s purpose would be fulfilled.

And consider the men talking with Him. Moses and Elijah are associated with the Law and the Prophets, but they were also real men with remarkable histories. Moses had died, and God had buried him. Elijah had been taken into heaven by a whirlwind. Now they appeared in glory and spoke with Jesus about His coming departure.

Could that conversation have ministered encouragement to our Lord in His true humanity? It may have. Luke tells us what they spoke about; he does not tell us every word they said or describe Jesus’ inward response. We must leave that distinction clear. We have no conversation to invent and no private memories to put into their mouths.

But we should never imagine that Christ’s humanity was a disguise. He is fully God, and He became truly man, without sin. Later Luke expressly tells us that an angel strengthened Him as He prayed in the garden. There is no contradiction between His full deity and His receiving ministry in His true humanity. Here on the mountain we see Him speaking with these men about the work before Him. Only He could accomplish that saving work. Moses could not do it for Him. Elijah could not do it for Him.

Then, in verse forty-four, He told His disciples, “Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men.”

Now read verse fifty-one again: “he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem.”

He knew where He was going. He knew what awaited Him. And He set His face to go.

That is more than the determination of a strong personality. We are looking at the obedience of the Son who came to accomplish the saving work given Him by the Father. He is not simply showing us how to be brave. He is going to do what we could never do for ourselves.

Our hope rests in the Saviour who went to Jerusalem, gave Himself for our sins, rose again, and was received into glory. When rejection wounds us, we need our eyes brought back to Him. We belong to the Lord who would not turn aside from saving sinners. His purpose must govern the way we treat the people who refuse our witness.

But having seen Him, how can we treat His call lightly?

Earlier in the chapter He said, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.” Now the Lord who calls us to follow is Himself moving steadily toward Jerusalem.

We are following a Person. Our direction must come from Him.

Verse fifty-two shows that this settled purpose includes practical action. He “sent messengers before his face.” They went into a Samaritan village “to make ready for him.”

There is preparation here. There is an assignment. There are messengers who actually go where they have been sent. We are not told their names, and we are not given a report of the arrangements they sought. The language naturally fits preparation to receive Him, including practical hospitality. But Luke keeps our attention on what happened when they went.

“And they did not receive him.”

Let the weight of that sentence settle on you. They did not receive Him.

This was no failure of His character. There was no flaw in His message. The One whose face was set toward the accomplishment of redemption was refused entry into the welcome they might have given.

Luke tells us why: “because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem.”

The setting includes the old division between Jews and Samaritans, with their rival claims concerning worship. That background helps us understand the objection to Jerusalem. But we must stay with what Luke actually says. He does not name this village. He does not describe a quarrel between the messengers and its residents. He does not tell us that every Samaritan would have responded this way.

The stated reason for this refusal is His Jerusalem-bound direction.

The very course He was obediently pursuing became the occasion of their rejection.

That means a closed door does not, by itself, prove that we have disobeyed the Lord. We should examine ourselves. We should be willing to acknowledge wrong conduct or careless words. But we cannot make people’s welcome the final test of God’s will. Here the perfect Son is on the right road, and the village does not receive Him.

Some of us need that steadiness. You have tried to speak truth kindly, and it was not welcomed. You have tried to fulfill a responsibility, and it was misunderstood. You have been tempted to conclude that obedience cannot be right if it is this uncomfortable.

Look at Jesus. Obedience and opposition can meet on the same road.

Now be careful. This passage does not turn every frustrated preference into persecution. If someone disagrees with our opinion, that does not automatically place us beside Christ and them beside the rejecting village. The first question is still whether our direction is governed by His Word.

But when the duty is clear, the refusal of another person cannot become our new lord.

Imagine a traveler who stops at a door to ask for help and is turned away. The door is behind him now, but he keeps looking back at it. He slows down. He argues with it in his mind. Before long, he has spent more effort thinking about the closed door than walking toward his destination.

We can do that spiritually. The conversation is over, but we rehearse it. The refusal has happened, but we keep living inside it. The person who said no begins to determine the direction of our whole day.

