Reactions to a Message
Richard Kruse
The purpose of this article is to look at four passages of scripture, noticing the various reactions of the people to the particular message. The underlying thought is: What type of audience are we? 
REBELLIOUS
            The Roman Empire established local kings. Caesar Octavius appointed Herod as the King of Judea, even though Herod was not from the royal (David) family. Herod was feared but not respected. He killed those who threatened his power or authority. His greatest achievement was in constructing the temple, which was begun in 20 B.C. and completed long after his death in 63 A.D.
          In Matthew 2:1-4 we are told that the Magi (the wise guys) came to Jerusalem asking, "Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews?" King Herod was disturbed by the message (verse 3). If this newborn king were from the Royal Family, it would be a most serious threat to Herod's power and authority. Because Herod was disturbed, Jerusalem was disturbed. As you know, when Herod found out that he was outwitted, he became furious. He acted out his anger by killing boys under 2 years of age in Bethlehem and its vicinity.
       Some questions for us: What affect does the preacher's message have, if we disagree? Will we leave the congregation? Quit giving? You know, the "my way or the highway" attitude? Years ago, an almost-blind, elderly member, who was very rich, gave the money needed to paint the interior of the church building... but insisted on selecting colour. The con‑aggregation had to put up with purple walls until her death. What strings to we attach to a message we hear from the pulpit?
RESPONSIVE
         The familiar story of the angels appearing to shepherds is presented in Luke 2. The terrified shepherds believed the angel's message, which doesn't take rocket science to imagine. The effect of their message was a positive response from the shepherds. The shepherds were not told to go to Bethlehem; the angels' message was simply "Here is the sign", the proof, that the child born in Bethlehem is the Saviour (Luke 2:15-20).
          The shepherds didn't say: "isn't that great; ho hum"! Neither was their attitude that this would make a great bedtime story for the grand kids. The shepherds were united, convicted together; they went together. They told to others about the message and the child; they did not simply "enjoy" the experience. They worshipped: "glorifying and praising God"; they were changed.
          What if the message of the preacher is true, are we willing to believe the message? Are we willing to respond? Are we willing to tell others? Are we willing to be changed spiritually? On the other hand consider the preacher. What if, as he studies, he discovers one of his or the congregation's doctrinal positions is greatly challenged? Is he willing to risk his job and/or reputation to make a positive response to this new understanding of the Scriptures?
RELIGIOUS
          John the Baptist had become popular among the religious folk of the day (Luke 3:7-15). Some even thought he might be the Messiah because his message was practical and full of wisdom; he spoke with authority—not like the Scribes. However, he was quick to point to the coming Messiah's message: (John preached repentance, the Messiah would also give a new way of living and the power to live that new life.)
            Even though John was preaching in the wilderness, he had, in fact, become too popular. John challenged some, who had come to be baptized. as to why they wished to be baptized.
For some people it seems that it had become the "in thing to do". For others, it seemed to be strictly a religious formality. These "religious" responses had one thing in common. They were external responses, responses that did not call for any real change in life.
       Several years ago a wife came to me requesting that I baptize her husband and (without going into the obvious reasons why) I refused. The couple did permit me to begin meeting with them in their home for several weeks. Finally, the husband told how the other men at work had observed the change in his behaviour and came to him that week, comment‑ing on the changes. He was bringing forth the fruit of repentance. To be baptized before demonstrating at least a beginning of a change in life, could have been simply fulfilling a religious ritual.
RESPECTFUL
          The fourth audience to consider is presented in Acts 17:19-21, 32. The philosopher types who gathered on Mars Hill "spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas". You know the types. They've sat in Sunday school classes for years; you'll see them at the lectureships and special meetings. They are ever learning, and yet "never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Timothy 3:7). They are to be commended for their desire to learn. Yet, they can be very indifferent when it comes to the reality of putting the messages into practice. They might not publicly disagree or argue with the speaker; they simply passively listen, always showing respect—yet, without a positive, life-changing response.
          If a new, challenging idea is presented to them, they will usually reject it—especially if it would cause them to change some behaviour. Several years ago an elder of a congregation said to me, "I'm not opposed to change—as long as nothing is done differently"!
          Forty years ago, before teaching a class of young married couples, I asked them: "What do you expect of me as your teacher?" We recorded their answers, which they freely presented. Then I asked, "What can I expect of you as a class?" The response was far more subdued. Some, when realizing that something would be expected from them, decided that they would rather attend another class where they could simply sit and learn. I still believe that these are valid questions that must be answered in order to have a fruitful study. What type of audience do we mirror?