You're familiar, no doubt, with the title of Spurgeon's book, Morning and Evening. There's another book called Evening by Evening, where he has a number of selections, one of which is called The Lesson of the Cross. And Spurgeon is thinking in particular in this Lesson of the Cross section of the suffering Savior in those moments on the cross. And of that moment, Spurgeon says, if you're not humbled in the presence of Jesus, you do not know Him. You were so lost that nothing could save you but the sacrifice of God's only begotten Son. And as Jesus stooped for you, bow in humility at His feet. A realization of Christ's amazing love, Spurgeon says, has a greater tendency to humble us than even a consciousness of our own guilt. Pride cannot live beneath the cross. Spurgeon says, let us sit there and learn our lesson. And so with those words, today, we want to sit there. We want to go to the cross with Jesus, taking those steps to Calvary to see Him crucified. We don't want to avert our eyes. We need to see what is happening there. We need to behold the old rugged cross where the wisdom of God in His redemption of sinners as being accomplished, the substitutionary work of a suffering servant. We need to see it. When we see it, when we can behold what God is doing, and we see the cross and see the glory of God on the cross, and the wisdom of God on the cross, and we see the cross as power to us who are being saved, when we see the cross that way, we understand why we sing lyrics like, sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their guilty stains. when you see the power of the cross. Jesus said He was going to be killed. In Matthew 16.21, He used the language that He would be killed. A chapter later, in chapter 17.23, He said the same thing. In chapter 20.19, He specified He'd be delivered over to the Gentiles to be mocked, flogged, and crucified. All of this is happening before the events themselves are unfolding that we see in the passion events that start in Matthew 21 forward. Jesus' chapters earlier knew exactly what was coming. As one writer so eloquently put it, the ultimate explanation of the cross is neither Jewish hostility nor Roman injustice, but the declared purpose of God. That's the ultimate explanation of the cross. Christ is coming to do what God the Father sent Him to do. And what Christ is experiencing is exactly what Christ foretold would happen. We are watching the unfolding plan of God in redemption. And we'll see this in three scenes. There's mockery before the cross in verses 27 to 31. Mockery before the cross. Then there's the scene at the cross of the crucifixion itself, verses 32 to 38. And then there's mockery at the cross in verses 39-44. Mockery seems to frame this scene. Demeaning Jesus, parodying His kingship. I've called this sermon a parody of royalty, because that's what the soldiers are trying to engage in. But the irony is deep, because He's King indeed, though they are just mocking Him. In verse 27 it tells us that the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the governor's headquarters and gathered a whole battalion. What they're going to do, they're doing in front of a large but private gathering. This is a very large private gathering because a battalion of this size would not be dozens but hundreds of soldiers, perhaps as many as 600. That's an enormous amount of people that have been gathered for Jesus to be embarrassed in front of. Now maybe you've been embarrassed in front of a large group of people. I imagine it's probably not totaled 600 or more. And in this case, Jesus is going to be humiliated before these soldiers, having already been flogged. We need to keep in mind that in the previous episode, Barabbas and Jesus were put before the crowd. Which of these do you want me to release, Pilate said. And the crowd demanded that Jesus be crucified and that Barabbas be released, and Jesus was flogged by Pilate to then be crucified. And so he's been severely beaten and weakened. All of this must be kept in mind, I think, for the events that are going to follow. So in this very large private gathering, they strip him and put a robe on him, probably a robe belonging to one of the soldiers. But they're making fun of him. This is a mock enthronement. Oh, he's king. Well, what do kings need? Well, he's going to need a robe. And so here's one. And so they put this scarlet robe on him. And in verse 29, what else does a king need? Well, they need a crown. And so they take this branch of thorns and they wind it and twist it together until it becomes a crown-like object. And they put that on his head. And what else does a king need? They need a scepter. And so they take a reed and they put that in his right hand. And this is all a mock enthronement meant to shame him. And in verse 30, they spit on him. They took the reed and struck him on the head. This is not the first time they've spit on him. or the first time they've struck him. Earlier, when he is before the Jewish Sanhedrin, the same thing takes place. This probably recalls also Isaiah 50, verse 6, where the suffering servant is being struck and humiliated and spat upon, his beard being pulled. All of this is happening after a very brutal flogging. I mean, we should imagine that even if Jesus had wanted to resist, he would have no strength to do so. Though, of course, we knew. that it is his intention to voluntarily lay down his life. But he has no strength as it is. In verse 31, we're told that when they mocked him, they stripped him of the robe, put his clothes on him, and led him away. So they're