Tag: Stott

Suffering and Glory

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

According to the Bible, suffering is an alien intrusion into God’s good world, and it will have no part in his new universe.

  1. Suffering is often caused due to sin, or the sin of others: children suffer with unloving or irresponsible parents, poor and hungry people suffer from economic injustice, refugees suffer from cruelties of war, people suffer in road casualties cause by alcohol.
  2. Suffering can be a reckless use of our freedom. There is cause and effect but it is much different than Hindu karma. Think about how unreliable the universe would be receiving pain for every wrong step and pleasure for every good step.
  3. Suffering is due to the human sensitivity to pain: but pain is a valuable warning sign that something is wrong (Dr. Paul Brand, leprosy, and feeling pain).
  4. Suffering is due to the kind of environment God has placed us: laws of nature are in effect when the hurricane devastates a coastal town.

Stoics believed that suffering is meaningless, but Jesus spoke of it as revealing God’s glory. What then is the relationship between Christ’s suffering and ours? How does the cross speak to our pain?

Patient Endurance: while suffering is to be recognized as evil therefore resisted, there comes a time when it must be realistically accepted. It is no credit to us if we are beaten for doing wrong, but if we suffer for doing good and endure it, this would be pleasing to God (1 Peter 2:18-23, Hebrews 12:1-3).

Mature Holiness (Hebrews 2:10, 5:8-9, 7:28, James 1:2-4): Jesus was made perfect through suffering, and he was never disobedient. Here are biblical images of suffering and discipline:

  1. A father disciplines his children: this is an expression of love. No discipline means no love.
  2. God as a refiner of gold: heat to purify and remove the dross.
  3. Jesus mentions his allegory of the vine: pruning to bear fruit.

God intends suffering to be a means of grace; it develops humility and deepens insight.

Suffering Service (John 12:23-26, 32-33): death is more than the way to life; it is the secret of fruitfulness. Unless it falls into the ground and dies, it remains a single seed. Paul found meaning in his suffering; the greatest secret of evangelism or missionary effectiveness is the willingness to suffer and die for the sake of others:

  1. For the sake of the Gentiles (Ephesians 3:1, 13)
  2. For the sake of the body (Colossians 1:24)
  3. For the sake of the elect (2 Timothy 2:8-10)

The Hope of Glory (Hebrews 12:2): suffering should be expected; don’t be surprised by it (Matthew 5:10-12, John 15:18-21, Philippians 1:30, 1 Thessalonians 3:3, 1 Peter 2:21, 4:12, 2 Timothy 3:12). It is the hope of glory than makes suffering bearable. What happens to us down here cannot compare to the next life. Suffering is God’s appointed path toward sanctification (mature holiness), multiplication (fruitful service), and glorification (our final destiny).

The Ground of a Reasonable Faith: Job had the attitude of self-pity and self-assertion, while his friends’ attitude may be described as self-accusation. The goal is self-surrender, which Job realizes at the end of the book.

The Pain of God: the cross of Christ is proof of God’s love, that it is personal, loving solidarity with us in our pain. Philip Yancey wrote a book called, “Where is God When it Hurts?” and asked an interesting question, “If God is truly in charge, somehow connected to all the world’s suffering, why is he so capricious, unfair?” Similar to Job 9:23, like God mocking the despair of the innocent. But God is not on a deck chair watching us, he was on the cross, and continues to suffer with us today.

Outside of Lazarus’ tomb, Jesus wept with those who grieved and snorted with indignation. He wept over Jerusalem, lamenting over their blindness and obstinacy.

Nobel Peace Prize winner (1986) Elie Wiesel wrote about his time in the death camps of Auschwitz, Buna and Buchenwald and came to this conclusion: he heard over and over the question about “Where is God? Where is he?” and as they were force to watch hangings at the gallows, he heard it again, “Where is God now?” He heard a voice within him answer, “Here he is…he is hanging here on this gallows.” God in Christ suffers with his people still.

Seven Affirmations in the Letter to the Galatians:

  1. The Cross and Salvation (Galatians 1:3-5): an introductory statement that is theologically balance and indicates what the letter is going to be about.
    1. The death of Jesus was voluntary and determined.
    2. The death of Jesus was for our sins.
    3. The purpose of Jesus’ death was to rescue us.
    4. The present result of Jesus’ death is grace and peace.
    5. The eternal result of Jesus’ death is that God will be glorified forever.
  2. The Cross and Experience (Galatians 2:19-21): in context Paul writes about justification, how a righteous God can declare sinful humans as righteous. Several times he repeats it is not by the law. The death of Jesus on the cross satisfied the demands of the law.
  3. The Cross and Preaching (Galatians 3:1-3): once you have begun in faith in Christ, why continue in their own achievement?
    1. Gospel-preaching proclaims the cross visually (prographo).
    2. Gospel-preaching proclaims the cross visually as a present reality (to accept or reject).
    3. Gospel-preaching proclaims the cross as a visual, present and permanent reality (perfect tense indicates a permanent benefit of the historical action).
    4. Gospel-preaching proclaims the cross also as an object of personal faith (we continue in faith and grace, not personal efforts).
  4. The Cross and Substitution (Galatians 3:10-14): here is the meaning and consequence of the faith. Here is Paul’s logic:
    1. All who rely upon the law are under a curse (Galatians 2:16, 3:10, 11, 12, Deuteronomy 27:26, Habakkuk 2:4).
    2. Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us (plain statement of substitution, Galatians 3:13).
    3. Christ did this in order that in him the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, by faith (Galatians 3:14).
  5. The Cross and Persecution (Galatians 5:11, 6:12)
    1. Preaching circumcision is to preach salvation by the law.
    2. Preaching the cross is to preach salvation by God’s grace alone.
  6. The Cross and Holiness (Galatians 5:24): there are acts of the flesh and acts/fruit of the Spirit).
  7. The Cross and Boasting (Galatians 6:14): false teachers where obsessed with the numbers of their converts.
    1. To glory or boast in the cross is to see it as the way of acceptance with God.
    2. To glory or boast in the cross is to see it as the pattern of our self-denial.

The Cross in Galatians:

  1. The grounds for our justification (Galatians 1:4, 3:13)
  2. The means of our sanctification (Galatians 2:20, 5:24, 6:14)
  3. The subject of our witness (Galatians 3:1, 5:11, 6:12)
  4. The object of our boasting (Galatians 6:14, 17, Philippians 3:18)

Related Images:

Loving Your Enemies

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

To live under the cross means that every aspect of our lives is shaped and colored by it. We are to be imitators of God (Ephesians 5:1-2) and exercise relationships as Jesus did.