Christ’s destination was not determined by that village’s welcome. He had set His face toward Jerusalem.

When following Christ costs us someone’s welcome, will we still allow Christ to govern our response? We cannot control the reception we receive. We are responsible to the Lord for the answer we give.

Follow His settled direction.

But the next part of the passage shows us another danger. We can remain convinced about the right direction while responding to opposition in the wrong spirit.

Second, receive His searching correction. Verses fifty-four and fifty-five.

“And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?”

James and John saw the refusal. Their proposed answer was destruction.

Notice that they address Jesus as “Lord,” and that they ask His permission: “Lord, wilt thou…?” They have an actual event in Scripture in mind. We ought to hear their question fairly before we hear the Lord’s answer.

These men had seen His power. Earlier in this chapter He had given the Twelve power and authority and sent them to preach and heal. James and John had also been with Him on the mountain and had seen Moses and Elijah. Matthew and Mark tell us that, coming down from the mountain, the disciples asked about Elijah, and Jesus instructed them. That conversation belongs before this Samaritan incident; Luke does not record it as a later lesson.

It is reasonable to think Elijah could have been fresh in their minds. Luke does not say that this was the precise chain of thought that produced their request. What he does tell us is enough: they saw the rejection, remembered Elijah’s precedent, and asked their Lord whether they should act.

We know from the wider Gospel setting that people were asking about “that Prophet,” the promised prophet associated with Moses. That belongs to the biblical world of their question. It does not prove James and John reasoned from that expectation here. We should not write a private argument for them that Luke has not recorded.

They were not men without Scripture, without experience of Christ’s power, or without confidence in His authority. And still they needed His correction. That brings their danger much nearer to Bible-believing people like us.

We can have a true passage in mind, know that Christ has power to act, and still be wrong about what He would have us do. Their knowledge and experience did not place their judgment beyond His rebuke.

That ought to make every one of us willing to listen carefully. Religious language does not guarantee a right response. A Bible reference does not, by itself, prove that we have applied the Bible correctly. We must submit the response we want to make to the Lord we claim to serve.

The specific event behind their reference to Elias is in Second Kings chapter one. Fire came down and consumed the captains and their fifties who confronted Elijah. This is not the scene on Mount Carmel where fire consumed the sacrifice. James and John are recalling fire that consumed people, and they want to bring that precedent into this village’s refusal of Jesus.

But a true account of what God did in one setting is not permission for us to reproduce it wherever we think it would be useful.

We must ask what God commanded, whom He commissioned, what the circumstances were, and what authority He has given us now. Scripture must govern our use of Scripture.

Jesus does not rebuke Elijah here. He rebukes His disciples. We should not make the Old Testament prophet the villain in order to make our point. The error before us is the disciples’ proposal in this situation, while accompanying the Son of man on His saving mission.

Nor should we tell ourselves that the God of the Old Testament was severe while the God of the New Testament became loving. In First Kings seventeen, through Elijah’s ministry, God provided for a widow and restored her son to life. Mercy was present there. In Luke ten, Jesus Himself warns of judgment upon those who reject the witness sent to them. Judgment is present there.

God has not changed His character. His servants must attend to His particular command and purpose in the situation before them. The same Lord who authorized Elijah’s service is correcting the use these disciples want to make of Elijah’s example.

How easily we can make the same kind of mistake. We know that God judges sin. That is true. We know that the truth must be defended. That is true. We know that rejection of Christ is serious. That is true. But those truths do not authorize every response we feel inclined to make.

Truth does not become ours to use independently of the Lord who gave it.

Verse fifty-five says, “But he turned, and rebuked them.”

The village has rejected Him, but at this moment His correction is directed toward the men walking with Him.

We may be very ready for God to deal with the people outside. Are we ready for Him to deal with us?

It is possible to see somebody else’s wrong very clearly and to remain strangely unaware of our own response to it. The refusal was real. Their proposed retaliation was wrong. The reality of the first did not excuse the second.

