It's been a few months or so since I have spoken about a subject very close to my heart - the "neglected" resurrection. It's never far from my thoughts though - just like my other favourite topics of theological discussion. Such as the Holy Spirit, His baptism, filling, gifts and Presence or the Song of Solomon! It doesn't take much for me to begin considering the importance of the resurrection though. Usually an over-use of the word; "The Cross" achieves it.
That's happened twice this week. I read a blog post that quoted Chris Tomlinson who asked the question;
"Can we talk about the Cross too much"?
My thought was - no surely we can't if we are talking about the WORK that Christ accomplished on the Cross. The taking of our sin in place of us. The pure and spotless sacrifice. But if we are talking about the Cross as a sentimental icon and sing emotive songs such as "The old rugged Cross" - about a Saviour hanging "there" - then yes, I think we can.
The second thing that brought this issue of the gospel and the neglected resurrection to my mind was reading a blog called "The Wartburg Watch". It is a blog written by two Southern Baptist women in the USA and of course is named after Martin Luther. They take an critical look at some of the church's more legalistic and assumed practices (it won't be to everyone's taste). But the particular blog post that caught my eye was titled; "A Deficient Gospel" - reviewing C J Mahaney's small book; "A Cross-centred Life". The interesting thing is that I have read this small book some years ago but even I didn't notice this (not being Mahaney's greatest fan).
Mahaney builds his book premise around the verse - 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 - that he cites as saying;
"Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you…. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins.”
From that Mahaney builds his theology around what he calls; "The main thing". However the "Wartburg Watch" saw something;
"Here’s why I believe Mahaney teaches a “deficient gospel”. Did you notice that he places a period after the phrase “that Christ died for our sins”? Paul, who was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, places a comma after the word “sins”. Well, maybe the translators actually inserted punctuation, but what is of vital importance is what Mahaney fails to include.
Now let’s go back to his original question: “What’s really the main thing in your life?” In other words, what is of “first importance”? Here is Paul’s complete response in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 (ESV): “that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.”
And this was their comment - that I loved so much I posted it today on my Twitter account.
"You see, a crucified “Saviour" ... is of no use unless He is resurrected".
Sounds obvious doesn't it? And many who speak adoringly of "the Cross" will impatiently probably snap that of course they know that Jesus Christ is resurrected. But I've discovered that one's theology and living tend to adapt to the vision of Jesus Christ that you persistently speak of and think about. If we as Christians (I believe) persistantly visualise Jesus Christ hanging broken and naked on a Cross, neglected and alone - then our theology will adapt to that belief. You will not develop a powerful optimistic missiology or eschatology and you may not have an adequate view of the Holy Spirit either.
Am I wrong? Prove me so. The emphasis of popular evangelicalism by "homies" such as Mahaney or Mark Driscoll urge us to spend much time at the foot of the Cross. Indeed Mahaney wrote in his book;
"When you’re tempted to doubt God’s love for you, stand before the cross and look at the wounded, dying, disfigured Savior, and realize why He is there. I believe His Father would whisper to us, “Isn’t that sufficient? I haven’t spared My own Son; I deformed and disfigured and crushed Him – for you. What more could I do to persuade you that I love you?”
It sounds incredibly emotive doesn't it? But is it actually biblical? When Stephen the first martyr was being stoned for his belief in Christ - I suspect that he may have been tempted to doubt God's love. No one who believed in Messiah had died for their beliefs and maybe Stephen wondered for a second if it was real. But he didn't see; "A wounded, dying, disfigured Saviour". Rather he saw;
" .... gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God ...Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."
It is a vision of the fully alive and ascended Jesus Christ as Lord that will give us cause to NEVER doubt the love of God for us. Not trying to imagine what it looked like at Calvary. After all - let us never forget this compilation of verses from the New Testament that lead us inevitably and unquestionably to the understanding that it is the ASCENDED and resurrection Lord Jesus Christ who pours out the Holy Spirit that really gives us certainity of the love of God for us.
"Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing (Acts 2:33 - ESV) .... For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father (Romans 8:15 - KJV)".