Conciliation and Discipline: we are called to be peacemakers (Matthew 5:9) and to seek peace and pursue it (1 Peter 3:11). Peacemaking can never be a unilateral activity; live at peace with everyone is qualified by two conditions, “if it is possible” and “as far as it depends upon you” (Romans 12:18).

Jesus was determined to make peace with us, his enemies who had rebelled against him, he made peace through the blood of the cross (Colossians 1:20). If we are the offender, there is:

  1. Humiliation in apologizing.
  2. Deeper humiliation in making restitution where possible.
  3. Deepest humiliation in confessing the deep wounds we have caused will take time to heal and cannot be lightly forgotten.

The incentive in peacemaking is love, but it denigrates into appeasement whenever justice is ignored. The two powerful cries of a child are “nobody loves me” and “it’s not fair” since their sense of love and justice come from God. Here are the stages of reconciliation:

  1. Private: one-to-one confrontation with the offender, and if he listens, he will be won over.
  2. Take several others in a rebuke: if not the actual offense, perhaps the confrontation in stage one.
  3. To the church: if he will not listen, it goes to the community of faith; a third chance to repent.
  4. It is only here, if he does not repent, that excommunication is allowed.

Christian Attitudes Toward Evil: does the cross commit us to a non-violent acceptance of all violence? Does it invalidate the process of justice and the so-called “just war?” Does it prohibit the use of any kind of force so that it would be incompatible for a Christian to be a policeman, soldier or prison guard? How did we respond to divine mercy? (Note the resemblance to our September r12 emphasis).

  1. We are to present our bodies as living sacrifices (Romans 12:1-2).
  2. We are to think of ourselves with sober judgment (Romans 12:3).
  3. We are to love each other by employing gifts (Romans 12:4-13, 15-16).
  4. We are to bless our persecutors and do good to our enemies (Romans 12:14, 17-21).

How do we react to persecutors and enemies? The Romans 12-13 has several directions:

  1. Evil is to be hated: hate what is evil, cling to what is good (Romans 12:9).
  2. Evil is not to be repaid: don’t repay evil with evil, do what is right in the eyes of everyone (Romans 12:17, 19). Revenge and retaliation are forbidden. The sermon on the mount is pretty clear (don’t resist and evil person). Peter on Jesus (1 Peter 2:23), he did not retaliate while suffering.
  3. Evil is to be overcome: don’t be overcome by evil, overcome evil with good (Romans 12:21). Heaping burning coals is not retaliation, but a figure of speech to cause him shame. When we retaliate with evil, evil increases in the world; our desire is to decrease the amount of evil in the world.
  4. Evil is to be punished: he (the government) is God’s servant to do good, an agent of wrath to punish evil doers (Romans 12:17, 19, 13:4). It is God prerogative to punish, not ours. Law enforcement is God’s servant to carry out justice.

Retaliation is not wrong, since evil deserves to be punished, should be punished, and in fact will be punished. Jesus said each person will be judged according to his deeds (Matthew 16:27). Peter tells us that Jesus entrusted himself to the one who will judge (1 Peter 2:23).

Authority of the State: the Christian attitude should be one of balance, avoiding extremes, embracing critical respect. In each stated point, the state is limited in its authority.

  1. The origin of its authority is God (Romans 13:1, 4, 6): three times Paul asserts the state’s authority. Despite the defects of the Roman government, Paul declares its authority and ministry of be God’s. The state must be respected as a divine institution, but to give it blind allegiance would be idolatry. The early believers would not say that “Caesar is lord.”
  2. The purpose God gives authority is to reward good and punish evil (Ephesians 1:21-22, Romans 13:3-4): Most governments tend to be better at the latter than the former; law enforcement is stronger than positive encouragement.
  3. The means by which the state’s authority is exercised must be as controlled as its purposes are discriminate (Romans 13:4): to protect the innocent and punish the guilty, coercion is often used. Authority implies power and we have to distinguish between violence and force. The state can exercise capital punishment and make war. The state has the power to stop evil-doers; punishing aggressors who threaten it from outside, and punish criminals who threaten it from the inside.
  4. The due recognition of the state’s authority is laid down (Romans 12:1, 2, 5, 6, 1 Peter 2:13, 1 Timothy 2:1-2). There are limits to our submission to the state (Revelation 12).
    1. Suppose the state misuses its God-given authority and promotes evil and suppresses good?
    2. Suppose the state ceases to protect people and begins to oppress them?

The apostle gives no room for totalitarian rule. Even Daniel practiced civil disobedience, as well as Peter and John. If the state commands what God forbids, or forbids what God commands, we disobey the state in order to obey God. We respect the state but we do not worship it.

Overcoming Evil with Good: evil is to be repaid but not repaid (depending on the agent). How can evil be overcome (Romans 12:21) and also punished (Romans 13:4)? The difference is between pacifists and war theorists.

  1. Just war theorists tend to concentrate on the need to resist and punish evil.
  2. Pacifists tend to concentrate on overcoming evil with good, and forget that evil must be punished.

Christians need to look beyond defeat and surrender of the national enemy to its repentance and rehabilitation; a politics of redemption and forgiveness.

Related Images:

Self-Understanding & Self-Giving

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

What is the attitude we should adopt for ourselves? In society today, secular humanism teaches that we basically worship ourselves, literal self-deification. Jesus said to love God, then others as we love ourselves. Some counselors emphasize loving ourselves before we are able to love others. A song on K-love by Natalie Grant has a line very similar, “you can’t love, when you don’t love yourself.”

Jesus emphasized only one commandment, to love God, and the second is like it. It is a practical guide to loving others since no one ever hated his own body (Ephesians 5:29). This is similar to the golden rule (Matthew 7:12) but we cannot always know how others would like to be treated themselves, so perhaps I would not want to be treated that same way. The love mentioned is the agape love, unconditional, meaning sacrificial love. The problem is elevated by Paul that in the last days, men will become lovers of self (2 Timothy 3:1-5) instead of lovers of God.

Paul also challenges us to view ourselves in sober judgment (Romans 12:3). The cross supplies the answer because it calls us both to self-denial and self-affirmation.

