Showing posts with label Atonement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Atonement. Show all posts

Wednesday, 20 November 2019

Daily Meditation

Accepting the Atonement of the Cross

The apostle Paul wasn’t even present at the crucifixion of Christ, yet he declared that this act was an act of cosmic and supernatural proportions. This was a real drama of theological redemption. Here the curse of God’s law was visited on a man who bore the sins of His people. For Paul, the crucifixion was the pivotal point of all history. Paul was not satisfied to give an account of the event. While affirming the historicity of the crucifixion, Paul added the apostolic interpretation of the meaning of the event. He set forth propositions about the death of Christ.
The issue before the church is this: Is the apostolic propositional interpretation of the cross correct or not? Is Paul’s view merely a first-century Jewish scholar’s speculation on the matter, or is it a view inspired by God Himself?
What difference does it make? This is not a trifling matter or a pedantic point of Christian doctrine. Here nothing less than salvation is at stake. To reject the biblical view of atonement is to reject the atonement itself. To reject the atonement is to reject Christ. To reject Christ is to perish in your sin.
Please let us not soften this with an appeasing dance. Let us be clear. Those teachers in the church who deny that the death of Christ was a supernatural act of atonement are simply not Christians. They are enemies of Christ who trample Jesus underfoot and crucify Him afresh. 

Coram Deo

Make this declaration: “Heavenly Father, I accept without reservation the supernatural atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross.”

Passages for Further Study


Thursday, 13 June 2019

Daily Meditation

Accepting the Atonement of the Cross

The apostle Paul wasn’t even present at the crucifixion of Christ, yet he declared that this act was an act of cosmic and supernatural proportions. This was a real drama of theological redemption. Here the curse of God’s law was visited on a man who bore the sins of His people. For Paul, the crucifixion was the pivotal point of all history. Paul was not satisfied to give an account of the event. While affirming the historicity of the crucifixion, Paul added the apostolic interpretation of the meaning of the event. He set forth propositions about the death of Christ.
The issue before the church is this: Is the apostolic propositional interpretation of the cross correct or not? Is Paul’s view merely a first-century Jewish scholar’s speculation on the matter, or is it a view inspired by God Himself?
What difference does it make? This is not a trifling matter or a pedantic point of Christian doctrine. Here nothing less than salvation is at stake. To reject the biblical view of atonement is to reject the atonement itself. To reject the atonement is to reject Christ. To reject Christ is to perish in your sin.
Please let us not soften this with an appeasing dance. Let us be clear. Those teachers in the church who deny that the death of Christ was a supernatural act of atonement are simply not Christians. They are enemies of Christ who trample Jesus underfoot and crucify Him afresh. 

Coram Deo

Make this declaration: “Heavenly Father, I accept without reservation the supernatural atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross.”

Passages for Further Study

Friday, 4 July 2014

Douglas Wilson's Letter From Moscow

Seven Theses on Penal Substitution

Douglas Wilson
Blog and Mablog
June 27, 2014 

Glancing around the Internet, I have recently noticed higher levels of interest than usual in the doctrine of penal substitution, and thought it might be worthwhile to set down a few basic principles concerning the doctrine. So here they are:

1. Penal substitution defined is the doctrine that the salvation of God’s people is secured through a propitiatory blood sacrifice that He provided for us, doing this through the death of Jesus on the cross. The holy wrath of an infinitely perfect God was propitiated in the death of Jesus Christ on that cross. We are saved from the wrath of God by the love of God as these two attributes of God collided in the agony of Jesus Christ. In that collision, the wrath was satisfied, and the love entered into resurrection joy. The wrath was punctiliar and the love is everlasting.

2. Penal substitution is human sacrifice, and is a scandal. Nothing whatever can be done about this, and it is sinful to try to undo or fix the scandalous aspects of it. God made it scandalous on purpose, in order to keep our number of refined theologians to a minimum.

Thursday, 1 August 2013

Taking Offence at God

Exposing the Inner Man

Some Christian churches have long ago decided they would worship God, not as He is and revealed Himself to be, but they would worship Him as they want Him to be.  And what they want God to be is someone who minces around their lusts.

A recent piece in The Blaze provides a case study.  The hymn writers in the example are faithful; the denomination concerned is not. 

Why Is a Major Church Denomination Banning Famed Hymn ‘In Christ Alone’ From Its New Song Book?




It’s no secret that the Presbyterian Church (USA) — which is different from other branches of Presbyterianism — collectively takes a more liberal approach to theology. Most recently, the denomination is gaining attention for its rejection of the hymn, “In Christ Alone.” Rather than including the song in its new hymnal book, PCUSA axed it — an action that may leave some faithful believers scratching their heads.

After all, the song is robust with Christian themes of hope, strength and Christ’s dying on the cross. So, why would the PCUSA turn its back on it?

Here’s why: There’s one, key line in the third stanza that created a barrier — and debate: “Till on that cross as Jesus died/the wrath of God was satisfied.”

