Category Archives: Gospels Studies

05/12/2022

On the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus

By Phillip Powers

TEXT
19 “There was a rich man who would dress in purple and fine linen, feasting lavishly every day. 20 But a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, was lying at his gate. 21 He longed to be filled with what fell from the rich man’s table, but instead the dogs would come and lick his sores. 22 One day the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 And being in torment in Hades, he looked up and saw Abraham a long way off, with Lazarus at his side. 24 ‘Father Abraham!’ he called out, ‘Have mercy on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this flame!’

25 “‘Son,’ Abraham said, ‘remember that during your life you received your good things, just as Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here, while you are in agony. 26 Besides all this, a great chasm has been fixed between us and you, so that those who want to pass over from here to you cannot; neither can those from there cross over to us.’

27 “‘Father,’ he said, ‘then I beg you to send him to my father’s house— 28 because I have five brothers—to warn them, so that they won’t also come to this place of torment.’

29 “But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.’

30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said. ‘But if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

31 “But he told him, ‘If they don’t listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’”

~Luke 16.19-31

Title: On the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus
Series: Who is Jesus? A Study of the Gospel of Luke
Church: South Caraway Baptist Church, Jonesboro, AR
Date: May 08, 2022

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus, Sermons, Spiritual Formation

08/12/2021

On Theological Discourse and the Example of Jesus

By Phillip Powers

In many ways, the nature of theological discourse, especially when it comes to navigating areas of disagreement, is like a crucible. It very quickly burns away every veneer, every façade, every pretense, and it reveals in no uncertain terms the condition of a person’s heart. It exposes the quality of person’s character in ways that no other interpersonal endeavor seems to. In my last post, I suggested that no matter how stark our disagreements may be, we must still engage our opponents Christianly. We must cultivate the virtues of Christ-likeness even when we are required to address questions of Biblical interpretation about which we hold strong convictions or for which we have the most zeal. Our Lord Jesus Christ is the exemplar par excellence when it comes to interacting with people with whom we have sharp and pointed disagreements, and as His disciples, we would do well to consider His conduct in these matters and do likewise.

Of course, a cursory reading of the Gospels quickly reveals that Jesus was not afraid of theological debate. There were many occasions where things got quite heated in the discussions that He had with the religious leaders of His day, and Jesus certainly did not hold back in His rebuke of them. He variously referred to them as a “brood of vipers” (Matt 12.34, 23.33), as “hypocrites” (Luke 12.56, 13.15), even as “sons of their father the devil”(John 8.44). To our modern ears, this sounds overly harsh and smacks of contempt. Moreover, it appears to be nothing more than a kind of ad hominem attack, which is a logical fallacy that attacks the person rather than engages the substance of their argument. However, Jesus was a master of language and rhetorical strategy; therefore, He cannot be charged with any kind of personal malice or fallacious argumentation. Upon further study of these exchanges, it becomes clear that Jesus’ disagreements with the Jewish religious were, in fact, quite substantive, and that these disagreements were a large part of the motivations that led the Jewish leaders to plot for His death by crucifixion.

Further reflection on these scenes is beyond the scope of this article; however, the question remains: to what extent are Jesus’ interchanges with the Jewish religious leaders exemplary for our approach to navigating disagreements in theological discourse? Does our pursuit of Christlikeness require that we emulate the rhetorical strategies of Jesus against the Pharisees? Are we supposed to treat our theological opponents with the same attitude and method as Jesus? In answer to these questions, I would like to offer the following thesis: Jesus’ interactions with the Jewish religious leaders of His day are not an example for how we should address our disagreements in modern theological discourse. And in the space remaining, I would like to offer three reasons in support of this conclusion.

First, Jesus had the proper authority to rebuke. The question of Jesus’ authority was the driving force in the majority of His conflict with the Jewish religious leaders. In Mark, chapter 1, and verse 22, we read that the people “were astonished at his teaching because he was teaching them as one who had authority, and not like the scribes.” Jesus possessed inherent authority as Messiah, and this was a direct threat to the Jewish religious establishment. This was the primary point of contention between Jesus and the religious leaders. In fact, the differences in biblical interpretation that separated them were not even that significant by comparison. The religious leaders rejected the messianic claim of Jesus, and that rejection pushed them to conspire for His death as early as Mark chapter 3. So, in truth, the conflict between Jesus and the religious leaders was never really a theological one to begin with. It was through and through a question of authority and submission, specifically the messianic authority of Jesus and the refusal of the Jewish leaders to submit to Him. Therefore, we must conclude that the rebukes that He spoke against them were aimed, not at their theological disagreements, but rather, they were meant to provoke the religious leaders to repentance and submission.

Secondly, Jesus had the necessary character to rebuke. We confess that Jesus is the second person of the Trinity incarnate, fully God and fully man, born of the virgin Mary, born without sin. He was “tempted in every way as we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4.15). He lived a sinless life in perfect obedience to the Father. He was not given to vices like pride and arrogance, contempt, scorn, guile, etc. Even in His anger, He was without sin. This means that the rebukes that He levied against the Jewish religious leaders came from a heart that was perfectly righteous and holy. He was genuinely driven by love for God and by love for His opponents; He championed the truth for the sake of the truth, not for personal gain or one-upmanship. His motives were never mixed, never polluted, never turned toward self, but always meant to bring His opponents to repentance and faith. This is the ideal to which we must aspire; however, on this side of glory, we can never be certain that our motives are perfectly pure. As long as we live in this fallen world, our attitudes will necessarily be mixed with sin, which is why we be ever conscious, always examining the motives of our hearts before venturing to rebuke those with whom we disagree. We should submit ourselves to the examination of the Spirit, praying as the psalmist taught us, “Search me, God, and know my heart; test me and know my concerns. See if there is any offensive way in me; lead me in the everlasting way.” (Psalm 139.23-24)

And lastly, Jesus had the ideal context to rebuke. It goes without saying that the world has changed since the days of Jesus and His first followers. His was a culture that was primarily oral, where theological discourse was a public affair, where disagreements were hammered out in face to face dialogue in front of a crowd of onlookers. By contrast, ours is a culture that is primary literary, where theological discourse is a written affair, where disagreements are hammered out in books and journal articles that are subject to peer review and the editorial process. Of course, the proliferation of social media has all but circumvented those processes; avenues for both formal and informal review are nearly nonexistent in the facebook realm, the twitterspace, and the blogosphere. But there is a big difference between discussing our theological differences in face to face conversation and taking anonymous potshots from behind a computer screen. When Jesus launched His rebukes against the Jewish religious leaders, He was operating in a open and public context that required active listening and clear argumentation. It was a context that had natural checks and balances in the form of the watching crowds. He knew His opponents, and they knew Him; there was no hiding. The point is this: context matters. In other words, context determines how we navigate our theological disagreements. How we discuss these matters in face to face dialogue is very different from how we handle them on social media or in the pages of published scholarship.