Hear His words: “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.”

We must not use that sentence to invent a diagnosis Luke does not give. He does not say here that James and John were possessed. He does not unfold every motive moving through their hearts. We do not need to pretend that he does. Christ’s judgment is searching enough: they do not understand the character of the spirit expressed in their proposal.

They need His correction more than they need permission to carry out their plan.

That is a humbling place to stand. Lord, I thought I was ready to act for Thee. But I need Thee to show me what is wrong with the action I am proposing.

Will we let the Lord we are defending correct the way we defend Him?

We often ask the Lord to open doors, change circumstances, and deal with other people. We should also ask Him to expose what we have excused in ourselves. We can be hurt and still be wrong in what we say next. We can have a legitimate concern and still handle it sinfully. We can be defending a true doctrine while allowing our manner to contradict the Lord we profess.

This is not a call to weak conviction. Jesus does not change His destination. He does not apologize for going to Jerusalem. He does not ask the village to determine His mission. His firmness and His restraint stand together.

We do not have to surrender truth in order to surrender vengeance.

Consider our homes. A parent has a real responsibility to correct a child. But that responsibility does not make every angry word a righteous word. We may need to address disobedience, and we may also need to confess the manner in which we addressed it. Owning our sin does not erase the child’s responsibility. It puts our own response under the authority of the Lord.

Consider our church life. We may need a difficult conversation. We may need to draw a clear doctrinal line. We may need to deal with conduct that cannot be ignored. But the existence of that duty does not give us permission to enjoy another person’s humiliation.

Consider our witness. Someone mocks what we believe. The quick answer is ready. We can make the person look foolish. But what are we seeking? Are we speaking truth for that person’s good, or have we begun to value the victory of the exchange more than faithfulness to Christ?

Those are applications we must make to ourselves. We are not claiming to know every hidden motive of James and John. We are allowing their correction to make us willing to examine our own hearts.

Ask yourself a plain question: If the Lord were to forbid the response I have already planned, would I submit to Him?

They said, “Lord, wilt thou?” We must be willing for His answer to be no.

Submission is tested when He corrects us. We may gladly call Him Lord when He sends us. Will we still hear Him as Lord when He restrains us?

Follow His settled direction. Receive His searching correction.

And then, third, continue with His saving intention. Verse fifty-six.

“For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”

That word “For” gives the reason for His correction. The proposal of the disciples does not fit the purpose of His coming. They want to consume these people. He declares His saving mission.

The issue is not whether rejection matters. It does. The issue is whether the disciples will let the Lord’s purpose govern their response to rejection.

He is going to Jerusalem. We have already heard Him speak of rejection, suffering, death, and resurrection. The Saviour refused by this village is continuing toward the place where He will give Himself for sinners.

That is why we cannot reduce the passage to being pleasant when people are unpleasant. Christian kindness matters, but the center here is larger and deeper. The Son of man has come to save. His disciples must learn to conduct themselves in keeping with His mission.

Does that mean there will be no judgment? No. In the next chapter, Jesus gives solemn warnings concerning cities that refuse the witness sent to them. He speaks of accountability and judgment. Mercy here does not cancel that truth. His restraint is not approval of unbelief.

We must hold both truths where Scripture holds them. The Saviour truly saves. God truly judges. The servants of Christ are not free to seize judgment for themselves because somebody has rejected them.

Neither does this verse settle every question about civil authority, lawful protection, or discipline. Those questions must be answered from the Scriptures that address them. Here Jesus is correcting a proposal to destroy a village for refusing Him. We should preach that correction plainly without making the verse carry claims it does not make.

Then Luke gives us the action that follows the correction: “And they went to another village.”

What a quiet ending after such a heated proposal.

No fire falls at their command. No welcome is forced. The refusal does not make Jesus abandon the Father’s purpose. They go to another village.

Verse fifty-one gives us His settled direction. The end of verse fifty-six shows us continued movement in that direction. Between those two statements stand rejection, a wrong proposal, and the Lord’s correction. None of them brings His mission to an end.