Friday, 29 March 2013

Unbelieving Distaste, Christian Joy

The Parting of the Ways

Christmas can have a certain sentimental pull for those who are perishing.  After all, only the most depraved cannot be moved at the sight and joy of a newborn baby.  Motherhood, fatherhood, birth, poverty, rejection--all of these pull at the sentiments of most men.  The world has an emotional attachment to Christmas.

Easter not so much.  Here is the divine commentary upon how non-Christians view Easter versus Christians:

Wednesday, 27 March 2013

Lenten Meditations

Words of Significance

As we approach Easter, we would refer readers to a series of meditations we published five or so years ago.  They amount to a consideration of the Seven Words uttered by our Lord from the Cross.  These seven words are, of course, timeless and eternal. 

You can find them as follows:

The first word: "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
The second word: "This day you will be with me in Paradise"
The third word: "Woman, behold your son"
The fourth word: "My God, my God why has thou forsaken me"
The fifth word: "I thirst"
The sixth word: "It is finished"
The seventh word: "Into Thy hands I commit my spirit"

Each of these words uttered by our Lord are public utterances--meant for His people not only to be heard, but meditated upon and puzzled over.  All seven are intrinsic to His work of atonement and the Passion. 

They may provide helpful material for meditation in the coming days of this season. 

Friday, 22 April 2011

The Glory and the Stumbling

Why Do You Call That Day "Good"?

The Cross remains a stumbling block to Unbelief (Galatians 5:11). That is as it should be. It always will be. To Christians, however, the Cross remains our great boast and glory (Galatians 6:14). That, too, is as it should, and always will, be.

There are certain truths which immediately divide Belief and Unbelief. There is no common ground. No room for compromise. The Cross is one of those lodestones which separates the pure metal from the dross.

To the Unbeliever, the Cross is offensive because it testifies as an eloquent witness to mankind's sinfulness, guilt, depravity, and moral worthlessness. It also testifies to God's judgment upon sin; to His holiness; that He will not let sin go unpunished. It stands, therefore, as the instrument of universal condemnation upon the entire human race.

Faced with this divine testimony against mankind, Unbelief typically has two responses. The first is anger. The second is mockery. The anger rails against the primitiveness of the Cross, its bloodiness. It takes offence. How could anyone believe, yet alone glory, in something so violent, bloody, and negative!

The mockery assails Belief with epithets of ignorance, backwardness, credulity, and primitive stupidity. It puts belief in the Cross on a par with the tooth fairy.

It is significant that in the eighteenth century when academics and false teachers within the bosom of the Church itself began to attack God and His Christ they focused upon the Cross. They tried to make it more acceptable to Unbelief by "re-interpreting" it. These false teachers--wolves in sheep's clothing--took up the offence of the Cross and sought to make it more acceptable to Unbelief.

The first thing was to assure everyone that the Cross was very, very important. But not for the reasons that the Apostles and the "one holy catholic and apostolic church" had thought. Rather, the Cross and Jesus upon it, we were told, was the most noble celebration of humanity. It spoke of purity of life, of steadfastness, faithfulness, integrity, and noble self-sacrifice. It demonstrated the "greater love"--the golden rule. Yes, the Cross saved--but not in the way once thought. It saved because it provided all men with the impelling, energizing moral example to which all could aspire. And in aspiring and achieving such moral nobility, we would be saved.

There is nothing unique about the Cross, we were told. After all, hundreds of thousands of people have died the death of crucifixion. What makes the Christian Cross so important was the moral example of the One who was dying upon it. Thus put, the Cross became not an emblem of shame, but a beacon of human potential, dignity and glory. It showed all mankind the way of salvation in that is provided a motivational example of human moral excellence. Blah, blah, blah. Unfortunately, there are still many who still lurk within the bosom of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church who thus teach, and who endeavour to put a Satanic sheen upon the Cross. Note them well: their goal is to attempt to remove the offensiveness of the Cross. Immediately the attempt is made they identify themselves as being like their father, the one who has been a liar from the beginning.

But God is not served by the lies of men. Trying to make the Cross less offensive to Unbelief can only proceed by denying what God has said about it. It is God Who has revealed, "the soul that sinneth, it shall die" (Ezekiel 18:20). It is God Who has declared that on the Cross Jesus was bearing our sins in His body (I Peter 2:24). It is God Who has revealed that on the Cross, Christ became a curse for us (Galatians 3:13). It is God Who promised long before time that the guild of our iniquities would be laid upon Him and that by His grievous wounds we, His people, would be healed (Isaiah 53: 4-6).

Here, then, is why the Cross is so offensive to Unbelief and why its has borne centuries of egregious slurs and hateful epithets. If the death of Christ were a death for sinners; if He were bearing the sins of His people in their place on the Cross; if He were cursed in their place, then Unbelief itself must be evil, cursed, and under the wrath of God. Which is to say that all Unbelievers are, in God's sight and holy judgment, evil, cursed and under His holy wrath. What Unbelief would dismiss as an unhistorical relic, God has put forth as the ultimate indictment of guilt.