Stott mentions that the cross must be called representative as well as substitutionary.

  1. A substitute is one who acts in place of another in a way as to render the other’s action unnecessary: a football player off the bench, a soldier in place of a civilian, one is now inactive, and replaced.
  2. A representative is one who acts on behalf of another, in a way as to involve the other in his action: an agent represents a player and can act on his behalf; he does not speak instead of the player, but for him.
  3. Jesus was our substitute because we could never do what he did for us. As our representative, he has done what we have also done, by being united with him, have died and risen with him.

Paul writes about the conflict in Romans 6, that we are dead to sin and can therefore no longer live in sin (Romans 6:2). Baptism dramatically expresses our participation in going from death into life. When we speak of Jesus dying to sin, we understand that he died and bore its penalty, since the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). It is a fact that we must constantly remember each day.

Self-denial (Mark 8:34): We each must be both Barabbas (he escaped the cross) and Simon of Cyrene (he carried the cross). To carry the cross is to be in a position of a condemned man, on his way to execution. To carry a cross is for no other purpose. A hard life or a handicap is never “a cross to bear.” Self-denial is never depriving ourselves of something we enjoy, but rather disowning ourselves, and renouncing our right to go our own way.

Three deaths and resurrections in Scripture:

  1. Death to sin and subsequent life to God: this is inherent in our conversion and baptism. This death is basically legal, death to sin by union with Christ in his death to sin.
  2. Death to self: called taking up our cross, or denying or crucifying ourselves: it is done daily and willfully. This death is moral, a death that puts down the old sinful nature and its desires, and the resurrection which follows leading us into a new life of righteousness.
  3. Carrying the dying of Jesus in our mortal bodies, so the life of Jesus may be displayed in our bodies (1 Corinthians 15:30-31, Romans 8:36, 2 Corinthians 4:16). This death is physical, death to safety, being given over to death for Jesus’ sake.

This teaching is that we are wholly bad and we need to be totally repudiated and crucified with Christ.

Self-affirmation: Alongside Jesus’ explicit call to self-denial is his implicit call to self-affirmation (which is not the same as self-love).

  1. Jesus’ teaching about people: he drew attention to the ugly things and evil inside of people (Matthew 7:21-23) but he spoke about the value of human beings in God’s side. Mankind is the crown of God’s creating activity and is made in God’s image. God don’t make no junk.
  2. Jesus’ attitude to people: he went out of his way to honor those who were dishonored by society; embraced little children, approached Samaritans and Gentiles.
  3. Jesus mission and death for people: he came to serve and give his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). “My worth is what I’m worth to God.”

Is it possible to value ourselves and deny ourselves at the same time? True self-denial is not the road to self-destruction but the road to self-discovery.

  1. The self we are to deny, disown and crucify is the fallen self (everything that is incompatible with Jesus Christ).
  2. The self we are to affirm and value is our created self (the teaching on losing self in order to find self).

We must affirm: our rationality, sense of moral obligation, our sexuality, family life, gifts and creativity, stewardship of the earth, hunger for love, experience of community, awareness of God’s majesty, the inbuilt urge to worship.

We must deny: our irrationality, moral perversion, blurring sexual distinctiveness, lack of sexual control, selfishness which spoils family life, fascination with the ugly, lazy refusal to develop God’s gifts, anti-social tendencies, proud autonomy, and idolatrous refusal to worship the living God.

The next level: we are not just created and then fallen, but rather created, fallen and redeemed: regeneration, resurrection, redemption and re-creation.

Self-sacrificial love: self-understanding should lead to self-giving. The community of the cross is a community of self-giving love, expressed in the worship of God (Mark 10:35-45):

  1. The choice between selfish ambition and sacrifice: the brothers express selfishness at its worst, which is incompatible with the way of the cross.
  2. The choice between power and service: asking to sit on either side of Jesus, essentially have their place on throne to rule over others. Zebedee has servants and the boys likely missed having them around. They would follow Jesus for a while as long as there was just compensation at the end of it all. Lust for power is incompatible with the way of the cross.
  3. The choice between comfort and suffering: they would become vagrants and vagabonds, missing the comforts of home. Insistence on security is incompatible with the way of the cross.

Spheres of service: home, church and the world. There is a paradox that suffering is the path to glory, death is the way to life, and weakness is the secret of power.

The cross lies at the heart of mission. The cross-cultural missionary pays costly family and individual sacrifices, renounces economic security, professional promotion, replaced with solidarity with the poor and needy, repenting of pride and prejudice, and modesty of living and serving under national leadership.

Only the incarnation can span these divides, because it means entering into the worlds of other people, their alienation, loneliness and pain. Incarnation led to the cross, where Jesus took our flesh and then bore our sin.

Love is self-giving (1 John 3:16-18): our most valuable possession is laid down for others. The essence of love is self-sacrifice. Murder is taking another’s life; self-sacrifice is laying down your own life.

Related Images:

The Celebration of Community

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

Perhaps this presentation of Christ’s cross is too individualistic. If so, this section should restore the balance. The purpose of Christ’s self-sacrifice on the cross was not just to save isolated individuals but to create a new community, whose members would belong to him, love one another and eagerly serve the world. The community of Christ will be nothing less than a renewed and reunited humanity, which Christ, as the second Adam, will head (1 Corinthians 15:45).

From the Day of Pentecost onward (Acts 2), it has been clear that conversion to Christ means also conversion to the community of Christ. These two transfers—of personal allegiance and social membership—cannot be separated. Read 1 Peter 2:4-10, written by the apostle who preached powerfully on that Day of Pentecost.

First Peter 2:4-10 is the basis of the Community study:
Peter describes what is true about Christian believers. He does NOT necessarily describe how we feel all the time. We are living stones in a spiritual house, a holy and royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God.

One note specifically about the people of God as “a holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5) and “a royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9): This is the famous priesthood of all believers on which the Reformers laid great emphasis. In consequence of this universal priesthood, the word “priest” (Greek hiereus) is never in the New Testament applied to the ordained minister. The minister shares in offering what the people offer but has no distinctive offering to make that differs from theirs.

The uniqueness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross does not mean that we have no sacrifices to offer, but only that their nature and purpose are different. They are not material but spiritual, and their object is not propitiatory (turning away God’s wrath) but eucharistic (thanksgiving), the expression of a responsive gratitude. What would be some examples of “spiritual sacrifices” (1 Peter 2:5)?

