 |
|
|
"Christians are combatants in a conflict between good and evil, light and darkness, God and the devil."
-- Bob Larson
|
|
| |
Contexts for “Universalistic” Texts: Part 1 (1 Jn. 2:2)
Posted on Wednesday, October 12 @ 21:03:30 PDT by Randall East |
|
Erick submitted: " The purpose of this article is to offer a valid alternative interpretation to a verse that is often used to support the idea that Christ’s death on the cross was for each and every human being. A better approach is to see the multi-national scope of Christ’s work according to the promise made to Abraham (Gen. 12:3 cf. Rev.7:9-10; 22:2), and the first century authors combating a spirit of Jewish superiority and covenant exclusivity based on God’s choosing of their nation in the past. Though Israel was God’s chosen nation that was never meant to imply every person in that nation was chosen (Mt. 3:9; Jn. 8:39, 44; Rm. 9:8; 11:2), nor that God never planned to reveal himself in and through other nationalities – i.e. including Gentiles in the New Covenant “Israel” (Eph. 2:19).
The two respective views (universal atonement, and particular redemption) have a long history, and are not new to the current preterist movement, but both can have an effect on eschatological views about life for mankind in the New Covenant age and so it is important to get both the CROSS as well as the parousia correct. Indeed, where we fall short in understanding the one we will inevitably fall short in the other, and our message to the world will be at best compromised, and at worse yet another false testimony about the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ.
It is my opinion that the view labeled “Limited Atonement” or “Particular Redemption” is most in line with the scope of Scripture, and the big picture of God’s redemption of mankind in Christ according to the promise made to Abraham. The following will simply seek to establish context for one of the most common proof-texts cited against this view, and I’ve chosen to handle this passage first because it is perhaps one of the most difficult. The verse reads as follows:
“…and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world [kosmos]” (1 Jn. 2:2)
The Preterist Universalist interpretation is that Christ not only died for the Christian’s sins, but for the sin of every human being who’s ever lived. Though this may on the surface to be an adequate explanation of this verse, it does not hold up under more careful scrutiny. By examining the context of this passage we find that John is simply teaching his audience that Christ’s atonement was not limited to one nation, but to all nations. Though John (an Apostle to the Jews (Gal. 2:9)) does not supply a particular name or church to which he is writing (and theories abound), one can deduce from the text that it was probably a mostly Jewish audience – and thus prone to bias against the Gentiles - from the following verses:
a) 4:11-14 --- an emphasis on loving fellow Christians “friends/beloved” based on Christ’s being the Savior of “the world” for “whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God.” (same connotation as the “kosmos” of 1 Jn. 4:1; not of 1 Jn. 2:15 – unless one erroneously believes we are not to love those for whom Christ died). “Kosmos” is a pregnant term with a variety of connotations in the New Testament, therefore context must determine its interpretation, it is not enough to say it always means “the universe” or “the system of man” or “the Jewish nation.” etc. John’s audience was to love each and every member of the church based on the fact that Christ died for ALL peoples. These verses I believe are reminiscent of the same author’s earlier account of Christ’s rebuking of the Pharisee Nicodeamus (“Israel’s teacher”) when Christ taught him that God sent His Son because he loved the WHOLE world/”kosmos” (i.e. not just Israel) that WHOSOEVER believed in Him would be born from above – not necessarily born a Jew (cf. Jn. 3:16). Although arguments can be made that John’s gospel was to Gentiles (Some cite evidence from Eusebius suggesting its publication may have been in the region of Ephesus – though Jews were among the first converts in Ephesus), the Apostle John’s ministry in general was to Jews (Gal. 2:9). It is not my opinion that the “kosmos” of John 1 is limited to the Jewish world (as some have taught) but the exact opposite, and this is the way John uses the term in 1 Jn. 2:2.