For me there is a complete gospel that leads me on from staying stuck considering my indwelling sin. It leads me from deep appreciation and awe and wonder at what Jesus did for me back 2000 years ago but on to the empty Cross and empty tomb and the thrill of hearing the victory echoes of heaven as He entered in with a host and sat down at the right hand of the Father until all His enemies have been put under His feet.
So a complete Gospel?
1. He came to earth in the incarnation - very God and very man.
2. He lived a perfect and spotless life - "tempted in all points like as we - yet without sin".
3. He died a death - taking our sin upon Him and becoming sin for us.
4. He rose victoriously binding principalities and powers by taking away the Law.
5. He ascended on high taking "captivity captive".
6. He sat down enthroned on high until His enemies are made His footstool - and poured out "this which you know SEE and HEAR" - the promised Holy Spirit who cries out "Abba! Father!"'.
Why live a Cross-centred life when you can live a gospel-centred life and take the most glorious message to the waiting and desperate lost?
That's happened twice this week. I read a blog post that quoted Chris Tomlinson who asked the question;
"Can we talk about the Cross too much"?
My thought was - no surely we can't if we are talking about the WORK that Christ accomplished on the Cross. The taking of our sin in place of us. The pure and spotless sacrifice. But if we are talking about the Cross as a sentimental icon and sing emotive songs such as "The old rugged Cross" - about a Saviour hanging "there" - then yes, I think we can.
The second thing that brought this issue of the gospel and the neglected resurrection to my mind was reading a blog called "The Wartburg Watch". It is a blog written by two Southern Baptist women in the USA and of course is named after Martin Luther. They take an critical look at some of the church's more legalistic and assumed practices (it won't be to everyone's taste). But the particular blog post that caught my eye was titled; "A Deficient Gospel" - reviewing C J Mahaney's small book; "A Cross-centred Life". The interesting thing is that I have read this small book some years ago but even I didn't notice this (not being Mahaney's greatest fan).
Mahaney builds his book premise around the verse - 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 - that he cites as saying;
"Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you…. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins.”
From that Mahaney builds his theology around what he calls; "The main thing". However the "Wartburg Watch" saw something;
"Here’s why I believe Mahaney teaches a “deficient gospel”. Did you notice that he places a period after the phrase “that Christ died for our sins”? Paul, who was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, places a comma after the word “sins”. Well, maybe the translators actually inserted punctuation, but what is of vital importance is what Mahaney fails to include.
Now let’s go back to his original question: “What’s really the main thing in your life?” In other words, what is of “first importance”? Here is Paul’s complete response in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 (ESV): “that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.”
And this was their comment - that I loved so much I posted it today on my Twitter account.
"You see, a crucified “Saviour" ... is of no use unless He is resurrected".
Sounds obvious doesn't it? And many who speak adoringly of "the Cross" will impatiently probably snap that of course they know that Jesus Christ is resurrected. But I've discovered that one's theology and living tend to adapt to the vision of Jesus Christ that you persistently speak of and think about. If we as Christians (I believe) persistantly visualise Jesus Christ hanging broken and naked on a Cross, neglected and alone - then our theology will adapt to that belief. You will not develop a powerful optimistic missiology or eschatology and you may not have an adequate view of the Holy Spirit either.
Am I wrong? Prove me so. The emphasis of popular evangelicalism by "homies" such as Mahaney or Mark Driscoll urge us to spend much time at the foot of the Cross. Indeed Mahaney wrote in his book;
"When you’re tempted to doubt God’s love for you, stand before the cross and look at the wounded, dying, disfigured Savior, and realize why He is there. I believe His Father would whisper to us, “Isn’t that sufficient? I haven’t spared My own Son; I deformed and disfigured and crushed Him – for you. What more could I do to persuade you that I love you?”
It sounds incredibly emotive doesn't it? But is it actually biblical? When Stephen the first martyr was being stoned for his belief in Christ - I suspect that he may have been tempted to doubt God's love. No one who believed in Messiah had died for their beliefs and maybe Stephen wondered for a second if it was real. But he didn't see; "A wounded, dying, disfigured Saviour". Rather he saw;
" .... gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God ...Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."