And notice the plural: “they went.” The account does not give us a speech of repentance from James and John, and we should not invent one. But the company continues with Jesus. His rebuke becomes part of their instruction as they walk with Him.

There is encouragement here for disciples who need correction. The Lord’s correction calls us back into obedience. Our next responsibility is not to defend our wrong response. It is to hear Him and follow Him in the next step.

Sometimes we think the only satisfactory ending to a painful encounter would be the other person finally acknowledging that we were right. We keep waiting for that scene. We imagine the apology. We rehearse what we would say if we had one more opportunity.

This passage ends with another village.

There is still a road to walk. There is still the Lord to follow. There is still obedience before us.

That does not mean every damaged relationship should be abandoned. It does not mean we never return to a conversation, never seek reconciliation, or never continue to pray for someone. It means that one rejection does not acquire the right to consume our whole life. We must take the next step the Lord actually requires.

For one person, that may be another quiet attempt to speak the gospel when there is a fitting opportunity. For another, it may be faithful work that receives little appreciation. For another, it may be an apology for the spirit in which a true concern was expressed. For another, it may be leaving an argument alone and fulfilling a duty that has been neglected while the argument occupied the heart.

We cannot select the next step merely because it feels satisfying. We must take it under Christ’s direction.

And we must not turn one refusal into a verdict against a whole people. This is a village of the Samaritans. Luke does not tell us that all Samaritans responded this way. In John chapter four, Samaritans receive the testimony concerning Christ. Later, in Acts chapter eight, the word of God is received in Samaria, and Peter and John are sent there. John participates in a work of gospel witness among Samaritans.

We must not claim that Acts identifies this same village. It does not. We must not invent a private memory or a recorded apology that Luke has not given us. But the wider biblical account certainly will not allow us to treat this refusal as the end of Christ’s purposes for Samaritans.

Do not let a hard encounter teach you to despise the people you are called to reach.

Think of a particular face. Not an abstract opponent. Not a category. A person. Someone whose response has troubled you, frustrated you, or wounded you. Do you still desire that person’s good before God? Can you pray for that person’s salvation? Can you speak truth without making injury your aim?

We will not do that by pretending that rejection does not hurt. We do it by remembering whom we follow and why He came.

The Son of man came to save.

We are not the Saviour. We cannot redeem anyone by our determination. We cannot force faith into another person’s heart. Our responsibility is to bear faithful witness to Christ, obey His Word, and leave the outcome in His hands.

But what a Saviour we have to proclaim. He did not turn aside from Jerusalem when He knew the suffering ahead. The cross was no accident that ruined His plans. He gave Himself for our sins. He rose again. The One who set His face toward that work is the One in whom guilty sinners may place their trust.

If you have never trusted Him, do not make this message a project in self-improvement. You need more than a better reaction to difficult people. You need forgiveness. You need the Saviour. You cannot earn His salvation by becoming more patient, more religious, or more determined. Come to Him as a sinner who needs what He alone can give. Turn to Christ and trust His finished work.

And if you belong to Him, hear His call in this passage.

Follow His settled direction. Do not let opposition choose your destination.

Receive His searching correction. Do not let the wrong done by someone else excuse the wrong response in you.

Continue with His saving intention. Do not allow one closed door to end your obedience or harden your heart against the people who need Christ.

Let us bring those truths down to one honest response before God.

Bring before the Lord the person whose rejection you keep rehearsing. Ask Him to search the response you have been defending. Is there a word to confess, a retaliatory answer to withhold, or a person for whose salvation you have stopped praying?

Receive His correction now. Tell Him plainly that His Word has authority over your answer as well as your convictions. Then continue with Him, seeking the good of the person you could not persuade. You may never receive the apology you hoped for. You can still obey the Saviour you belong to.

Our Lord set His face toward Jerusalem. The village refused Him. His disciples needed correction. And He continued.

Set your face with Christ. Let His purpose govern your direction. Let His word govern your spirit. And keep following Him.

“And they went to another village.”