This type of universalistic language is used often in the Bible in a multi-national sense, such as in Romans 10:12-13 when Paul states, “For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of ALL [nationalities], abounding in riches to ALL [people from all nations] who call on Him; for ‘WHOEVER calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.’” As preterists we of all people should understand the restricted “all” and the qualified “world,” for much of our eschatology is built upon such ideas, so it behooves the Preterist Universalist to also keep an open mind towards those passages that seem to speak to the issue of soteriology in “universalistic” terms.
b) 2:22-24; 5:9-13; --- the audience was under attack by those antichrist’s who taught among other things that it was possible to have the Father and yet deny the Son and/or to deny that Jesus was that particular hoped for Son/Messiah. Who else but Jews would teach that they had “the Father,” but not the Son, or that Jesus was not the long awaited Messiah? Even today we see these are particularly Jewish critiques of Christian theology.
c) 4:2-3 --- Another heresy addressed by John is “docetism” (the belief that Christ only appeared to be incarnate and never truly died on the cross). Some believe this heresy is associated with the early Gnostic sects, and these sects are thought to have started in Samaria with Simon “Magnus.” However, many believe that Gnosticism is Jewish in origin and not pagan.
d) The false teachers were at one time associates of John and the other Jewish Apostles who “went out from us” into the “kosmos” (2:19, 4:1). It is debatable where John himself spent most of his time in ministry, but John’s primary target audience for ministry was to the Jews (Gal. 2:1, 9) and this phrase “went out from us” must be seen in the broader context of the origins of the Christian faith in Jerusalem.
With that said, we must conclude that John’s target audience in this letter was Jewish Christians, many of whom held onto strong anti-Gentile biases even after coming to faith in Christ. However, it is not enough to show that the context makes the multi-national interpretation most likely; we must also demonstrate that the universalistic interpretation is most unlikely -- and this we will demonstrate by the words of John himself regarding the atonement. For not only is there implicit proof that John is NOT teaching universal redemption, there is explicit proof that he DOES teach particular redemption.
We see in the same epistle John teaching a PARTICUAL REDEMPTION. In 3:16 he states, “We know love by this, that He laid down His life for US; and WE ought to lay down our lives for the BRETHREN.” The “us” is clearly qualified as the Church upon which John basis his exhortation to “love the brethren.” Moreover, in 4:9-11 we see a parallel passage that states, “By this the love of God was made manifest in US, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world/”kosmos” (the dwelling of man – ALL MEN) so that WE (Christians from the entire world) might live through Him. In this is love, not that WE loved Him but that He loved US and sent His Son to be a propitiation for OUR sins. Beloved if God so loved US, WE ought to love ONE ANOTHER.”
Notice also how the “propitiation” spoken of by John is for the Church alone – compare this with the “propitiation” spoken of in the passage under consideration (2:2). And still another time when “propitiation” is used in the New Testament in a multi-national sense is in Rm. 3:25, 29. In fact, even the doctrine of propitiation itself is taken from the Old Testament sacrificial system is based on a “limited atonement,” for the High Priest sacrificed not for every individual on earth, but only those taking part in the chosen nation of God, to make atonement for “the people” – now the spiritual elect “descendants of Abraham” (Heb. 2:17; 9:15; 13:10; Rm. 9:24,11:5).
With these considerations a compelling (or at least “persuasive”) case is made that John was writing to Jews who were assaulted by false Jewish teachers and those who tempted them to look down upon their Gentile brethren, and this was the impetus for 1 Jn. 2:2 which teaches that Christ’s “propitiation” or “mercy seat” was not only for the “inner court” citizens of Heaven (the Jewish Christians out of the Mosaic “kosmos” cf. Noah’s “kosmos” in 2 Pet. 3:6), but also for those once consigned to the outer court of the Gentiles. It by no means necessarily teaches or even implies (nor can it be taken as such without contradicting John himself) that Christ expiated the sins of every human being, but rather the sins of “the people” from all nations according to the multi-national (“kosmos”-wide) promise made to Abraham. No propitiation means no expiation which means no salvation and therefore no reconciliation. The mercy seat is for those represented by the High Priest Jesus Christ, and not for those outside of the New Covenant with “Israel.”
"
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Amen & amen (Score: 1)
 by Roderick on Thursday, October 13 @ 00:01:10 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | | God bless you Erick! |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Erick on Friday, October 14 @ 14:34:33 PDT
Re: Contexts for “Universalistic” Texts: Part 1 (1 Jn. 2:2) (Score: 1)
 by davo on Thursday, October 13 @ 09:39:24 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
Erick: “Kosmos” is a pregnant term with a variety of connotations in the New Testament, therefore context must determine its interpretation, it is not enough to say it always means “the universe” or “the system of man” or “the Jewish nation.” etc.