It is a vision of the fully alive and ascended Jesus Christ as Lord that will give us cause to NEVER doubt the love of God for us. Not trying to imagine what it looked like at Calvary. After all - let us never forget this compilation of verses from the New Testament that lead us inevitably and unquestionably to the understanding that it is the ASCENDED and resurrection Lord Jesus Christ who pours out the Holy Spirit that really gives us certainity of the love of God for us.
"Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing (Acts 2:33 - ESV) .... For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father (Romans 8:15 - KJV)".
For me there is a complete gospel that leads me on from staying stuck considering my indwelling sin. It leads me from deep appreciation and awe and wonder at what Jesus did for me back 2000 years ago but on to the empty Cross and empty tomb and the thrill of hearing the victory echoes of heaven as He entered in with a host and sat down at the right hand of the Father until all His enemies have been put under His feet.
So a complete Gospel?
1. He came to earth in the incarnation - very God and very man.
2. He lived a perfect and spotless life - "tempted in all points like as we - yet without sin".
3. He died a death - taking our sin upon Him and becoming sin for us.
4. He rose victoriously binding principalities and powers by taking away the Law.
5. He ascended on high taking "captivity captive".
6. He sat down enthroned on high until His enemies are made His footstool - and poured out "this which you know SEE and HEAR" - the promised Holy Spirit who cries out "Abba! Father!"'.
Why live a Cross-centred life when you can live a gospel-centred life and take the most glorious message to the waiting and desperate lost?
17 comments:
I have managed to access your site.
I'm finding google blogs of any kind are taking an absolute age to load.Perhaps some kind of filtering is going on? Or nothing of the sort?
========================
Jesus coming and wowing us all with His exploits is a weird kind of Christianity.
He laid His glory aside.
He became the 2nd Man.
He even bothered with going through a water baptism that none of us could ever get round it.
But thousands of years of slow motion setup prepared us for the few hours surrounding the Cross.
The tabernacle broke it all down into components for us.
The scapegoat.
The burnt offering.All the other details.
The apostles knew much of the Life of Christ by actually spending 3 years with Him. But it was Paul who was blitzed with the revelation of the Inner Jesus.It was he who saw that Christ's crucifixion was like the shuttle plane that carries us into the heavenlies with Him. Ephesians 1 is so packed with this stuff, it beggars belief that there would be a church anywhere that would just glorify the crucifixion alone. The crucifixion is central to ALL aspects of the tabernacle, but only because it takes a ragamuffin crowd from the East right through to the West, where they find themselves, like the Ark of the Covenant....all covered within and without with gold.
Cross-centred is fine so long as it is code (Biblical code, 1 Cor 2) for cross & resurrection centredness... Adrian Warnock's new book is a help in this direction, as is Mike Reeves clarity on Trinity.
Ultimately, it only makes sense to talk of the cross when we talk also about being caught up into the community of the Triune God. This is the great gospel of Athanasius, Luther and Calvin but much is lost along the way... Mark tells us Jesus dies and then flips the camera to Jerusalem to the torn curtain... the cross is so we can have relationship (and that implies resurrection)
You got it Dave. I suspect that Mahaney and S.G do mean "Cross" as code. When I was in Bristol at Grace Church, I raised this for discussion in a care group and one of the members expressed that opinion - they felt "Cross" was code for gospel.
However ... if we are using that code, do non-Christians understand that code? Or do they think we just mean the two planks of wood at Calvary literally? After all - Catholics and Anglicans have their icons of the cross so that would fit in.
I guess I'm questioning whether it is the most appropriate "code-word". Non-Christians know the word "gospel" - so maybe that's a better word?
Looking forward to seeing what Adrian Warnock has to say on the resurrection when the book is available to read!
I think it's where Piper begins to help us - God is the gospel, the point is to come to God - that's why the cross is so important, and the resurrection so necesssary. It's coming into relationship with him now and in the new creation that's so good.
Btw, reading Robert Jenson's commentary on Song of Songs. It's great so far, sane stuff on marriage, but priority on Christ & the church. Intimate relationship between God and his people...
Sam Allberry is with you...
take the resurrection test
Interesting!! Brill - thanks for that one!
And I've noted down the Jenson commentary on Song of Songs - sounds a great balance - getting the contemporary relevance but honouring the "main thing" - Jesus Christ and His Bride, the Church!