just having fun. Roman soldiers were known to humiliate prisoners, to play games with them, and to be cruel with them before punishment. We shouldn't be surprised then at this kind of thing, knowing the charges that are labeled against Jesus. They want to make fun of him and demean him. So they take off this mock-enthronement uniform that they've put together, and now it's time for crucifixion. Punishment's going to be swift. They led him away to crucify him. Now, most of the time we're assuming that the crown of thorns would have remained on him because it tells us they stripped him of the robe and put his own clothes on him. So if you wonder why people will assume that the crown of thorns was on his head, even at the cross, it's for this reason here. Unless they mean by taking off the robe that they put on him, they're including everything else they put on him as well. Perhaps by implication, though, the crown of thorns stayed, but we just cannot be certain. The Romans used crucifixion in the case of slaves, notorious criminals, and insurrectionists who wanted to make a political statement. That's what Jesus is charged with. Jesus is charged as someone who's upsetting the peace and they want to make an example out of him. They wouldn't do crucifixions privately. They wouldn't go to the backyard of the Roman leader's headquarters or something like that. They would do it publicly and along a main road so that people could walk by and see it. This was a deterrent. No one wanted to be crucified, and this is what they wanted everyone to see so that they could show, here's what happens when you cross us. This is what your end could be like. They would have people watch. This wasn't something that was sectioned off with caution tape. People could come and gather and watch crucifixions take place. Even people who knew Jesus were at that cross, and women that He knew and ministered with. They did not bar children from seeing this. Rome wanted this to be known. And if Jesus had a movement, that people were following and they were lauding him to be some king, then Rome was very interested in people seeing Jesus being defeated by the Roman Empire. This was a very big check on their strength, if you will, against Jesus and all those who followed him. In verses 32 to 38, we see the scene at the cross itself. In verse 32, or at least almost there, in verse 32, as they're going out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name. They compelled this man to carry his cross. This verse is probably explained by the fact that Jesus is too weak to carry the cross. Let's think about his weakened state first of all. Having been flogged, he has to carry what's known as the cross beam. I know that one typical image in our minds might be Jesus carrying the entire horizontal and vertical beams that are already nailed together on his back. That's actually very unlikely. Historically, what seemed to be the case is that the vertical piece was at the site of crucifixion. And the person who's being crucified is leaving the city under a Roman guard caravan with anyone else being crucified, and he's got the cross beam, the horizontal beam on his back, weighing about 30 to 40 pounds. In other words, this is not unreasonably heavy for a man to carry, but somebody who's been beaten as severely as Jesus, it seems that he's even unable to carry this. He has so little strength. What we should picture, I think, is that on the way out of the city, the Roman soldiers are accompanying the condemned criminals. Luke 23 tells us the other two criminals are walking with Jesus. They've got their crossbeams on their backs. And as they're going, Jesus is unable to complete this journey. We don't know at what point along the way He needs help, but He has no strength to complete the journey, and they can't have someone die along the way. He's to die on the cross. That's Roman punishment. They're not going to leave a body along the way. And for matters of uncleanness, they did have some sensitivities to that, too. They had a certain site that they were heading, the place of crucifixion. So they need some help, and they commission this guy, Simon of Cyrene. We should think about this for a moment, because earlier in Matthew 5.41, Jesus tells his disciples in the Sermon on the Mount that if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. And that had to do with the idea of Roman authority could at any point order someone to go a great distance. In Matthew 5.41, we're actually seeing that play out as a Roman soldier or a group of them, they conscript Simon of Cyrene, and they tell him he's going to go the rest of the way. This is a Roman lawful order. This isn't something they're suggesting to him or asking for volunteers. They're ordering him, right? What we need to note is that his name and location suggest that he's probably a Jew from North Africa. Cyrene is a region in North Africa that had a large Jewish population. Now, Luke's Gospel and Mark's Gospel tell us that Simon is on his way in. I think suggesting that he's coming to Jerusalem because of the particular time of week it is. Being a Jew from a region that's not Jerusalem, he's coming like other pilgrim Jews would to Passover. That's what this week is. It's Passover week in Matthew 27. So you have Simon of Cyrene who is clearly a devoted Jew. People who weren't serious about following the law of Moses didn't go that didn't make pilgrimages to Jerusalem. People who were serious about it did. Here's someone who cares about the Passover lamb. Here's someone who cares about