Well you say this Erick, but that's not what you've demonstrated in saying that 1Jn 2:2 is applicable to just Christians alone.
Erick: …John’s primary target audience for ministry was to the Jews…
Erick: It is not my opinion that the “kosmos” of John 1 is limited to the Jewish world (as some have taught) but the exact opposite, and this is the way John uses the term in 1 Jn. 2:2.
So you say "kosmos" is not applicable to Israel yet you have to ignore what you said above to maintain that, i.e., "context must determine its interpretation". Yet logic consistent with a pręteristic perspective should then tell you that John's entire context of "world" in this his epistle WAS indeed historic Israel, e.g., 1Jn 2:17; 5:19.
Erick: These verses I believe are reminiscent of the same author’s earlier account of Christ’s rebuking of the Pharisee Nicodeamus (“Israel’s teacher”) when Christ taught him that God sent His Son because he loved the WHOLE world/”kosmos” (i.e. not just Israel) that WHOSOEVER believed in Him would be born from above – not necessarily born a Jew (cf. Jn. 3:16).
So now Erick you are wanting a bob each way – your "WHOLE world" is bigger than Israel BUT not as big as the "WHOLE world"?
Well forget what Roderick suggests you believe PU's believe, this is how Pantelism [something Roderick won't deal with] addresses "world" in the context of "Israel" in these verses:
Jn 3:16-17 For God so loved Israel that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever of Israel believes in Him should not perish in Israel's AD70 lake of fire but find life, surviving into the age. For God did not send His Son into Israel to condemn Israel, but that Israel through Him might be delivered.
Thus:
1Jn 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our [the first-fruits] sins, and not for ours ONLY, BUT ALSO for the whole world [all Israel].
Thus ALL Israel, first-fruits and WHOLE harvest i.e., historic Israel, were redeemed as per the prophetic Scriptures.
Erick: Though Israel was God’s chosen nation that was never meant to imply every person in that nation was chosen…
Again, I think you misunderstand God's choosing – He did corporately "choose" all Israel to be His kingly priestly nation in His world; within this God refined the choosing with regards to His redemptive and reconciling purposes that were to be outworked IN Israel FOR Israel AND subsequently to God's wider creation – man as a WHOLE.
This is why "world" in the likes of Jn 3:16ff, 1Jn 2:2 and Jn 1:29 ARE Israel specific BUT generically applicable beyond – for this very reason: Paul who relates "world" beyond the borders of ethnic Israel is unequivocal in his teaching that Israel's redemption brought about the world's reconciliation – as per the verses I have previously quoted ad infinitum.
Erick: As preterists we of all people should understand the restricted “all” and the qualified “world,” for much of our eschatology is built upon such ideas…
Well yes you would think so, but no, as I have shown above – this you do not do - you lack consistency.
Erick: In fact, even the doctrine of propitiation itself is taken from the Old Testament sacrificial system is based on a “limited atonement,” for the High Priest sacrificed not for every individual on earth, but only those taking part in the chosen nation of God, to make atonement for “the people” – now the spiritual elect “descendants of Abraham” (Heb. 2:17; 9:15; 13:10; Rm. 9:24,11:5
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 10:43:29 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, October 13 @ 11:31:27 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 12:02:28 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, October 13 @ 12:13:29 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 13:01:55 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 13:46:27 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 14:32:55 PDT
- by vento on Thursday, October 13 @ 14:55:41 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, October 13 @ 15:01:28 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 15:40:06 PDT
- by Erick on Friday, October 14 @ 13:54:17 PDT
- by davo on Friday, October 14 @ 16:58:06 PDT
- by Erick on Friday, October 14 @ 19:34:39 PDT
Redemption = Forgiveness - Therefore Pantelism errors (Score: 1)
by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 16:35:00 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Davo writes on his website:
'Redemption': God's unilateral act in Christ of reconciling and restoring the relationship between Himself and His creation. Humanity in [because of] Christ has a renewed stance.
But redemption = forgiveness of sins
Colossians 1
14in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
The PU's say that those who did not have faith were punished for their sins at 70 AD.
Acts 10
43All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name."
John 8
24I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins."
