What the Death of Christ accomplished

When Christ died,

"The Father and his Son intended by the death of Christ to redeem, purge, sanctify, purify, deliver from death, Satan, the curse of the law, to quit of all sin, to make righteousness in Chrst, to bring nigh unto God, all those for whom he died...therefore, Christ died for all and only those in and towards whom all these things recounted are effected..." (The Death of Death, pg 99)

Below are a few Scriptures which support Owen's claim.  Many more can be found by reading the Scriptures:

• Redeem - Galatians 4:4-5, Titus 2:12-14
• Purge - Hebrews 9:12, 14; 
• Sanctify - Hebrews 1:3
• Purify - Titus 2:14
• Deliver from death - John 10:28, 2 Timothy 1:10, Romans 5:6-10
• Deliver from Satan - Romans 16:20
• Deliver from the curse of the law - Galatians 3:13
• Quit all sin - Hebrews 9:26, Revelation 5:9-10
• Make righteousness in Christ - Romans 3:21-22
• Bring unto God - Ephesians 2:13-16

On Theological illiteracy

"Our theological currency has been debased.  Our minds have been conditioned to think of the Cross as a redemption which does less than redeem, and of Christ as a Saviour who does less than save, and of God's love as a weak affection which cannot keep anyone from hell without help, and of faith as the human help which God needs for this purpose.  As a result, we are no longer free either to believe the biblical gospel or to preach it.  We cannot believe it, because our thoughts are caught in the toils of synergism.  We are haunted by the Arminian idea that if faith and unbelief are to be responsible acts, they must be independent acts; hence we are not free to believe that we are saved entirely by divine grace through a faith which is itself God's gift and flows to us from Calvary.  Instead, we involve ourselves in a bewildering kind of double-think about salvation, telling ourselves one moment that it all depends on god and next moment that it all depends on us.  the resultant mental muddle deprives God of much of the glory that we should give Him as author and finisher of salvation, and ourselves of much of the comfort we might draw from knowing that God is for us."

John Owen has a wonderful way of presenting things clearly.  And this was written in the 1700's.
From The Death of Death, pg. 13-14.

Baptized for the Dead? 1 Corinthians 15:29

A friend of mine from Colorado wrote this.  I would love to hear your comments and thoughts on it.  You can find more of his work at www.livinggodministries.net

When we begin to mature in our faith in Christ Jesus, our life becomes an adventure of discovery. One way we begin to discover what we now have, is by reading the Bible. When reading the Bible we often discover what our God has said and done in the past. When reading through the letters of the Apostle Paul, we occasionally discover passages that are difficult to understand. Peter recognized this challenge in his second letter, chapter 3:15,16. One of these difficult passages is found in Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, 15:29, where he wrote, "Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?" What is difficult, is that we recognize that a person cannot be baptized on behalf of someone else. Baptism is a personal and individual decision by those who undergo conversion. However, it appears that Paul is suggesting that we can undergo this sacrament of conversion on behalf of someone else who is already dead. How can this be without contradicting the rest of the Scriptures that specifically address personal responsibility with regards to salvation? Understanding this verse requires an understanding of the pharisaical doctrines of baptism and indwelling life. With an understanding of these doctrines, it will be easy to both understand and appreciate this statement to the church in Corinth.

Liberty without License - Gal 5:13-18

I am preaching through Galatians currently, and this week I am reflecting on Galatians 5:13-26 in order to speak on it a few weeks from now.  While I inherently have an understanding of what Paul is saying about not using our freedom to sin, actually expressing this without it sounding like a new form of legalism is a hard thing.  One can speak experientially of their own life, but not be able to convincingly articulate that reality to others. Convincing articulation is what sets apart great writers and orators.  I am neither, but I believe the following quotations are excellent food for thought in this regard.