remembering that time when God's judgment passed over everybody that was covered by blood in Egypt. This guy cares about that. And he's making this trip to Jerusalem because of the feast. And he's stopped by the soldiers and he's conscripted into this spontaneous service, maybe against his initial wishes. Luke 23-26 tells us that he carried the cross behind Jesus. So what we should imagine is Jesus getting back up if He's fallen, making His way, and now Simon is behind Him, following Jesus, carrying His cross. He's going behind Jesus the rest of the way. The reader might also note that this is a new Simon. We've already seen a Simon in the story featured very prominently named Peter. But he has failed Jesus. He has denied Jesus, and he has fled. He has experienced remorse. He has overcome. But he will not be restored until after the resurrection. Here is a new Simon. One from Cyrene. One who was not a disciple for the years of Jesus. And even though Peter had earnestly and earlier said, I will die with you if I have to, it will be Simon of Cyrene who is with Jesus up to that point of crucifixion. Not the well-meaning Peter. It will be this Simon. What does a scene like this do to a man? who all of a sudden is randomly pulled, it seems, at the will of the soldiers, to do this. Well, according to tradition in church history, Simon becomes a believer, and his children become missionaries. His children are actually named in Mark's Gospel. In Mark 15, verse 21, It tells us, they compelled a passerby, Simon of Cyrene, who was coming in from the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to carry his cross. And I think New Testament scholars are right, who observe, it's interesting that he names the names of these children for the readers of Mark's Gospel, as if Mark's readers would know them. As if Mark's readers would know them. There's a Rufus, named in Romans 16 as someone part of a house church. So it's very likely that if Rufus and Alexander, Simon's children, have already been born, then as a family, they're traveling to Jerusalem, and Simon is pulled out, and Simon takes that cross and follows Jesus the rest of the way. I don't think it's likely, though, that his family stayed wherever they were. especially because it was so common for people publicly to follow the crowd and the caravan to the place of crucifixion. It's likely the whole family ended up going there. We know certainly that Simon did. And according to church history, Simon became a believer, and I think that we could say an event like this would certainly be used of the Lord in a pivotal way, though we don't know his moment of conversion. But if his sons are with him, What they see is Dad is approached by this soldier, and now Dad is getting out, walking the walk that a dead man walks. Because the walk with a cross on your back is a one-way trip, friends. It's to death. You don't come back. And so they see their dad. Now they know he hasn't done anything wrong. They know that he's conscripted to do this. But here's Dad going down, and here's husband going down following Jesus to the cross. in verse 33, arrive at a place called Golgotha, which means place of the skull. Golgotha is how the word sounds in Aramaic. That's how you would pronounce it for skull. Now the Latin word, Calvaria, is much more common where we get the word Calvary. So if you've ever wondered why people call it Mount Calvary or Calvary, it's because that's the Latin form of Golgotha. So Golgotha and Calvary are both ways of saying the word skull. There's a few reasons why it could have been called skull or place of the skull. First of all, it was a place of execution, and a skull might be something that makes you think of something grotesque or even death, because you're not talking about someone's face, you're talking about their skull, something of no life. It was a place of execution, so that would certainly fit. It was also an area known for having tombs near it. One of those nearby tombs would be one that Jesus is placed in. until the third day. And then it's also possible, according to some tradition, that the site looked like a skull, that it even had this resemblance geographically to one. So they go to this place called Golgotha, and they're going likely along a main road to this site, which is near a main road. And in verse 34, they offer Jesus wine to drink mixed with gall, but when he tasted it, he wouldn't drink it. There are a couple options for how to take this, I think. Some say that mixed wine like this was used as a sedative. You need to remember, though, that the people giving this to Jesus are the ones that have just flogged him, mocked him. I don't think it's as likely that they were trying to help ease his pain by giving him this. More likely is the fact that while someone might be thinking something refreshing is being offered, mixing it with gall would make it bitter, not only more difficult to drink, but increasing and exacerbating one's thirst. So this is probably another example of their cruelty that these soldiers delight to engage in. No doubt, though, this could be an allusion to Psalm 69.21, where David writes, they gave me poison for food, and for my thirst, they gave me sour wine to drink. Here's the true and greater David, the son of David, experiencing these things like what Psalm 69 happened for that first king, David, who was a suffering king on many occasions. Jesus is the consummate righteous sufferer, a suffering king indeed. And in verse 35, it tells us when they crucified and they divided his garments among them by casting