But remember above, redemption = forgiveness,
Colossians 1
14in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Therefore not all are redeemed - and Davo's definition is in error and therefore Pantelism is in error because redemption = forgiveness.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: Contexts for “Universalistic” Texts: Part 1 (1 Jn. 2:2) (Score: 1)
by davo on Thursday, October 13 @ 20:29:06 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
MichaelB, I know you are frantic and desperate to say something, anything, and I'm happy for you to drive traffic through my site, but as usual you are unable to make any worthwhile contribution of any depth to Erick's article ABOVE, but are off tilting at wind [might have something to do with chasing too much POO, oops sorry, PU].
Instead of detracting from Erick's article with your random and repeated 'cut n pastes' – most of which I've dealt with before and which to this point you've been unable to grasp let alone deal with succinctly. Why not put together an anti-pantelism post and lay out precisely your beef, submit it, then I can come along and calve it up for you and give you "pantelism 101".
Meanwhile someone might have some thoughts of substance to contribute to the conversation in regards to Erick's article above or my riposte to IT – as in dealing with specifics of both.
davo – pantelism.com –
"And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world." 1Jn 2:2
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 21:46:19 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, October 13 @ 22:10:37 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Thursday, October 13 @ 23:41:32 PDT
- by Erick on Friday, October 14 @ 14:43:53 PDT
- by Virgil on Friday, October 14 @ 19:57:05 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 06:39:28 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 07:31:06 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 08:02:09 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Monday, October 17 @ 05:18:07 PDT
- by Virgil on Monday, October 17 @ 06:11:17 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Monday, October 17 @ 13:21:58 PDT
- by Virgil on Monday, October 17 @ 13:38:18 PDT
- by vento on Friday, October 14 @ 08:10:26 PDT
CHALLENGE (Score: 1)
by davo on Friday, October 14 @ 17:15:02 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
Vento: C'mon Davo, is posting Scripture such a bad thing!!! At least Mike is "cutting and pasting" the actual scriptures.
G'day Scott,
Posting scripture is great BUT, anyone can cobble together so called proof text verses interspersed with small comments with "therefore" & "and" as MichaelB does, yet without exploring express points made etc – what he does is just lazy and takes no thinking effort, other than to think to himself "I've fought the fight well". Like why not just walk up to someone and rattle off Jn 3:16 to their face then walk off "knowing" that with the Scriptures you've evangelized well – like get real, but that is MichaelB's MO.
My challenge the MichaelB is to put together in "an article" as opposed to sporadic, erratic and repeated posting comments, his objections to PANTELISM i.e., quote me alone – what I've written either on my site OR here at PP. I am NOT interested in HIS ideas of WHAT HE THINKS PU's believe – deal with my "stuff" [pantelism] alone – put them together concisely and submit them.
Vento: You are re-writing them to fit your needs!!!
I've done no more than Sam Frost has done in some of his articles i.e., giving the essence of what he believes is being said according to his argument given – yet do you chasten him with "re-writing them to fit your needs!!!"? Now then, it is in questioning or querying "one's interpretation" according to "one's argument" where we find discussion, dialogue and diversity etc – that's why I responded to Erick's article, NOT that he should believe as I do.
davo – pantelism.com –
"And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world." 1Jn 2:2
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Roderick on Friday, October 14 @ 19:32:24 PDT
- by leo724 on Friday, October 14 @ 20:49:38 PDT
- by davo on Friday, October 14 @ 22:45:19 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 05:47:02 PDT
- by davo on Friday, October 14 @ 22:41:22 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 03:04:43 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, October 16 @ 11:45:43 PDT
What exactly have I not proven? (Score: 1)
by MichaelB on Friday, October 14 @ 21:31:49 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Virgil writes:
Michael, I have yet to see you "prove" anything to anyone here man. I am hoping that when you represent Preterism to others you are doing better than just posting proof texts.
Virgil - when Davo writes something like this below, what is it that I need to prove?
How else could God have said it, if some group was not going to be part of Abraham and some group was not going to be part of the Jerusalem above?
Davo's idea that ALL are Abraham's sons and ALL are born of the Jerusalem from bove is absolutely ridiculous.
Davo quotes:
Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all…
Gal 4:25-26 …for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children-- but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.