"Anyone who uses freedom to indulge the flesh is not really free at all.  Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin"(John 8:34). In other words, license is the very opposite of liberty.  It is really a form of slavery.  Real liberty comes when Christ frees me from sin, not to sin...[but our newfound] freedom to serve others...is actually a new from of slavery.  the word "serve"[Gal 5:13] is the Greek word for 'be a slave'- the kind of person who washes the dishes and takes out the trash.  So here is the paradox: By setting us free to serve, the Holy Spirit enslaves us to one another in love." -Ryken, REC: Galatians, chapter 18

These words wonderfully articulate the new Christian life to serve and love.  But how does one serve and love.  This is where the law of God comes in.  We are not freed from the law, but from its demands for becoming righteous through the law.  Now that we are righteous in Christ, we can live out the law by the empowerment of the spirit and truly love one another.  Granted, we will still sin, we will love imperfectly, we will fail along the way, but we can continue to walk in this way and learn what it means to love our God and love our neighbor.  This is our calling in the Christian life.  To be free to love.  Let us press on toward the goal of heaven where love will be the rule of the day.

Pastoral Letter on Infant Baptism

Dennis Johnson, a prof at Westminster Seminary California, shares a letter he wrote to one of his daughter explaining how he changed from holding a believer's baptism view to the reformed view that includes the baptism of infants.  It is a wonderful pastoral letter.  You can read it here.

Pudd'nhead Wilson and the Christian Life

I just finished Pudd'nhead Wilson by Mark Twain. For those who are unfamiliar with the story here is a brief synopsis: Thomas a Becket Driscoll and Valet de Chambre are switched in the crib when Roxy, a slave woman, 1/32 negro, realizes that nobody will ever notice. She gives her son, Chambre, the leg up in society. Unfortunately he turns on her many times, even selling her down the river to pay a gambling debt, though she holds over him the spectre of turning him in as the fraudulent heir that he is.

Eventually he kills his uncle and Pudd'nhead Wilson, the town lawyer and also sleuth and finger print collector uncovers the whole thing on the final morning of the trial. The murderer is exposed and shipped down the river and the "slave boy" but true heir takes his position. Only problem, he is the heir, but he still lives, talks and acts like the negro he was raised to be.

As I reflect on the story, this passage of Scripture comes to mind.

Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God — or rather are known by God — how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? Galatians 4:8-9

What a commentary on the Christian life and how we continue in what we were even when we are free. Even though the true heir is restored to his rightful place, he continues to long for and live like a slave. Isn't that the Christian's struggle? Though we are rightful children, we long for the slop of this world, its riches, its rewards and its entrapments, but we are free. We have every right to a real life grounded in Christ, but we live like slaves. Oh that each of us recognized this reality and began enjoying the glorious freedom of Christ - growing, learning and living like men and women freed from sin and death so that we can really love God and our neighbors.

Where's Jesus? The story of Jacob stealing the blessing. (Genesis 27)

As I continue on a new line of posts entitled "Where's Jesus?"  I am thinking that every Wednesday I will post a thought on this topic. Today, in my second posting in this line, I would like to explore the story of Jacob stealing the blessing from Esau.  The story is found in Genesis 27.  Where is Jesus in this story of a younger brother tricking his elderly father into giving him the family blessing?  Where is Jesus in this story where Jacob lies to his father? Where is Jesus in a story where the prime player says "The Lord your God gave me success" (v.20) as he perpetuates the ruse in order to scheme his way into blessing?

Where's Jesus? The story of Jacob marrying Rachel and Leah (Genesis 29:14-30)

Jesus makes a startling statement in John 5:39 when he says,

"You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me..."  

If this is true, and it is, for every bit of Scripture is a testimony to Christ, then one of the best questions we can ask of any passage is "Where's Jesus?"

Sometimes finding Jesus is akin to finding Waldo in a picture full of detail, sometimes it is as obvious as can be.  I have been studying Genesis with my small group and must admit that more often than not I don't see Jesus clearly in the text.  Take for example the story in Genesis 29:14-30 where Jacob marries both Leah and Rachel.  Where is Jesus in this story?  (After thinking about it yourself, continue reading.

The Manhattan Declaration

There is a great declaration related to the sanctity of Life, Marriage and religious liberty which has recently been published.  it is called the Manhattan Declaration and you can read it here.  I signed on tonight and encourage you to read this well thought out piece.

Here is an excerpt:

"While the whole scope of Christian moral concern, including a special concern for the poor and vulnerable, claims our attention, we are especially troubled that in our nation today the lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are severely threatened; that the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable ideologies; that freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized by those who would use the instruments of coercion to compel persons of faith to compromise their deepest convictions." 

A Theology of the Thorn - Praying for Health instead of Healing

Last month I was in a conversation with some older men who are mentoring me in prayer and one of them mentioned that there is a difference between praying for health and praying for healing.  That was quickly followed up with a reference to Paul's thorn in the flesh.  Let me quote the text from 2 Corinthians 12:7-10:

“To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong” (NIV).

There is no scholarly consensus on exactly what this "thorn" was, and the possibilities are almost as endless as the number of theologians.  Eye disease, epilepsy, poor speech, opposition and numerous other things have all been suggested.  I do not have any new contributions to make on this front.  What I would like to do is shift the focus from the problem, to the prayer Paul prayed and the answer he received.

Christmas and churches

Genevan Opposition

At times during the sixteenth century, ecclesiastical holidays caused agitation in the city of Geneva. It seems to have been a difficult matter for a resolution, since any official action taken would stir up some element of the population.

The Register of Ministers in Geneva (1546) records a list of "faults which contravene the Reformation." Among the directives regarding "Superstitions" is the following: "Those who observe Romish festivals or fasts shall only be reprimanded, unless they remain obstinately rebellious. "[9]

On Sunday, 16 November 1550, an edict was issued concerning holidays; it was a decree "respecting the abrogation of all festivals, with the exception of Sundays, which God had ordained. "[10] This ban on festival days (including Christmas) caused an uproar in certain quarters, and Calvin was reproached as the instigator of the action.

Calvin's personal writings about holidays, in this instance, are somewhat ambiguous. He says he was not directly involved in the decision. In personal correspondence with John Haller (pastor in Berne), Calvin writes, "Before I ever entered the city, there were no festivals but the Lord's day." He added, "If I had got my choice, I should not have decided in favor of what has now been agreed upon."[11]

It seems that Calvin was initially uneasy about the edict to ban the festivals, because he feared that the "sudden change" might provoke tumult which could impede the course of the Reformation. Nevertheless, in the same letter to Haller, Calvin says, "Although I have neither been the mover nor instigator to it, yet, since it has so happened, I am not sorry for it."[12] ...

Thus, Calvin's writings on worship clearly enunciate the concept which has subsequently been called the regulative principle of worship: all modes of worship must be expressly sanctioned by God's word, if they are to be considered legitimate. Since Christmas observances, and other ecclesiastical festivals, are not commanded in the scriptures, they fail to meet divine approval, even if there were no additional objections to them.

Further, we should note Calvin's own pastoral practice as indicative of his convictions. The Reformer preached consecutively through books of the Bible, without regard to the ecclesiastical year. Surely if Calvin had adopted the attitude of modern Christmas-keepers, he would have felt constrained to abandon this systematic instruction of the scriptures, and deliver annual discourses from the birth narratives during the month of December. The fact that he did not comply with contemporary expectations speaks volumes.[16]

You can read Kevin Reed's full article here ...Read more

Reflections on the Atonement

Yesterday, I was in conversation with a friend of mine concerning the Atonement. Now, you might be thinking, what kind of friends sit around talking about the atonement? To which I would say, mine. Each week I have a wonderful conversation about spiritual issues ad theological doctrines. I cherish these conversations. Let me fill you in on some of the eye-opening conclusions we drew:

Typically the doctrine of the Atonement is limited to the the death and crucifixion of Christ. However, this is in error, for if the doctrine is thus limited without reference to the sinless life of Christ, the Resurrection, Ascension and subsequent sending of the Spirit then something less than an efficacious atonement occurred. (This is one of those points where the discipline of systematic theology is lacking by its compartmentalizing of dogma.)

What I mean is this, without a sinless life, Christ was unable to atone for others, much less himself. He would not have been the spotless lamb of God, sent to take away the sins of the world. Nor would he have been a pleasing sacrifice to God, rather his death would have been a just punishment for his sin, a punishment everyone of us should have to undergo an infinite number of times over. But as a sinless man, God was able to accept his perfect life given as an atoning sacrifice for every sin ever committed by any person.