lots. So the cross would be on the ground when they arrived, or at least the vertical piece, and they would attach the horizontal piece and they would then fasten the victim to it. Then they would then hoist the whole cross into the air so that the person would hang suspended by what they fastened them with. Nails in Jesus' case, though people were also known to be crucified with ropes. Now, you would hang there for hours or sometimes even days. Death was not speedy, but on some cases, depending on how brutally beaten you were beforehand, your death could be quicker than others. It tells us in verse 35 that they crucified him and then divided his garments, because crucifixion was done with people being naked on the cross. And so they have no clothes. What's happening to the garments? Well, the soldiers that are crucifying people are given the right to divide up the garments of the victim however they want. After all, the victim's going to die. They don't need those clothes again. And so the soldiers are gambling for it, especially Jesus' inner tunic, another gospel tells us. It was seamless, of one piece, and they considered that valuable and wanted that as well. And so Jesus is in utter humiliation on the cross, beaten beyond belief and suffering there and thirsting indeed. Now, notice the Gospel doesn't go into all the details of crucifixion. I've listed several of them for you, but there are probably a couple of reasons why. Number one, the audience of Matthew's Gospel knows exactly how crucifixion functions. They would have known all the details about the process. There would be no need to belabor it. But I want to secondly observe, and perhaps even more importantly observe, that the physical torture was not the cup that Jesus drank. And this is an important point. Because there was someone on his right and someone on his left who were also crucified, and neither of those men drank the cup. Keep in mind that only Jesus would drink the cup, and it is more than the physical suffering, more than the physical suffering, as awful as it was. He who is blameless would be made sin for us and bear the wrath of God in our place. So sometimes, in order to display and demonstrate God's love, sometimes well-meaning evangelists and gospel preachers will go into the greatest lengths about the crucifixion, how awful it was, sparing us perhaps the needed details about how horrendous our sin is and what that costs Christ spiritually as he dies in our place. As important as the details of crucifixion are, they themselves could not comprise the cup The cup, the wrath of God that Jesus would bear was more than the physical suffering. Again, many people had been crucified before Jesus. They were crucifying people with Jesus. And people would be crucified after Jesus. What makes His death different? That's the question. Other people were nailed on crosses. Other people were flogged. Other people were demeaned. And other people died drowning in their own blood. What makes His cross different? Because He drank the cup. And that wasn't something so evident and visible to the naked eye. In verse 37, or verse 36, it tells us that the soldiers watched him there. And Psalm 22 is probably in view for verses 35 and 36. I quoted from Psalm 69 a moment ago, but listen, in Psalm 22, 18, David wrote that they divide my garments among them, for my clothing they cast lots. And in the previous verse, Psalm 22, 17, David says they stare and gloat over me. So here you see Jesus with his garments divided, and they're watching him right there at the cross. It could be a slow process, but the soldiers have to. And over his head it tells us they put the charge against him, which read, this is Jesus, the King of the Jews. How profoundly ironic, because here it's meant to be mockery from the Roman soldier's perspective. They don't really believe he's a king. They mocked him with a mock enthronement earlier in Matthew 27. And yet we learn from the other Gospels, and John's Gospel in particular, that the inscription was written in multiple languages. It was written in Aramaic, which was the language of the land. It was written in Latin, which was a Roman language, and it was written in Greek, which was an international language throughout the Roman Empire. In other words, they wanted anybody who passed by to have this international announcement. No matter what language they speak, they wanted everybody to go by this cross and see, here's what this person claimed, and look what happened to him. And yet, in a deeper level of irony, they're saying in multiple languages what's indeed the truth for all the universe to know, that here's God's King. Right here. It doesn't look like this is the way you get enthroned, but they just need to wait a little longer. This is Jesus, the King of the Jews, the sign says. In verse 38, the two robbers, more likely insurrectionists, people who were considered political insurrectionists with treason, they were crucified with him, one on the right and one on the left. the language of right and left had been used in the Gospel of Matthew, was in chapter 20 when His disciples, two of them, were trying to determine who would be on Jesus' right and who would be on Jesus' left. Because they believed Jesus was the King, and He was going to have a kingdom, and who was going to be on the right and who was going to be on the left. Well, here's the King on the cross, and what it looks like to be on His right and on His left. Doesn't look so glamorous, does it? Here are these insurrectionists on it, these revolutionaries. And