You may come up with many different examples from your own experience, but I see eight kinds of spiritual sacrifices mentioned in Scripture:

  1. We are to present our bodies to him for his service, as “living sacrifices” (Romans 12:1); that sounds like a material offering, but it is termed “spiritual worship,” presumably because it pleases God only if it expresses the worship of the heart.
  2. We offer God our praise, worship and thanksgiving, “the fruit of lips that confess his name” (Hebrews 13:15).
  3. We offer prayer, which is said to ascend to God like fragrant incense (Revelation 5:8).
  4. We offer “a broken and contrite heart,” which God accepts and never despises (Psalm 51:17).
  5. We offer faith, which is called a “sacrifice and service” (Philippians 2:17).
  6. We offer our gifts and good deeds, “for with such sacrifices God is pleased” (Hebrews 13:16).
  7. We offer our life “poured out like a drink offering” in God’s service, even unto death (2 Timothy 4:6).
  8. We may present the special offering of the evangelist, whose preaching of the gospel is called a “priestly duty” because the evangelist’s converts can be presented as “an offering acceptable to God” (Romans 15:16).

First Peter 2:6-8 include three Old Testament quotes that are applied to Christ. Notice how and why the stone affects different people in different ways:

  1. First Peter 2:6 quotes Isaiah 28:16, which is in the context of God’s promise that evil will be found out, judged and swept away. The person who trusts in the Lord will endure and will not be touched by the judgment.
  2. First Peter 2:7 quotes Psalm 118:22; the psalmist’s next words confirm that the Lord is the one who put the stone in place: “The Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes” (Ps 118:23).
  3. First Peter 2:8 quotes Isaiah 8:14, which also calls the Lord a sanctuary for those who trust him while promising that unfaithful Israel will “fall and be broken” (Isaiah 8:15).

We have received mercy so that we may “declare the praises of him who called [us] out of darkness into his wonderful light” (1 Peter 2:9). Our new intimate relationship to God, which has replaced the old and painful estrangement, is marked by:

  1. Boldness: we are able to approach God is freedom and confidence; humbly (as sinners) yet boldly (as forgiven sinners) we come into God’s presence.
  2. Love: this love has driven out fear; responding to his loving initiative with an answering love of our own.
  3. Joy: we are no longer alienated and humiliated, we are rescued and restored; worshiping him with musical instruments and expressing our joy in songs of praise.

These are not to be thought of as purely private and interior experiences, they are to distinguish our public worship. Consider your public worship with other believers. What aspects of our worship express boldness, love, and joy?

The brief time we spend together on the Lord’s Day must not be separated from the rest of our lives; it is intended to bring our lives into focus.

Singing is a unique feature of Christian worship: I sent a few Journeyman missionaries to the Far East and they developed friendships with young local Buddhist monks. The Christian young men prepared an American style meal, and the evening led toward sharing music and Christian praise songs. The boys ask the monks to share some of their songs from the Buddhist faith. The monks got together and chanted a little and then shyly confessed, that “we really don’t have any songs in our religion.”

Whenever Christian people come together it is impossible to keep them from singing. The Christian community is a community of celebration. Evaluate the element of joy and thanksgiving in our worship experiences.

The community of Christ is the community of the cross. Having been brought into being by the cross, it continues to live by and under the cross. Our perspective and our behavior are now governed by the cross. All of our relationships have been radically transformed by it.

  1. The cross is not just a badge to identify us
  2. The cross is not just the banner under which we march
  3. The cross is also the compass that gives us our bearings in a disoriented world

Related Images:

The Conquest of Evil

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

The Bible holds promises like overcoming, victory, conquest, triumph; this was the first century vocabulary of followers of the risen Lord.

The cross disarmed and triumphed over the devil, along with all the powers and principalities at his command. They believed in Satan’s downfall, yet were victims of such violence for little more than having faith in the resurrected Jesus. So how did God triumph and have victory over the enemy? Stott explored six stages:

The Conquest Predicted: it all started in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:15) with the promise of the Messiah.

The Conquest Begun: this comes in the ministry of Jesus. As Satan recognized Jesus as the future conqueror, he made every attempt to get rid of Jesus (Herod’s rage, wilderness temptations, the crowds and leaders attempts to kill Jesus, Peter’s contradiction of the way of the cross).

The Conquest Achieved: this is the binding of the strong man, the Savior actually on the cross. Paul addresses two aspects of the saving work of the cross (Colossians 2:13-15):

  1. The forgiveness of sins: there is cancelling debt, the written code or IOU, (Romans 7:12) a broken Law of judgment. It was a signed confession, cancelled, wiped away, nailed to the cross.
  2. The overthrow of powers and authorities: three graphic verbs to explain their defeat.
    1. Stripped like foul clothing.
    2. Made a public spectacle, exhibiting powerlessness.
    3. Triumphed over them by the way of the cross; a captive’s procession through the victor’s city.
  3. What Christ did:
    1. Disarming them.
    2. Total resistance of the enemy.

The Conquest Confirmed and Announced: we cannot regard the cross as defeat and the resurrection as victory. The cross was where the victory was won, the resurrection was the victory endorsed, proclaimed and demonstrated. It was impossible for death to keep him because death was defeated on the cross, not the resurrection.

The Conquest Extended: the church is now out on its mission to preach the resurrected Lord. People are called to repent and believe in the risen Lord. People move from darkness to light; from death to life, from idols to the living God.

The Conquest Consummated: at the parousia.
The death and resurrection belong together in the New Testament, they go together. Seldom is one mentioned without the other (Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:34, John 10:17-18, 2:19, Acts 2:23-24, 1 Corinthians 15:1-8, 1 Thessalonians 4:14, 2 Corinthians 5:15, Romans 6:1-4, Luke 24:30-35).

Remember that it is by his death that our sins are dealt with, not the resurrection: the blood brought propitiation, redemption, justification, and reconciliation. Nowhere in the Bible does it mention that Christ rose for our sins. True, had he not been raised, our faith would be in vain and our preaching would be futile. Nothing would be accomplished by his death if he had not been raised from the dead. The gospel emphasizes the cross, since that is the place of victory. The resurrection did not achieve our deliverance from sin and death, but it brought us an assurance of both (1 Peter 1:3, 21).