I wouldn't be hasty in saying that we always have to add the resurrection when we talk about the cross, or write about it in this discussion. After all, Mr. Mahaney is not the only one to write about the cross. Lloyd-Jones has a book titled "The Cross." John Stott has a book called "The Cross of Christ." If they want to write about the cross let them. If someone else wants to write about the resurrection, they don't have to write about the ascension, too.
Now, I realize that all of these things go hand in hand. But for a topical book such as the Cross centered life, written FOR Christians who know that Christ is resurrected, its like it goes without saying. Besides the fact that Mr. Mahaney preaches on the resurrection.
Plus, it is a code word, in a sense. Paul said that he preaches nothing else but Christ crucified, but we also know that when he says that he was talking about the whole gospel, not just literally the cross.
That's a helpful angle from Janelle, it's fair to say we can't always say everything, nor do we need to. It's the right emphasis over time that matters.
I'm interested to see that IVP in the UK have published Sam Allberry's Lifted, Dan Clark's Alive? and are distributing Adrian Warnock's Raised with Christ --- all of them resurrection books in the last few months. Gaps in the market can be filled...
“When you’re tempted to doubt God’s love for you, stand before the cross and look at the wounded, dying, disfigured Savior, and realize why He is there. I believe His Father would whisper to us, “Isn’t that sufficient? I haven’t spared My own Son; I deformed and disfigured and crushed Him – for you. What more could I do to persuade you that I love you?”
I find that quote incredibly disturbing (at least without the context, although I'm not sure how much any context could improve it!). I can totally understand how people such as Steve Chalke could describe the atonement as Cosmic Child abuse when faced with descriptions of precisely that as above.
Janelle,
Great points and as ever I love hearing your thoughts - I learn so much from your perspective!
Does Mahaney teach on the resurrection? Could you direct me to a few that spring to mind? I did a brief survey of the SGM main site (including his blog) and the results were interesting:
"Resurrection" search produced 5 pages - 2 of which were an interview with an SGM pastor where he spoke of the resurrection in the Gospel.
"Cross" search produced 110 pages.
Your final point was so interesting that it's prompted another blog post!
"Plus, it is a code word, in a sense. Paul said that he preaches nothing else but Christ crucified, but we also know that when he says that he was talking about the whole gospel, not just literally the cross".
It made me think all day - does; "Cross" and "crucified" necessarily mean the same thing? Now it may do, maybe I'm just being a bit picky with words.
Ian,
A good point. I'm pondering over this too - exactly what gazing at this kind of stuff (or sin) does in our lives. It's a thought process on-going!
May I encourage any of you that want to follow up this post to connect yourselves to Francois DuToit on Facebook. (There cannot be too many with that name!) He is an excellent faith building teacher like Rob Rufus. Here is a recent conversation.
Francois Du Toit We don’t need to die to ourselves because we already died when Jesus died (2 Cor 5:14)we can only reckon ourselves dead unto sin, and alive unto God, Rom 6:11 The word, reckon is the word logitsomai, which means to make a calculation to wich there can only be one logical conclusion; this is not wishful thinking or pres...umption, it is the logical revelation of the Gospel!See more
Yesterday at 15:08 · Comment ·UnlikeLikeYou, Darlene Pitre Foux, Ginger Pearce, Michael Cuypers and 26 others like this.
Rod Campbell This is a good point because I think there can be a misconception with the idea of "dieing to ourselves." That could be turned into a work unto salvation. 2 Cor 5:14, refers to the fact that Christ died in our place to provide us with eternal life. We cannot die to ourselves to receive eternal life. However, in following Christ there is a ...
However, in following Christ there is a ... See moreresponsibility we have in dealing with self or our selfish desires, Roman 6:13 -> "Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness." I agree that there needs to be better understanding of the words "die to ourselves" or people will think it's their job to get themselves saved - when it's our job to ensure the old self - stays old -> dead.
