March 2005 Archives

What hope is there for a world that is filled with so much tyranny and oppression if there is not an ultimate judge?

What hope is there for a world that is filled with so much tyranny and oppression if there is an ultimate judge?

Our hope is found in the Righteous Judge who was judged in our place (Romans 3:23-26; Galatians 3:10-14; 2 Corinthians 5:21).

Below is a very thought-provoking section from T.F. Torrance's The Mediation of Christ. It led me to marvel at the great wisdom and love of God. Enjoy! It's well worth the necessary time it takes to read it.

“The covenant between God and Israel was not a covenant between God and a holy people, but precisely the reverse. It was a covenant established out of pure grace between God and Israel in its sinful, rebellious and estranged existence. Hence, no matter how rebellious or sinful Israel was, it could not escape from the covenant love and faithfulness of God… There were evidently critical moments in Israel’s history when it seemed ready to do anything to flout the will of God in hope of breaking loose from the grip of his unswerving love and of escaping from the painful transformation of its existence that relations with ‘the Holy One of Israel’ involved. No, the covenant was not made with holy people, nor did its validity depend upon a contractual fulfillment of its conditions on the part of Israel, for its was a unilateral covenant which depended for its fulfillment upon the unconditional grace of God and the unrelenting purpose of reconciliation which he had pledged to work out through Israel for all peoples. And therefore…it depended upon a vicarious way of response to the love of God which God himself provided within the covenant—a way of response which he set out in the liturgy of atoning sacrifice and which he insisted on translating into the very existence of Israel in its vocation as ‘servant of the Lord.’

“…the more fully God gave himself to this people, the more he forced it to be what it actually was, what we all are, in the self-willed isolation of fallen humanity from God. Thus the movement of God’s reconciling love toward Israel not only revealed Israel’s sin but intensified it. That intensification, however, is not to be regarded simply as an accidental result of the covenant but rather as something which God deliberately took into the full design of his reconciling activity, for it was the will and the way of God’s grace to effect reconciliation with man at his very worst, precisely in his state of rebellion against God. That is to say, in his marvelous wisdom and love God worked out in Israel a way of reconciliation which does not depend on the worth of men and women, but makes their very sin in rebellion against him the means by which he binds them for ever to himself and through which he reconstitutes their relations with him in such a way that their true end is fully and perfectly realized in unsullied communion with himself.

“That is the way in which we are surely to interpret the Incarnation, in which God has drawn so near to man and drawn man so near to himself in Jesus that they are perfectly at one. In Jesus the problematic presence of God to Israel, the distance of his nearness and the nearness of his distance, which so deeply trouble the soul of the psalmists and prophets alike, was brought to its resolution” (T.F. Torrance, The Mediation of Christ, pp. 28-29).

“It is...of the greatest importance to see the significance of Christ’s death and resurrection, which
are the center of Paul’s proclamation, as an inseparable unity; and particularly to keep in view
how the significance of Christ’s resurrection is determined by that of his death and vice versa. On
the one hand the eschatological significance Paul ascribes to Christ’s resurrection is not that of a
general belief in redemption or immortality that may be said to have found its firm basis in
Christ’s resurrection. The eschatological significance of Christ’s resurrection is determined by the
special character of his death... For Paul Christ’s death is determined primarily by its connection
with the power and guilt of sin. It is characteristic of this emphasis that again and again he relates
Christ’s death to the cross and can therefore qualify the whole of his gospel as ‘the word of he
cross’ (1 Corthinians 1:17-16; cf. Galatians 3:1)...It is this special death of Christ, qualified by the
cross, which further determines the significance of Christ’s resurrection and the new life that has
come to light with it, in its forensic, ethical, and cosmic aspects...

“On the other hand, it is to be maintained no less vigorously that in Paul’s proclamation the
resurrection of Christ in fact means the breakthrough of the new aeon in the real, redemptive-
historical sense of the word, and therefore cannot be understood only in forensic, ethical, or
existential categories...Because Jesus was the Christ, his resurrection is not, as previous raisings of
the dead, an isolated occurrence, but in it the time of salvation promised in him, the new creation,
dawns in an overwhelming manner, as a decisive transition from the old to the new world (2
Corinthians 5:17; cf. v. 15). It is in this light too, that those passages are to be understood where
Paul calls Christ the Firstborn, the Firstfruits, the Beginning:

...that he might be the Firstborn (protokos) among many brethren (Romans 8:29).
...but now Christ has been raised from the dead, the Firstfruits (aparche) of those who have fallen
asleep (1 Corinthians 15:20).
...who is the Beginning (arche), the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be the First
(Colossians 1:18).

