Saturday, April 4, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with New Testament professors Doug Moo and Andreas Köstenberger on the importance of women being the first to discover the empty tomb and the meaning of Easter Sunday.
H/T: Justin Taylor
Saturday, April 4, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with New Testament scholars Andreas Köstenberger and Douglas Moo. Dr. Köstenberger looks at the role of Joseph of Arimathea in Jesus’s burial, the rules for burial at the time, and what we know about first-century tombs. Dr. Moo answers the question of where Jesus was between his death and his resurrection, focusing on 1 Peter 3, which says that Christ preached to spirits in prison. Is this a reference to Jesus descending into Hades?
H/T: Justin Taylor
Friday, April 3, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with historian Paul Maier and New Testament scholar Andreas Köstenberger, looking at the origin, object, and purpose of Roman crucifixion, along with one difference in emphasis between the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and John on suffering and glory.
H/T: Justin Taylor
Thursday, April 2, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with scholars Doug Moo, Nick Perrin, and Paul Maier, focusing on the background of the Passover, why Jesus and the disciples reclined at the Last Supper instead of eating at a table, and why the Jewish officials had to get Pontius Pilate involved after beginning their judicial proceedings against Jesus.
H/T: Justin Taylor
Wednesday, April 1, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with historian of ancient history Paul Maier (of Western Michigan University) and New Testament professor Grant Osborne (of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School), focusing on the behind-the-scenes motivations and actions of the Sanhedrin as they plot to put an end to Jesus once and for all.
H/T: Justin Taylor
Tuesday, March 31, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with New Testament professors Grant Osborne (of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) and Andreas Köstenberger (of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) along with historian of ancient history Paul Maier (of Western Michigan University), focusing in particular on the opposition to Jesus and what angered his Jewish antagonists so much.
H/T: Justin Taylor
Tuesday, April 1, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with New Testament professors Nicholas Perrin (of Wheaton College) and Grant Osborne (of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School), focusing in particular on the cursing of the fig tree, the cleansing of the temple, and the role of the temple in the theology and practice of Jesus. We will be releasing a new video each day this week.
H/T: Justin Taylor
Grinding Axes in the Dark
The late Christopher Hitchens liked to frighten little children with horror stories about the evils of religion. Often times he was more narrowly referring to the religion of Islam, but he did not hold back from the “evils” of Christianity, either. Of all the things that offended him, the offence of the Cross of Christ was the most acute. He wrote:
The idea of a vicarious atonement, of the sort that so much troubled even C.S. Lewis, is a further refinement of the ancient superstition [of atoning sacrifice]. Once again we have a father demonstrating love by subjecting a son to death by torture, but this time the father is not trying to impress god. He is god, and he is trying to impress humans. Ask yourself the question: how moral is the following? I am told of a human sacrifice that took place two thousand years ago, without my wishing it and in circumstances so ghastly that, had I been present and in possession of any influence, I would have been duty-bound to try and stop it. In consequence of this murder, my own manifold sins are forgiven me, and I may hope to enjoy everlasting life. [Cited by Tim Challies, quoting from Hitchen’s God Is Not Great.]
Against this, the Apostle Paul provides the counterpoint:
For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. . . . But we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles. [I Corinthians 1: 18, 23.]
Hitchens, despite two millennia of human “evolution”, has not moved one iota beyond or away from the Greeks of Paul’s day. He is stuck in their spiritual time warp. He, like they, still finds the crucifixion of Jesus Christ to be greatly offensive–and in so doing bears testimony to the truthfulness of Scripture. He cannot help himself. Apparently, evolution embarrassingly stopped somewhere along the way.
But Hitchens’s animus is useful insofar that it testifies to this abiding indictment: the crucifixion of Jesus is offensive to all but Christians. To Christians, the Cross is our glory, our power, our hope, and our motivation to love God and His Christ with all our hearts. It represents the very power of God Himself. But to Unbelievers, it is the ultimate insulting offence.
Why? Why should Unbelief find the Cross so offensive? On its own terms, Unbelief is prepared to recognise, even celebrate, the sacrifice of one for another. It concedes happily that Sydney Carton’s sacrifice for Darnay, Lucie, and their child in the Tale of Two Cities was a glorious act. It acknowledges willingly that Evans’s stepping outside into the freezing Antarctic cold to die in the vain attempt to save Sir Robert Scott and his colleagues was heroic, an act of true self-sacrificing love.
More deeply lies another animus. The Cross of Christ is hated because of what it says about the Unbeliever. It testifies to the evil of every man. Worse, it declares that this human evil is not a mere failure, or childish mistake, or bumbling error, or something which will be smoothed out in the endless centuries of evolutionary development. Rather, the Cross of Christ declares that every man is truly and thoroughly wicked. Moreover, it declares that death and eternal damnation is the certain consequence as we, sinners all, are indicted before a holy God. Therefore, the Cross is not just foolishness or silly or primitive or childish–it is hateful, and despicable because of what it says about us. Since it indicts humanity so powerfully, sinful hearts–being true to their nature–attempt to deflect the guilt and the blame back to God.
Thus for Christ’s sacrificial cross, only contempt is forthcoming. While folk may honour sacrifice as noble, not so Christ’s cross. The reason is not hard to find. It lies here: Christ was dying to satisfy His heavenly Father. Therefore, whilst Christ may be noble, God must be a tyrant. Consider this: had Sir Robert Scott asked Evans to lay down his life for his colleagues, whilst Evans might be considered a tragic hero, Scott would be regarded in a very negative light. In the same way, the cross of Christ represents an evil deity. It thus becomes an outrage, a thing to be loathed.