Yesterday at 15:31Justin Thomas I believe alot of it involves "the renewing of your mind" that Paul speaks about. Dying to yourself refers to dying to your will and allowing for Christ to live through you to do the will of the Father in your life, but I think that without a clear knowledge of this we as ppl are unable to live in that reality. It works on the same premise as ... See moresomebody who inherits something. The inheritance is theirs but without them knowing about it they will never be able to receive it. Therefore, I agree that we ought to teach the Cross and make sure that ppl understand exactly what was achieved for them on the cross the day that we were including in Christ's crucifixion. And as Paul writes and says 'It is not I who lives, but Christ who lives in me, and the life I now live in the flesh I live By faith in the Son of God" (Gal 2:20) Which further confirms that it is not us who are responsible for our own salvation, but that it is Christ In Us who is transforming us. But again, It relies on the need to know the truth. The awesome part of it, for me personally, is where in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul speaks about the sacrifice and describes the nature of the seed sewn vs the nature of the product reaped, and he uses the analogy of a seed and says that if the plant is to grow the seed must first die, however, I believe that because in todays society that message is not accurately articulated to ppl when they accept Christ as their saviour for alot of ppl the decision to die to there own will and purposes still needs to be made. For many still live life according to the flesh and not according to the Spirit and they have not yet "put to death their sinful nature with its evil passions and desires" (Col 3:5), That said, I come back to Romans 12:2 where Paul encourager us to "be transformed by the renewing of your mind" for as long as one sees according to the flesh they can never live in victory over sin for their minds are still governed by the sinful nature of the flesh, but through the work of the Spirit who brings revelation of the Word and renews the minds of God's children they may see through new eyes, according to the Spirit and live a life which is pleasing and holy to God.
Rod Campbell Well said Justin - and if we're still living according to the flesh, than what are we doing about it. Putting it to death or enjoying its pleasures?
Yesterday at 16:08Francois Du Toit Col.3:1 Pursue with persuasion the consequence of your co-inclusion in Christ. Relocate yourself mentally! Engage your thoughts with throne room realities; His resurrection co-raised you to the same position of authority, seated in the strength of God's right hand.
3:2 Becoming affectionately acquainted with these thoughts will keep you from being distracted again by the earthly (soul-ruled) realm.
3:3 Your union with His death broke the association with that world; the secret of your life now is the fact that you are wrapped up with Christ in God. (Occupy your mind with this new order of life; you have died, your new life is hid in oneness with Christ in God. The secret of your life is your union with Christ in God.’)
3:4 Every time Christ is revealed as our life, we are being co-revealed in the same glory (likeness and image of God) being united together with Him.
3:5 Consider the members of your body as dead and buried towards everything related to the porn industry, sensual uncleanness, longing for forbidden things, lust and greed which are just another form of idol worship. ... See more
3:6 It was because of these things that the anger of God fell upon His son.
3:7 Because of our unbelief we were all once swept along into a lifestyle of lust.
3:8 But now you can permanently rid yourselves of all these things: things such as violent outbursts of rage, depression, all manner of wickedness, slander (any attempt to belittle someone else and to cause someone to receive a bad reputation, blasphemos) and every form of irregular conversation.
3:9 We are no longer obliged to live under the rule of a sinful nature, neither are we cheating anyone through false pretensions,
3:10 but we stand fully identified in the new creation renewed in knowledge according to the pattern of the exact image of our Creator.
3:11 The revelation of Christ in us gives identity to the individual beyond anything anyone could ever be as a Greek or a Jew, American or African, foreigner or famous, male or female, King or pawn. (In seeing Him not just recorded in history but revealed in us, we discover the face of our birth as in a mirror!) From now on everyone is defined by Christ; everyone is represented in Christ.
3:12 You are the product of God’s love, He restored you to His original thought to belong to Him exclusively. It is like changing garments; now that you have gotten rid of the old, clothe yourselves with inner compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. (Just like you were known by the garments you wore, these qualities now define you.)
Notes:3:6+7 It was because of these things that the anger of God fell upon His son.
:7 Because of our unbelief we were all once swept along into a lifestyle of lust.
Greek singular son, not sons; unbelief not disobedience. Paul did not write in verses and chapters, they were added later. The sentence should be broken after son. The word traditionally translated will come upon, is the word erchetai, 3rd person, singular present middle voice, passive, deponent, indicative mood from erchomai. Present tense, sometimes used as a lively expression of a past action, middle voice, one performs an action for himself, not to himself, passive, the subject is the recipient of the action.