...we can say...that Paul’s kerygma of the great time of salvation that has dawned in Christ is
above all determined by Christ’s death and resurrection. It is in them that the present aeon has lost
its power and hold on the children of Adam and that the new things have come (Herman
Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, pp. 55-57).

“Preaching predestination, or creation, or the new birth, or the baptism of the Spirit is not preaching the gospel. All these things are related to the gospel and are necessary for the working of the gospel, but they are not the essential message to be believed for salvation. Furthermore, unlike the gospel message, they do not directly address the matter of our justification and assurance of salvation. Only the message that another true and obedient human being has come on our behalf, that he has lived for us the kind of life we should live but can’t, that he has paid fully the penalty we deserve for the life we do live but shouldn’t—only this message can give assurance that we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Graeme Goldsworthy, Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture, pp. 83-84).

Over the next two weeks I will be posting parts of a section from Herman Ridderbos' Paul: An Outline of His Theology. I've been reading him of late and have found him to be very edifying. The section I will begin posting is section 28 (pp. 166ff) entitled, "The Righteousness of God in Christ." Ridderbos writes:

"Just as it is true of the entire revelation of the mystery that it has Christ for its content, so also the revelation of the righteousness of God, as the ground for acquittal in the divine judgment, takes place in Christ. And just as the entire Pauline gospel has its center in the death and resurrection of Christ, so also the gospel of justification by faith.

This revelation of the righteousness of God is related to the death and resurrection of Christ in all sorts of ways. Romans 3:21-31, where once again the basic eschatological-christological structure of Paul's gospel comes clearly to the fore, is very central and very pointed in the further exposition of this theme. Verses 24ff. are especially important here:

' and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, [25] whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. [26] It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. '

"What is of particular importance for us in this context is that justification is founded here on the death of Christ. Moreover, God's righteousness is spoken of in a differentiating sense. God has made Christ a means of propitiation in his death, and in this way manifested his justice in his death. By this nothing other can be understood than that God has shown the adjudicating power of his righteousness in Christ, by giving him for others as a means of propitiation in death. The idea is then joined to this that God till this moment had not meted out the punishment on the sins of men that was due them, but passed over them in his forbearance, i.e., in his withholding of the judgment. Now, 'in the present time,' God has abandoned this attitude of waiting, however, and shown his vindicating righteousness, in the death of Jesus. Here again the apostle clearly elucidates the redemptive-historical significance of Christ's death, in the sense that the divine judgment on the sins of the world has, as it were, been drawn together in Christ's death, and in this way the eschaton has become present time. Just as Christ's resurrection is the breaking through of the new creation (2 Corinthians 5), so the final judgment of God has become manifest in his death. God has in this way justified himself toward the world in him and at the same time made known, revealed, the righteousness that is necessary in order that those who have faith in Jesus might stand in the judgment of God. For just as the abandonment of Christ in death took place because of our sins, so his resurrection occurred for the sake of our justification (Romans 4:25). Just as Christ's death was a demonstration of God's righteous judgment on the sin of the world, visited on him as the means of propitiation, so his resurrection was the demonstration and proof of the acquitting righteousness of God, revelation thus of righteousness in the sense of Romans 1:7; Romans 3:21" (pp. 166-167).

I thank God for the ministry that Dr. Clowney has had in my life through his teaching and writing ministry. "The great theme of his life, namely Christ's presence in the whole of Scripture and his present work in the church" has had a profound influence on my life and ministry. The following is from the web magazine of the PCA.

Edmund P. Clowney, 87, (July 30, 1917 – March 20, 2005) met his Lord face to face on Sunday, March 20. He is survived by his wife of 63 years, Jean Wright Clowney; by his five children: David Clowney, Deborah Weininger, Paul Clowney, Rebecca Jones, and Anne Foreman; by twenty-one grandchildren; and by eleven great grandchildren.

Born in Philadelphia, Ed received his B.A. from Wheaton College in 1939, a Th. B. from Westminster Theological Seminary in 1942, a S.T.M from Yale University Divinity School in 1944, and a D.D. from Wheaton College in 1966. Ordained in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, he served as pastor of several churches from 1942 to 1946 and was then invited to become assistant professor of practical theology at Westminster Theological Seminary in 1952. He became that institution's first president in 1966, and remained there until 1984, when he took a post as theologian-in-residence at Trinity Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Charlottesville, Virginia.