Entering into Christ’s victory: although the devil has been defeated, he has not yet conceded defeat. He is overthrown but has not been eliminated. Stott mentions a tension between our theology and our experience:

  1. On one hand we are alive, seated and reigning with Christ with powers and principalities under God’s feet.
  2. On the other hand we warned that spiritual forces have set themselves in opposition to us (as in Ephesians) and have no hope of standing against them without the Lord’s strength.

There is an element of “already” and “not yet.” Triumphalists see the victory and command the dark forces, while defeatists see only the malice of the devil and overlook the victory of Christ. Jesus literally came to confront and defeat the devil and undo the damage he has done.

  1. We are no longer under the tyranny of the Law.
  2. We are no longer under the tyranny of the flesh.
  3. We are no longer under the tyranny of the world.
  4. We are no longer under the tyranny of death.

Related Images:

The Revelation of God

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

Here we are to investigate how the cross was a word and a work. And we ought to listen attentively.

The Glory of God: According to John, Jesus referred to his death as a glorification, and event through which he and the Father would be supremely glorified or manifested. The Bible tells us that heaven and earth are filled with his glory. The flowers in the field had glory exceeding Solomon’s, God showed his glory in delivering the people from Egypt (Ps 19:1, Isaiah 6:3, Matthew 6:29).

We had a glimpse of his glory at the transfiguration, and was manifested in the miracles or signs. John tells us that we have seen his glory. The cross appeared to be shame, but it proved to be glory. The synoptic gospels tell us that suffering is the pathway to glory. His coming death was his hour of glorification:

  1. Some Greeks came to see Jesus, “the hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified” and then talked about his death (John 12:23).
  2. Judas leaves the upper room, Jesus says, “Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him.” (John 13:31).
  3. In his high priestly prayer, Jesus says, “Father the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you” (John 17:1).

In the cross there is a clear and public demonstration of God’s justice (Romans 3:25-26) and his love (Romans 5:8).

The Justice of God: There is seeming injustice in God’s providence: Abraham’s plea with God over Sodom and Gomorrah, the entire book of Job, and Psalm 73 where evil people prosper.

Romans 3:21-26 – the reformers interpreted “a righteousness” to mean a righteous status which is of God; it is bestowed by him. We read about the sacrifice of atonement was to demonstrate God’s justice.

  1. The first look is to the past (all sins in the past had beforehand been unpunished, Romans 3:25), and it looks to the present and future (so as to be just and the one who justifies the man who has faith in Jesus, Romans 3:26).
  2. Why had he not judged sinners according to their works? Although self-restraint might postpone justice, he could not allow a backlog of sins to mount up indefinitely.
  3. The cross shows both his justice in judging sin and his mercy in justifying the sinner.

The Love of God: How can the horrors of the world be reconciled with the love of God? Why does he allow them?

  1. This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us (1 John 3:16). Apart from Jesus, we know nothing about love.
  2. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins (1 John 4:10). The words, “live” and “propitiation” betray our severe need. Because of sin, we deserve to experience death and to die under the righteous anger of God. But Jesus bore the wrath instead of us.

God poured out his love (Romans 5:5) and he demonstrated his love (Romans 5:8).

  1. God gave his Son for us. He did not send another being or creature, but himself.
  2. God gave his Son to die for us. The incarnation was the beginning of his self-giving, having emptied himself, humbled himself and became obedient to death, on a cross.
  3. God gave his Son to die for us. For underserving sinners who have missed the mark.

Three marks of false love:

  1. Mark of limitation (something is withheld)
  2. Mark of control (someone is manipulated)
  3. Mark of detachment (we remain self-sufficient, unimpaired, and unhurt)

Three marks of authentic love:

  1. Characterized by limitless self-giving.
  2. Characterized by risk-taking with no guarantee of success.
  3. Characterized by vulnerability that is easily hurt.

Both the Father and the Son suffer the cost of their surrender, though differently:

  1. The Son suffers dying; the Father suffers the death of the Son.
  2. The grief of the Father is just as important as the death of the Son.
  3. The fatherlessness of the Son is matched by the sonlessness of the Father.

Is there more emphasis on God’s love over the cross? Is there repentance and salvation without the cross? Some stories illustrate God’s forgiving mercy and contain nothing about the need for an atoning sacrifice.

  1. Did Paul corrupt church dogma and make the cross necessary for salvation?
  2. Islam claims that the boy is saved without a Savior. The incarnation, the cross and the resurrection are all unnecessary. If God is truly great, he can forgive without all of these things.
    1. Parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector: one was justified (Luke 18:9-14)
    2. Parable of the unmerciful servant: the king freely forgave and cancelled the debt (Matthew 18:23-35)
    3. Parable of the Prodigal Son: welcomes him back and reinstates him (Luke 15:11-24)

Middle Eastern understanding: the prodigal was returning in disgrace. Punishment was inevitable. The father bears the suffering rather than inflicting it. The father ran (his age ran nowhere under any circumstances), cultural humiliation, taking on the shame. This is the humiliation of the incarnation and the shame of the cross on our behalf.

Wisdom and Foolishness of the Cross: (1 Corinthians 1:17-2:5) – Jews demand miraculous signs and the Greeks demand wisdom. We preach Christ crucified which is a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks. Paul came without a message of human wisdom, or his own strength. Instead he brought the foolish, revealed message of the cross. He had to overcome his own weakness, fear and trembling and relay on the power of the Holy Spirit.

Related Images:

The Salvation of Sinners

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

“Images” of salvation (or the atonement) is a better term than “theories.” Theories are usually abstract and speculative concepts, where biblical images are concrete pictures and belong to the data of revelation.

  1. Propitiation introduces us to rituals at a shrine
  2. Redemption, to a transaction in the marketplace
  3. Justification, to proceedings in a courtroom
  4. Reconciliation, to experiences in a home or family
  5. Substitution is not a theory, but the foundation of these all

Propitiation: Romans 3:24-25, 1 John 2:1-4, 4:10 – to propitiate someone is to appease or pacify his anger. Remember God’s holy wrath and his loving self-sacrifice of Christ, which was his own initiative to avert his anger.

This is a critical question: is the object of the atoning action God or man? If the former, then the right word may be propitiation (appeasing God); if the latter, the right word may be expiation (dealing with sin and guilt). Christians are less pacifying the displeasure of God and more as a means of delivering man from sin. At the cross Jesus expiated sin, he did not propitiate God.