then lastly, in verses 39 to 44, we see mockery at the cross. Our scene this morning closes as it opens, with them mocking his kingship. And there are three groups here. Observe them with me, and then we'll look at some details. The first group are those who pass by in verses 39 and 40. They deride him, wagging their heads, saying, you who would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save yourself. If you're the Son of God, come down from the cross. When verses 41 through 43, the second group, the religious leaders, it tells us the chief priests also with the scribes and the elders mocked him and they said multiple things too. And in verse 44, the third group are the robbers, the insurrectionists, the criminals crucified on his right and his left. Worthy of note is that the language that they're going to use calls into question Jesus' identity as the Son of God, and what he would do if he were to really prove that he is the Son of God, which should remind us of the devil's temptations of Jesus earlier in Matthew. And just as there were three temptations, there are three expressions of mockery here by these three groups. I think that we should see something very satanic then in what is happening here. This isn't neutral, this is not people who are indifferent, but this I think is satanically inspired in verse 39 and following. It tells us that those who pass by derided him, wagging their heads, which may remind us of Psalm 22.7, since Psalm 22 has already been in vogue much of the time already. In Psalm 22.7, David said, All who see me mock me, they make mouths at me, and they wag their heads. These who pass by might include people randomly leaving the city or randomly coming into the city, but either way, they are wagging their heads because here's somebody, look at the language his inscription is in, he claimed to be the king of the Jews. Boy, you know better than that. Shame on him. Wagging their heads with derision. It's possible too that many of these could be those who are aware of what the crowd had said earlier in the Roman trial in Matthew 27. People who are aware of the charges against Jesus. Shaking their heads. In verse 40, Some do seem to be aware of these charges because they say, you who would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save yourself. Earlier, that was what was charged against Jesus in Matthew 26.61 when He was in front of the Sanhedrin. Notice the language there though. If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross. That exact language is used by the devil in Matthew 4. If you are the Son of God. come down from the cross. What's the irony in this case? Because there's irony all over the place. The irony here is that things are not just different from what they seem, they're the exact opposite. If Jesus came down He would prove disobedient to what God had said to do. Because He is the Son of God, He must complete what He was sent to do in obedience to the Father. So they say, if you're the Son of God, come down. But don't they need to see that because He's the Son of God, He must stay there? He must be there for us and for our salvation. They were trying to get Him to demonstrate His divine Sonship. If you are who you say you are, then you should come down. And all of this stems back to the common idea in the day that a crucified Messiah would be a disqualified Messiah. A suffering Messiah would be a false Messiah. This isn't impressing anybody in Matthew 27. He's dying just like the people on the right and the left, like a criminal. In verse 41, the chief priests and the other religious leaders lay in on Him. They'd mock Him, and they'd say, He saved others, He can't save Himself. He's the King of Israel, let Him come down from the cross, and we'll believe in Him. So they're speaking more in the third person about Jesus rather than directly to Him, like the previous ones. But they say, we'll believe in Him if He validates His claim by coming down from the cross. Well, what's the irony here? If Jesus actually came down from the cross, He would be saving Himself, but not anybody else. It tells us in verse 42, He saved others, He can't save Himself. That's what they think. But if He saves Himself, then He cannot save others. That's the truth of the matter. And they don't see it. In verse 43, they move on with another taunt, these religious leaders, and say, He trusts in God, let God deliver Him now, if He desires Him, meaning if God desires this person on the cross, for He, this person on the cross, said, I'm the Son of God. So if Jesus is really God's Son, if God really delights and desires Jesus, then let God deliver Him. That would be the proof. Now the truth of the matter here, and another layer of the irony, is that God will deliver Jesus. Not from the cross, but after the cross, indeed on the third day. Deliverance is coming. This may echo Psalm 22.8, where David, who is suffering in that same psalm, quotes his enemies. And the language of the enemies ends up echoing in the language of the derisive religious leaders. lining up the characters in Psalm 22 with perfect parallel. In Psalm 22.8, the enemies were saying of David, He trusts in the Lord. Let God deliver Him. Let Him rescue Him. For He delights in Him. The religious leaders are coming up to Jesus and they're saying about Him, Let God deliver Him. He delights in the Lord. He trusts in the Lord. It's clear when you look in Psalm 22 who is who. Jesus is the true and greater David. The Son of David that was promised And the enemies who come down the line of the seed of the serpent