In 1990 Ed and Jean moved to Escondido, California, where Ed was adjunct professor at Westminster Seminary California. In 2001, he took a full-time position as associate pastor at Christ the King Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Houston, Texas. After two years, he moved back to Charlottesville, where he once again became part-time theologian-in-residence at Trinity Presbyterian Church. He remained in this role until his death.

Ed was a compassionate counselor; a devoted servant of Jesus Christ, his Word, and his church; a peacemaker; and a true visionary. He dreamed for Christ's kingdom and was instrumental in the birth or furtherance of such ministries as the Reformed Theological Seminary in Aix-en-Provence, France; Westminster Seminary California; Trinity Church, Charlottesville; the Lausanne Conference; InterVarsity ministries, both in the United States and in England; and "The Westminster Ministerial Institute," an inner-city training program for pastors in Philadelphia, out of which the Lord developed the Center for Urban Theological Studies. He also had a life-long interest in children's Christian education materials.

Ed will be supremely remembered by many as a preacher, perhaps the most gifted proponent and practitioner of redemptive-historical preaching of this generation. He was unique in his ability to pick up the threads of redemptive history and to weave a rich expositional tapestry that brought Christ in all his perfections and glory before God's people so that they were drawn to love and worship the Redeemer.

His writing displays the great theme of his life, namely Christ's presence in the whole of Scripture and his present work in the church. His books include Preaching and Biblical Theology, Called to the Ministry, Christian Meditation, Doctrine of the Church, The Message of I Peter, The Unfolding Mystery, and Preaching Christ in all of Scripture. Some of these titles have been translated for the benefit of the worldwide church. His last book, How Christ Transforms the Ten Commandments, was accepted by his publisher only days before his death.

Ed left behind a legacy not only of written books and articles, but a great number of sermons and lectures, as well as magazine columns such as the humor column "Eutychus and His Pin" for Christianity Today and Bible studies for Tabletalk. His sense of humor and his love for people left a mark wherever he went. In the last week of his life, one attending nurse, laughing as she left his room, exclaimed, "What a sweet man!" Those who knew and loved him would agree. His tender-hearted encouragement and wisdom will be greatly missed, but his work will be established by his Master who has now welcomed him with those reassuring words: "Well-done, good and faithful servant, enter now into the joy of your Lord!"

The family has established a scholarship fund at Westminster Theological Seminary. Contributions in support of Dr. Clowney's continuing Kingdom legacy may be made to The Edmund Clowney Memorial Fund by mailing your check to Westminster Theological Seminary, P.O. Box 27009, Philadelphia, PA 19118 or online via credit card at https://www.gospelcom.net/wts/development/clowney-memorial.html.

Information on memorial services in Charlottesville, Virginia, and at Westminster Theological Seminary's Glenside, Pennsylvania campus will be posted at the Seminary's website at www.wts.edu as soon as the details become available. The family is creating a memorial website where remembrances may be posted by the public. A link will be posted shortly at www.wts.edu.

“By referring to the gospel as the hermeneutical key I mean that proper interpretation of any part of the Bible requires us to relate it to the person and work of Jesus. This was recognized in Article III of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics, which says, ‘We affirm that the Person and work of Jesus Christ are the central focus of the entire Bible.’ We have already considered some of the ramifications of Jesus’ post-resurrection claims that all the Scriptures are about him. This is another way of saying that Jesus is the sole mediator of the truth of God. This mediatorial role has great significance for how we understand the Bible.

For there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus, himself human who gave himself a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:5-6).

The Jesus who mediates the word of God to us is the Jesus who is defined in terms of his historic saving act. The meaning of the Bible, in that case, is tied to the saving work of Jesus (Graeme Goldsworthy, Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture, p. 84).

What is a Gospel-centered church? Is it a church that believes that God has made Christ to be its wisdom, even its righteousness, sanctification, and glorification (1 Corinthians 1:30)? In other words, is what constitutes a Gospel-centered church the cherished belief and conviction that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, that no one comes to the Father except through him (John 14:6)? Or is there more to a Gospel-centered church than just what it believes and preaches concerning Jesus? On what criteria can we consider our churches to be or not to be Gospel-centered? That is the question.