Fire and brimstone theology has the idea of appeasing an angry God or that the cross was a legal transaction in which an innocent victim was made to pay the penalty for the crimes of others. This is not Paul’s theology, but came from the minds of medieval churchmen (this is not biblical Christianity).

  1. The reason why a propitiation is necessary is that sin arouses the wrath of God:
    1. His anger is poles apart from ours.
    2. What provokes our anger (injured vanity) never provokes God; what provokes his anger (evil) seldom provokes ours.
  2. Who makes the propitiation? In pagan cultures it is always the human trying to avert the anger of the deity.
    1. The gospel states that nothing we can do or say or even contribute can compensate for our sins or turn away God’s anger. There is no possibility of persuading or bribing God to forgive us.
    2. God is so gracious he gives us the sacrificial blood to make atonement (Leviticus 17:11).
    3. Remember that God does not love us because Christ died for us; Christ died for us because God loves us.
  3. What is the propitiatory sacrifice? Not an animal, vegetable or mineral, but a person. The one person who could step in was God himself.

In Pauline theology, man is alienated from God by sin and God is alienated from man by wrath. It is the substitutionary death of Christ that sin is overcome and wrath is averted. God can now look at man without displeasure and man can now look at God without fear. Sin is expiated and God is propitiated.

Redemption: we move from an image at the temple to the marketplace, from religious rituals to business transactions, from ceremony to commercialism; to redeem is to buy back by purchase or ransom. There is an emphasis that we are more than redeemed by Christ, we are ransomed by him. This comes only at the payment of a price, which then sets us free. The price paid is not “himself” or his “life” but his “blood” (1 Peter 1:18-19). Christ was the victim as well as the priest, entering the Holy Place by his own blood (Hebrews 9:12, Romans 3:24-25, Ephesians 1:7). In communion, we drink the blood of Christ not to participate in the life of Christ, but in his death, appropriating the benefits of his life laid down.

Justification: this image tasks us into the courtroom. Justification is the opposite of condemnation. Forgiveness remits our debts and cancels our liability to punishment; justification declares us in a right standing before God. There have been various objections to justification:

  1. Strong antipathy or dislike to legal categories in talk about salvation; it presents God as Judge rather than as Father.
  2. It attempts to dismiss the doctrine as a Pauline idiosyncrasy, originating in his legalistic mind.
  3. Catholic objection of the reformers teaching on justification by faith;
    1. The Council of Trent (Session 6, January 13, 1547) taught that justification takes place at baptism and includes both forgiveness and renewal.
    2. Also, that before baptism, prevenient grace predisposes people to convert themselves to their own justification by freely assenting to and cooperating with that grace.
    3. Post-baptismal sins are not included within the scope of justification.

Justification declares the person right before God, it does not make them right.

  1. If just means forgiven and accepted and right with God, then we immediately become what God declares us to be. There is a difference between declaring and making us just.
  2. If just is used to signify made new or made alive, then again we are what God declares us to be.
  3. If just means having a righteous character or being conformed to the image of Christ, then God’s declaration does not immediately secure it, but only initiates it. Sanctification is another topic, dealing with growing in holiness.

Faith is of no value in itself. Its value lies solely in its object. The justifying work of Son and the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit cannot be separated. Good works follow justification and new birth. Salvation is never by works but unto works.

God never acquits the guilty (Exodus 23:7) and never condemns the innocent (Proverbs 17:15).

Four of Paul’s key phrases summarize his defense of this divine justification of sinners.

  1. The source of our justification is indicated in the expression “justified by his grace,” that is, by his utterly undeserved favor, which occurs in Titus 3:7 and in Romans 3:24. No one can justify himself, no one is righteous (Romans 3:10, 20, 24).
  2. The grounds for our justification are that we are “justified by his blood” (Romans 5:9). There could be no justification without atonement. There is no pardon without principle; there is no forgiveness that simply overlooks sin.
  3. The means of our justification is indicated in Paul’s favorite expression “justified by faith” (Romans 3:28; 5:1 [“justified through faith”]; Galatians 2:16; 3:24). Grace and faith belong indissolubly to one another, since faith’s only function is to receive what grace freely offers.
  4. The effects of our justification can be deduced from Paul’s expression “justified in Christ” (Galatians 2:17), which points to his historical death, and personal relationship with him that, by faith, we now enjoy.

Reconciliation: this image is from the home and family and friends; it is the opposite of alienation. It begins with reconciliation to God and then to the community. It has to do with making peace with God, adoption into his family and having access to his presence. Ephesians 2:11-22 refer to the wall of separation, Jews and Gentiles (Ephesians 2:14) but also separated from Christ (Ephesians 2:12).

How does reconciliation take place (2 Corinthians 5:18-21)?

  1. God is the author of reconciliation: it is from his initiative, not ours. We are reconciled to him; he is not reconciled to us. He is always the subject and never the object. Reconciliation presupposes enmity between two parties. The Bible uses words like, enemies with God, enmity, hostility (Romans 11:28, 5:10).
  2. Christ is the agent of reconciliation: 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 make this clear; God reconciled us to himself through Christ (past tense). It was finished at the death of Christ.
  3. We are the ambassadors of reconciliation: (2 Corinthians 5:20).

Summary:

  1. Propitiation underscores the wrath of God upon us.
  2. Redemption, our captivity to sin.
  3. Justification, our guilt.
  4. Reconciliation, our enmity against God and alienation from him.
  5. All of God’s saving work was achieved through blood-shedding, the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ.

Related Images:

Ransomed by God

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

This is about the self-substitution of God. How can the holy love of God come to terms with the unholy lovelessness of sinful man? The problem is not outside of God; it is within his own being. How can he express at the same time his holiness and judgment and his love and pardon? Only by providing a divine substitute for the sinner, so that the substitute would receive the judgment and the sinner would receive the pardon.

Sacrifice in the Old Testament: Paul tells us the Christ gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice (Ephesians 5:2), gave himself (Galatians 1:4), or in Hebrews 9:14, Christ offered himself. Jesus died for sins (Romans 8:3, 1 Peter 3:18). In our passage today, we see that sacrifice in the OT was just a shadow of what was to come.

Sacrifices were offered for several reasons: they were associated with penitence, celebration, national need, covenant renewal, family festivity and personal consecration. Regarding sacrifice we find them to signify belonging to God, and also alienation from God because of sin and guilt.

The notion of substitution means that one person takes the place of another, in order to bear his pain and to save him from it. Moses stepped in to save the Hebrews (Exodus 32:32), Paul would have stepped in for his people (Romans 9:1-4), Abraham was going to sacrifice his son but was provided a substitute (Genesis 22:13).

In a sacrifice the worshipper brought the animal, put hands on it and killed it. The priest applied the blood, burnt some of the flesh, and arranged to have the rest eaten. The point was identification and the hands were a symbolic transference of their sin. The shedding and sprinkling of blood was vital for atonement, and eating of blood was prohibited (Leviticus 17:11).

  1. Blood symbolized life (Genesis 9:4, Deuteronomy 12:23)
  2. Blood makes atonement, the reason is the repetition of the word life (life was given for life, the life of the innocent for the life of the guilt).
  3. Blood was given by God for this atoning purpose: the sacrificial system was God-made, not man-made.

Two verses we need to look at: without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22) and, it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins (Hebrews 10:4). While Old Testament sacrifices were shadows, the substance was always Christ. For a substitute to be effective, it must prove to be an appropriate equivalent. Animals are not equal with humans, humans are not equal with God (Matthew 12:12, 1 Peter 1:19).

Passover and Sin Bearing: Passover was the beginning of Israel’s national identity, and it was here the New Testament identifies the death of Christ as the fulfillment of the Passover (the new and redeemed community and the new exodus from sin). God provided self-disclosure of himself:

  1. Yahweh revealed himself as the Judge (the background to the final plague).
  2. Yahweh revealed himself as the Redeemer (blood is applied to the door and they must take shelter under it).
  3. Yahweh revealed himself as Israel’s covenant God (he redeemed them to be his own people).

For us, the message is also clear:

  1. The Judge and Savior are the same person (it was God who passed through Egypt to judge the firstborn, who passed over the Israelite homes to protect them).
  2. Salvation was (and is) by substitution (only the firstborn males who were spared were in whose families a firstborn lamb had died instead).
  3. The lamb’s blood had to be sprinkled after it had been shed (there had to be individual appropriation of the divine protection).
  4. Each family rescued by God was thereby purchased for God.

What does it mean to bear sin? Jesus bore our sins (1 Peter 2:4) and was once offered to bear the sins of many (Hebrews 9:28). It means to bear sin’s penalty.

The Scapegoat (Leviticus 16:5-28): One goat gets killed and the blood is sprinkled in the usual way, while the priest lays his hands on the living goat’s head and confesses the sin and rebellion of the people. The living goat is then driven into the desert.

Do not make the mistake of driving a wedge between the two goats because the two together are described as the sin offering (Leviticus 16:5). Each embodied a different aspect of the same sacrifice, one exhibiting the means and the other exhibiting the results of the atonement.

Jesus death and two sin-bearing statements:

  1. He died to give his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45).
  2. He died to pour out his blood for many (Mark 14:24, Isaiah 53:12).

Who is the substitute? Yes, it was Jesus, but was he just a man? If so, how could a human being stand in for another human being? Was he then simply God appearing to be a man? If so, how could he represent humankind? How could he (God) have died? Neither God alone nor man alone, but the unique and only God-Man was a suitable substitute, uniquely qualified to mediate between holy God and sinful man.

The possibility of a substitute rests upon the identity of the substitute. The essence, nature and identity of the Christ had been the subject of many heresies and controversies.

God was in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:19): the righteous loving Father humbled himself to become, in and through his holy Son, flesh, sin and curse for us, in order to redeem us without compromising his own character. Make this personal.

The doctrine of substitution not only affirms a fact (that God was in Christ substituting himself for us) but it’s necessary (there is no other way by which God’s holy love could be satisfied and rebellious humans could be saved). Therefore, we all stand before the cross, as Adam, embarrassed at our nakedness attempting self-justification, wearing filthy rags. Jesus wore the rags and clothed us with righteousness.

Related Images:

The Satisfaction for Sin

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

The way different theologians have developed the concept of satisfaction depends on their understanding of the obstacles to forgiveness which first need to be removed.

  1. What demands are made which stand in the way until they are satisfied?
  2. Who is making the demands?
  3. Is it the devil? Or is it the law, or God’s honor or justice or the moral order?

Stott argues that the primary obstacle is to be found in God himself. He must satisfy himself in the way of salvation he devises. He cannot save us by contradicting himself.

Satisfying the Devil: this teaching was widespread in the early church. It comes out of declaring the devil with power and the cross deprived him of it. Mankind had been in captivity not only to sin and guilt but to the devil. They thought of him as the lord of sin and death, he is the major tyrant from whom Jesus came to liberate us. Here are two mistakes:

  1. They credited the devil with more power than he has. They speak as if he had acquired certain rights over man which even God himself was under obligation to satisfy honorably.
  2. They thought of the cross as a divine transaction with the devil; it was the ransom-price demanded for the release of the captives, and paid to the devil in settlement of his rights.

The value in these theories is that they took seriously the reality, malevolence and power of the devil (the strong man fully armed). We must deny that the devil has rights over us which God is obligated to satisfy. Any notion of Christ’s death as a necessary transaction with the devil is ruled out.

Satisfying the Law: this theory assumes that mankind incurs the penalty of their law-breaking. They simply cannot be let off the hook. The law must be upheld and defended, and its just penalties paid. The law is therefore satisfied. An Old Testament example is when Darius sought to find a way to save Daniel. The law could not be tampered with. God longs to save us, but he cannot do so by violating his own law, which has just condemned us. He cannot just abolish the law he has established. The Bible says that every law-breaker is cursed and that Christ came to redeem us from the curse (Galatians 3:10, 13).

Satisfying God’s Honor and Glory: Anselm (the 11th century) declared the relationship between the incarnation and the atonement (in Cur Deus Homo?). He agreed that the devil needed to be overcome, but rejects the ransom theories on the grounds that God owed nothing to the devil but punishment.

Instead, man owed something to God, and that is the debt which needed to be repaid. Remember that believing God can forgive sin as we forgive others does not consider the seriousness of sin. So what can be done? If we are to be forgiven, we must repay what we owe. We are incapable of doing this for ourselves or others. There is no one who can make satisfaction for sin except God alone. It is essential that the God-Man make this satisfaction. He gave himself up, not as a debt he needed to pay, but freely for the honor of God.