have not changed their tune one bit. They say the same kind of stuff. The third group is in verse 44. The robbers crucified with Him reviled Him in the same way. It doesn't give us any indication here of what they say, but the other Gospels help us. Matthew also doesn't report what Luke does, which is in Luke 23. One of the thieves or the insurrectionists believes, and Jesus tells him that today you will be with Me in Paradise. You know, I wonder if Simon of Cyrene is still there. Or was he so sticking to an itinerary that he carried the cross all the way and then he was like, all right, my duty is done and then I'm out of here. I mean, there were a lot of people that were there. And maybe Simon still stayed. The cross was powerful to onlookers, whether Simon's eyes saw it or others as well. And the power is not in the physical suffering that He endured as much and as awful as it was. The power of the cross lies in the substitution. He drank God's cup of judgment in our place, bearing our sin and our iniquity. The other people experienced crucifixion, but Jesus was dying in our place. Remember, this cross was that probably reserved for Barabbas himself, and yet Barabbas was released. These insurrectionists on either side of Jesus had probably been with Barabbas in their political treasonous work. And here Jesus is there in the middle. Jesus was that seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3.15. God told the serpent, I'll put enmity between you and the woman, between your offspring and hers. He shall bruise your head and you shall bruise his heel. And Jesus is dying on a place that's called the skull. He's dying there on something that's like a head. And in His death, He's crushing death and defeating sin. What were they mocking Him with earlier? Not just a robe, not just a scepter, but a crown of thorns. You know, in Genesis 3.18, one of the aspects of God's judgment was thorns and thistles upon the land. And the Roman soldiers are just mocking Jesus, right? They're not trying to recall anything specific. They're twisting together thorns and they're putting it on His head. But Jesus will very literally bear the curse on His head, won't He? In our place, bearing the curse as the promised seed of the woman to crush the head of the serpent, whose slithering hisses can even be heard still in the mockery of those three groups at the cross, if you are the Son of God. But He is the Son of God. And He's defeating death. And He's paying for sin. And He's drinking the cup. Jesus very literally poured the curse of God upon His head. The scene is full of ironic truth because the Roman soldiers stage a mock enthronement, but Jesus actually is the King. The pastors by said that if Jesus is the Son of God, He should come down, but because He is the Son of God, He must stay there obeying the rule of the Father. Had He come down, we would die in our sins and have no hope of atonement. The religious leaders cried out, He saved others, He can't save Himself. Yet it's because He didn't save Himself that He can now save others. They said, He trusts in God. Let God deliver Him if He desires Him. Friends, Jesus was forsaken for our sake, trusting His Father the whole way through. The Father didn't deliver the Son from the cross. The deliverance was coming. When we look at a scene like this, and we see what Jesus is engaged in, and what He is embracing, oh friends, it should move us to the core as we marvel at the Gospel wisdom of God displayed as He redeems sinners through the cross. And not a cross and a crucifixion that was like every other crucifixion. This one was different. Not because you could always tell it outwardly. He looked like a criminal. Dying like a criminal. Like the ones on His right and left. But what was happening behind the scenes, it was planned before the foundation of the world, secures atonement for sinners, friends. That we would go to Christ by faith and embrace all that God has promised in Scripture that He is for us, believing that He alone pays for our sins in full. then now there is therefore no condemnation for all who are in Christ Jesus. Do you trust in Christ? Something very remarkable was happening with Simon when he takes up that cross, following, literally after Jesus, carrying his cross. And in Matthew 16, Jesus said, if anyone wants to come after me, he's got to deny himself. and He's going to take up His cross and He's going to come after me. And perhaps there is no more graphically literal example of that than watching Jesus go step by step and then seeing Simon behind Him with the cross step by step. And that's a graphic picture of the Christian life. We should be Simon. We should be the one who wants to take up our cross and follow after Jesus. Do you want to be His disciple? I'm not saying do you have historical interest in the events. Do you find it impressive? I'm not saying do you even believe that they took place historically. I'm saying do you want to be the disciple of the Son of God? That's a far different issue. We're not talking about just intellectual assent to these matters. We're talking about what Spurgeon said, that we'd sit at His feet and that we'd learn the lesson of being humbled by the amazing love He said to us and showed to us this Christ If He is King and Son of God, then He is worthy of our worship, and He is worthy of our devotion, and we should be His disciples, and we should deny ourselves, because it's not about us. If Jesus is who He says He is, then friends, it is all, and will always be, about Him. About Him. And we should follow Him.