Furthermore, to remove from the doctrine of the Atonement any mention of the resurrection, ascension and subsequent sending of the Spirit would be to cast humanity into a place of powerlessness with no hope of living a victorious Christian life over sin. If these three events are not taken to be integral to the doctrine of the Atonement then what would humanity's resulting atonement look like? I believe that without these three events, humanity would be cast back into a position very much like that of Adam. Sure our sin would have been covered, assuming of course Christ was sinless and died for us, but we would not have any power internal to ourselves to defeat the next temptation to sin. Thus we would perpetually be living a defeated Christian life, intent on reliving the 3rd chapter of Genesis over and over and over again. However, with the resurrection, ascension and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the Christians' atonement is truly efficacious. It is powerful and the power to defeat sin becomes a power internal to our new constitution as a new humanity. We no longer are subject to the temptations and sins of the fallen order, we are now redeemed and able to live the new life, a life able to choose not to sin.

The doctrine of the Atonement is so much larger than simply the death and burial of Christ, it encompasses his entire life, so that it can affect our entire life. Live on in the power of the Spirit. ...Read more

Sold out for Jesus?

See this great post by a young family sold out to Christ and willing to abandon their life for the sake of those in need. This is one amazing story of Adoption and how God works to change people into his hands and his feet.

26th Federalist Paper and Israel's request for a King

Recently I finished reading Alexander Hamilton's 26th Federalist Paper. In this particular text, the argument is made for restraining the powers of a strong standing army perpetually, but not limiting the legislative branch in their ability to call up an army. Hamilton argues that forcing the democratically elected officials to review a military budget every 2 years will bring to the people's attention the question, "Is this army really needed right now?"

He goes on to write,

"Schemes to subvert the liberties of a great community REQUIRE TIME to mature them for execution. An army, so large as seriously to menace those liberties, could only be formed by progressive augmentations; which would suppose, not merely a temporary combination between the legislature and executive, but a continued conspiracy for a series of time. Is it probable that such a combination would exist at all? Is it probable that it would be persevered in, and transmitted along through all the successive variations in a representative body, which biennial elections would naturally produce in both houses? Is it presumable, that every man, the instant he took his seat in the national Senate or House of Representatives, would commence a traitor to his constituents and to his country? Can it be supposed that there would not be found one man, discerning enough to detect so atrocious a conspiracy, or bold or honest enough to apprise his constituents of their danger? If such presumptions can fairly be made, there ought at once to be an end of all delegated authority. The people should resolve to recall all the powers they have heretofore parted with out of their own hands, and to divide themselves into as many States as there are counties, in order that they may be able to manage their own concerns in person."

Obviously Hamilton felt that the answer to each of his questions was "No." However, time would tell that, should our military,police and intelligence establishments decide to impinge on our liberties, their is nothing that the general American could do to repel such an infringement. His last statement stands, our only solution is to do away with representative government and move towards true democracy. But the problem with this is the fickle, changing opinions of people. We are so easily swayed to the left and then to the right, generally based on what serves our best interests. No, the solution is truly to be found in the kingly reign of Christ.

For Christ alone leads us in the way of self-denial, love and peace. He teaches us to give and not take. He alone, can bring us true security even in the midst of military infringements upon our freedoms. Christ is the solution to all our governmental woes, to cast ourselves at the cross and lament our desire to rule ourselves. Hey, this is starting to sound strangely like 1 Samuel 8 and the Israelite desire to have a King instead of allowing the Lord to rule them. Read the story and draw your own conclusions on the path forward. ...Read more

2 Kingdom Theology

Here is a great post on 2 kingdom Theology

Leadership and Decision making

Carl Trueman gives an insightful essay on why leadership must make choices and why cultural postmodernism is destructive to true leadership.

On Christless Preaching

Here are some great quotes from Spurgeon on Christless preaching:

I struggle with this, having seen so very few examples of Christ centered preaching, but this is my goal, proclaim Christ fully. May you be encouraged as you read Spurgeon's thoughts.

Between Two Worlds: How Mediators in the OT Point to Christ

Between Two Worlds: How Mediators in the OT Point to Christ

Posted using ShareThis