These deeper realities and truths had an ardent witness in Christopher Hitchens. But his rage against the Cross had a deeper, inchoate malevolence that would have been embarrassing to acknowledge. He hated God because he could not betray his own sinfulness–to which he defiantly clung until the end. He was a true scion of Unbelief.
When God confronted Adam after his rebellion, Adam protested that the fault was not his. It was God’s. “The woman you gave to be with me, she gave me the fruit and I ate.” Adam blamed Eve as the immediate cause of his sin. But he also blamed God as the first and ultimate cause. He implied that if God had not given him the one who was “bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh”, he would never have fallen into sin. Thus, Hitchens (along with all who despise or neglect the Cross as irrelevant) would indict and blame God. If there is anything wrong with humanity, it is God’s fault.
There have been attempts to coat the Cross with saccharin. Unbelief can remake it into a noble sacrifice, a moral example, an heroic act by Christ. But Hitchens could see more clearly than that. He could see that the “problem” with the Cross lay not with Christ, but with the Father–that God would require this of His Son in order to save His people. It is what the Cross tells us about God which offends. But this was not all. His fulminating against God had a deeper motive. For Hitchens, it is what the Cross said about him that was most offensive. When confronted with true moral guilt before an angry God, if submission in humble belief is not possible, the only response left is bitter, sarcastic mockery, which is what he gave out.
As Easter approaches, these things will play out once again around the world. To Believers, the Cross both humbles us into the dust and lifts us to the eternal skies. We cherish the old rugged cross and all it represents–about God the Father, and His only begotten Son, and about us.
But to Unbelievers, the word of the cross will remain as it always has–folly. In this way, even Unbelief testifies to the truth of God and His Christ, despite itself.
Sunday, March 29, AD 33.
The following video, filmed in conjunction with our book The Final Days of Jesus, features short explanations from and interviews with New Testament professors Doug Moo (of Wheaton College Graduate School) and Andreas Köstenberger (of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary). We will be releasing a new video each day this week.
True Truth and Real History
As we approach the season of Passover and the once-for-all-delivered-to-the-saints Atonement, here is an interesting piece on the actual date of Messiah’s crucifixion.
Justin Taylor refers us to an article recently published in First Things, which discussed the evidence for the exact date of Jesus’ death.
April 3, AD 33
In our new book, The Final Days of Jesus: The Most Important Week of the Most Important Person Who Ever Lived, we assume but do not argue for a precise date of Jesus’s crucifixion. Virtually all scholars believe, for various reasons, that Jesus was crucified in the spring of either a.d. 30 or a.d. 33, with the majority opting for the former. (The evidence from astronomy narrows the possibilities to a.d. 27, 30, 33, or 34). However, we want to set forth our case for the date of Friday, April 3, a.d. 33 as the exact day that Christ died for our sins.
To be clear, the Bible does not explicitly specify the precise date of Jesus’s crucifixion and it is not an essential salvation truth. But that does not make it unknowable or unimportant. Because Christianity is a historical religion and the events of Christ’s life did take place in human history alongside other known events, it is helpful to locate Jesus’s death—as precisely as the available evidence allows—within the larger context of human history.
Among the Gospel writers, no one makes this point more strongly than Luke, the Gentile physician turned historian and inspired chronicler of early Christianity.
The Year John the Baptist’s Ministry Began
Luke implies that John the Baptist began his public ministry shortly before Jesus did, and he gives us a historical reference point for when the Baptist’s ministry began: “In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar . . .” (Luke 3:1).We know from Roman historians that Tiberius succeeded Augustus as emperor and was confirmed by the Roman Senate on August 19, a.d. 14. He ruled until a.d. 37. “The fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar” sounds like a straightforward date, but there are some ambiguities, beginning with when one starts the calculation. Most likely, Tiberius’s reign was counted either from the day he took office in a.d. 14 or from January 1 of the following year, a.d. 15. The earliest possible date at which Tiberius’s “fifteenth year” began is August 19, a.d. 28, and the latest possible date at which his “fifteenth year” ended is December 31, a.d. 29. So John the Baptist’s ministry began anywhere from mid-a.d. 28 until sometime in a.d. 29.
The Year Jesus’s Ministry Began
If Jesus, as the Gospels seem to indicate, began his ministry not long after John, then based on the calculations above, the earliest date for Jesus’s baptism would be in late a.d. 28 at the very earliest. However, it is more probable to place it sometime in the first half of the year a.d. 29, because a few months probably elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and that of Jesus (and the year a.d. 30 is the latest possible date). So Jesus’s ministry must have begun between the end of a.d. 28 at the earliest and a.d. 30 at the latest.This coheres with Luke’s mention that “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age” (Luke 3:23). If he was born in 6 or 5 b.c., as is most likely, Jesus would have been approximately thirty-two to thirty-four years old in late a.d. 28 until a.d. 30, which falls well within the range of him being “about thirty years of age.”
The Length of Jesus’s Ministry
Now we need to know how long Jesus’s public ministry lasted, because if it went on for two or more years, this would seem to rule out spring of a.d. 30 as a possible date for the crucifixion.John’s Gospel mentions that Jesus attended at least three Passovers (possibly four), which took place once a year in the spring:
- There was a Passover in Jerusalem at the start of his public ministry (John 2:13, 23).
- There was a Passover in Galilee midway through his public ministry (John 6:4).
- There was a final Passover in Jerusalem at the end of his public ministry, that is, the time of his crucifixion (John 11:55; 12:1).
- And Jesus may have attended one more Passover not recorded in John but perhaps in one or several of the Synoptic Gospels (i.e., Matthew, Mark, and Luke).