In conclusion, there is a vast difference between the rebukes that Jesus levied against those who had rejected Him as their Messiah and navigating our theological disagreements within the body of Christ. And what we must affirm is that Christians are called to navigate their disagreements with attitudes and approaches that are counter to the ways of the world at large. We are called to be different, we are called to righteousness and holiness. We are called to the way of love. It is natural and easy to love those with whom we agree, but it is whole other challenge to love those with whom we disagree, even when that disagreement is relatively minor. We must learn to love others theologically. The example of our Lord Jesus Christ demands nothing less than this.

For further study:
Smith, Brandon D. “Loving Others Theologically”, posted at mereorthodoxy.com, July 10, 2018.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus, Practical Theology

12/23/2019

On the Fourth Sunday of Advent

By Phillip Powers

advent 4

The fourth Sunday of the season of Advent is dedicated to the contemplation of love, namely that it was love that motivated the Father to send the Son into the world as the incarnate Christ-child. And though the lectionary readings do not mention the love of God specifically, they do focus us on that great act of love, whereby our Savior became like unto us so that we may become like Him. So, before we turn our attention to the readings for this fourth Sunday, let us remind ourselves of that most memorable of verses,

For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will no perish but have everlasting life. (John 3.16)

This is the gift that we celebrate at Christmas, and the lectionary readings prepare us for that celebration by reminding us that this was the eternal plan of God from the very beginning of time.

Old Testament: Isaiah 7.10-16
Of course, this is the passage where we find God’s prediction of the virgin birth, that “the virgin will conceive, have a son, and name him Immanuel,” (verse 14), and this is the verse that will be cited by Matthew in today’s Gospel reading. And so it is tempting to fast forward immediately to the those events surrounding the birth of the Christ-child. However, we would be completely remiss if we ignored the original context within which this prophecy is given. And while we do not have the space here to recount the whole story, it would behoove us to linger in these chapters, specifically chapters 7-9, before jumping to the details of the Christmas story. This passage recounts the promise given through the prophet Isaiah that God would deliver the Kingdom of Judah from the enemies, even in spite of the seemingly insurmountable odds that were arrayed against them. “For before the boy knows to reject what is bad and choose what is good, the land of the two kings you dread will be abandoned.” (Verse 16) And it is this pattern then that becomes the typological precedent for the coming of Messiah. In other words, because God loves His people, He will deliver them from their enemies, whether those enemies be temporal (as with the people of Judah) or eternal (as with us and our enemy – sin).

Psalm: Psalm 80.1-7, 17-19
In the Psalm reading, “the psalmist laments Israel’s demise and asks the Lord to show favor toward his people, as he did in earlier times.” (Study Note, NET Bible) In other words, the psalmist is praying for God’s salvation specifically as that pertains to the restoration of the people of Israel. “Listen, Shepherd of Israel, who leads Joseph like a flock; you who sit enthroned between the cherubim, shine on Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh. Rally your power and come to save us.” (Verses 1-2) But what is most sobering in this Psalm is that the psalmist admits that the people of Israel have reaped the just and due consequence of their sin in punishment from God, and that it is God and God alone who can must intervene on behalf of His people for their forgiveness and restoration. “Lord God of Armies, how long will you be angry with your people’s prayers? You fed them the bread of tears and gave them the full measure of tears to drink.  (Verse 4-5) And this is not unlike the spiritual condition of all humanity; we are too justly under the judgment of God for our sin, and He and He alone is the one who must act for our salvation. And so we pray, “Restore us, Lord, God of Armies; make your face shine on us, so that we may be saved.”

New Testament: Matthew 1.18-25
The Gospel reading for this fourth and final Sunday of Advent, then, takes us to the events leading up the birth of the Christ-child. “After his mother Mary have been engaged to Joseph, it was discovered before they came together that she was pregnant from the Holy Spirit. So her husband Joseph, being a righteous man, and not wanting to disgrace her publicly, decided to divorce her secretly.” (Verse 18-19) Obviously, Joseph was facing a perplexing dilemma, and who’s to say what we might have done under those same circumstances. But God intervened in a dream telling Joseph to take Mary as his wife. “She will give birth to a son, and you are to name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.” (Verse 21) Of course, Matthew goes on in verses 22-23 to make the point that this was in fulfillment of what God had said through the prophet Isaiah, as we saw in our Old Testament reading. And “When Joseph woke up, he did as the Lord’s angel had commanded him. He married her but did not have sexual relations with her until she gave birth to a son. And he named him Jesus.” (Verses 24-25) But the important point to note in this passage is that in the Christ-child, God himself has come into the world “to save His people from their sins.” 

New Testament: Romans 1.1-7
And this was God’s plan A all along, as Paul goes on to show in the New Testament reading. Of course, in the Letter to the Romans, Paul is writing to a church that he himself had never visited. He was practically a stranger to them, and so, in these introductory verses, he must establish his identity and the authority from which he writes, which he ultimately grounds in the Gospel of God. “Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God.” (Verse 1) And it is this concept, the Gospel of God that Paul goes on to define in verses 2 thru 6 of the passage, that it was promised beforehand through the prophets in the Scriptures (verse 2), that it concerns his son, Jesus Christ our Lord, that he was a descendant of David (verse 3), appointed the powerful Son of God by the Spirit through resurrection (verse 4), and that through Him, we have been given a mission to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of His name throughout the nations (verse 5). The point being that this was God’s plan all along from eternity past to eternity future, the Gospel of God is the script by which history unfolds. And the coming of Christ, both in His first Advent and in His second, is the cornerstone of that Gospel.