Around A.D. 60 Paul wrote “to the saints and faithful brothers in Christ at Colossae.” In his letter to them he thanks God for their faith in Christ Jesus and for the love that they had for all of God’s people (Colossians 1:4). Colossae was clearly a city where the Gospel was bearing fruit and growing since many of its people had heard and understood the Gospel of God’s grace in Christ (Colossians 1:6). The church at Colossae was plainly a Christian assembly brought into existence through the Gospel-centered preaching of Epaphras (Colossians 1:7). God was accomplishing great things in this city located in the Lycus River Valley in ancient Phrygia.

But though the Gospel was bearing much fruit there, false teaching was present having the potential of doing this new little church great harm. Evidently these false teachers “thought that Christ was no more than a beginning; to go on to spiritual maturity, it was necessary to follow their rules and practices” (Carson, Moo, and Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament, p. 335). So what does Paul do in his letter to address this problem? He puts a strong emphasis on the supremacy of Christ over all creation, visible or invisible, “whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities” (Colossians 1:15ff). He tells the Colossian church that Jesus is the first to rise from the dead “that in everything he might be preeminent” (Colossians 1:18).

It is not too far into the letter that Paul begins to address the Colossian believers directly. “And you [who are the church at Colossae], who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, [Jesus] has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the Gospel that you [who are the church at Colossae] heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister (Colossians 1:21-23). Paul exhorts the Colossian church to remain stable and steadfast in the content of the Gospel.

I think it is critical that we modern day interpreters don’t allow our individualistic mindset to cloud our understanding of what Paul is doing here in this letter. He’s writing to the church at Colossae. Yes, the Colossian church is full of individuals, but Paul is not so much addressing individuals (though he is) as he is addressing the corporate body of believers at Colossae. It seems to me that we tend to read and understand these verses with reference to ourselves personally. For example, when meditating upon Colossians 1:21-23, we often think, “I was once alienated in mind, doing evil deeds, and now Christ has reconciled me in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present me holy and blameless and above reproach. Therefore, I must continue in the faith. I must remain stable and steadfast in the content of the Gospel.” Though this is true of every individual believer, Paul is not so much addressing individuals as he is addressing the corporate body of believers at Colossae.

Therefore, we can best Paul’s emphasis by paraphrasing these verses with a corporate emphasis, “The congregation at Colossae who once was alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, Jesus as now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present them holy and blameless and above reproach before him.” What was at stake in the city of Colossae was the steadfastness of the church there in the Gospel of which Paul was a minister. So over and over again Paul addresses the Colossian congregation. “I want you [the congregation] to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea” (Colossians 2:1). “As you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him” (Colossians 2:6). “See to it that no one takes you [the church at Colossae] captive by philosophy and empty deceit” (Colossians 2:8).

It is clear in chapter two that the church at Colossae was formed when the content of the preached Gospel was received. Paul then informs the church that its conduct is always to be in line with the truth concerning Christ that it received (Colossians 2:6). In verse 7, Paul exhorts the Colossian church to walk in the Gospel since it has been rooted and is being built up in Christ and established in the content of the Gospel. What Paul is essentially doing in his letter to the Colossians is calling this church to be Gospel-centered.

In chapter 3, Paul calls the Colossian church to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” since it has been raised with Christ (Colossians 3:1). What the church at Colossae was in danger of doing was thinking that in order to go on to spiritual maturity, it was necessary to follow the rules and practices taught by these false teachers. But what Paul tells this church is that its life is not found in the performance of religious rites. Rather its life is found in Christ who is its life (Colossians 3:3-4).

So what is a Gospel-centered church? What makes a church Gospel-centered? Before we answer this question, lets consider Colossians 3:16, which I believe gives us Paul’s answer. “Let the word of Christ dwell in you [the congregation at Colossae] richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” The key phrase is “the word of Christ.” What does Paul mean by that? Once we answer that question, then we can know what it means for “the word of Christ” to dwell richly in a congregation.

Consider the following verses in Colossians. “We always thank God…when we pray for you, since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of the love that you have for all the saints, because of the hope laid up for you in heaven. Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the Gospel” (Colossians 1:3-5).

“Continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the Gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister” (Colossians 1:23).

“Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s affliction for the sake of his body, that is, the church, of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God that we given to me for you, to make the word of God [concerning Christ] fully known” (Colossians 1:24-25).

“At the same time, pray also for us, that God may open to us a door for the word, to declare the mystery of Christ” (Colossians 4:3).

It seems to me that the “word of Christ” is just another way of referring to the Gospel. So what Paul is calling the Colossian church to do is let the Gospel of Christ dwell in it richly. In other words, he is calling the Colossian church to be Gospel-centered. Paul exhorts the Colossian church to let the truth that Christ “is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead” (Colossians 1:18), that Christ has reconciled it “in his body of flesh by his death” (Colossians 1:22), that Christ is “the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:27, that in Christ “are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3), that in Christ they (i.e. the Colossian church) have been filled (Colossians 2:10), that in Christ they have been delivered “from the domain of darkness and transferred to the kingdom” of the Father’s beloved Son. We could go on and on, but what we are meant to understand is that a Gospel-centered church is a church where the word about Christ, where the Gospel, dwells richly!

If a Gospel-centered church is a church where the word about Christ dwells abundantly, how do we know if our particular church is Gospel-centered? The evidence that a church is Gospel-centered is that the Gospel marks the very songs we sing and the way in which we sing them. The singing of a Gospel-centered church is Gospel-centered, that is, a Gospel-centered church’s singing is marked by a deep rejoicing in the mighty acts of God in Christ! And the teaching and one-anothering that takes place within a Gospel-centered church is filled to overflowing with the truth of the Gospel of grace. All of these marks of Gospel-centeredness are found in Colossians 3:16.

I want to share a brief comment that Matt Hand made to me in a recent e-mail that I think is relevant to our discussion. "I am convinced the church is PEOPLE, and the only way to have a Christ-centered, Gospel-driven church is to have Christ-centered, Gospel-driven PEOPLE." May our churches be filled with wives and husbands (Colossians 3:18-19), children and parents (Colossians 3:20-21), and singles who together let the "word about Christ" dwell in them richly, "teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in [their] hearts to God."

One of the classes that I teach each semester is Principles of Bible Study. My first lecture in this class each semester is entitled, “Jesus as a Bible Student.” The lecture is an exposition of Luke 24. It is the one text that I repeatedly take my students to throughout the semester. Verse 27 is the key verse: “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, [Jesus] interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” There is hardly a class hour that goes by when I do not stress that the Bible student has not really understood any particular text unless we have discerned how it testifies to or finds its ultimate reference point in the Person and Work of Christ. When my students walk out of my class at the end of the semester I want them to be convinced of the fact that the overall structure of biblical revelation finds its cohesiveness only in Christ’s Person and Work.

One of my lectures addresses a question that is raised with a careful reading of Luke 24:15-16. In telling us of the two disciples who had lost hope that Jesus was the one to redeem Israel because he had been crucified, Luke says: “While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. But their eyes were kept from recognizing him.” The question I ask my classes is, “Why were their eyes kept from recognizing Jesus?” After all, their dashed hope was due to the fact that Jesus had died. Why didn’t Jesus just say, “Men, why have you lost hope? Look at me. I have been raised from the dead! I’m alive!” Why didn’t Jesus restore their confidence that he was the redeemer by letting them recognize him? Why was it that “their eyes were kept from recognizing him”?

Well, one of our newest Eucatastrophe readers commented on my March 14th post (MORALISM VS. CHRIST-CENTERED EXPOSITION by Tim Keller) by quoting from a book entitled Text, Church and World: Biblical Interpretation in Theological Perspective. What I love about this quotation is that it answers my question the same way I have answered it in class. I had not yet found any book that addresses this issue until I was given this excerpt. I immediately went and checked the book out of our college library. Enjoy! In discussing the report of Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James to the disciples of Jesus' resurrection, Francis Watson writes:

“…their report to the disciples met with disbelief. The account of the vision was dismissed as nonsense (leros), a futile attempt to compel reality to conform to one’s desires; and the emptiness of the tomb (which Peter was able to confirm) evoked only perplexity at the strange and distressing fact that Jesus’ corpse had undoubtedly disappeared (Luke 24:10-12, cf. vv. 22-24). As yet, in other words, there was no framework available within which the message of Jesus’ resurrection would make sense. It is for this reason that the two disciples on the way to Emmaus are represented as not recognizing the traveler who joined them on the road - not because he appeared to them ‘in another form’ (en hetera morphe)…but because the conditions were not yet in place within which faith becomes a possibility. The statement that ‘their eyes were kept from recognizing him’ (Lk. 24:16) stems…from [Luke’s] understanding of faith. Faith in the risen Christ originated and originates not in unmediated experience but through the mediation of Holy Scripture. According to the earliest Christian preaching accessible to us, Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, was buried, and was raised on the third day - again, in accordance with the scriptures. Thus, in response to the two disciples’ expression of sorrowful perplexity, the unrecognized Jesus simply did not make himself recognizable but engaged in scriptural interpretation, saying to them,’ “O foolish people, slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself’ (24:25-26)… It was therefore the role of the unrecognized interpreter of holy scripture to show them that they already possessed, in the experiences of today, yesterday and the day before, the key to the renewal of their scripturally-grounded hope which would set that hope for the first time on a firm, unshakeable foundation…Having momentarily glimpsed the risen Christ, the disciples recall how their hearts burned within them ‘while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the scriptures’ (Luke 24:32). The fire is the light and warmth of the dawning faith in the resurrection, understood not as an isolated marvel but within the comprehensive context established by Holy Scripture” (Text, Church and World: Biblical Interpretation in Theological Perspective, pp. 289-290).

We have said that you must preach the gospel every week--to edify and grow Christians and to convert non-Christians. But if that is the case, you cannot simply 'instruct in Biblical principles.' You have to 'get to Jesus' every week.

For example, look at the story of David and Goliath. What is the meaning of that narrative for us? Without reference to Christ, the story may be (usually is!) preached as: "The bigger they come, the harder they'll fall, if you just go into your battles with faith in the Lord. You may not be real big and powerful in yourself, but with God on your side, you can overcome giants." But as soon as we ask: "how is David foreshadowing the work of his greater Son"? We begin to see the same features of the story in a different light. The story is telling us that the Israelites can not go up against Goliath. They can't do it. They need a substitute. When David goes in on their behalf, he is not a full-grown man, but a vulnerable and weak figure, a mere boy. He goes virtually as a sacrificial lamb. But God uses his apparent weakness as the means to destroy the giant, and David becomes Israel's champion-redeemer, so that his victory will be imputed to them. They get all the fruit of having fought the battle themselves.

This is a fundamentally different meaning than the one that arises from the non-Christocentric reading. There is, in the end, only two ways to read the Bible: is it basically about me or basically about Jesus? In other words, is it basically about what I must do, or basically about what he has done? If I read David and Goliath as basically giving me an example, then the story is really about me. I must summons up the faith and courage to fight the giants in my life. But if I read David and Goliath as basically showing me salvation through Jesus, then the story is really about him. Until I see that Jesus fought the real giants (sin, law, death) for me, I will never have the courage to be able to fight ordinary giants in life (suffering, disappointment, failure, criticism, hardship). For example how can I ever fight the "giant" of failure, unless I have a deep security that God will not abandon me? If I see David as my example, the story will never help me fight the failure/giant. But if I see David/Jesus as my substitute, whose victory is imputed to me, then I can stand before the failure/giant. As another example, how can I ever fight the "giant" of persecution or criticism? Unless I can see him forgiving me on the cross, I won't be able to forgive others. Unless I see him as forgiving me for falling asleep on him (Matt.27:45) I won't be able to stay awake for him.

In the Old Testament we are continually told that our good works are not enough, that God has made a provision. This provision is pointed to at every place in the Old Testament. We see it in the clothes God makes Adam and Eve in Genesis, to the promises made to Abraham and the patriarchs, to the Tabernacle and the whole sacrificial system, to the innumerable references to a Messiah, a suffering servant, and so on. Therefore, to say that the Bible is about Christ is to say that the main theme of the Bible is the gospel--Salvation is of the Lord (Jonah 2:9).

So reading the Old Testament Christocentrically is not just a "additional" dimension. It is not something you can just tack on - to the end of a study and sermon. ("Oh, and by the way, this also points us to Christ".) Rather, the Christocentric reading provides a fundamentally different application and meaning to the text. Without relating it to Christ, the story of Abraham and Isaac means: "You must be willing to even kill your own son for him." Without relating it to Christ, the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel means: "You have to wrestle with God, even when he is inexplicable-even when he is crippling you. You must never give up." These 'morals-of-the-story' are crushing because they essentially are read as being about us and what we must do.

A BASIC OUTLINE FOR CHRIST-CENTERED, GOSPEL-MOTIVATED SERMONS
The following may actually be four points in a presentation, or they may be treated very quickly as the last point of a sermon. But more generally, this is a foundational outline for the basic moral reasoning and argument that lies at the heart of the application.

The Plot winds up: WHAT YOU MUST DO.
"This is what you have to do! Here is what the text/narrative tells us that we must do or what we must be."
The Plot thickens: WHY YOU CAN'T DO IT.
"But you can't do it! Here are all the reasons that you will never become like this just by trying very hard."
The Plot resolves: HOW HE DID IT.
"But there's One who did. Perfectly. Wholly. Jesus the---. He has done this for us, in our place."
The Plot winds down: HOW, THROUGH HIM, YOU CAN DO IT.
"Our failure to do it is due to our functional rejection of what he did. Remembering him frees our heart so we can change like this..."

a) In every text of the Scripture there is somehow a moral principle. It may grow out of because of what it shows us about the character of God or Christ, or out of either the good or bad example of characters in the text, or because of explicit commands, promises, and warnings. This moral principle must be distilled clearly. b) But then a crisis is created in the hearers as the preacher shows that his moral principle creates insurmountable problems. The sermon shows how this practical and moral obligation is impossible to meet. The hearers are led to a seemingly dead end. c) Then a hidden door opens and light comes in. The sermon moves both into worship and into Christ-application when it shows how only Jesus Christ has fulfilled this. If the text is a narrative, you can show how Christ is the ultimate example of a particular character. If the text is didactic, you can show how Christ is the ultimate embodiment of the principle. d) Finally, we show how our inability to live as we ought stems from our rejection of Christ as the Way, Truth, and Life (or whatever the theme is). The sermon points out how to repent and rejoice in Christ in such a way that we can live as we ought.

The following is a short article I was asked to write for The Summit Magazine (a magazine for alumni and friends of Baptist Bible College & Seminary). I plan on expanding on it quite a lot since it is impossible to do justice to this topic in 800 words (at least it's impossible for me). Here it is:

What would you say is the difference between morals-driven and Gospel-driven leadership in the home? We ask this question because we believe its answer is vital to the spiritual health of the home. Both morals-driven and Gospel-driven homes are concerned with the morality of their children. They both desire children who love God and others as themselves. They both value truth-telling, faithfulness, patience, servanthood, etc. However, they represent two radically different perspectives on these important concerns, desires, and values. So what does it mean for leadership in the Christian home to be Gospel-driven?

In our search to answer this question, we sought to apply the Gospel-centered perspective to specifics such as “What does it mean to be Gospel-driven in teaching our children to obey and honor us as their God-given parental authority?” Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians has been instructive in answering questions about leadership in the Christian home. We discovered that this idea of being “Gospel-driven” in the home is not new. It is not another Christian fad with a catchy phrase that after having its “day in the sun” will soon fade away. It is a concept that is as old as Scripture itself.

We have only enough space to introduce a Gospel-driven perspective of leadership within the Christian home. So we will consider Ephesians 6:1-4, verses that address both children and parents in the same context. As we look at these verses, we must remember that Paul did not intend for us to separate the commands to children and fathers from the life-giving foundation of the Gospel laid out in chapters one to three. In other words, Paul never intended the sole or even primary motivation for children to obey their parents to be that “it is right” (v. 1). How often have believing children been told the main reason for obeying their parents is that it is right? We are not saying the “rightness” of obedience is not a reason for obedience. It is a God-given reason, but “rightness” must not be the main reason or motivation for believing children to obey.

This same thinking applies to Paul’s second commandment to children in verses 2-3. The promise “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the earth” (v.3) is not the main reason children are to honor their parents. This is a reason, but it is not the reason. To give these two reasons for obedience as the primary reasons for offering obedience to parents is to teach our children to live a morals-driven life rather than a Gospel-driven life. If these reasons are our emphasis, we are essentially teaching our children that they should obey so they will be blessed. Although this teaching is true on one level, it is not true on the most important level.

Paul never intended us to sever Ephesians 6:1-3 from Ephesians 1-3. Remember that in Ephesians 6:1-3 Paul is writing to believing children. He has first declared to these children, whom he calls to obedience and honor, that God the Father has already blessed them in Christ with every spiritual blessing (1:3), that He chose them in Christ before the foundation of the world so they should be holy and blameless before Him (1:4), and that in Christ they have the forgiveness of sins (1:7). All believers, both parents and children, possess these unbelievable blessings.