But for Belief, whilst the Cross indicts and kills us all, it also makes us alive. For upon that Cross, the Saviour of the world bore the guilt of His sheep--His known and beloved people--in their place, so that they might be freed, forgiven, delivered, and saved. The Cross is God's appointed way to redeem, or buy back the enslaved to sin, those who had been made captive to the Devil.

Thus, for Belief the Cross is our great glory. It manifests the greatest free love of God, His mercy, and His condescension. It is the immediate reason of our forgiveness by God, the Judge of the heavens and the earth. More than anything else, the Cross gives us a sure and certain hope. To us, the Cross does not mean death, but life--abundant and eternal life, for at the right hand of God there are pleasures ever more.

That is why the Church calls this day--the day of remembrance of our Lord's death upon the Cross--Good Friday. Never was a day more aptly named.

And can it be, that I should gain
And interest in the Saviour's blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain?
For me Who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love, how can it be,
That thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
--Charles Wesley

Monday, 15 February 2010

Meditation on the Text of the Week

Full and Final Settlement

Let each one do just as he has purposed in his heart; not grudgingly or under compulsion; for God loves a cheerful giver.
II Corinthians 9:7

In New Zealand we have a Treaty Grievance "industry". Its fundamental animus is the unlawful historical expropriation by the Crown of Maori land and assets usually as an outcome of the Maori wars. Its more recent and increasingly pervasive animus is a revisionist recasting of the Treaty of Waitangi, where it is claimed that Maori are co-partners with the government in ruling the nation.

This “Treaty partner” concept has been used to argue for Maori ownership in some proportional sense of all economic activity, resources, assets, and wealth in New Zealand. In general the governing apparatus in this country has accepted the revisionist recasting and has proceeded to agree to dolling out large amounts to Maori to reflect their rightful status as “Treaty partners”.

To some it is considered a thing most passing strange that the government and the country would accept so readily and easily the idea that any government of the day would dole out millions upon millions of taxpayer expropriations to a newly discovered category of beneficiary—that is, to so-called Treaty partners. But it is not strange at all.
Expropriation and redistribution is what almost all people in the country believe is the central role and competence of government—so settling Treaty grievances is business as usual, as is the ever expanding claims and newly discovered rights of Maori. It's simply the way the country works now, as it has done for the past eighty years.

From time to time the Crown and Maori will talk about “full and final settlements”. The idea is that the Crown will have settled once-and-for-all an historical grievance, so that no further claims can be made. Both parties would apparently agree—but a few years later, the Oliver Twist syndrome appears, and those who had once agreed that they had received “full and final settlement” are back, begging for—sorry, demanding—more.

An absolute classic of the syndrome was the “special deal” given to Maori business interests when the government was crafting its ludicrous Emissions Trading Scheme. Now under this nonsense, all economic activity and enterprise is to be taxed for producing carbon dioxide—that wonderful, life giving, green producing gas. But under the legislation Maori business interests are to receive special treatment, exemptions, and supports because when the respective tribes signed “full and final” settlements they had no idea that one day the businesses and wealth established as a result of settlement of grievances would be subject to a carbon dioxide tax. So, Oliver's bowl was whipped out, and more settlements were made.

Of course the country will just shrug and move on. Everybody knows that that's just what governments do. Expropriation and redistribution. Good on the Maori for being clever enough to push themselves to the front of the line.

But this reality remains: anyone who continually has to make atonement and provide restitution for wrongs is enslaved. Consequently, the nation is progressively becoming enslaved atoning and making restitution, atoning and making restitution, and so on. It is precisely for this reason that Christians are free—well, more accurately, they are bonded slaves to Him who has made them free indeed. Compared to our former state, His yoke is easy and His burden is light.

Our Gospel is that Christ has provided full and final settlement for all our sin. He has made atonement, and He has sat down at the right hand of God the Father. It is complete, full, final, and perfect. We are free. We no longer need to make repeated sacrifices or atonements for our daily sins. This is a wonderful release, since the longer we walk with the Christ in the light of His law, the more we realise the depths and pervasiveness of our sinfulness and its former robbery of God. If the Son sets you free, you shall be free indeed. How liberating for us is that cry from the Cross—it is finished! It is over. It is done. Full and final settlement for all the sin of all My people.

The implications are all consuming and extensive. They touch every part of our lives and daily existence. Amongst many other things, because of His full and final settlement we Christians are unmoved by the pseudo-guilt which the modern world would foist upon citizens and subjects. The mantra of needing to “pay up” and “settle” no longer has a hold over us. The pseudo-guilt of Oliver's bowl, offering us a way of atoning for past and present wrongs no longer has any impact or hold over our souls. Consequently, we are freed to give generously and cheerfully to those genuinely in need, rather than to those who have made begging a career and lifestyle choice.

Giving in a vain attempt to make atonement, or giving to make things right is compulsion, which is to be enslaved. For there is no end to it. Giving out of joy at being set free is a celebration of His full and final settlement for all our sin. Is it surprising, then, that the Scriptures declare that God loves and rejoices with the cheerful giver?