And so, we return to where we began, that the Gospel of God is nothing less than the expression of His love for His people, and that is what we celebrate at Christmas. God himself entered into the creation as the Christ-child incarnate to save His people from their sins. And thanks be to God for giving us this gift.

For further study:
On the Season of Advent
On the First Sunday of Advent
On the Second Sunday of Advent
On the Third Sunday of Advent

Comments Off on On the Fourth Sunday of Advent   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Worship & Liturgy

12/17/2019

On the Third Sunday of Advent

By Phillip Powers

advent 3

On the third Sunday of Advent, also known as Gaudete Sunday (from the Latin word meaning “rejoice”), we contemplate joy. And the best definition of joy that I have ever come across, though I cannot remember where I found it, goes like this:

Joy is the settled assurance that God is in control of all the details of my life, the quiet confidence that ultimately everything is going to be alright, and the determined choice to praise God in every situation.

Because this is the lesson of Advent, that in the midst of the heartache and sorrows that abound in this present moment, we can still rejoice. We can rejoice because of the Christ-child who came into the world to live a perfect life, die on the cross, and rise again for our forgiveness, and we can rejoice because one day the Christ-King will come again to put an end to our suffering once and for all. So, on this third Sunday of Advent, with the celebration of Christmas less than two weeks away, we rejoice in the one who saves, and the lectionary readings help us to do just that.

Old Testament: Isaiah 35.1-10
In the Old Testament passage, we read of the return of God’s people from exile and the restoration of the Holy City. After the judgment and destruction of chapter 34, chapter 35 opens with a scenic vision of renewal. And so we read, “The wilderness and the dry land will be glad; the desert will rejoice and blossom like a wildflower. It will blossom abundantly and will also rejoice with joy and signing.” (verse 1-2a) And it is in this picture of renewal and restoration that “They will see the glory of the Lord, the splendor of our God.” In other words, God will restore and renew what was lost and damaged by sin, and His people are to look upon it and rejoice. As verse 10 confirms, “and the redeemed of the Lord will return and come to Zion with singing, crowned with unending joy. Joy and gladness will overtake them, and sorrow and sighing will flee.” What a day that will be when illness and death, suffering and sickness will come to an end. And so, Isaiah encourages us in verse 3, “Strengthen the weak hands, steady the shaking knees! Say to the cowardly: ‘Be strong; do no fear! Here is your God; vengeance is coming. God’s retribution is coming; he will save you.'”

Psalm: Psalm 146.5-10 or Luke 1.46b-55
Now, the lectionary gives us two options for the Psalm reading on this third Sunday of Advent. Psalm 146, verses 5-10, extols the compassion of God, especially as He attends to the neediest of His people. “Happy is the one whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord his God, the Maker of heaven and earth, the sea and everything in them. He remains faithful forever.” (verses 5-6) Whether we are talking about the exploited and oppressed, the imprisoned, the blind, the resident aliens, the fatherless, it is God who is understood to be the help in their time of need. In other words, He is the one who rights the wrongs that we have suffered, because “The Lord reigns forver; Zion, your god reigns for all generations. Hallelujah!” (verse 10). The Christ-child came into the world to inaugurate the kingdom of God on earth, and one day, He will come again to consummate the kingdom of God once and for all. And so, we rejoice in praise because He is the solution for our every need.

The other option for the “psalm” reading comes from the Gospel of Luke, chapter 1, verses 46-55, which is of course known as the Magnificat, the song of Mary. And though it is not a Psalm per se, it is nevertheless stands in that vein, because in it Mary voices her praise toward the God who has blessed her with the responsibility of carrying his Son. And so, “My soul praises the greatness of the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my savior.” (verses 46-47). But her joy is not simply motivated by her privilege in carrying the Son of God, but because of what that child represents, namely the coming of God into the world to save His people. And so she sings in verse 50, “His mercy is from generation to generation on those who fear him.” And again in verse 54, “He has helped his servant Israel, remembering his mercy to Abraham and his descendants forever, just as he spoke to our ancestors.” Mary is able to rejoice, because she know that through her, God is setting into motion his eternal plan of salvation. So, also we rejoice as we await the completion of that plan at His second coming.

Gospel: Matthew 11.2-11
The Gospel reading then brings us face to face with the existential angst of this reality, namely that we have been promised joy but everywhere we look we only see suffering. In Matthew, chapter 11, we read of John the Baptist who has now been imprisoned and will soon be executed. So, he sends messengers to Jesus to ask, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?” (verse 3) Of course, this is the very man who had baptized Jesus in the Jordan River proclaiming Him to be the Lamb of God come to take away the sins of the world. But now, he is in prison, and his faith is wavering. And so, Jesus responds, not with condemnation mind you, but with compassion; “Go and report to John what you hear and see,” namely referring to the nature of His ministry. (verses 4-6) Of course, Jesus goes on in this passage to explain the importance of John’s ministry in the unfolding of God’s salvation by way of an appeal to Malachi 3:1, but the important part comes in verse 11, where we read, “Truly I tell you, among those born of women no one great than John the Baptist has appeared, but the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.” In other words, we can rejoice even when the promise doesn’t match the reality, because we know that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.

New Testament: James 5.7-10
And lastly, the New Testament reading exhorts us to cultivate patience with our joy. “Therefore, brothers and sisters, be patient until the Lord’s coming. … You also must be patient. Strengthen you hearts, because the Lord’s coming is near.” (verse 7-8) And then, after he instructs us not to complain about one another, James goes on to say, “Brothers and sisters, take the prophets who spoke in the Lord’s name as an example of suffering and patience.” (verse 10) What James understands is that the strength to endure comes from joy, as he said back in chapter 1, verse 2, “Consider it great joy , my brothers and sisters, whenever you experience various trials.” And the joy that we have in light of Christ’s first coming strengthens us to endure until His second coming. And so James exhorts us in this passage, “Brothers and sisters, do not complain about one another, so that you will not be judged, Look, the judge stands at the door.” Our common joy in the Advent of the Christ child should unite us in peace, because we endure better together.