Justin Thomas I want to clarify my statement which says we are not responsible for our salvation, because it may lead ppl astray. Salvation is a gift, as with any gift it is free. We are not responsible for saving ourselves, but we are responsible when it comes to choosing whether or not we accept that salvation. Our responsibility is not in saving ourselves through doing good works etc, but our responsibility comes in the choices we make.
Yesterday at 16:14Rod Campbell Amen Justin - got it!
Yesterday at 16:17Jozef Blaha this is the answer I was looking for today thanks for reading my mail to me
Yesterday at 16:56Megan Anne Fey Amen Francois, and wonderful translation of Colossians!
Yesterday at 18:12Bruce Hooper that is why Paul can say that he is constrained and compelled to preach this gospel. it is a guaranteed to succeed because it is basedoin His achievement
Yesterday at 18:48Darlene Pitre Foux AAAAMEN ! WONDERFULLY Said & DONE ! Darlene Foux/ Thanks !
11 hours agoJozef Blaha
I cant agree more with you guys I would reconsider the word "responsibility", its our ability to respond to the word of God or the love of God that is spread abroad in our hearts by the Holy spirit of whom is our gift and that it ignites our faith, and shows off the very power of His salvation as if we were on a display for all to see and also to ... See moreknow that the truth... See More is no longer kept a secret but that its Christ that abides in us and therefore us in him, its a good thing that Jesus is not ashamed to call us his brethren as he takes it upon himself to present us holy and blameless to the Father, has God not chosen the foolish things of this world to shame the wise and the nobodies to shame the popular crowd and the despised to shame the acceptable of this world and yet because of him are we in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption, how could we even be in our right minds if we were to return to our old mind sets as one boasting over one another in our futile thinking, it would be right to say a dog returns to his own vomit
about a minute ago ·
8 hours agoMegan Anne Fey Well said Jozef!!!! Amen!
8 hours ago
Justin Thomas Jozef I used the word 'responsibility' because it implies consequence. I believe that cause and consequence is a concept lost on society nowadays. People tend to believe they can do whatever they want and that there are no ramifications for their actions. The point I was trying to make is that God gave us free will to Choose to obedience or ... See moredisobedience. This was done because God wants us to be obedient to him out of our own will, for what pleasure can he derive from our obedience if we are forced to be obedient? Our obedience means nothing if we do not have the free will to choose whether or not we want to listen. That said, we must also realise that there will always be consequences for our choices, whether good or bad. The consequence of rejecting The Son is eternal damnation, which is a direct result of a choice that WE made. We need to choose to change, God has the ability to change us by way of his spirit but we have to responsibility to ask God to make the changes. The word says it, God stands at the door and knocks. It doesn't say he barges in and rearranges your furniture. He waits for us to invite him in. This is a vitally important concept. Nothing will change in our lives if we do not ask God to do it. The word says 'You have not because you ask not', we need to come to the Lord and request. I have the ability to get 90% for everything, but I have the responsibility to study so that my ability is seen. Our relationship with the Lord goes both ways, We must do what we can in the natural so that God can do what he can in the supernatural. God will not do something which you yourself can do. And that needs to be realised by ppl. He is not going to bring things to you if you can go to them, because then its easy, yet our road is difficult. If we have to go to them then it requires faith that this is what we supposed to be doing. It requires selflessness because if you wrong you gonna look like an idiot but you mustn't care. We as ppl have a part to play in our walk with the Lord. We need to know our function and role in particular situations because God uses them to teach us, stretch us and make us grow. We must take responsibility of our destiny and realise that If we do not choose to follow God's way, God cannot work within us and our situation. Because we are not doing our part so God will not do His. Now you must understand that I am not saying that God is not able to do it, because we know God is all powerful, but Our walk with God is a partnership, and it works both ways, Just as Jesus is the access point we must go to in order for us to have fellowship with God so too is he the access point for God to have fellowship with us, and if we are not doing our part God will not do his.