God Satisfying Himself: these interpretations all represent God as subordinate to something outside and above himself which controls his actions, to which he is accountable, and from which he cannot free himself.

  1. The language of provocation: God is provoked by Israel’s idolatry to anger or jealousy or both. But God is never provoked without reason. It is evil alone that provokes him and God must behave like the holy God that he is. If evil did not provoke him to anger, he would forfeit our respect, for he would no longer be God.
  2. The language of burning: this depicts God as burning in his anger; kindling, quenching and consuming.
  3. The language of satisfaction itself: basically that God must act as himself; what is inside must come out.

God is provoked to jealous anger over his people by their sins. Once kindled, his anger burns and is not easily quenched. He unleashes it, pours it out and spends it.

The Holy Love of God: what does this have to do with the atonement? Just as God chooses to forgives sinners and reconcile them to himself, he must first be consistent with his character. How can God express his holiness without consuming us? How can he love us without condoning our sin? How can God satisfy his holy love? How can he save us and satisfy himself? In order to satisfy himself, he sacrificed or substituted himself for us (which is the next chapter).

Related Images:

The Problem of Forgiveness

Posted on by

These are notes from my reading John R. W. Stott’s classic book, The Cross of Christ.

Why does our forgiveness depend upon the death of Christ? Why does God not just forgive us without the necessity of the cross? Why can’t God practice what he preaches and forgive without condition, as he instructs in Matthew 6:14-15, 18:21-22? If we believe that God can forgive us as we forgive others, we have not yet considered the seriousness of our sin. The obligation of the forgiven is to forgive. God need no forgiveness and we overlook the fact that we are not God. This attitude demonstrates our shallowness. Our sin is not a personal injury toward God, it is downright rebellion against him.

How does God express his holy love? How can he forgive sin without compromising his holiness? How can he judge sinners without frustrating his love? Stott focuses on four concepts:

The Gravity of Sin:

  1. Five Greek words for sin: hamartia (missing the target); adikia (unrighteousness or iniquity); poneria (evil of a vicious kind); paraptoma (trespass or transgression); anomia (lawlessness or disregard of a known law).
  2. The emphasis of Scripture is the godless self-centeredness of sin. We proclaim our independence and autonomy; taking a position reserved for God alone. Sin is defiance, arrogance and the desire to be equal with God.
  3. David’s confession, his sin was against God (Psalm 51:4). Sin cannot be dismissed a simply a cultural taboo or a social blunder. Sin has a willful and defiant or disloyal quality: someone is defiled or offended or hurt.

Human Moral Responsibility:
Is it fair to blame human beings for their misconduct? Are we responsible for our actions? Scapegoats include: genes, chemistry, inherited traits, parental failures, early childhood upbringing, educational or social environment.

Criminal law determines assumes that people have the power to choose whether or not to break the law and treats them accordingly. There is even a distinction between intentional and unintentional homicide (between murder and manslaughter – which is straight out of Mosaic law). Liability also may depend upon moral and mental factors: the intention of the mind and the will. Lack of consciousness and control will always need to be defined. Trying and convicting and sentencing in the courts is based on the assumption people are free to make choices, being free agents.

The Bible emphasizes original sin, as an inheritance, so we are tainted and twisted from the start (Mark 7:21-23, John 8:34). We are enslaved to the world (public fashion and opinion), the flesh (our fallen nature) and the devil (demonic forces). At the same time the Bible tells us that while our responsibility is diminished, it is not demolished. We are morally responsible. We are to choose between life and death, good and evil, between the living God and idols (Matthew 23:37). Yet no one may come unless the Father draws him (John 6:44, 5:40). If men do not come to Christ, is it because they cannot or they will not? This is the debate between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Man does not sin out of weakness but he chooses to let himself go into weakness. There is always a spark of decision.

True and False Guilt: If humans have sinned, and they are responsible for their sins, that makes them guilty before God. There is a guilt that is deserved (John 3:19, men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil). This is a deliberate rejection of truth and goodness. False guilt looks at the cross and senses sorrow and guilt for Christ dying on the cross. We must understand that we did this, we are guilty. But it is false guilt to leave it there, and not talk about forgiveness of that sin. We must not look at the cross and only feel the shame for what we did to Christ, we must see the glory of what he did for us. Like the Prodigal Son, a guilty conscience is a great blessing, but only if it drives us to come home.

If there is false guilt (feeling bad for what we have not done), there is also false innocence (feeling good about the evil we have done). False contrition is unhealthy (ungrounded weeping over guilt) and so is false assurance (ungrounded rejoicing over forgiveness).

To say that someone is not responsible for their actions is to demean him as a human being. Eve blaming the snake, Nazis blaming they were only following orders.

Holiness and God’s Wrath: Our sins separate us from him, his face is hidden and he does not hear our prayers (Habakkuk 1:13, Isaiah 59:1-2). Moses hid his face. Isaiah had a sense of uncleanness. Job sat as a despised man. Ezekiel saw only a likeness of God’s glory. Peter recognized his sinfulness. John fell on his face as though he were a dead man. Closely related to God’s holiness is his wrath, which is the only reaction to evil.

The impersonal character of God’s wrath: this makes wrath not a divine attribute, but it is transformed into a process. Perhaps Paul’s adoption of impersonal wrath is not to affirm that God is not angry, but to emphasize that his anger is void of any personal malice. It is a fact, a process. Perhaps speaking to God’s anger is legitimate anthropomorphism.

Metaphors to God’s separation from sin: height (high and lifted up); distance (we dare not approach too close – Moses, Isaiah, the Tabernacle, and Uzzah); light and fire (a consuming fire that we cannot approach); and the most dramatic is vomiting (idolatrous practices were abhorred, disgusting, loathed, and lukewarmness was to be spit out). The point is that God cannot be in the presence of sin. We must hate evil and be disgusted with it. We cannot walk the road of moral compromise. Sin does not often provoke our anger and we then we do not believe our sin will provoke God’s anger.

This is essential to understanding the cross: balanced understanding of the gravity of our sin and the majesty of God. Diminish either and we diminish the cross. Forgiveness for God is one of the most profound problems. God must not only respect us as responsible beings, but also must respect himself as the only holy God. Before a holy God can forgive us, there must be some kind of necessary satisfaction.

Related Images: