Tag Archives: Jesus Christ

•

Oh, my...this has been around a while...I'll add some to the end of it.

1 John 3:1-3: "Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! Therefore the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure."

Ephesians 1:5 ...he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—

Mark 10:15 "I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."

Our sermon on Sunday was on the passage in Mark and the person who spoke gave examples of what that might  mean.

Children are not by nature clean beings.  My daddy always says, "a boy is a noise with dirt on it."  On that day, when Jesus was speaking...nobody was clean.  They had traveled on the dusty roads and had been sitting in the hot sun all day.

When we come to the Father, we come to him as broken and messy children.  We may not have a clue where we're going, but like a child, the Father just picks us up and puts us where we should be.

We bring nothing with us.

Job 1:20 "Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return.

We don't bring our works, our faith, our love.  All that we have, the Father has given.

 

•

Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves. Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession.... Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

• 1 Comment

•

Discuss whether you see a way around exclusivism, pluralism, and inclusivism that might still keep integrity of each particular religion in place. Discuss how religious language might or might not play a role in your conclusion.

Exclusivism (the doctrine that only one religion is “true”) is the foundation of many religions.  If Scripture is correct, “Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.”  Whatever a person believes passionately will come out of his or her mouth.  People who believe that their belief system has the only means to salvation; if they believe that souls depend on the truth of that system, that belief will be shared with others. They can fully respect the dignity of other people, and understand the depth of the beliefs of others; they want to share the truth so that all will come to salvation.  One can “witness” or “evangelize” by simply stating one’s belief, while allowing others to share their own beliefs in the same way.

Inclusivism may be compatible with exclusivism, in that (in Christianity, for example) inclusivism maintains that Jesus Christ is the only means of salvation, but salvation (through Christ) can be obtained without a specific belief in Christ for salvation, but through the “general revelation” of nature. People who embrace inclusivism have an understanding that people who have never heard the gospel of Christ, may (through general revelation) may come to a saving faith without ever hearing of Christ).

Pluralism maintains that all religions are equally valid and that any religion may bring a person to salvation.  This cannot be compatible with exclusivism (within a person) but may coincide with inclusivism.  Once cannot simultaneously believe that there is only one means of salvation and believe that there are many ways to salvation.

Within a group of people, discussions can take place that allow sharing and debates of beliefs.  These discussions can get passionate and even heated at times, and they depend on the ability of others to present their convictions and listen to other people and maintain respect and civility for the other people, even if they do not respect the other religion.  If respect and civility are not present, the “doctrine of ‘just shut up’” might come into play.

...continue reading →

• 1 Comment

•

The "L" - "limited atonement" - AKA "definite atonement", "particular redemption".

I know what the doctrine means, but there are folks out there who can put it much more simply than I can.  From wiki:

The doctrine states that Jesus Christ's substitutionary atonement on the cross is limited in scope to those who are predestined unto salvation and its primary benefits are not given to all of humanity but rather just believers.

Removing the "predestination" language, which is a debate all unto itself, we can "universalize" that definition.

Some folks define "predestined" to mean "those who God knew, from eternity, who would (in the future) believe).  That's fine...for the purpose of explaining "limited atonement", we can use "those who will believe".

If I try to simplify, what I come up with is

"Limited atonement" means that Christ's suffering and death on the cross made atonement only for those who believe."

(my brain is working at half-speed - thank you, nyquil)

If we want to define "limited atonement", we need to define "atonement".  Here we can get into a spiral:  atonement = expiation = atonement, etc...(it is here I go off on a tangent, reading Anshelm...Subsitutionary vs. Satisfaction - which for the purpose of definition doesn't seem to matter much)

I found a "definition" of "atonement" that is more of a graphic than a definition.

"atonement" = at-one-ment.  Sort of romantic, actually.

Who has the suffering and death of Christ on the cross made "at one" with God?  Whose sins are paid for?

If the sins of all the people in all the world are paid for, how can God justly send anybody to hell?  They've been bought and paid for by the blood of Christ.

In the end, everybody except Universalists limit the scope of the atoning blood of Christ.

Outside of Universalism, both sides limit the effectiveness of atonement (atonement being the actual payment - either Christ being the our substitute on the cross OR Christ satisfying our debt to the Father on the cross).  In unlimited atonement, the death of Christ does not pay the penalty for the sins of the unsaved; they go to the grave still owing the debt.  In unlimited atonement, Christ is not the substitute

If atonement is limited to those who believe, then Christ's blood paid the penalty in a very effective way and it does exactly what it was meant to do:  purchase souls.

If atonement is universal (for every person who every lived), then Christ's blood effectually purchases nothing, it merely raises the possibility of salvation.

Either atonement is limited, and only the sins of some are paid for; some are saved, or atonement is unlimited, and all sins are paid for and none will go to hell.

Has the suffering and death of Christ on the cross made all "at one" with the Father?   Is the scope of effectiveness of the payment limited to those who believe?

OR

Is all of mankind "at one" with the Father?  All are bought and paid for, all have been purchased and all will find eternal life?

I started this post with an eye toward 1 John 2:2.

  • Does the "whole world" mean every person who is living or who has ever lived?  Is the scope of atonement unlimited?
  • Or does "whole world" have a meaning that is pointed at "people groups" - Jews vs. the "whole world" (Gentiles).

Unless Universalism is true and all people, of all times are bought and paid for, if their sins are covered, and all will go to heaven, then atonement is limited...the question is:  who limits it.

•

"Total Depravity" matters.

It matters because if there is some little bit of good in us, then we can somehow try to earn our salvation.

Mormons say, "For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we saved, after all we can do." (II Nephi 25:22) - emphasis mine

Total depravity matters, because if we can earn our salvation, there is no need for a savior.

We are not just a little "sick", so that we can get better and so attain salvation.

No - we are DEAD in our sin. We can no more walk toward our own salvation than Lazarus was able to walk out of his tomb before Christ called him.

It is not until we understand the depth of our sin that we can fully understand our need for our Saviour.

It is not until we see how bad we are, that we see how good God is.

How Deep The Father’s Love For Us

Words and Music by Stuart Townend
©1995 Kingsway's Thankyou Music

How deep the Father's love for us
How vast beyond all measure
That He would give His only Son
To make a wretch His treasure

How great the pain of searing loss
The Father turns His face away
As wounds which mar the Chosen One
Bring many sons to glory

Behold the Man upon a cross
My guilt upon His shoulders
Ashamed, I hear my mocking voice
Call out among the scoffers

It was my sin that held Him there
Until it was accomplished
His dying breath has brought me life
I know that it is finished

I will not boast in anything
No gifts, no powr's, no wisdom
But I will boast in Jesus Christ
His death and resurrection

Why should I gain from His reward?
I cannot give an answer
But this I know with all my heart
His wounds have paid my ransom