Does this fit into your theology of what the death of Christ did?

He died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. -2 Corinthians 5:15

He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. -1 Peter 2:24

Notice how seamlessly Paul and Peter tie the death of Christ into the life we live as believers.

It is of course blessedly true that Christ's death results in atonement. That is fundamental and non-negotiable. Paul and Peter say just that in the immediate context of these two texts. But that's not what they say in these verses. Here they say not that Christ's death results in (the 'that' in each text is the Greek word hina--'in order that,' 'so that') living in heaven when we die but living in a heavenly way here and now. Christ's death produces something not only for us but also in us.

Not sure quite what to do with this. But I know this demands reflection in my life and theology. Maybe yours too.

ITG

Registration closes in a few days. Details here.

Looking forward to a great year.

Just Say What God Says

Spurgeon:

I am content to live and die as the mean repeater of scriptural teaching, as a person who . . . invented nothing, as one who never thought invention to be any part of his calling, but who concluded that he was to take the message from the lips of God to the best of his ability and simply to be a mouth for God to the people, mourning that anything of his own should come between, but never thinking that he was somehow to refine that message, to adapt it to the brilliance of this wonderful century, and then to hand it out as being so much his own that he might take some share of the glory of it.

--Charles Spurgeon, as quoted in H. M. S. Richards, Feed My Sheep (Review and Herald, 1958), 38

Blessed plagiarism.

More Real

Come to the Father--really come to know God, so that God becomes to you more real, in a sense, than anything you see. This is essential to obtaining a quiet and untroubled heart.

--Martyn Lloyd-Jones, preaching on John 14:6-7, in Let Not Your Heart Be Troubled (Crossway, 2009), 114

Unhealthy Individualism vs Healthy Concern for Individuals

Here's the first page, and the first page of the conclusion, of Gary Burnett's published dissertation, Paul and the Salvation of the Individual.

In New Testament studies over the past 25 years there has been an increasing emphasis on the understanding of the documents against a background of people groups--Jews and Gentiles--and how the NT writers understood the relationship of these groups within what they saw as the emerging plan of God.

The result of this has been that more and more emphasis has been given to the relevance of the texts to questions of collective identity and social cohesion, and less and less importance attached to how the texts might address issues more to do with the individual, the salvation of the individual and individual behaviour. This has developed largely as a result of two influences: that of the tools and methods of the social science disciplines, to which NT scholars have increasingly turned for assistance in their quest to understand the texts; and that of the New Perspective on Paul, which has served to highlight Paul's concern about the relationship between Jew and Gentile in the community of the people of God and along with the the wide acceptance of a covenantal framework for understanding first century Judaism and the worldview of the NT writers. (p. 1)

Burnett then goes on to examine at length some key passages in the first 8 chapters of Romans to consider carefully the degree to which Paul seems to have in mind the individual.

He concludes:

Recent approaches to NT study have, quite rightly, given much more attention than ever before to the socio-historical situation in which the texts were originally written and read, and have often sought to find useful tools by which to do this by recourse to the disciplines of sociology and social anthropology. In addition, in the New Perspective that has emerged in Pauline studies, interpretations of Paul have become much more focused on Paul's concern with the relationship between Jews and Gentiles in the people of God. . . .

While both these factors have resulted in much benefit in understanding the Pauline texts, there has been something of an imbalance in recent years, where the implications of Paul's arguments for the individuals in the churches to which he wrote, and indeed, we might say, for the individual in general, have been either neglected or dismissed. It is the contention of this thesis, that not only are there implications for the individual in what Paul has to say, but it was his intention to address the individual. . . . Paul's argument had the individual in mind, rather than simply broad 'macro' issues, such as the identity of the people of God. (p. 215)

--Gary W. Burnett, Paul and the Salvation of the Individual (BibInt 57; Leiden: Bril, 2001)

A very important and needed corrective. A corrective that should not displace the gains of recent scholarship, yet it should supplement, and even sober, current scholarly tunnel vision regarding Paul's concerns.

Invincible

I find this moving every time I'm reminded of it. In A.D. 404 John Chrysostom, the early church father, was brought in before the Roman emperor. The emperor threatened him with banishment if he remained a Christian.

Chrysostom responded, 'You cannot banish me, for this world is my Father’s house.'

'But I will kill you,' said the emperor.

'No, you cannot, for my life is hid with Christ in God,' said Chrysostom.

'I will take away your treasures.'

'No, you cannot, for my treasure is in heaven and my heart is there.'

'But I will drive you away from your friends and you will have no one left.'

'No, you cannot, for I have a friend in heaven from whom you cannot separate me. I defy you, for there is nothing you can do to harm me.'

Self-control Is Not for the Timid

Ed Welch:

There is a mean streak to authentic self-control. Underneath what seems to be the placid demeanor of those who are not ruled by their desires is the heart of a warrior. Self-control is not for the timid. When we want to grow in it, not only do we nurture an exuberance for Jesus Christ, we also demand of ourselves a hatred for sin. . . .

When was the last time you said 'No' to something, out of obedience to Christ, when it actually was hard to say 'No'? Maybe you can say 'No' quite easily to cocaine, but you linger over salacious advertising. Maybe you can say 'No' to the second or third drink, but you will never miss a dessert (though you vow weekly to change your eating habits). Whatever earthly desire doesn’t take 'No' for an answer is a lust that surpasses your desire for Jesus Himself. With this in mind, we quickly realize that self-control is not simply an exercise in self-improvement. It is an essential discipline in a high-stakes spiritual battle. The only possible attitude toward out-of-control desires is a declaration of all-out war.

See Ya Soon

Away for a bit of unplugged time. Back in the blogging saddle next . . . oh, who knows when.

Woodbridge: Inerrancy

An interesting, and moving, lecture by John Woodbridge on the occasion of Wheaton College's 150th birthday in October 2009. Dr. Woodbridge calls Wheaton to be faithful to its roots, roots that held high the sacred authority of the Bible without heed to scholarly respectability.

The Most Orthodox Theologian in the Universe

The devil is orthodox in his faith; he believes the true scheme of doctrine; he is no Deist, Socinian, Arian, Pelagian, or antinomian; the articles of his faith are all sound.

--Jonathan Edwards, 'True Grace Distinguished from the Experience of Devils,' in Works, Hickman ed., 2:43