Even if there were only three Passovers, this would still make a date of a.d. 30 all but impossible for the date of the crucifixion. As noted above, the earliest likely date for the beginning of Jesus’s ministry from Luke 3:1 is late a.d. 28. So the first of these Passovers (at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry; John 2:13) would fall on Nisan 14 in a.d. 29 (because Nisan is in March/April, near the beginning of a year). The second would fall in a.d. 30 at the earliest, and the third would fall in 31 at the earliest. This means that if Jesus’s ministry coincided with at least three Passovers, and if the first Passover was in a.d. 29, he could not have been crucified in a.d. 30.
But if John the Baptist began his ministry in a.d. 29, then Jesus probably began his ministry in late a.d. 29 or early a.d. 30. Then the Passovers in John would occur on the following dates:
Words of Significance
As we approach Easter, we would refer readers to a series of meditations we published five or so years ago. They amount to a consideration of the Seven Words uttered by our Lord from the Cross. These seven words are, of course, timeless and eternal.
You can find them as follows:
The first word: “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”
The second word: “This day you will be with me in Paradise“
The third word: “Woman, behold your son”
The fourth word: “My God, my God why has thou forsaken me”
The fifth word: “I thirst”
The sixth word: “It is finished”
The seventh word: “Into Thy hands I commit my spirit”
Each of these words uttered by our Lord are public utterances–meant for His people not only to be heard, but meditated upon and puzzled over. All seven are intrinsic to His work of atonement and the Passion.
They may provide helpful material for meditation in the coming days of this season.
Dancing in the Aisles
On that Sabbath Morning particularly celebrating the Resurrection, Christians all over the world will assemble as part of the new world and will greet each other with the triumphant declaration, “Christ is risen!” and the formal response will redound: “He is risen, indeed!”. It is probably our most triumphant “high five”.
Why is the Resurrection so significant, so central? Is it such a “big deal”? Or is it Christians making much ado about very little?
There is a provocative passage in New Testament where Paul tells the Ephesian believers what he has been praying for them. He writes:
I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. These are in accordance with the working of the strength of His might which He brought about in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come. (Ephesians 1: 18-21)
Clearly Christians are to grow in their understanding of the work of God the Father which He wrought in raising His Son from the dead. It manifests the “surpassing greatness of His power” toward us. It appears that these things are not immediately to be grasped by new Believers, but something which they gradually comprehend over time, as they grow in their understanding of the Scriptures and of life.
The raising of a person to life again, whilst a miraculous work of God, is not in itself so spectacular. Did not our Lord raise Lazarus? Did not Elisha raise the dead son of the Shunamite woman? The Resurrection of Christ, however, is of a different order entirely. It was of cosmic significance. Nothing would ever be the same again. All had changed. (Revelation 21:5) Every part of creation has been and will be affected as a result. (Ephesians 1:10) Every human soul, amongst both the living and dead, was now orientated toward, and under the aegis of, the resurrected Christ–whether they liked it or not. (Philippians 2:9-11) The principalities and powers of the air–the demonic forces–were dethroned and cast out. (Colossians 2: 15; John 12: 33) A human ruler of all creation had been enthroned in their place. A judge had been installed. (Acts 17: 31) All His enemies are to be placed under His feet. (Acts 2: 34,35) The last enemy thus to be conquered will be death itself. (I Corinthians 15: 25, 26) The life giving, brooding Spirit of the Living God had fallen upon the earth to regenerate, enliven, and re-create His people, right down to the joints and marrow, to the thoughts and intentions of the heart. (Hebrews 4: 12, 13)
When Christians greet each other on Resurrection Morn with the declaration, “Christ is risen!” this is what they are professing: the remaking of all things that were broken from the beginning of the world. We are now in the years of our Lord’s dominion. The riches of all His glorious inheritance are being shared with us, His people. What we experience now is but the smallest foretaste of the coming glory of creation as it is utterly, thoroughly, and completely remade by Christ, the Lord of the heavens and the earth.
It’s enough to make one dance for joy, in the aisles of the great congregation.
On Being a Lentendud
Liturgy and Worship – Church Year
Written by Douglas Wilson
Thursday, 23 February 2012
A few days ago I posted a little poem — one of my periodic forays into high art — about the affair of the sausages, as a result of which incident the Swiss Reformation began in earnest. It turns out that this poem and other related things generated some excitement on the Internet (and who does not believe that the Internet could always use a little more excitement?)
The poem was simply an application of some of the warnings contained in a joint statement that Christ Church and Trinity Reformed Church developed together. “We stand gratefully in the Reformation tradition which courageously freed the saints of God from those enslaving regulations related to saint days, penitential seasons, and superstititous fasting . . . [we] warn our people to likewise remember these lessons from the history of the church.” Emphasis added, and you can read more on all this both here and here.
Of course Lent can be observed without sinning, and without falling into gnosticism. It can also go the other way. But staying away from the central problems takes a particular kind of spiritual insight. Those who don’t observe Lent, as I don’t, don’t believe the game is worth the candle. Those who do believe it to be worthwhile are certainly free in Christ to have at it. But as they do, it is (I believe) essential for them to take great care that they not allow the traditions of men supplant the authority of Scripture (Matt. 15:3). In my view, this work is frequently not even attempted, which is why I kibitz about this subject from time to time. Let me give just a couple of very simple examples.
In the Bible, there certainly are times of fasting that may go public without any problem, as when an asteroid is going to land on Kansas City, and the president has asked us all to fast and pray. This is the kind of repentance that the inhabitants of Nineveh showed (Jonah 3:7). But whenever fasting is part of a cyclic, spiritual exercise, when it is an ongoing spiritual discipline, Jesus required that it be a secret between you and God.
In short, if everybody on Facebook knows what you are not doing for Lent, with fifteen minute updates, along with a snapshot of the burrito you are not eating, you already have your reward. Cultivating a right heart on this is fundamental to Christianity. Understanding this principle is basic. When people are running around yelling about the asteroid, religious showboating is not the great temptation. But if it involves praying the synagogue, giving alms with brass accompaniment, and fasting with a wan countenance and wry commentary, and so forth, Jesus told us very explicitly how we are not supposed to behave.
Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why those who are observing the fast ought not to despise those who aren’t — because the fellow who looks like a lentendud might be fasting just like you, only more obediently.
A second observation is this. If you are a member of that great and growing American regiment that is into high food finickiness, then you should understand that your temptation might be to use Lent to ramp up your natural inclinations, instead of mortifying them. Our nation has a long history of food weirdness, and this really must be taken into account. We have not done well with the Scripture’s indiscriminate blessing of processed corn, refined sugar, meat with dubious points of origin, wheat germ, and tofu (1 Tim. 4:4).
This means that a number of folks might need to be going the other way. C.S. Lewis once spoke of those who, when confronted with a flood, break out the fire extinguishers. If you want to use a penitential season to mortify something in your life, then you might ought to pay attention to what actually needs to be mortified. Otherwise, you will just be digging your own particular groove deeper.
Fasting ought not to be “more of what you usually do,” and if what you usually do is worry over food too much, then you need to take care. What I mean is this. Suppose you have a thing about really “healthy” bread, the kind with the Ponderosa bark still in it. Your natural inclinition will be to go into a penitential season resolved to operate within all your existing categories. But wouldn’t eating Wonder bread with Skippy peanut butter for forty days be perhaps more to the spiritual point?
There are of course other arguments and considerations — exegetical, historical, theological, and more — that could be brought into a discussion of Lent, but it is not necessary to go into everything. Scriptures do give us real liberty in such things. But we are not at liberty to be enslaved, and to disregard of some of the principles cited above is a fast track to such entanglement.
All that said, have a merry Lent.
>When the Divine Hammer Fell
Church Year
Written by Douglas Wilson
Friday, April 22, 2011
It is very easy for modern readers of the gospel of John to assume that he sometimes falls into the role of a chatty tour guide, telling us the meaning of certain words in two languages, and that he does so for purposes of amusing us along the way. “And on your left, you may see . . .”
He does this a number of times, but the point is not amusement. When John does this, he is pointing to something that he wants us to see. And he wants us to see it in such a way as to do good to our souls.
“When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha” (John 19:13).
This pavement of stones is possibly the room Gazith in the Temple. Half this room was sanctified, and half was common. There was a door to enter each section. The Sanhedrin used to meet in the common half, and it was lawful for a Gentile to go there—in other words, Pilate could have been there. This room was paved with smooth stones, square and hewn. The Greek word for this is lithostrotos, and, as John makes a point of telling us, the Hebrew is Gabbatha. The Hebrew word Gabbatha is used once in the Old Testament, referring to the time when King Ahaz removed the great laver in the Temple from its resting place on the backs of the bronze oxen, and placed it on the pavement (2 Kings 16:17). The Septuagint uses the same Greek word that John used in 2 Chron. 7:3. In each instance, we are talking about a pavement of stones in the Temple.
And Jesus is a Temple (John 2:19). Jesus is a stone (Matt. 21:42). Jesus, the stone that the builders rejected, was standing on a pavement of stones before the judgment seat, in order to become the rejected stone. Make special note of this, John says. Jesus was standing on a pavement of stone when this happened.
Another instance of this in the same chapter—given to strengthen our faith on this good Friday—is this one:
“And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha: where they crucified him . . .” (John 19:17-18a).
Jesus died on Calvary, and when He died, He destroyed the one who had the power of death, that is, the devil (Heb. 2:14). What is this place of a skull?[1] The first gospel promise in the Bible is the promise that the Messiah would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). Throughout the Old Testament, God uses women to strike the heads of His enemies. A nameless woman throws a mill stone off a tower, strikes Abimelech on the head, and he is fatally wounded (Judg. 9:53). Jael kills Sisera with a spike through the head (Judg. 5:26). God strikes the hairy scalps of His adversaries (Ps. 68:21). And Golgotha fits within this typology too. It is a head—a skull. Moreover, it is a head of death—a skull. What did God do in the death of Jesus? God, like Jael, the wife of Heber, drove a spike, a cross, into the head of His ancient foe.
The stake was set up, diligently placed by Roman soldiers, and then, when Jesus died, the divine hammer fell.
[1] Special thanks to my student Steven Opp, who suggested the first part of this line of thought to me.
>Why Do You Call That Day “Good”?
The Cross remains a stumbling block to Unbelief (Galatians 5:11). That is as it should be. It always will be. To Christians, however, the Cross remains our great boast and glory (Galatians 6:14). That, too, is as it should, and always will, be.
There are certain truths which immediately divide Belief and Unbelief. There is no common ground. No room for compromise. The Cross is one of those lodestones which separates the pure metal from the dross.
To the Unbeliever, the Cross is offensive because it testifies as an eloquent witness to mankind’s sinfulness, guilt, depravity, and moral worthlessness. It also testifies to God’s judgment upon sin; to His holiness; that He will not let sin go unpunished. It stands, therefore, as the instrument of universal condemnation upon the entire human race.
Faced with this divine testimony against mankind, Unbelief typically has two responses. The first is anger. The second is mockery. The anger rails against the primitiveness of the Cross, its bloodiness. It takes offence. How could anyone believe, yet alone glory, in something so violent, bloody, and negative!
The mockery assails Belief with epithets of ignorance, backwardness, credulity, and primitive stupidity. It puts belief in the Cross on a par with the tooth fairy.
It is significant that in the eighteenth century when academics and false teachers within the bosom of the Church itself began to attack God and His Christ they focused upon the Cross. They tried to make it more acceptable to Unbelief by “re-interpreting” it. These false teachers–wolves in sheep’s clothing–took up the offence of the Cross and sought to make it more acceptable to Unbelief.
The first thing was to assure everyone that the Cross was very, very important. But not for the reasons that the Apostles and the “one holy catholic and apostolic church” had thought. Rather, the Cross and Jesus upon it, we were told, was the most noble celebration of humanity. It spoke of purity of life, of steadfastness, faithfulness, integrity, and noble self-sacrifice. It demonstrated the “greater love”–the golden rule. Yes, the Cross saved–but not in the way once thought. It saved because it provided all men with the impelling, energizing moral example to which all could aspire. And in aspiring and achieving such moral nobility, we would be saved.
There is nothing unique about the Cross, we were told. After all, hundreds of thousands of people have died the death of crucifixion. What makes the Christian Cross so important was the moral example of the One who was dying upon it. Thus put, the Cross became not an emblem of shame, but a beacon of human potential, dignity and glory. It showed all mankind the way of salvation in that is provided a motivational example of human moral excellence. Blah, blah, blah. Unfortunately, there are still many who still lurk within the bosom of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church who thus teach, and who endeavour to put a Satanic sheen upon the Cross. Note them well: their goal is to attempt to remove the offensiveness of the Cross. Immediately the attempt is made they identify themselves as being like their father, the one who has been a liar from the beginning.
But God is not served by the lies of men. Trying to make the Cross less offensive to Unbelief can only proceed by denying what God has said about it. It is God Who has revealed, “the soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Ezekiel 18:20). It is God Who has declared that on the Cross Jesus was bearing our sins in His body (I Peter 2:24). It is God Who has revealed that on the Cross, Christ became a curse for us (Galatians 3:13). It is God Who promised long before time that the guild of our iniquities would be laid upon Him and that by His grievous wounds we, His people, would be healed (Isaiah 53: 4-6).
Here, then, is why the Cross is so offensive to Unbelief and why its has borne centuries of egregious slurs and hateful epithets. If the death of Christ were a death for sinners; if He were bearing the sins of His people in their place on the Cross; if He were cursed in their place, then Unbelief itself must be evil, cursed, and under the wrath of God. Which is to say that all Unbelievers are, in God’s sight and holy judgment, evil, cursed and under His holy wrath. What Unbelief would dismiss as an unhistorical relic, God has put forth as the ultimate indictment of guilt.
But for Belief, whilst the Cross indicts and kills us all, it also makes us alive. For upon that Cross, the Saviour of the world bore the guilt of His sheep–His known and beloved people–in their place, so that they might be freed, forgiven, delivered, and saved. The Cross is God’s appointed way to redeem, or buy back the enslaved to sin, those who had been made captive to the Devil.
Thus, for Belief the Cross is our great glory. It manifests the greatest free love of God, His mercy, and His condescension. It is the immediate reason of our forgiveness by God, the Judge of the heavens and the earth. More than anything else, the Cross gives us a sure and certain hope. To us, the Cross does not mean death, but life–abundant and eternal life, for at the right hand of God there are pleasures ever more.
That is why the Church calls this day–the day of remembrance of our Lord’s death upon the Cross–Good Friday. Never was a day more aptly named.
And can it be, that I should gain
And interest in the Saviour’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain?
For me Who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love, how can it be,
That thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
–Charles Wesley
>In Solidarity, At Golgotha
Along with doubtless everyone in the country we have been exercised and provoked in soul by the Christchurch quake. We are also approaching Easter when judgment fell upon our Lord. That too is always trying time, when we, along with all Believers, stand at Golgotha and contemplate what we have done. With the hymn writer we confess:
Behold the Man upon a cross
My guilt upon His shoulders
Ashamed, I hear my mocking voice
Call out among the scoffersIt was my sin that held Him there
Until it was accomplished
His dying breath has brought me life
I know that it is finished
The article of Christ’s substitutionary atonement comes right out of Scripture itself. The Apostle Peter, speaking under the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declares, “And He Himself bore our sins in His body on the Cross . . .” (I Peter 2:24) Golgotha is a place of terrible divine judgment and retribution. The guilt of all the sin of all His people fell upon Him; He bore it for them in their place.
Therefore, Golgotha is also a place where Believers, along with the Saviour, die. You cannot have one without the other. You cannot, on the one hand, believe that the Christ loved His people so much that He bore the wrath of God on their behalf, without on the other, judging and rejecting one’s own life of sinfulness, mockery and unbelief. So, Peter again: “And He Himself bore our sins in His body on the Cross that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.” (I Peter 2:24)
Jesus under the Judge and Executioner. That is what Golgotha is about. All Christians know this. They know they stand in the judgment of God upon them, in Christ. It is not a pleasant place to be. But if there is to be any hope, any love, any consolation at all it will only be found at this wretched place, and in this Person.
The modern Unbeliever bridles at suggestions which makes even an oblique reference to divine judgment. This vituperative reaction takes place on two levels. The first level is that of scorning and mockery. The entire concept of God’s judgment presupposes not only God, but that He is holy and hates evil. Since the modern Unbeliever has carefully constructed and drawn to himself a narrative of God’s non-existence, his religious predilections require him to scorn and mock Christians when they warn of God’s judgment to come.