Davo writes:
The 'father of faith' and 'the mother of us all' extends to more than just the seed that acknowledge or confess their linage.
The scripture says...
Not every person is Abraham's sons / offspring...
Romans 9
7Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." 8In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring.
Scripture says...
Not every person has the Jerusalem from above as mother.
Galatians 4
24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:
"Be glad, O barren woman,
who bears no children;
break forth and cry aloud,
you who have no labor pains;
because more are the children
of the desolate woman than of
her who has a husband."
28Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son." 31Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by davo on Friday, October 14 @ 23:19:36 PDT
Now for a Proof (Score: 1)
by MichaelB on Friday, October 14 @ 22:17:48 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Justification came to those with faith:
Romans 3
26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
Grace came to those with faith:
Romans 5
2through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we[a] rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.
Salvation came to those with faith:
Romans 9
16I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes:
Reconciliation to those with faith:
Colosians 1
22But now he has reconciled you by Christ's physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation— 23if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel.
Redemption came to those with faith:
Acts 10
43All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name."
Ephesians 1
7In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace
Life from the dead came to those with faith:
John 11
25Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"
Eternal Life came to those with faith:
John 6
40For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."
The inheritance (new covenant, kingdom) etc. came to those with faith.
Hebrews 6
12We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.
Righteousness came to those with faith.
Romans 3
22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.
NOW FOR A PROOF:
Pantelism teaches that all who ever lived are "in Christ"
1Corinthians 15
22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
The bible says there is "no condemnation in Christ Jesus"
Romans 8
1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.
But people at AD70 were "comdemned" for not believing.
John 3
18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son
Therefore:
Not every human being was "in Christ"
Being "in Christ came through "believing"
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by davo on Friday, October 14 @ 22:55:08 PDT
- by MichaelB on Friday, October 14 @ 23:10:49 PDT
- by davo on Friday, October 14 @ 23:23:42 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 06:34:13 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 02:48:59 PDT
- by Erick on Saturday, October 15 @ 15:11:01 PDT
- by Ed on Saturday, October 15 @ 20:16:06 PDT
Some food for thought ......... (Score: 1)
by Everlasting on Saturday, October 15 @ 07:00:25 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
To All,
I recently read a short book by C Baxter Kruger, "Jesus and the Undoing Of Adam". In so far as I know Baxter Kruger is neither a preterist nor a universalist, but he does believe in objective union. In a nutshell, it was the eternal purpose of the Triune God to create, reconcile and embrace the world in Jesus Christ, the predestined representative and substitute of the human race. Jesus gathered humanity in himself, which he cleansed, justified, reconciled and sanctified, and included in His relationship with His Father, in the power of the Spirit.
In the community of which I am a part the inclusive message of objective union is having a great impact. It is bringing great joy and refreshment to many people who have been Christians for most of their lives. As I read the discussion on Planet Preterist on Preterist Universalism, and the thoughts of Davo in particular, I hear echoes of Kruger. I am submitting the following excerpts in the hope that they might be helpful in understanding the inclusion of all humanity in Christ.
May God bless us all in a deeper understanding of the Love of God in the giving of His Only Son, Jesus.
Everlasting.
Kruger writes:
“The foundational truth that makes the gospel GOOD NEWS to us, without which there is no good news at all, is the connection, the objective union between Jesus Christ and the human race. That connection means one died for all; therefore all died. That objective union means that the death of Christ was our death; and that there and then in Jesus Christ the human race was crucified, dead and buried; that on the Cross our disease, our estrangement, our alienation, our flesh, were crucified.
Paul saw it. He saw that Adam’s fall and ours, Adam’s alienation and ours, Adam’s sin and ours, were called to an abrupt end, that there and then in Jesus Christ it was all put to death. And then Paul saw the resurrection. If we were united with Jesus Christ in his death, what happened to us in Jesus’ resurrection? Listen to what Peter says: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1Peter1:3) Jesus Christ died, and Jesus Christ rose again from the dead, on Easter Sunday morning. The heart of the gospel is the news that in his death and resurrection, something was happening to you and to me and to the human race. When he died, we died. And when he rose we rose again to new life, there and then, 2000 years ago.
Listen to how Paul describes it in Ephesians 2:
“But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.