5 hours agoFrancois Du Toit We must realise that the New Testament celebrates the finished work of Christ as a result of His obedience. Rom.5:19
the problem with the law was not in its content but in the fact that man's best and most responsible decision to keep the law limited man to willpower, and proved failure again and again, "the good that I want to I cant!" was the miserable conclusion of the law system!!!
faith cannot be confused with willpower!
Its our realising of what God believes concerning us that saves us not our decision to believe...even our faith is a gift
The language of the OT is "DO!"... See more
the language of the New is "DONE!"
Natalie Green Saying we must die to ourselves to be "righteous" is saying that our death has more merit than Christ's death to justify us (or literally declare us righteous). Ha, Francois, can you tell I've been under Sheilagh's teaching? That woman is anointed, and she's mentioned you a lot! I hope to meet you someday!
4 hours agoJustin Thomas I agree it is already complete. But we need to understand WHAT is complete-When Christ said it is finished, he was saying that we have been reconciled. For that is the purpose of the cross, to reconcile us back to the father. Spiritually we are set free, but in the natural we have not yet been sanctified. Sanctification is the process of changing ...
See more
our nature from a Sinful nature to a Righteous nature. So Whilst in the Spirit we are free and Righteous, in the natural we have yet reached that place, thats why we WORK OUT OUR salvation. This is further emphasised in Paul continuous encouragement to Walk after the Spirit, to Run the race, etc all these things imply that we start and a finish. There not just a finish. what was finished was the reconciliation between us and the Father. This allows for us to enter into his presence and be changed into his righteousness. Paul further writes and says that God will FINISH the good work he BEGAN in you. That work is the sanctification of the flesh. So you are not wrong, but understand that I do not refer to the Spiritual aspect of it, for VERY few ppl see us with spiritual eyes. We are the earthly representation Of God, therefore, we need to have God's nature put in us because by Nature we are Sinful. Christ's Resurrection provides a means for that to happen. By way of us receiving the Spirit whose Job it is to bring conviction-to make us aware of the sin-so we can repent-change our ways. The function of the Spirit is to teach us the way of God so that we may be accurate representations of the Father. Then, in so doing our natures are transformed as we reach maturity which is Love. Why is it love, because As we are told that the entire law is summed up in one commandment-Love your neighbour as you love yourself. If we represent God to the world, and God is love, then surely maturity in God is us reaching the level of Love. Faith is desperately important, but it is the foundation. 'Let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward into Maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about cleansing right, the laying on of the hands, resurrection of the dead and eternal judgement' Heb 6:1-2. As we are told in 1 Corinthians 13 Love is a more excellent way, it is greater than Faith and hope because love is maturity, where as faith is the foundation. My friends we are called ambassadors, Ambassadors DO things on behalf of somebody else. 2 Corinthians 5:20-21 confirms this. Where paul says that God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. Take note that paul says 'MIGHT Become' not 'is'. Again, might suggests that there is a possibility that will not happen, what can stop that from happening? Our choice not to move forward into maturity.
Francois Du Toit Ok! Please give our love to Sheilagh!
3 hours agoFrancois Du Toit If all Jesus did was to sort out our salvation to give us a better chance to make heaven one day, but we've got to sort out our own sanctification, then we might as well try keep the law and forget about the New Covenant!
If its a time related thing then its gonna take years, then to be fair God must give us a long enough life in the flesh to give us the best chance to get holy enough!!!!??
"Of God are you in Christ whom God made our wisdom! His wisdom does not compete with ours; we inherit ours from our traditions and personal experiences;
In His wisdom He already redeemed, justified and sanctified us, through one act of righteousness, once and for all!!
you can try your hardest to improve on that, its not possible!!! 1 Cor.1:30,31... See more
Why not rather agree with God about you? Believe what God believes and stop struggeling to improve your conduct!
We are not in window-shopping mode, we behold His glory as in a mirror!!!! that brings effective and immediate faith to see the finished product and effortless change! From the futile glory and boasting of the flesh to the unfading glory of our redeemed design! 2 Cor 3:18, Rom.3:27
about an hour agoFrancois Du Toit The only sin the Holy Spirit convicts of is the sin of not believing in Jesus; not believing the success of the cross
John 16:8,9
Post a Comment