The second level is more sinister, but related to the first. All stories of God not-being-true are actually suppressions of the truth. Therefore, when Christians speak to Unbelievers of the judgment to come there is a conscience-borne ring of truth to it. This ordinarily produces reactions of fear, loathing, hatred and disgust amongst Unbelievers. The truth hurts the sinful heart; this truth hurts most of all.
The mockery and scorning become quickly incandescent.
We have seen this occur in the aftermath of the Christchurch earthquake. Some Christians have suggested that it serves as a warning of the judgment to come. Immediately otherwise normally sane and balanced folk have jumped all over them, spraying spittle-flecked outrage in every direction. Here is the one that we laugh at the most: those Christians who dare even to suggest that the hand of God lies behind the earthquake in Christchurch, we are told, are the moral equivalent of Islamic fundamentalists. Now you just know that reason and judiciousness has flown the coop when those who warn of God’s judgement are made the religious and moral equivalent of those who conspire and perpetrate murders.
For Christians this is nothing new at all. They live daily in the judgment of God. They have come to faith only through both acknowledging God as their Judge and seeing sentence carried out upon their Lord in their place. Moreover, that Moderns get so wound up at the notion betrays an ignorance of the Christian faith that is profound. All through history, Christians believe that God has judged people and nations for their stiff necked arrogance and rebellion against Him. Noah and the great Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, Egypt under the plagues, the catastrophic destruction of Jerusalem under Nebuchadnezzar, and the even more catastrophic devastation of Judah and Jerusalem under Titus in AD70 testify to this. The prophets warn constantly of these things.
Consequently, there is a time honoured tradition throughout the history of the Church of pointing to all calamities and calling all men to consider their ways before Almighty God, while there is yet time. Our Lord Himself has done just that. Two calamities hit the headline news while Jesus was ministering in Galilee. One was an act of extreme and callous brutality by the State. The other was a natural calamity, like the Christchurch earthquake. Jesus used both to warn of the judgment to come.
Now on the same occasion there were some present who reported to Him about the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And He answered and said to them, “Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered this fate?
“I tell you, no, but, unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” Luke 13:1-5
Note the emphatic repetitious device. Note the authoritative, “I tell you . . .”
No doubt there were hearers that day who were outraged at Jesus. But Christians, living daily in the vortex of God’s judgment upon them at Golgotha, believe completely in these words and the warning they contain. Of course the Christchurch earthquake is a warning to all in this country, just as every funeral, every death is a warning to the living. “For unto man it is appointed once to die, but after this the Judgment.” (Hebrew 9:27)
For those who refuse to heed the warning, continuing to shake the fist of offence and rage, we have only this to say: you can present your case and your arguments to the Almighty on that Day. You will indeed have your day in the assizes of Heaven. But it will be us in the dock, not God. And know one thing further: on that Day there will be no disputes about procedures or evidence. All of you will be made plain: every thought, motive, intention, word, and ethic of our entire lives will be laid as evidence before the Judge. And He has already told us the standard He will be applying: “whoever observes the whole Law (of God), but slips in just one point, has become guilty in every respect.” (James 2:10)
Christians have already been judged, at Golgotha. They live constantly in the shadow of God’s judgment. But they no longer fear that Day. But no man, woman or child need fear that Day. If any heed the words of the Saviour of the world and repent, turning from Unbelief to Him, and stand in solidarity with Him at Golgotha, and believe that there He took their just punishment in their place, they too will be saved.
Has not God appointed Him the Saviour of the whole world? He Whom God has appointed, approved, and accepted as our Saviour, let not man despise.
>
>Cleaning the Place Up
But his master answered and said to him, “You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow,and gather where I scattered no seed? Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received the money back with interest.
Matthew 25: 26,27
Where is the Kingdom of God going in history? This question has three possible answers: all three have been propounded in the course of the history of the Kingdom. None has yet gained permanent hold in the collective heart and mind of God’s people. The three possible outcomes are:
1. That the Kingdom will progressively diminish in the world, until, like Frodo and Sam clinging to the last rock at the breaking of the world, the eagles will come and rescue the last few remaining Christians before all is swept away. In this view of the course of the Kingdom, the idea is to get as many life rafts and life-belts into the sea as possible so that the maximum number of drowning people can be saved as the ship goes down.
2. That things will stay pretty much as they are—with ebbs and flows. The Kingdom will neither increase nor decrease; from a Christian perspective things will neither get worse nor better. It will be “same old, same old” until the final advent of our Lord—which could occur at any time, since there are no developments in the Kingdom which must take place prior to His final return.
3. That the Kingdom will be so filled and empowered by God’s Spirit that the world will be progressively Christianised—genuinely so—to where the overwhelming majority of the world’s population will be truly converted and living holy and godly lives. In this possibility the world will be a grand and glorious place prior to the Final Advent. Since the Kingdom is way short of that glory at present, there remains much work to be done. Therefore, the coming of our Lord is a long way off.
As we mentioned above all three possibilities have been propounded at different times and locations in the history of the Church. Generally, in the West the first possibility has held dominance throughout most of the previous century. Two world wars, totalitarian communism, the Great Depression, the nuclear threat—all helped convince Christian folk that the future of the Kingdom was bleak indeed, and that glory and triumph would only be known and experienced after the end of redemptive history, when the stricken ship had gone down.
Our view is that the Scriptures teach the third outcome for the Kingdom—the world-wide Christianization of mankind through the preaching of the Gospel. One of the reasons is the sequence of parables our Lord delivered just prior to His death in answer to the disciples’ question upon hearing that the temple would be torn down, “When shall these things be?”
Of course, the destruction of the Temple was imminent, within a generation. For the disciples, steeped in the prevailing rabbinic eschatology, the coming of the Messiah meant the Final Advent. It took them several years to be weaned off this mono-dimensional view and grasp that the destruction and judgment of Jerusalem in AD 68—70 was not the end of redemptive history, but the beginning of a work of redemption greater than the human race had ever seen. The Gospel was going to the Gentiles, and all the world was to be made a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ.
In answer to the question as to when the temple stones would be torn down, our Lord definitively stated that it would occur within that generation (Matthew 24: 34)—as indeed it came to pass. But redemptive history would go on. Jesus then told a series of parables, all of which imply a long passage of time. He uses the image of a landowner who goes away for a long time, leaving his servants in charge of His affairs. When He comes back, it is clear that He expects that things will have changed a lot since His departure. His servants will have been hard at work; His household will be greatly enlarged, running smoothly, well governed, and in much better shape than when He departed. He returns as one who is very demanding, a “hard man”, who expects to reap where He did not sow, and harvest where He had not scattered seed.
Our great hope is that we will be present at the Final Advent of our Lord when He comes to the earth. We long to be here when He comes. And we shall be. Paul insists upon it (I Thessalonians 4:16,17). Our hope does not focus and terminate upon death and our souls going to heaven. Our hope looks beyond that—it looks for our being able to participate in the greatest glorification of the Son of God ever seen in all creation—and that will be when He returns to the earth to make it His dwelling place forever. Our greatest hope is to be there bodily—whole and complete. And we shall be, for we will all form part of His glory train. The dancing, the feasting, the singing, and the celebration will be unlike anything ever seen since the beginning of time. “I’ll be back,” is the great, triumphant cry of the dying saint.
When our Lord comes, He expects to see everything in order, well managed, running smoothly. He expects to find the Gospel preached to every creature as He commanded, and all the nations discipled, being instructed daily in all His commandments. He expects to reap where He did not sow—and what the Lord expects, He will get. He is the Lord of the heavens and the earth, after all.
So, knowing that the Lord is returning, we work hard to clean the place up before He gets here. It is what faithful servants do. “Occupy until I come!”
>Like Nothing Else on Earth
How lovely is your dwelling place, O Lord of hosts.
My soul longs, yes faints for the courts of the Lord;
My heart and flesh sing for joy to the living God.
Psalm 84: 1,2
What makes a person happy? It is a question worth asking because people overwhelmingly identify happiness as the experience or state they value above all else. But there are few who attain such a state of happiness. For most it is a fleeting experience. But to be happy only for a time is a sure indicator that whatever brought happiness was not the true or genuine cause of joy.
This is one reason why so many marriages in our modern world fall apart. From the outset they are made to bear a weight that is beyond the institution itself. The idea that marrying another person will make or ensure one’s happiness is a foolish notion. Of course, when it does not transpire as expected, the marriage is discarded. Clearly the marriage had not “worked out”. The marriage partner had not made one happy, after all.
Our text speaks of a joy and felicity in terms that are so exuberant that it is almost embarrassing in our culture which values understatement and reserve. The depth of passion and longing for the courts, the dwelling place of the Lord of hosts is striking. The Psalmist was either exaggerating, or was subject to religious dementia. Many would think that these are not sentiments of a balanced and reasonable person.
In fact they reflect a person who is remarkably sane and profoundly in balance. For the Psalmist has found the secret of life itself—the secret of happiness. It is a secret known to all Believers to one extent or another. Felicity is to be found not in myself, but in another. But the “other” is not my husband, wife, child or any other creature. Happiness is found, known, and experienced by being in the presence of the Lord of hosts. It is experienced truly when we are able to visit with Him, in the place where He dwells.
Where then does the Lord dwell, that we too may yearn, long, and seek to visit with Him, in His house? For when we enter His dwelling place, we see Him. Seeing Him, and being in His presence, fills His people with joy and happiness. It brings us into the very purpose and meaning of life itself. Therefore, where does He dwell, that we may enter and visit with Him? Let us go quickly, without delay.
In asking this question, we know that only God can answer it. For the dwelling place of God is at His appointment and determination, not ours. Our fathers talked about the evils of “will worship”–something not often spoken of in our days of ignorance. “Will worship” is that act of pride and pretense which asserts that we can summon and conjure the Lord at the time and place and media of our pleasure. The Psalmist, however, was in no doubt. If he was to visit with the Lord it was to be in the Lord’s house—where He had chosen to put His Name, where His holy altar was established. Our joy, then, is to go to the Lord at the place of His choosing, not to vaingloriously summon Him to the place of our election and pleasure.
Under the Older Covenant this place was in space and time; it was localised upon the earth. That place was at the Ark of the Covenant and its surrounding Tabernacle and the great altar. In time this was fixed, by divine appointment and command, in Jerusalem at the temple. The Psalmist is, thus, speaking about the extremes of joy and happiness he found when he entered through the Beautiful Gate, came into the vast courts of the Gentiles, then passed through to the place of sacrifice and attended upon the holy place. There he joined with the Lord’s people to sing psalms of praise, to enter into public and private prayers, offer up sacrifices, and hear God speak through the words of His appointed servants.
Under the New Covenant, in which we now live, the dwelling place of God which He has appointed, is once again localised upon the earth. It is at a particular space and time—at His appointment and choosing. He dwells there. He meets with His people in that place and at that time. He blesses His people there with His presence. They find that this place is lovely. It is the place where their heart and flesh sing for joy to the living God.
Where is this place and time where the Lord has chosen to dwell? It is wherever God’s people gather together in the Name of Jesus Christ His Son. He had chosen to be there and dwell there. Did our Lord not declare, “Where two or three are gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midst of them”? (Matthew 18:20)
Thus the question of where might the place of the Lord’s dwelling be is easily answered. He has appointed His house and chosen dwelling place to be wherever His people gather in the Name of His Son to worship Him and attend upon Him. Gathering to this place makes us truly and profoundly happy; it sheds a divine light upon all else, so that our entire existence becomes one of happiness and felicity.
My soul longs, yes faints for these courts.
>If Christ Be Not Raised, We are Most Pitiable
If Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.
I Corinthians 15:17
The significance of the resurrection of the body of Christ remains a conundrum to many Christians. They see the resurrection as an inessential oddity. This, in turn, explains why so many professing Christians over the past two centuries have been able to abandon a belief in the resurrection of the body of Christ, whilst still claiming to be Christian.
Yet our text definitively and emphatically declares that without the bodily resurrection of Christ, the whole Christian faith is worthless—a chimera, a vanity. The question is begged. Why? There are partial answers to the question, which, though true as far as they go, are yet incomplete. The partial answers appeal to matters of veracity and vindication.
The “veracity” argument is used in our text. Paul and the apostles had proclaimed Christ risen. If God did not actually raise Him bodily from the dead, the apostles would have borne false witness—they would have lied. (verses 14,15) The apostles would have said things about God and His Christ that were not true: therefore, all that they proclaimed on the authority of God would be equally suspect and erroneous. The credibility of the apostles as God’s spokesman would be null and void. The faith of the Church would likewise be an empty vanity.
Now this argument draws a clear line in the sand between Christians who believe truthfully and those who claim the faith, yet deny the bodily resurrection of our Lord. If you deny the bodily resurrection, you deny the apostles and the Gospel writers. If you deny them, you deny God and the possibility of saving faith—since saving faith believes that what God has said is true. The emphatic biblical statement that “Abraham believed God and faith was imputed to him as righteousness” cannot apply: therefore, if you deny the resurrection, you are still in your sins.
The “vindication” argument goes further and considers the matter in terms of the atonement and the work of Christ upon the Cross. The undoubted Christian (apostolic) faith is that Christ bore our sins in His body upon the Cross. He bore our guilt and our penalty. He descended in to hell in our place. If God had left Him in hell it would only have been because the atonement was incomplete or inadequate. It would not be finished; Christ would, therefore, have been wrong in His sixth word from the Cross, when He declared: “It is finished”–that is, it is over. It is done.
Therefore, God raised Him up to vindicate the Son and His atonement. His resurrection from the dead declares to His people and to the world that full and complete atonement for the sins of His people had been accomplished and that the wrath of God was fully satisfied against our sins. (This is intimated in Hebrews 1:3: “When He has made purification for our sins, He sat down at the right hand of God.”) The resurrection also declared that Christ Himself was sinless and death could not hold Him. The resurrection is, therefore, at the same time, a vindication of the perfect sinlessness of our Saviour. (Acts 2:24)
But to these considerations, we must add a third. Christ had to be raised bodily from the dead because He came to save His people from their sins and His people are bodily, fleshly and material beings. If He were not to save them in-body, He would not save them at all. If Christ had not been raised bodily, then there is no life for men in the future. That is why Paul declares, “If we had only hoped in Christ in this life, we are of all men most to be pitied.” (I Corinthians 15: 19) Without a bodily resurrection of Christ, there is no eternal life to come for men.
Now this argument seems strange to many today. But there is a reason it lacks force. It is because ever since the early Church a synthesis between Greek and Christian thought was promulgated which has infected and done great damage to the Church ever since. It is an error we have yet to root out. As Oscar Cullmann has put it: “ . . . down through the history of doctrine to the present day there can be traced a great misunderstanding, upon the basis of which that which is claimed as ‘Christian’ in reality is Greek.”
Oscar Cullmann, Christ and Time (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1964), p.54.
The root of this heresy or apostasy from biblical Christianity is the belief that the real perfect realm is a timeless mystical sphere where the material and the body has no place. This Greek world view was deliberately revived by the Enlightenment, and its influence continues strongly to this day. In principle, this heresy sees the bodily resurrection of our Lord as a backward step—the vestige of an earthly and primitive mind. In asserting the bodily resurrection of Christ, the apostles were merely reflecting their primitive ignorance of reality. This world-view is quite at ease with denying the bodily resurrection of our Lord—it is unimportant in the grand scheme of things. If there is to be any salvation at all, it will only come through escaping the material and the bodily to the timeless realm of ideas and pure thought—that is, to the realm of the divine. This explains why many modern professing Christians, caught in the thrall of Greek pagan ideas, have been more than willing to deny the physical resurrection of the Christ. It is nought (they say) but a primitive symbol of moving to a higher (non-material) plane of existence. Such make shipwreck of their faith.
When God created the world, and man as His image bearer in it, He created him body and soul. The body is just as much the perfect image of God as man’s mind and his soul. Thus, when Christ came forth to redeem mankind and the world, He rose bodily as the first born from death. If He were not to rise corporally from the dead, man would still be shattered, and broken, still under the penalty of sin. His resurrection would not be a resurrection of man. For perfect, sinless man is ever a material and physical being. Christ could not be the Head of a new human race if it were not a material and physical race: for the sinless perfection of the old race lay intrinsically in those corporate aspects.
That is why Paul declares that if we do not continue in eternity as material and corporal beings Christ is of no significance for us beyond this life. We have no hope of eternity. We will cease to exist as the perfect beings God created in the first place.
Thus, the resurrection is the proof that Christ is indeed restoring and saving us in every way. It is proof that His atonement and salvation is complete and total. It is proof that in Christ we are indeed a new creation; the old has passed away, and that all things have become renewed. That is why the resurrection is at the centre of the Christian faith.
contracelsum 