During this Advent season, may Christ lead us into the fullness of joy as we patiently await His triumphant return.

For further study:
On the Season of Advent
On the First Sunday of Advent
On the Second Sunday of Advent

1 Comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Gospels Studies, Spiritual Formation, Worship & Liturgy

12/12/2019

On the Second Sunday of Advent

By Phillip Powers

second-sunday-in-advent

In the second week of Advent, we focus on peace, that the Christ-child came into the world to offer us peace. Peace, meaning the absence of conflict, of animosity, of antagonism. In the words of the angels on the night of His birth, “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to people he favors.” (Luke 2.14) And when the Prince of Peace returns one day, He will establish His kingdom of perpetual peace once and for all. However, the good news pf Advent is that this is a peace that we, as His people, already experience in the here and now. And so, the lectionary readings for the Second Sunday of Advent invite us into the peace that His coming offers us and that we desperately look forward to at His coming.

Old Testament: Isaiah 11.1-10
Of course, the prophecies of Isaiah are replete with messianic overtones, and this week’s Old Testament reading is no different. In verse 1, we read, “Then a shoot will grow from the stump of Jesse,” which is Isaiah’s way of describing the Messiah according to His biological lineage descended from David, Son of Jesse. But the important thing about Him is what He will do, specifically how He will rule. Verse 2 of the passage tells us that, “The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him.” In other words, Messiah will be anointed with the Spirit of God for the purpose of ruling in justice. And what we must understand is that a just rule, established in righteousness and faithfulness (verse 5), is a prerequisite for peace, because, “He will judge the poor righteously and execute justice for the oppressed of the land.” (verse 4)

And it is His just rule that establishes the idyllic serenity that Isaiah goes on to describe in verses 6-9. “The wolf (traditionally read as lion) will dwell with lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the goat,” etc. And notice in verse 9, “They will not harm or destroy each other on my entire holy mountain, for the land will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the sea is filled with water.” This is Isaiah’s vision for the reign of Messiah, that violence will be no more, that bloodshed and conflict will be no more. Oh, how we long for that day, because, “On that day the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples. The nations will look to him for guidance, and his resting place will be glorious.” In other words, the reign of Messiah will be characterized by perfect peace. 

Psalm: Psalm 72.1-7, 18-19
According to the traditional heading, this psalm appears to be a prayer that was written by King David (see verse 20) for his son and successor Solomon. David is praying for Solomon as he prepares to ascend to the throne. And so, in verse 1, we read, “God, give your justice to the king and your righteousness to the king’s son.” However, given the messianic implications of the term “son of David”, we must see this as a prayer for the perfect and peaceful rule of Messiah. “He will judge your people with righteousness and your afflicted ones with justice.” (verse 2) And again, “May he vindicate the afflicted among the people, help the poor, and crush the oppressor.” (verse 4)  In other words, this psalm is an expression of longing for peace that is written on every human soul, and it reminds us that our longings for peace on earth will never be fully satisified by any human ruler or government. No, “Blessed be the Lord God, the God of Israel, who alone does wonders. Blessed be his glorious name forever; the whole earth is filled with his glory. Amen and amen.” (verse 18-19). There is a deep and severe longing in every human soul for the peace, and in this prayer, we affirm that it will only be realized with the coming of Messiah.

Gospel: Matthew 3.1-12
In the Gospel reading, then, we read of a familiar character in the Gospel accounts, namely John the Baptizer. And though we may not think of him in conjunction with the Christmas story, he is, nevertheless, important because of His role as herald. “For he is the one spoke of through the prophet Isaiah, who said: A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: Prepare the way for the Lord; make his paths straight.” (verse 3) And so, as we think about our Lord’s Advent, we must recognize that John was the appointed herald to announce His initial arrival. And he did so my preaching, “Repent, because the kingdom of heaven has come near.” (verse 2) This, by the way, is the same message that Jesus preached at the beginning of His ministry in Galilee.

But what makes this passage appropriate for Advent is what John says to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came out to be baptized. In verse 7, we read, “Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?” Admittedly, it is somewhat awkward to read about wrath when we are supposed to be focusing on peace; however, John has hit on something that is important to understand about our Lord’s coming, namely that before there can be peace, there must be wrath. Evil must be dealt with, and the wicked must be removed so that peace can rise.  And so, John proclaims that one who comes after him has “His winnowing shovel is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn. But the chaff he will burn with the fire that never goes out.” When our Lord Christ returns to in glory, He will bring with Him two things, peace for those who repent of their sins and wrath for those that do not. And so John tells us, “Therefore produce fruit consistent with repentance.”

New Testament: Romans 15.4-13
And finally, in the New Testament reading, we can see exactly what kind of fruit that is, namely that we who have repented of our sins, trusted in Christ, and received His peace should show forth that peace toward others. As Paul puts it in verse 7, “Therefore accept one another, just as Christ also accepted you, to the glory of God.” In other words, we are called to be Christ’s agents of peace in the world; we give to others what we ourselves have already received. This is in keeping with Paul’s prayer in verse 13, where he prays, “Now may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you believe so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.” The point is that the foundation for peaceful human relationships is grounded in the finished work of the Christ-child.

And the proof of Paul’s point in this passage is the full and equal inclusion of the Gentiles in the people of God. In the first century, there was no more antagonistic vitriolic relationship as that between the Jews and the Gentiles, but Paul strings together a handful of Old Testament quotes in this passage to show that it was always God’s plan to bring the Gentiles into the kingdom of Messiah. So, all of a sudden, Jewish followers of Jesus were faced with a dilemma, namely how could they accept Gentile followers of Jesus  into their communities as brothers and sisters in Christ. And Paul’s answer is that they can because they have received the peace of Christ. So, he prays, “Now may the God who gives endurance and encouragement grant you to live in harmony with one another, according to Christ Jesus, so that you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ with one mind and one voice.” This is the crucial point: He gives peace, we embrace peace, and He gets the glory.

May this Advent season bring you and yours all the peace of Christ that passes all understanding, and may we all show forth His peace to a world that is in so desperate need of it!

For Further Study:
On the Season of Advent
On the First Sunday of Advent

2 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Spiritual Formation, Worship & Liturgy

12/04/2019

On the First Sunday of Advent

By Phillip Powers

Adventskranz 1. Advent

As previously noted, this last Sunday, December 1, 2019, marked the beginning of the Christian season of Advent, and this first Sunday of the Advent season emphasizes hope, namely our expectation that Jesus the Christ will one day return to this earth in glory and power to establish His kingdom forever. Understandably, the corresponding lectionary readings (taken from the Revised Common Lectionary) help us to envision and to prepare ourselves for that day, and they reinforce our hope in the midst of the pain and difficulties that are so common in our world today.

Old Testament: Isaiah 2.1-5
In the Old Testament reading, we are confronted with “The vision that Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem” (verse 1), and in this vision, the prophet looks forward to the last days to see the house of the Lord established and all the nations streaming to it. In verse 3, they say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us about his ways so that we may walk in his paths.”  This reminds us that God’s plan was never solely for the people of Israel; rather, His plan was for the salvation of the nations, that all peoples might come to know Him and to enjoy His benevolence. Because on that day, “instruction will go out of Zion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” 

And on that day, He will establish peace, as Isaiah describes in verse 4, “They will beat their swords into plows and their spears into pruning knives.” He goes on, “Nation will not take up the sword against nation, and they will never again train for war.” What a glorious hope that we have, that our Lord Jesus will come back to establish peace on earth once and for all. Oh, how we desperately long for that peace, and so, Isaiah encourages us, “House of Jacob, come and let us walk in the Lord’s light.” In other words, we are called to people of peace because of our hope. We know that one day our Lord Jesus will return.  This is our blessed hope, and so we must walk in the His light.

Psalm: Psalm 122
The Psalm reading follows up on Isaiah’s vision, then, with a prayer for the well being of Jerusalem. It is one of the “Songs of Ascent” which would be sang by Jewish pilgrims as they made their way up to the holy city to worship at the temple. As it says, “I rejoiced with those who said to me, ‘Let us go to the house of the Lord.'” (verse 1) And David tells us why we should rejoice in verse 3-4, where he writes, “Jerusalem, built as a city should be, solidly united, where the tribes, the Lord’s tribes, go up to give thanks to the name of the Lord.” Of course David was thinking of that earthly city, that temple which was made by hands, but we know, in light of our Lord’s first coming, that we are waiting for that heavenly Jerusalem, the city of God, where we will live in the presence of God for eternity. This is our hope.

Gospel: Matthew 24.36-44
The Gospel reading for this first Sunday of Advent, as it does every year, comes from the Olivet Discourse, in this case Matthew’s version. And this is a profound reminder that the season of Advent is radically eschatological in its scope. Yes, it prepares us to celebrate the birth of the Christ-child at Christmas, but it also reminds that our hope is yet future. And as Jesus says, “Now concerning that day and hour no one knows – neither the angels of heaven nor the Son – except the Father alone” (verse 36). And He concludes, “This is why you are also to be ready, because the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect” (verse 44). The point here is clear, that we must be ready, that we must prepare ourselves for His arrival, and in the context of the Olivet Discourse, this means that we must be faithful to the responsibilities that He has left us. As it says in verse 46, “Blessed is that servant who the master finds doing his job when he comes.”

New Testament: Romans 13.11-14
And finally, the New Testament reading gives us a glimpse of what this readied faithfulness looks like. It is sufficient here, I believe, to simply quote the passage at length: “Besides this, since you know the time, it is already the hour for you to wake up from sleep, because now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. The night is nearly over, and the day is near; so let us discard the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us walk with decency, as in the daytime: not in carousing and drunkenness; not in sexual impurity and promiscuity; not in quarreling and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and don’t make plans to gratify the desires of the flesh.” That last line says it all, that we should put on Christ-likeness, because we know that our hope is certain and that our faithfulness will be rewarded on that day when Jesus comes again.

And so, let us renew our hope this Advent season. We live in a world that is completely inundated with conflict, confusion, and chaos; we are constantly bombarded with painful and tearful reminders that this world is not completely as it should be. But one day, it will all be put to rights, and until that time, we are called to endure in hope and to persevere in faithfulness, no matter how grim the outlook may be.

For further study:
On the Use and Benefit of the Lectionary
On the Season of Advent

3 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Spiritual Formation, Worship & Liturgy

01/25/2019

On the Ending(s) of the Gospel of Mark

By Phillip Powers

d38a6db3-bd4e-4462-b587-5e0764af14dd-mark-16

In the Sunday School class that I am a part of, we have recently been studying the history and meaning of the cross, and as a part of that study, I suggested that while the historical specifics and the theological significance of the cross are important, to truly understand the cross, we must understand it narratively as the climax of the Passion of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This led the class’s facilitator to ask me to walk us through the Passion narrative, an invitation that I was more than willing to accept, and so, for more than two months, we followed in the steps of Jesus as He made his way toward the cross. And we did this by focusing specifically on Mark’s version of these events, which is recorded in chapters 11-16 of his Gospel.

It has been said that Mark’s Gospel is simply a “passion narrative with an extended introduction.” And whether that is an accurate description or not, Mark does allocate a disproportionate amount of space to the final week of Jesus’ life as compared with the first three plus years of His public ministry or, even, the thirty-some years that Jesus had lived beforehand. To be specific, Mark dedicates six entire chapters of his Gospel, some 38% if you are doing the math, to the events leading up and following Jesus’ death on the cross. Obviously, he thought that these events were of supreme significance. And so, typical of Mark’s style, these final six chapters tell the story of Jesus’ passion with such action and drama as to constantly leave the reader on the edge of their seat waiting to see what might happen next.

However, all throughout this study of Jesus’ passion week, I found myself feeling somewhat more afraid with every step we took as we moved closer and closer to the ending of Mark’s Gospel. You see, I already knew that there is a text critical question regarding Mark’s Ending, but the vast majority of the members of the class, being King James faithful, were very likely unaware of this issue. I was terrified of how they might react when I explained that Mark, chapter 16, verses 9-20, as they appear in their Bibles, are most likely secondary in nature. Well, I am glad to report that my brothers and sisters in Christ were more than gracious in accepting my explanation of the issue, which, as I had presumed, most of them had never been exposed to. But, the vast ignorance of this issue among so many Christians, especially down here in the Bible Belt, breaks my heart, so in the space that follows I would like to give a brief overview of the issues related to Mark’s ending(s).

The fact of the matter is that there are actually four endings to the Gospel of Mark which are extant in the manuscript tradition. They are as follows:

  1. No ending, as is indicated in most modern translations, the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, particularly B and א, end the text of the second Gospel at verse 8.
  2. The Short Ending, immediately following 16:8, “But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after these things Jesus himself sent out through them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.”
  3. The Long ending (otherwise known as 16:9-20), which is included in all Bible translations that are available today, though usually with brackets, footnotes, and/or other indicators of its questionable authenticity.
  4. The Expanded ending, which expands the Long ending after verse 14, saying, “This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits [or, does not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to understand the truth and power of God]. Therefore reveal your righteousness now’ – thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, ‘The term of years of Satan’s power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, in order that they may inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness that is in heaven.”

Now, I am not here to argue the merits for or against any particular one of these four endings, but suffice it to say that the overwhelming consensus of New Testament textual scholarship has concluded that all of the endings that we have (numbers 2-4 above) are inherently secondary, and that, whether intentionally or unintentionally, the Gospel of Mark as we know it ends at 16:8. Based on both external and internal evidence considerations, this much seems reasonably certain.

However, what is important is not one’s conclusion regarding the original ending of the Gospel of Mark, but what conclusions should be drawn in light of the textual question. First, we must maintain our belief in the fundamental trustworthiness and historical reliability of the Bible in general, and of the Gospel accounts in particular. Just because the last twelve verses of the second Gospel as we know it are in question, this does not mean that the rest of the Gospel of Mark, or the other three Gospels for that matter, are inherently false. In fact, all of the events in the so-called Long Ending are attested in the other accounts, especially in Luke and Acts. Further, we must remember that we do not build theological conclusions based on the testimony of one verse in isolation. As important as scriptural citations are in establishing the Biblical basis for our theological conclusions, individual verses must be understood within the context of the whole of Holy Scripture.

Second, this does not mean that translations of the Bible which lack any indication of the textual issue, e.g. some editions of the King James Version, are fundamentally in error, or that the are trying to lead people astray. The history of the Bible in English is long and complex, and conclusions that are based on the presence and/or omission of this particular issue, or others like it, are simplistic and reductionistic. To the extent that any English translation of the Bible faithfully reflects the original text of the autographs, then it can be read with great spiritual benefit. As Jesus promised, the Spirit will lead us into all truth through His Holy Word. Ultimately, He is the one who inspired the original  biblical authors, He is the one who has providentially preserved the text, and He is the one who gives understanding of its truths and applies them to our hearts to make us more like Christ.

 

 

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus

04/03/2018

On the Season of Easter

By Phillip Powers

empty tomb

This past Sunday, the church universal celebrated Resurrection Sunday, which marks the annual commemoration of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. And, unfortunately, for most churches, especially those stemming from low church or free church traditions, this celebration will be quickly forgotten as they slide back into their usual routine of doing church every week. Sadly, most of the people who attended church yesterday, because it was Easter Sunday, will simply resume their normal routines, and they will continue to live as if the resurrection is simply an interesting story that happened long ago but has no real impact on their daily lives.

This is where I believe the historic Church Calendar can aid us in our spiritual formation. According to that traditional reckoning of the church’s annual worship rhythms, the celebration of the resurrection is not simply something that is relegated to one Sunday per year. No, the season of the Resurrection lasts for almost two months and culminates in the church’s celebration of the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. Just as Jesus spent 40 days after His resurrection with His disciples teaching them about the kingdom before He ascended, observing the Resurrection as a season in the church’s worship can help us to more fully understand, appreciate, embrace, and be formed by that most essential of historical foundations that Christ is risen!

So, during my sermon this past Sunday, I challenged those who were in attendance simply because it was Easter, that if they really wanted to be Easter only Christians, then I would expect to see them in Church for the next seven consecutive Sundays. I doubt that many of them will heed that challenge, nevertheless, the Season of the Resurrection, sometimes called Eastertide, is an invitation for Christians, both corporately and individually, to intentionally position ourselves in a place where the Spirit may take us deeper into the wonder and mystery of Christ crucified and resurrected.

So, in the limited space that follows, let me offer some practical suggestions on how Christians, both as individuals and as congregations, might navigate the next seven weeks leading up to Pentecost so as to grow in and be formed by the wonderful mystery of the Gospel.

First, read through, or reread through, one of the four Gospels in the light of Jesus resurrection. The lectionary for the Season of the Resurrection is going to be taking us through the Gospel of John, but you may choose another one of the four. Whichever you choose, try to read it as one of the first followers of Jesus. The Gospels tells us that it was only after Jesus resurrection that they truly began to understand more fully all that He had said and done during His ministry. And one of Jesus’ last instructions to His followers was that they were to go into all nations teaching them to observe all that He had commanded them. (Matthew 28.20)

Second, whether you are a preacher or simply a listener, ask yourself how the resurrection makes what you are saying and/or hearing in the sermon possible. It has been said many times perhaps, but it bears repeating: if what you are preaching doesn’t require Jesus, then you’ve missed the point. Paul said that the resurrection is the linchpin, if you will, of the Gospel (1 Corinthians 15), so how does the truth of Christ’s resurrection impact or influence the message of whatever particular text you are preaching. Here again, I would suggest considering the lectionary as a basis for determining a preaching schedule (see my post here), but wherever your preaching schedule is going, it is all meaningless without the resurrection of our Lord.

Third, be actively and intentionally involved in the life of the local church. During the Season of the Resurrection, the Lectionary replaces the Old Testament reading with a passage from the Acts of the Apostles. This is because the 50 day Season of the Resurrection culminates in the celebration of the coming of the Spirit on Pentecost, which might be called the birthday of the church. Jesus’ resurrection makes it possible for His followers to live in new life free from the power of sin, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit makes it possible for those followers to live in a new kind of Christian community, one characterized by love and service. So, during this Season of the Resurrection, seek out intentional ways to love and serve people in the local church.

The simple fact of the matter is that the Christian faith is meaningless without the resurrection of Jesus. Without it, Jesus is just another nameless victim executed by the Roman Empire; His death is pointless. The Apostle Paul said as much in his first letter to the church at Corinth, “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.” (1 Corinthians 15.17). So, if we truly believe that the death and resurrection of Jesus is the necessary and essential heart of the Christian Gospel, then it deserves to be celebrated more than just one Sunday per year. This Resurrection Season, let us remember that we worship a Risen Lord!

 

2 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Christian Education, Church History, Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus, Ministry, Spiritual Formation, Worship & Liturgy

03/28/2018

On Jesus’ Understanding of His Death

By Phillip Powers

JesusFinalHours-56a149da5f9b58b7d0bdda13

In a previous post, I began considering how we should understand the death of Jesus, and I argued that the overwhelming testimony of both the Old and New Testament point to a penal substitution view as essential for understanding the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Specifically, I gave a handful of quotations from the various New Testament authors that show that the very first followers of Jesus understood His death in this way. Now, it is only reasonable to suppose that they must have received this understanding from somewhere; they didn’t just come up with it on their own. And it is my thesis that they received this understanding of Jesus’ atonement from Jesus himself.

However, this proposition is not without its critics. One such voice is that which belongs to Brian Zahnd, founder and lead pastor of Word of Life Church in St. Joseph, Missouri and author of a book entitled, Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God: The Scandalous Truth of the Very Good News, where he argues:

“Among the many problems with [a penal substitution] theory of the cross is that it turns God into a petty tyrant and a moral monster. Punishing the innocent in order to forgive the guilty is monstrous logic, atrocious theology, and a gross distortion of the idea of justice. … A theory of the cross that says it was God who desired the torture and murder of Jesus on Good Friday turns the Father of Jesus into a cruel and sadistic monster. It’s salvation by divine sadism.” (101-102)

He has also stated that

“Even if penal substitutionary atonement theory is one of the correct models for interpreting the cross (personally I’m convinced its a pagan idea and an outrageous libel against God) its still not the gospel. The gospel is the story of Jesus – not abstract atonement theories.” (via @BrianZahnd, tweeted 3.20.18, 7:27PM)

And in his blog “How Did Jesus Understand His Death?”, he argues that Jesus understood his death in the vein of the Christus Victor theory of the atonement on the basis of John 12:31-32.

So, in order to understand the meaning of Jesus’ death, we must consider carefully how Jesus understood it and conveyed its significance to His first disciples. It is relatively obvious that Jesus anticipated his death by crucifixion at the hands of the Jewish and Roman authorities. In the Synoptics (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), He predicts his death at least three specific occasions. Those predictions, along with many other allusions, coupled with the obvious animosity between the Jewish religious establishment and Jesus clearly indicate that Jesus was well aware of the fate that awaited Him on that third and final trip to Jerusalem. However, not only did he expect his upcoming execution, he also very clearly saw it as the necessary culmination of His ministry and mission.

In this light then, it is reasonable to expect that He must have reflected on the meaning of His death. And there are three sayings of Jesus that give us some insight into how he understood that meaning. The first saying of Jesus that gives us some insight into how he understood His death is found in Mark 10:45 (also Matthew 20.28), which is known as the ransom saying, because Jesus says, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” The second saying of Jesus that shows how he understood his death is found in the words of institution at the Last Supper (Mark 14:22-25, Matt. 26:26-29, Luke 22:14-20). There Jesus reinterprets the elements of the Passover meal in the light of His upcoming death. And the third saying that is also somewhat conceptually related is found in the prayer of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, when he prayed “Take this cup away from me.” (Mark 14:36. Matt. 26:39,42, Luke 22:42)

These statements indicate that Jesus understood his death as a vicarious substitution for many, and it seems reasonably clear that the theological background of these sayings is to be found in that paradigmatic passage from the Old Testament which describes the vicarious substitution of the “suffering servant”. In Isaiah 52:13-53:12, the prophet vividly predicts the vicarious and expiatory suffering of the servant of the Lord for the many. The linguistic and conceptual parallels between the suffering servant song and these sayings of Jesus are quite telling. For example, the idea of a ransom in Mark 10:45, used as a metaphor, parallels the idea of a guilt offering in Isaiah 53:10, and the idea for many echoes the repetitive many in Isaiah 53:11-12. This indicates that Jesus clearly understood himself to be fulfilling the role of the suffering servant in His death on the cross.

Further, in the garden, when Jesus asks His Father to remove “the cup”, He is likely referring to “the cup of God’s wrath” or “judgment” so often described in the Old Testament prophets. And that is why He is able to say in John 12:31, “Now is the judgment of this world.” So, here again it seems fairly evident that Jesus understood His death as the satisfaction of God’s judgment on sin. In light of all this, it is safe to conclude that Jesus viewed His death as a substitutionary and expiatory act that satisfies the just judgment and due penalty for sin before a Holy God. It would seem, then, that the first followers of Jesus drew their penal substitution view of the atonement directly from the words of Jesus himself.

2 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus, Systematic Theology

03/15/2018

On so called ‘Cosmic Child Abuse’ and the Atonement

By Phillip Powers

o-CRUCIFIXION-facebook

In recent years, it has become rather faddish for critics of traditional atonement theory to dismiss the idea of penal substitution as a form of cosmic child abuse. In other words, these critics assert that it is a morally evil injustice for God to punish His innocent Son for the sins of all other human beings. They further assert that this kind of “redemptive violence” is simply incompatible with a God who is love. Stephen Chalk and Alan Mann, in their book The Lost Message of Jesus, state it this way:

The fact is that the cross isn’t a form of cosmic child abuse—a vengeful Father, punishing his Son for an offence he has not even committed. Understandably, both people inside and outside of the church have found this twisted version of events morally dubious and a huge barrier to faith. Deeper than that, however, is that such a concept stands in total contradiction to the statement “God is love”. If the cross is a personal act of violence perpetrated by God towards humankind but borne by his Son, then it makes a mockery of Jesus’ own teaching to love your enemies and to refuse to repay evil with evil.