Gospel-driven parenting says to believing children, “You are unspeakably blessed! Therefore, obey and honor us as your parents as to the Lord!” Gospel-centered parents seek to deepen their children’s understanding of the glorious riches that they already possess in Christ through faith. Their primary prayer and desire is that God would open the eyes of their children’s understanding so that they might know what is the hope to which God has called them, namely, the eternal riches of being in Christ (Ephesians 1:18). Morals-driven parenting says, “Obey and you will be blessed.” It seeks to motivate children to obey by emphasizing that if they work hard to live according to Biblical principles, then God will pour out His blessings upon them. Morals-driven parents (most often unknowingly) motivate their children through fear of lost blessings. Gospel-driven parenting says, “You are blessed. Therefore, obey.” The Gospel of God’s free grace teaches children to say “no” to their passions (Titus 2:11-12) not primarily for fear of lost blessings, but for joy in all that is already possessed in Christ. Gospel-driven leadership in the home produces joyful obedience and mutual submission because our crowning joy and security and blessings are not in our obedience but in our blessed Christ who lived and died in our place.

Unfortunately, we have been able to scratch only the surface of Gospel-driven leadership. We hope these thoughts will encourage you to continue to think through the implications of the Gospel in every relationship within the Christian home (Ephesians 6:22ff).

The gospel is "I am accepted through Christ, therefore I obey" while every other religion operates on the principle of "I obey, therefore I am accepted." Martin Luther's fundamental insight was that this latter principle, the principle of 'religion' is the deep default mode of the human heart. The heart continues to work in that way even after conversion to Christ. Though we recognize and embrace the principle of the gospel, our hearts will always be trying to return to the mode of self-salvation, which leads to spiritual deadness, pride and strife and ministry ineffectiveness.

For example, ministers derive more of their joy and a sense of personal significance from the success of their ministries than from the fact they are loved by God in Christ. Why? Their hearts are still operating on the principle--"if I do and accomplish all these things--then I will be accepted." (cf. Harold Abrahams in Chariots of Fire- "I have 10 seconds to justify my existence.") In other words, on one level, we believe the gospel but on another level we don't believe.

So why do we over-work in ministry and burn out? Yes, we are not practicing the Sabbath principle, but the deeper cause is unbelief in the gospel! Why are we so devastated by criticism? The person whose self-worth is mainly in his or her ministry performance will be devastated by criticism of the ministry record because that record is our very self and identity. The fundamental problem is unbelief in the gospel.

At the root, then, of all Christian failures to live right--i.e. not give their money generously, not tell the truth, not care for the poor, not handle worry and anxiety--is the sin under all sins, the sin of unbelief, of not rejoicing deeply in God's grace in Christ, not living out of our new identity in Christ.

"The remedy against this [guilt, discouragement over personal sin] is to look upon all your sins as charged upon the account of Christ. All your sins were made to meet upon Christ, as that evangelical prophet put it: 'He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and with His stripes we are healed.' Saith the wife to the bill collector, 'If I ower you anything, go to my husband', so may a believer say to justice, 'If I owe you anything, go to my Christ, who has underwritten me fully.' I must not sit down discouraged, under the fear of those debts which Christ, to the utmost farthing, has full satisfied.

"The remedy against this...is, to solemnly consider, that believers must repent for their being discouraged by their sins...it springs from their refusal of the richness, freeness, fullness, and everlastingness of God's love, and from their refusal of the power, glory, sufficiency and efficacy of the death and sufferings of the Lord Jesus Christ; and from their refusal of the worth, glory, fullness, largeness, and completeness of the righteousness of Jesus Christ...God did not give a believer a new heart for it to be rent and torn in pieces by discouragements" (Thomas Brooks).

Winter Wardrobe
HOLLYWOOD: With promises to be faithful to C.S. Lewis, and a marketing campaign reminiscent of The Passion, Disney and Walden Media move ahead with plans to bring The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe to movie theaters | by Andrew Coffin

You can read this article at: http://www.worldmag.com/displayarticle.cfm?id=10307

Another article about Narnia coming to the big screen: Disney's Next Hero: A Lion King of Kings (Brannon of Portland Studios made me aware of this one). It was featured in the New York Times.