(Ephesians 2:4-6)
The gospel is the astonishing news that something has happened to the Son of God, and the equally astonishing news that in him something has happened to the human race. If the whole human race fell into ruin in Adam – a creature, a mere man – what happened to the human race in the death of Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God? Paul tells us. When Jesus Christ died we died. But that is only the beginning. When he rose, we rose. He ascended and sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty, the place of honour and love and delight and complete and utter acceptance, and Paul tells us that in his ascension, we too we too were lifted up and seated with him at the Father’s right hand – and there and then welcomed, accepted, embraced forever. ……………
What happened on the Cross? Why did Jesus die? How do we understand the meaning of his death? The death of Jesus Christ was part of a seamless movement in which the Triune God laid hold of the human race and decisively and sovereignly altered its very existenc
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 07:34:19 PDT
- by davo on Saturday, October 15 @ 09:01:24 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 10:01:50 PDT
- by davo on Saturday, October 15 @ 10:23:10 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 10:28:11 PDT
- by davo on Saturday, October 15 @ 11:50:51 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 12:14:25 PDT
- by Barry on Saturday, October 15 @ 14:49:44 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 15:12:29 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 18:07:17 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 18:15:53 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 18:47:12 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 19:00:49 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 19:22:16 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 19:42:32 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 20:02:34 PDT
- by davo on Saturday, October 15 @ 20:37:31 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 20:41:56 PDT
- by MichaelB on Saturday, October 15 @ 18:19:42 PDT
- by leo724 on Saturday, October 15 @ 19:11:14 PDT
- by davo on Saturday, October 15 @ 08:57:56 PDT
- by Everlasting on Sunday, October 16 @ 16:43:46 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, October 16 @ 20:23:05 PDT
- by Paige on Saturday, October 15 @ 09:37:32 PDT
QUESTION FOR DAVO, VIRGIL, MICHAEL, ERICK (Score: 1)
by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 07:07:19 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I am in the hospital with terminal cancer. I have been told I will be dead before tomorrow morning. I am going to die. I have been an agnostic and a functional atheist my whole life. I ask you to explain to me what Christians call "the gospel".
What do you say to me????
Thanks!
-Bill |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 07:36:14 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 07:52:42 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 07:59:57 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 08:07:49 PDT
- by Virgil on Saturday, October 15 @ 10:05:35 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Monday, October 17 @ 13:42:40 PDT
- by Ed on Wednesday, October 19 @ 13:51:29 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Wednesday, October 19 @ 20:16:48 PDT
- by vinster on Saturday, October 15 @ 11:34:47 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 22:35:04 PDT
- by vinster on Sunday, October 16 @ 04:04:14 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Sunday, October 16 @ 08:59:49 PDT
- by Erick on Saturday, October 15 @ 12:09:45 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 22:35:56 PDT
- by Ed on Saturday, October 15 @ 20:27:22 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 22:36:55 PDT
- by Erick on Sunday, October 16 @ 07:33:05 PDT
- by Ed on Sunday, October 16 @ 10:42:09 PDT
- by Erick on Sunday, October 16 @ 18:02:41 PDT
- by Ed on Sunday, October 16 @ 18:47:29 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, October 16 @ 20:28:22 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Saturday, October 15 @ 23:50:16 PDT
- by Erick on Sunday, October 16 @ 07:35:50 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, October 16 @ 07:56:42 PDT
- by Virgil on Sunday, October 16 @ 11:33:20 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, October 16 @ 11:49:03 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Sunday, October 16 @ 14:18:52 PDT
- by Erick on Sunday, October 16 @ 17:41:29 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Monday, October 17 @ 05:11:09 PDT
- by Virgil on Monday, October 17 @ 06:08:14 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Monday, October 17 @ 13:18:56 PDT
- by Virgil on Monday, October 17 @ 13:30:57 PDT
- by Ed on Wednesday, October 19 @ 14:03:21 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Wednesday, October 19 @ 20:21:30 PDT
- by davo on Wednesday, October 19 @ 21:05:27 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Wednesday, October 19 @ 22:06:57 PDT
- by davo on Wednesday, October 19 @ 23:47:15 PDT
- by Ed on Thursday, October 20 @ 19:46:17 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, October 20 @ 22:23:09 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, October 27 @ 13:04:12 PDT
| 
|