Later, they give their understanding of the atonement when they state:

The truth is, the cross is a symbol of love. It is a demonstration of just how far God as Father and Jesus as his Son are prepared to go to prove that love. The cross is a vivid statement of the powerlessness of love.

This moral influence theory of the atonement is not new or original with Chalk and Mann. It was first advanced by a medieval scholastic theologian named Peter Abelard (1079-1142), who

“emphasized the primacy of God’s love and insisted that Christ did not make some sort of sacrificial payment to the Father to satisfy his offended dignity. Rather, Jesus demonstrated to humanity the full extent of God’s love for them” (Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 803)

In other words, on the cross, God showed to what extent He was willing to go to demonstrate the depth of His love for humanity, and His great love so demonstrated should cause human beings to respond in love to God. Certainly, God is love (1 John 4:7-21) and the cross is a demonstration of God’s love (Romans 5:8), but the above definition simply does not go far enough to explain why the cross is effective as a means of salvation for human beings. In what follows, I will give some reasons why this critique, that penal substitutionary atonement is “cosmic child abuse”, is completely unfounded and why a penal substitution view of the atonement is essential to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

First, it goes against the overwhelming testimony of Holy Scripture. It is no overstatement to conclude that the nearly unanimous witness of the Biblical authors from beginning to end is that Christ died as a substitute for the sins of humanity. There is not enough space here to quote all the verses that would serve to prove this point, so a few will simply have to suffice. As it relates to the Old Testament, one could argue that the entire sacrificial system was pointing to the death of Jesus, because that system is based upon the foundational assumption that the death of animals can substitute and atone for the sins of human beings. But, the premier text on this topic is the “Suffering Servant Song” of Isaiah 53, which says in part:

But he was pierced because of our rebellion, crushed because of our iniquities; punishment for our peace was on him, and we are healed by his wounds. We all went astray like sheep; we all have turned to our own way; and the Lord has punished him for the iniquity of us all. (verses 5-6)

And, in the New Testament, there are numerous verses that could be quoted to show that the first followers of Jesus understood his death as a substitutionary atonement for sin. Due to space limitations, a few will have to suffice. In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul says, “For I passed on to you as most important what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.” Also, in 2 Corinthians 5:21, “He made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” In Romans 4:25, he says “He was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.” And not only Paul, but we see that the other writers of the New Testament understood the atonement in this way as well. In 1 Peter 2:24, Peter wrote, “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree; so that, having died to sins, we might live for righteousness.” And in 1 Peter 3:18, he wrote, “For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring you to God.” In 1 John 4:10, John writes, “Love consists in this: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice (propitiation) for our sins.” And the author of Hebrews, says in Hebrews 2:9, “But we do see Jesus—made lower than the angels for a short time so that by God’s grace he might taste death for everyone.”

In light of all this, we are safe to conclude that the Old and New Testament authors unanimously understand the death of Jesus as a substitute making atonement to God for the sins of humanity.

Second, this view also misunderstands the essential character and nature of God in two ways. First, as it relates to His character, proponents of this kind of moral influence theory exalt God’s love over and against His other attributes, namely His holiness and justice. God’s character attributes cannot be so divided as to pit them against one another. He is a God of love, but he is also and equally a God of holiness and justice. Moreover, His attributes are interrelated, such that his love is just and holy, and his holiness and justice are loving. To pit God’s justice against His love is to recapitulate that ancient heresy attributed to Marcion of Sinope (c. 85-c. 160), who believed the wrathful Hebrew God of the Old Testament was a separate and lower entity than the all-forgiving God of the New Testament. That heresy was rightly condemned by the fathers of early church.

Also, as it relates to the nature of God, this view fundamentally misunderstands the doctrine of the trinity. These critics of the traditional penal substitutionary view seem to assume that the Son was an innocent third party separate and distinct from God the Father. Therefore, they argue that it is unjust for God to punish the Son for the sins of all humanity. However, the Son is not some innocent disconnected third party in this discussion; no, the Son is God himself. The second person of the trinity was incarnated as Jesus of Nazareth, so it was the second person of the Trinity that died on the cross. We must not disconnect God’s threeness (in persons) from his oneness (in essence). After all, Christians are fundamentally monotheists; Holy Scripture clearly teaches that there is one God. So, we must conclude that all three Persons are the same God. In other words, there is one God who eternally exists as three distinct Persons. So, if the second person of the trinity died on the cross for the sins of humanity, then we must say that God himself died on the cross for the sins of humanity. Thus, the Son was a willing participant in the crucifixion, as God took the sins of humanity onto himself.

The atonement, a penal substitutionary atonement, is at the very center of the Christian Gospel, that Jesus Christ bore the sins of humanity on the cross and died in their place to satisfy their deserved punishment before a just and holy God. Let us not shrink from this fact in fear or shame, but embrace it as the glorious demonstration of God’s love that it is.

2 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , | posted in Biblical Theology, Church History, Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus, Systematic Theology, Worship & Liturgy

Tim Challies

Slow To Write

"let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger."

lovegavehope

Just another WordPress.com site

Jared Cornutt

Pastor | Speaker | Writer

Denny Burk

A commentary on theology, politics, and culture

G3 Ministries

Events + Resources for the Local Church

Biblical Reasoning

Biblical and Systematic Theology According to the Scriptures

RetroChristianity

Reclaiming the Forgotten Faith

SBC Voices

Southern Baptist News & Opinion

Lucid Theology

Thoughts on words, books, theology, and life.

Baptist21

A pastor-led voice for Baptists in the 21st century

Center For Baptist Renewal

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

The Pastor's Well - Pastor Well

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

Welcome

Articles - AlbertMohler.com

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

The Gospel Coalition

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers