James Travis – Calvary Chapel https://calvarychapel.com Encourage, Equip, Edify Tue, 23 Jan 2024 17:12:20 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.2 https://calvarychapel.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cropped-CalvaryChapel-com-White-01-32x32.png James Travis – Calvary Chapel https://calvarychapel.com 32 32 Memento Mori: Death Inspiring Life https://calvarychapel.com/posts/memento-mori-death-inspiring-life/ Tue, 23 Jan 2024 14:00:12 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=158810 Memento Mori is a Latin phrase that means “remember that you will die.” It is, I think, the perfect way to end one year and...]]>

Memento Mori is a Latin phrase that means “remember that you will die.” It is, I think, the perfect way to end one year and start a new one. It might sound morbid, but, really, it’s magnificent. Let me tell you why.

Many people will have made many resolutions this past couple of weeks:

  • how they will live this coming twelve months
  • things they will start
  • perhaps even things they will stop

Personally, I can think of no greater resolution for this next three hundred and sixty-six days than this: remember, daily, that you will die.

The earliest known use of the term in popular culture was in the late 1500s. William Shakespeare brought it to the attention of many in his play “Henry IV”:

“…I make as good use of it as many a man doth of a Death’s-head or a memento mori …”
(Act 3, Scene 3)

It was then, and still is now, used to remind people of the impermanence of human life (cf. Isaiah 40). Classical antiquity (c. 800 BC to c. AD 500) was filled with references to the inevitability of death but with different language. Often visually or physically depicted by a skull, it was somewhat ubiquitous for a long time in art and literature.


During the Roman triumphal return of a conquering general, it is rumoured that someone carried a skull to remind the victor that he, too, would die one day … so enjoy today because there will be an end. Second century Christian writer Tertullian, apparently, wrote that this was standard practice, but evidence for his claim is scant.

How, then, does this fit into a Christian worldview?

Isaiah 40.6-8 tells us this:

“All people are like grass, and all their promises are like the flowers in the field. The grass dries up, the flowers wither, when the wind sent by the Lord blows on them. Surely humanity is like grass. The grass dries up, the flowers wither, but the decree of our God is forever reliable.”

The simple and humbling truth here is that you and I, all people, are like grass. Our lives begin with beauty and new growth. It seems like we will never stop developing, expanding, and flourishing. We transform, as if by some means of supernatural metamorphosis, from frail and helpless infants into miniature people, eventually reaching physical maturity with the world laid out before us. But, as Isaiah reminds, the grass dries up and the flowers wither. Our once indestructible bodies start to fail us. We begin to stand just a little frailer than before. Where there was once firmness and strength, we now notice frailty and fragility. What is happening to us? We have turned the corner from grandeur and greatness towards our inescapable end: the grave.

James, too, prompts us to consider the fragility and fleetingness of our lives:

“You do not know about tomorrow. What is your life like? For you are a puff of smoke that appears for a short time and then vanishes.”
(James 4.14, cf. Psalm 102.11, Job 8.9, 1 Chronicles 29.15)

So, accepting our limitations, what does this do for us?

Accepting that we have an end can, somewhat counter-intuitively, inspire us to live in the here and now. Matthew McCullough writes that facing up to the truth of our inevitable death leads us to a deeper hope in life. As we are honest with ourselves about the truth that each and every one of us faces a physical death, we are inescapably drawn into grief. We think of what we will miss; the people, the places, and the points that define our lives. Grieving over death is natural and shows us that this was never meant to be the case for humanity, that death is a consequence of the fall (Genesis 2.9, 16). To be self-aware enough over the inevitability of your death is to welcome grief into your life. However, as a born-again believer in the risen Jesus, we grieve not as those who do not have hope (1 Thessalonians 4.13-14).

It is in death that we experience the richest life: both momentarily and eternally. In death, for the believer, there is hope and there is life.

It grieves me that the most poignant and personal truths are only shared when life is ebbing away.
How different our transient existence would be if we regularly and routinely told those we love that we do, in fact, love them.
How different would our families, churches, friendships, and relationships be if everyone around us knew how valued, appreciated, respected, and special to us they were.
It grieves me that these truths only surface when death is imminent or, heartbreakingly, once death has already claimed another life. In death, there are some of the richest experiences life can offer.

Eternally, too, we experience the richest life in death.
Death hurts, there is no denying. Anything that we experience that contradicts who God is and His design for us hurts. Isaiah tells us that for those who choose to trust the suffering servant, for those who love the sacrificial Saviour, death no longer has a sting (Isaiah 25.8, 26.19). Death as the eternal and permanent enemy is no more (1 Corinthians 15.51-58). The resurrection of Jesus guarantees, both logically and theologically, your own. Whilst no doubt difficult, death is now simply another step in our journey to glory.
In death, there is hope and there is life (John 10.10).

So, as we all move closer each day to a physical death, accepting this truth should inspire you to live to the fullest each and every day.

Those people you love will not be here forever: tell them how much they mean to you.

Take the chances and seize the opportunities that God puts in your path.
Do not wait for things to one day, perhaps, maybe get better. Take action to do something about it (Nehemiah 4.9).

Yes, there is death in our life, but it is not the end.
Accept it, grieve it, but never lose sight of the hope of eternal life. Never forget, too, that hope and life in death are only found in the person, and through the work, of Jesus, and your faith therein.


Bibliography

Beard, Mary. The Roman Triumph. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2009.

McCullough, Matthew. Remember Death: The Surprising Path to Living Hope. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2018.

]]>
Bible Reading: Quality or Quantity? https://calvarychapel.com/posts/bible-reading-quality-or-quantity-2/ Fri, 05 Jan 2024 16:12:13 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=158756 To read Scripture daily is a good thing (2 Timothy 3.16, Romans 15.4, Mark 13.31, 1 Peter 2.2, Psalm 119.130). There isn’t, as far as...]]>

To read Scripture daily is a good thing (2 Timothy 3.16, Romans 15.4, Mark 13.31, 1 Peter 2.2, Psalm 119.130).

There isn’t, as far as I can see, a daily amount that we must read. Other faith traditions may impose an “expectation” on their adherents, but, for those born again by faith in Jesus, a daily commitment to read the Word and to hear from God through His Word, is something we want to do.

So, how much is enough? Should I read a certain amount every day? Let’s see.

Quality

Charles Spurgeon said the following:

“Some people like to read so many [Bible] chapters every day. I would not dissuade them from the practice, but I would rather lay my soul asoak in half a dozen verses all day than rinse my hand in several chapters. Oh, to be bathed in a text of Scripture, and to let it be sucked up in your very soul, till it saturates your heart!”

(1882, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit: Sermons)

Reading multiple chapters a day isn’t a bad thing, neither is reading a few verses. The fact that we’re daily in the Word is the most important thing. There’s no minimum daily, weekly, or yearly quota that we must read … and there’s no maximum allowed either! If you have a Bible app on your phone, you can usually set it to deliver a “verse of the day” to your home screen. Often memorable, stand-alone truths, this kind of Scripture intake can really help with “soaking in Scripture,” as Spurgeon says. We have a truth there, at our fingertips, to see over and over again each time we pick up our phones (which, research has shown, is on average every ten minutes).1 When we read for quality, we should think on that truth throughout the day. We should repeat it to ourselves throughout the day. Quality reading is about a truth truly taken in, not just quickly taken in.

If you’re in a season of soaking, my counsel would be to not allow this to be a permanent state. Don’t allow yourself to perpetually exist on the crumbs of such a glorious meal. If you’re soaking in the quality of just a few words each day now, plan ahead to take a deep dive into something new soon. Plan to devour books, sections, or even Testaments like never before. Enjoy the quality, and look ahead to the quantity.

Quantity

As we read above, some people like to read so many … chapters every day. I’ve had seasons where I’ve found myself drawn to reading through certain books of the Bible; maybe I’m teaching a passage soon and want the big picture, maybe things are happening at home that I think a specific book would speak into. Either way, sometimes we are drawn to more, and then reading a higher quantity of Scripture daily is what we need. Different books and different sections of our Bibles are hard to really understand in small pieces (the history books, for example) and so we do need to consider them as they come: as a whole.

If you’re in a season of ploughing through the Word, my counsel would be to make sure that your reading is deep enough for it to produce fruit. The witness of “Yeah, I read five whole chapters a day…every day!” mixed with a decidedly un-Christian lifestyle is not a good look. It’s also inconsistent with the commitment you have made to taking in the Word. If you’re working hard at taking it in, make sure you’re letting the Word work in you (James 1.22-25).

So, Quality or Quantity?

There’s no hard and fast answer to this; it’s a personal, situational, and seasonal response. The bottom line is that, as believers, we should be daily in the Word. If that’s a passage or a paragraph, a whole book or a bite-sized chunk, being in the Word is one of our everyday essentials.

I believe that God wants us to be continually sanctified, to be daily made more like Jesus (1 Thessalonians 5.23, Galatians 2.20, 1 Corinthians 6.11, Romans 6.6, Hebrews 13.12, and many more). In John 17, Jesus is recorded as praying for His disciples to be set apart in the truth. He then says that God’s Word is truth.

To be sanctified, to be set apart in the truth,
we have to be in the Word.

I’d love to hear from you about your Bible reading: Are you in a season of quality or quantity?

Let me know!


References:

1 https://www.zippia.com/advice/smartphone-usage-statistics/#:~:text=How%20many%20times%20does%20someone,That%27s%20a%20lot.

]]>
The Early Tree https://calvarychapel.com/posts/the-early-tree/ Wed, 06 Dec 2023 15:07:14 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=158675 For the past couple of years, Christmas trees seem to be appearing earlier and earlier. Not in the shops that want you to buy their...]]>

For the past couple of years, Christmas trees seem to be appearing earlier and earlier. Not in the shops that want you to buy their stuff, but in the homes of regular people like you and me. It seems that people are watching Christmas movies, listening to Christmas music, and eating Christmas foods way earlier than ever before.

Why is that?

Is it a Bahrain-specific thing: I’m traveling soon but want to enjoy some Christmas cheer here before I leave? Perhaps … but there might be a bigger-picture reason.

When we decorate for Christmas, when we put up the tree and switch on the lights, what are we really doing? For some, it begins and ends there:

Decorating the home looks nice.

Twinkling lights look nice.

Mince pies taste nice.

Michael Bublé sounds nice.

For some, it’s very surface-level. It’s just … nice.

But, on a deeper level, when we put up the tree and switch on the lights, what are we really doing?

What we’re doing is turning our eyes and hearts and minds towards hope.

When we put up the tree and switch on the lights, we’re putting a (very) visual reminder in our homes and lives that something better is coming.

We’re telling ourselves that the lives we live in the here and now are not all that there is and all that there will ever be. We’re turning eyes and hearts and minds to hope:

The hope of a coming child, a son, through whom we can live a peace-filled life (Isaiah 9.6).

The hope of restoration to right relationship with God and the close and intimate fellowship this brings (Revelation 21.3).

The hope that there’s something, someone, bigger, greater, and above it all who loves you, cares for you, and stepped down into fallen creation to rescue you from it all (Philippians 2.5-11).

The last few years were strange, weren’t they?

They put us in situations of separation, of uncertainty, of anguish, and of heartache. At times like this, we need hope.

If we look to the world around us for hope, for encouragement, and for the reassurance that tomorrow will be better, then each and every year we may just end up putting the tree up a little bit earlier. Just think—if you’re having a bad year, maybe your tree will go up in the summer …

But, if we look only to Jesus for hope, for encouragement, and for the reassurance that tomorrow will be better, then we’ll be free to throw that tree up and switch on those lights whenever we want to because our hope is firmly rooted in the truth of the Word of God and the Word become flesh, Jesus.

So, when should we put up the tree and switch on the lights? I guess it depends on why you’re doing so. Thinking deeper and leaning harder on the truth of Jesus for your hope, encouragement, and reassurance this festive season, put that tree up whenever you like.

]]>
Remembering Pastor Chuck: Retrospectives From Ray Ortlund, Nicky Gumbel, Elaine O’Connor, Daniel Hamlin, & James Travis https://calvarychapel.com/posts/remembering-pastor-chuck-retrospectives-from-ray-ortlund-nicky-gumbel-elaine-oconnor-daniel-hamlin-james-travis/ Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:00:31 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=158384 Keeping Jesus At The Center – Ray Ortlund My wife Jani and I were at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa on New Year’s Eve 1971, going...]]>

Keeping Jesus At The Center – Ray Ortlund

My wife Jani and I were at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa on New Year’s Eve 1971, going into 1972. The service was held in the big tent, of course.

We arrived early enough to get seats in the center of the front row.

Love Song played. Chuck preached. And then we took Communion. It was wonderful.

But the most unforgettable moment for me occurred right after the service. Chuck was still standing just behind the Communion table. And one of the young people greeting him, giving him a big hug, accidentally knocked over a stack of Communion trays.

What struck me was how quickly and genuinely Chuck reassured him and set him at ease: “Oh, that’s okay! No problem at all.” I thought, “Chuck is a wise pastor.

Any non-churchy kid could come in here and be accepted. Jesus is the only issue here.”

That memory has helped me in my own pastoral ministry all these years.

Thank you, Chuck.

 

Even When The Crowd Is Quite Small – Nicky Gumbel

I first met Chuck Smith in around 1978. At that time, Calvary Chapel was already a huge church, yet he was willing to come and speak to about five of us at HTB (Holy Trinity Brompton in London).

I still remember the talk he gave on “Healthy Sheep Multiply.” I was struck by his sheer stamina! He spoke for about three hours with hardly a pause.

Later I had the privilege of visiting Calvary Chapel, in around 1985, and heard him preach—expounding the Bible with great authority and humour.

Chuck Smith has rightly been called “one of the most influential figures in modern American Christianity.”

Learning To Love God’s Word – Elaine O’Connor

God used Pastor Chuck to introduce me to the inexhaustible insights and wisdom His Word has to offer.

It all began with my noticing that Pastor Chuck saw the world and others differently.

He saw humanity as precious, created by God for a relationship with Himself. He saw events as under the watchful gaze of a loving God.

The second thing I noticed was that Pastor Chuck cherished God’s Word, every single bit of it. He would get excited to read and study the Bible. I had only seen that depth of excitement at bakeries or sporting events.

It seemed logical that the two were connected. Therefore, wanting that same loving kindness-fueled perspective myself, I also began to read and study the Bible.

Through the years, I have experienced both bitter and sweet times.

Difficult as the bitter times have been, I have known with absolute confidence that God loves me and sees what is happening. I have known with astounding certainty that I can trust Him. No one can purchase this knowledge, even with access to the finest of stores. It is a gift from God.

There is something about one’s roots growing deep into God’s love—via His Word—that enables even the frailest tree to stand … and offer shade to others. The words of Psalm 1 are perfect and true.

“Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart, for I am called by your name, O Lord, God of hosts,” writes the prophet Jeremiah. Pastor Chuck felt the same way.

God used Pastor Chuck to instill in me that same sense of appreciation for Him and His Word, and that has made all the difference.

 

A Humble, Simple Love For The Word – Daniel Hamlin

I first started attending Calvary Chapel in the mid 1990’s. What stood out to me the most and what kept me coming back was the priority given to the Word of God. Not long after high school I went off to Calvary Chapel Bible College in Murrieta, California. Pastor Chuck would periodically come out to the college to preach, and it was during one of these sermons I discovered something about him that left a profound impact on me.

He was teaching through the book of Ruth and asked us to follow along as he read. Everyone’s head was down as they read along with him, but I happened to look up for a moment. I glanced at Pastor Chuck and noticed he wasn’t looking at his Bible. He was reciting the text correctly, but his eyes were off to the side. I realized he was reciting it from memory. We read through multiple chapters of Ruth that day and Pastor Chuck seemed to recite it all from memory. He didn’t do it for show, he didn’t draw any attention to himself about it, he just quietly recited it as if he were reading it. Had I not happened to glance up at him, I wouldn’t have known.

It was then I realized what a tremendous love for God’s Word he had. It challenged my own devotion to reading Scripture and inspired me to continue in my pursuit of studying the Bible. In that moment I realized this wasn’t something he just picked up along the way by accident. It was the result of a lifetime devoted to studying and taking to heart God’s precious Word.

To me, Pastor Chuck is a reminder of what the Lord can do through someone with nothing more than a humble, simple love for the Word and the Spirit. I never met Pastor Chuck personally, but his impact on my life and ministry was profound.

From Bahrain With Gratitude – James Travis

I had never heard the name Chuck Smith until I moved to Bahrain in 2013. The pastor of the church we joined on arrival was (and is still very much) a Calvary Chapel guy and I remember him talking about Pastor Chuck a lot.

I got a brief history of the movement, his understanding of the motivation behind the movement, the philosophy of ministry which my mentor saw (and appreciated) in Pastor Chuck, and was finally presented with a copy of Calvary Chapel Distinctives where I could hear from the man himself. The book was
something I devoured as I learnt and trained for ministry, and was later a key text during at least one of my M.Div classes with Calvary Chapel University.

All of that to say, Chuck Smith has had a deep and meaningful impact on my life
and ministry despite the two of us having never met. I’ve learnt a great deal
from his own writings but perhaps more so from those who spent time with
him. Those men and women would be horrified to read their own names here in
what is a tribute to the vicarious legacy of Chuck but, in summary, I’m grateful
for Chuck Smith. I’m grateful for and to the people he impacted and their
continuing impact on the lives of others.

It is a testament to him that ten years on from his death, he is still ministering life and its Author to others, through others.

]]>
5 Reasons We Need the Old Testament https://calvarychapel.com/posts/5-reasons-we-need-the-old-testament/ Fri, 22 Sep 2023 06:00:27 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=158206 It seems that no matter how much nuanced hinting or explicit declaration happens in churches, people still stumble over the question of “Do we need...]]>

It seems that no matter how much nuanced hinting or explicit declaration happens in churches, people still stumble over the question of “Do we need the Old Testament?” For some it’s interesting but not instructive. For some it’s awkward and not authoritative. For some it’s plain banal and therefore certainly not binding. Neither references and quotes made, nor promises and prophecies fulfilled, seem to cement in people’s mind that yes, we DO need the Old Testament.

Let me give you just five reasons (of many) why we do.

1. All Scripture (the entire Bible) is God breathed and has been Divinely preserved for your benefit, not just the last quarter (2 Timothy 3.16).

When Paul wrote this to Timothy, he wasn’t just thinking about the records of Jesus’ birth, life, death, and intervening ministry (Matthew-John).

Neither was he just thinking of the testimony of those who lived with and learned from Him (Acts, for example).

Neither was he only thinking of the Hebrew Scriptures (cf. 2 Timothy 3.15).

Paul was so often a big-picture guy, and his declaration that all Scripture is breathed out by God most certainly starts in Genesis and then includes the aforementioned records of Jesus’ life, ministry, death, resurrection, and legacy.

2. As believers, the New Testament gives us the hope of Jesus. The Old Testament shows us whyit was needed.

Again, and again, and again in the Old Testament, we see people doing their utmost to live the life God wants for them but failing. We see the fallen, fallible, and frail human condition come to the fore again and again. On their own and in their own strength and power, people simply can’t cover the space and separation between themselves and God that their sin has created.

We see in the Old Testament that, at the core, people want and need a figure of hope, someone to look to who will put this inability of theirs right. For a while, the figure was a judge (Judges 3.15); for a while, it was a king (1 Samuel 8.19-20). None worked, truly. The longing for something better remained. The longing for someone better remained. The New Testament makes clear that this person is, ultimately and permanently, Jesus.

3. The New Testament picks up right where the Old left off.

So much is shared in the first few books of your Bible. There’s creation, covenants between God and man, the promise of a Messiah, and time after time, the human condition is shown, warts and all. So many threads and themes are begun, so many promises are promised, and so many dilemmas are detailed. The New Testament picks up each, answers them neatly, and resolves them without fail in the person and work of Jesus.

Consider but a few:

See the story of Jael and her radical obedience in Judges 4 and how the New Testament flawlessly completes this arc.

See the proto evangelium, the first Gospel, of Genesis 3.

See the mathematical and chronological accuracy of the prophecies of Daniel.

See the prophetic declarations of Isaiah and Micah about the birth of Jesus.

See the suffering Saviour in Isaiah and the Psalms.

So much is predicted and begun in the Old and comes to fruition and finality in the New. To detach the two would be to have an answer to a question nobody asked.

4. Jesus said He came to fulfil, not abolish (Matthew 5.17).

Jesus fulfilled the sacrificial and atonement laws of the Old Testament. We’re no longer required to live by the complex atoning framework of Leviticus to be in God’s presence, for example. However, the character, selfless love, and behaviour of a believer draws much from the Old Testament (Romans 7.12). Jason Derouchie wrote that

“As Moses asserted, in the day of heart circumcision (Deut. 30:6), which we are enjoying today (Rom. 2:29), all of his teachings in Deuteronomy would still matter: “And you shall again obey the voice of the LORD and keep all his commandments that I command you today” (Deut. 30:8).”

Whilst we are no longer required to offer sacrifices for sins or to observe ceremonial laws, do we ever move past commandments like Deuteronomy 6.5?

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.”

To say that the Old Testament no longer matters is tantamount to saying passages like that don’t matter, and Jesus said otherwise (cf. Matthew 22.37).

5. Jesus said it all points to Him (John 5.39; Luke 24.27, 44-47).

Quite simple this one.

Jesus said it’s all about Him, so why wouldn’t it matter to those that love, follow, and believe in Him?
* * *

These are just five reasons why the Old Testament is important. We as a church have been working through it one chapter a week for a few years, and I honestly can’t remember how many times something has come up in Genesis or Exodus (for example) that has then been preached from a New Testament book on a Friday. To be believers with a well grounded, firm, and secure faith, we need to feed ourselves on the full counsel of Scripture, not just the last quarter.

I’d love your thoughts on the Old Testament:

Are you currently reading part of it?

Are there parts you’ve never read?

Are there parts you don’t understand?

Further Reading

https://jamestravis.net/2021/03/10/jael-radical-obedience/


References

https://jasonderouchie.com/10-reasons-why-you-should-read-the-old-testament/

]]>
Travel: Good for the Soul? https://calvarychapel.com/posts/travel-good-for-the-soul/ Fri, 18 Aug 2023 06:00:40 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=158101 Originally published in James Travis’ blog on July 29, 2023.   Living in Bahrain means that travel is an accepted part of life. We travel...]]>

Originally published in James Travis’ blog on July 29, 2023.

 

Living in Bahrain means that travel is an accepted part of life. We travel to see friends and family, we travel on vacation, we travel to renew visas, and we travel because living here puts us close to many other wonderful places (Europe, Asia, and Africa are all reachable in around three hours). People often say that “travel is good for the soul.” The philosopher Seneca (reportedly) said that “Travel and change of place impart new vigor to the mind.

How does this all look in the life of the believer?

Is travel really good for the soul?

Here, in no particular order, are some reasons why travelling is one of a great many good and perfect Divine gifts (James 1.17).

Travel interrupts and disrupts our well-worn rhythms and routines (but without penalty).

We’re not made to be at work twenty-four seven. We’re not created to be reachable and questionable all hours of all days. Being out of reach, offline, and unavailable has a huge impact on our mental and physical health.1 We’re forced to be still, be present, and just be.

Even those who love and thrive on routines need a break from them now and again. We see this as early as Genesis 2.1-3wherein God Himself rests from work and established patterns. People need rest (Exodus 20.8-11), and ultimately this work/break rhythm points us to Jesus in His fulfilment of the Sabbath (Hebrews 4.9-11). We rest knowing that our status before God will not suffer and our regular rhythms and routines can freely be paused without penalty. There is now no mental angst from removing yourself from your regular rhythms and routines because those routines are not earning you anything before God. Rest, recharge, and trust that this doesn’t remove any of God’s favour from you.

Travel gives new and renewed perspective.

What’s truly important, and what’s not.

Where we’re investing time, energy, and emotion, and where we shouldn’t be.

What we own, and what is beginning to own us.

What we truly need in our lives, and what we don’t.

These are just some of the contrasts we begin to see in increasing clarity when we move away from our comfort zones and all of the ‘stuff’ therein.

Matthew 6.19-21 teaches us very clearly that where our treasure is, so too is our heart and affection. We are counselled to love God with all that we are (Matthew 22.36-40) and this cannot be done whilst also glorying in our possessions.

Travel, wonderfully, removes us from most of our personal possessions and puts us out there in the Kingdom with little more than a suitcase. Less around us, more to see.

Travel gives new (visual) perspectives.

Seeing the sun rise or set over a new landscape renews your sense of awe and wonder in the process. Watching the same sun that sets over your house set over a mountain range in a different land is (somehow) a much more interesting process.
Seeing vastly different visuals challenges us to imagine a life that’s different from the one we are living and the one we are so used to seeing.

We begin to see that our little corner of the world is just that: little.

We begin to see that we are so small and insignificant in the face of the spectacular created world around us.

In Psalm 8.3-4 we read:

When I look up at the heavens, which your fingers made,
and see the moon and the stars, which you set in place,
Of what importance is the human race, that you should notice them?
Of what importance is mankind, that you should pay attention to them?

Seeing more also urges us to think things like;

Could there be more for me?

Could God fulfil me in a different location just as much as He does now?

If you never go (even for a short time), you’ll never know.

Simply, travel is fun and brings joy.

New places, new spaces, new faces.

There is joy in discovering more of creation than you have ever experienced before. Joy is an essential part of the Christian experience and one that I am convinced many are lacking. It’s a defining part of the born-again life.

As part of the fruit of the Spirit presented in Galatians 5 we read:

“… the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.”
(emphasis added)

So, is travel good for the soul? It seems that it is, yes.

It doesn’t have to be an epically-long international odyssey, but going somewhere new to do something new is a gift from God: enjoy it!


References

1 https://www.helpguide.org/articles/mental-health/social-media-and-mental-health.htm ↩

]]>
Exchanging Heaven for Here https://calvarychapel.com/posts/exchanging-heaven-for-here/ Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:00:06 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=157830 Our Bibles are littered with exchanges; Psalm 106.20, Mark 8.37, 2 Corinthians 6.13, and Micah 6.6-8, to name a few. One often overlooked exchange in...]]>

Our Bibles are littered with exchanges; Psalm 106.20, Mark 8.37, 2 Corinthians 6.13, and Micah 6.6-8, to name a few. One often overlooked exchange in Scripture is found in Philippians 2. “Wait—you say—Philippians 2 is one of the most talked-about passages in Scripture!” We read therein of Jesus taking on flesh (vv. 7-8), how He condescended to our level (v. 8a), was obedient in a way that we could never be (v. 8b), and in doing so truly showed His Divinity, power, glory, and majesty (vv. 9-11). There is so much going on there in such a rich teaching that we would be forgiven for overlooking the beautiful exchange Jesus made: heaven for here.

Writing to a church from prison1 about living out their Christian lives (1.27), Paul says that as the Philippians (and us by extension) live day by day we should have the same mindset as Jesus (2.5). Think about life and those around you like this, he says, and then proceeds to pen perhaps the richest and most illuminating teaching on Jesus in the New Testament, perhaps. This hymn, this poetic powerhouse of a description of Jesus as the model of the behaviour he wants the church to have, also lays out a beautiful and fascinating exchange: heaven for here.

Now, before we really get into it, saying that Jesus exchanged heaven for here assumes that He existed before His incarnation. He could not exchange His place in heaven for a place among us here on earth if He came into existence on that O so Holy Night in Bethlehem, right? Jesus was, and is, and always will be (John 8.58). He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow (Hebrews 13.8). So, the exchange …

Philippians 2.6 tells us that Jesus existed in the form of God (ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ) prior to His incarnation. This does not mean that He kind of looked like God or was the next best thing, a copy ready to paste. It means that He possesses the essentials that make that person that person, nothing added and nothing subtracted.2 H.A.A. Kennedy wrote that the word Paul chose here (μορφῇ— in the form of)

“…always signifies a form which truly and fully expresses the being which underlies it…” 3

Before His incarnation then, Jesus had the role in heaven of physically and visibly representing God to those present (John 1.18, 6.46) by truly and fully expressing the being that is God (cf. Deuteronomy 4.35). Jesus was, simply, the One who showed those around Him what God was like: God in a physical and viewable form.

Joseph Henry Thayer (of lexicon notability) wrote that

“[Jesus] bore the form (in which he appeared to the inhabitants of heaven) of God.”2

 

“You should have the same attitude toward one another that Christ Jesus had,

who, though he existed in the form of God,

did not regard equality with God

as something to be grasped,

but emptied himself

by taking on the form of a slave,

by looking like other men,

and by sharing in human nature.”

(Philippians 2.5-7, emphasis added)

Philippians 2 teaches us, then, that Jesus exchanged His place representing and embodying God in heaven (v. 6) to represent and embody God on earth (v. 7).

Why did this all happen?

Why was heaven exchanged for here and what does this mean for us, now?

We read the reason in vv. 9-11 of the same chapter:

“As a result God highly exalted him

and gave him the name

that is above every name,

so that at the name of Jesus

every knee will bow

—in heaven and on earth and under the earth—

and every tongue confess

that Jesus Christ is Lord

to the glory of God the Father.”

(Emphasis added)

Jesus exchanged heaven for here so that every knee will bow: everyone will one day meet Him, and the Father sincerely wants you to meet Him as Saviour (2 Peter 3.9, Revelation 20.4-15).

Jesus exchanged heaven for here so that everyone will acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord: there is no other name under heaven by which we are saved and all notions of self-sufficiency ceased in this exchange (Acts 4.12).

Heaven was exchanged for here so that, as Isaiah wrote, we who walk in great darkness can see a great light (9.2).

Heaven was exchanged for here to give you, and to give me, the opportunity, by grace alone and through faith alone, to have our sins forgiven, through Christ alone, for the glory of God alone.

Heaven was exchanged for here so that we can experience a full, abundant, and meaningful life here (John 10.10) and life eternal when this one ends (John 3.16-17).

Heaven was exchanged for here so that you and I can be brought back into right relationship with God because the barrier, our sin, has been removed (Romans 6.23).

Heaven was exchanged for here so that here could be made ready for heaven (Revelation 21.1-4).

In all of that, simply, heaven was exchanged for here, for you.


References

1 – https://www.gotquestions.org/prison-epistles.html

2 – https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g3444/kjv/tr/0-1/

3 – H.A.A. Kennedy: The Expositor’s Greek Testament, The Epistle to the Philippians

]]>
Teaching v. Preaching: What Should We Get at the Gathering? https://calvarychapel.com/posts/teaching-v-preaching-what-should-we-get-at-the-gathering/ Fri, 05 May 2023 06:00:17 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=157566 Many people have personal preferences and their own opinions about the gathered church (which is fine; we’re all made, graced, and gifted uniquely, cf. 1...]]>

Many people have personal preferences and their own opinions about the gathered church (which is fine; we’re all made, graced, and gifted uniquely, cf. 1 Peter 4.10). One area keenly discussed is the receiving of God’s Word when the church assembles for its regular and formal service (Hebrews 10.25):

Is it preached?

Is it taught?

Is there even a difference?

As we’re making decisions about how our gatherings should look and how we should expect to receive the Word, we really ought to consult Scripture itself (1 Corinthians 14.36).

So, let’s do just that now …

We’ll begin by looking at 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy: they were written to a church-leading man, in part, about “doing church” after all. Paul writes:

“I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you in case I am delayed, to let you knowhow people ought to conduct themselves in the household of God, because it is the church of the living God, the support and bulwark of the truth.”
(1 Timothy 3.14-15, NET, emphasis added)

As part of these instructions for “how to do church,” five times in two letters Timothy is instructed to teach (1 Timothy 2.12, 4.11, 16, 6.2; 2 Timothy 2.2, διδάσκω to teach or speak in a public assembly, to direct, to admonish, to instruct).

Only once is Timothy instructed to preach (2 Timothy 4.2, κηρύσσω – to publish, proclaim, to announce openly and publicly).

There is, in Paul’s letters to Timothy at least, a preference for teaching and instruction over simply announcing the Good News when the church is gathered. Is this reflected in the wider New Testament?

In a word, yes: preaching is spoken of 61 times to teaching‘s 160 (NET).

So, What Does This Mean for Our Weekly Worship Services?

It means that teaching certainly does have a place: a scriptural place of importance that (by frequency at least) outweighs preaching. To enter church and expect to simply hear the Gospel message, isolated from any biblical instruction, is to want dessert without a main course.

It means that when we gather we should want to know and to grow in our faith, and we do this, first and foremost, by being instructed in God’s Word (1 Corinthians 14.18-19).

It means that our expectations as we gather should line up with Scripture and that we receive the rhema¹ (Acts 5.20-21) as those who want to learn.

It means that teaching should not simply be tolerated, but treasured (Proverbs 2.1-5).

To be preached at without being taught will certainly have value for some. Most, however, need the why that teaching provides in addition to the what of the Good News:

Why does God love me?

Why did Jesus need to die for me?

Why is it important for me to live a certain lifestyle now I have claimed Christ as Saviour and why does this text lead me to it?

Why is the Gospel good news for me?

The Two – Teaching and Preaching – Are Not in Competition; They Are Complementary: Each Is Essential to the Other.

I once read something on how preaching and teaching should go together each week as the church gathers:

“…our world needs to know just how far we have fallen from our original purpose

(the teaching of the text),

but that there is a Saviour who has ascended higher than we ever can, and He wants to take us with Him

(the preaching of the Gospel message).”

So, What Should We Get at the Gathering?

Your pastor’s primary job when the church gathers—according to Scripture—is to teach before he preaches (it’s literally part of his job title, see Ephesians 4.11 and the grammatical coherence of pastors and teachers).

When you gather at church, there are those among you who don’t know why (or even how) we’ve fallen and, as such, whythe Gospel is the good news. Scripture, properly handled and taught, reveals so. To present the Gospel message aside from the teaching of Scripture is to answer a question that nobody asked.

So, if you already know why the Gospel is good news, great! But remember, there will be those in your church family who are newer to the faith than you are and maybe there are those whose biblical literacy is catching up to yours, so be patient with those who might not yet know why. Pray for them as they receive God’s Word as instruction and insight that they haven’t had before.

Simply, be patient in the teaching as you await the preaching.

If there are passages, or whole books of the Bible, that you lack understanding in, soak in the teaching of the text and welcome the opportunity to know and grow in your faith.

Simply, take in the teaching and the preaching with equal enthusiasm.

Whatever posture you find yourself in as you receive the Word each week at church, let us all see above everything else, and with a progressing clarity and brilliance, its Divine Author and the Saviour that it points us to (John 5.39-40).


References

¹ Rhema: that which is spoken; declaration, saying, speech, word.

]]>
Iron Sharpening Iron https://calvarychapel.com/posts/iron-sharpening-iron/ Mon, 13 Mar 2023 06:00:53 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=157147 ]]>

One often-quoted Bible verse that speaks of the benefit of living in community with other believers comes from Proverbs:

“As iron sharpens iron, so a person sharpens his friend.”
– (Proverbs 27.17, NET)

Yes, the benefits of living in close community with other Christians are vast and varied—but, how does Proverbs 27.17 practically play out?

How do we go about sharpening one another as iron sharpens iron?

After ten years of living in an international church community, I’ve seen plenty of people come and go, and I’ve seen plenty of iron sharpening methods. I’m convinced that some interpret Proverbs 27.17 as saying,

“As one smooth piece of sandpaper gently rubs on wood, ever so delicately removing surface specks,

so a person sharpens his friend.”

or,

“As soft clothes gently bump in a dryer,

so a person sharpens his friend.”

Have you ever seen the process of iron sharpening iron?

   

There is tension, there is friction, and there is intentionality.

There’s discomfort, there’s effort, and there’s hard work.

Now, please don’t get me wrong: iron sharpening is not about starting conflict in order to, you know, really sharpen one another. Intentionally sought-out conflict rarely (if ever) works out well. But, within our believing and intentional friendships—when we have established that both sides want to pursue growth and sanctification, and that both sides know that the context is one of mutual care and familial love—the frictional fellowship of iron sharpening has a thoroughly biblical place.

I know in my own life and my own walk with the Lord, I have always appreciated those with whom I have this kind of relationship (and there does need to be a solid relationship before this kind of Scriptural iron sharpening can take place). Someone who can either put an arm around your shoulder or grab you by the (proverbial) scruff of the neck and tell you some truth in love, in your best interests, is a friend indeed (Proverbs 27.6a).

Why do we need this kind of true iron sharpening in our life?

Wouldn’t it be easier to just exist in one another’s company in a perpetual state of piety?

Well, as Paul writes to the Ephesians, we need to practice the truth in love so that we will

“…in all things grow up into Christ, who is the head.”
– (Ephesians 4.15, NET)

Any kind of growth or self-improvement is rarely enjoyable. Think:

Gaining fitness takes dedication and discipline.

Learning a new language takes perseverance and practice.

Mastering a new skill takes focus and form.

Sanctification, the daily life of the disciple who wants to become more like Jesus, takes all that and more.

One wonderful tool in our arsenal is the other believers in our lives. We cultivate relationships with them wherein we can feel tension and heat, where what needs to leave our lives can be removed, where friendly friction is welcomed, and ultimately where we can grow in our knowledge and love of the Lord Jesus. A Word-wielding brother or sister in your life who wants to help you live out the truths of Scripture is worth their weight in gold. Treasure them.

If you don’t have relationships like that I hope that you will actively seek them out, to the glory of God and for your own good.

]]>
Gossip & The Gospel https://calvarychapel.com/posts/gossip-the-gospel/ Mon, 13 Feb 2023 18:29:48 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=49361 I recently talked with a good friend and the conversation turned to (among many things) the topic of gossip. It went something like this: Person...]]>

I recently talked with a good friend and the conversation turned to (among many things) the topic of gossip. It went something like this:

  • Person A – “I don’t think people realise the wider impact gossip has on a community.”
    • Person B – “What do you mean?”
  • A – “It robs one person of an opportunity to apologise and to pursue reconciliation.”
    • B – [Intrigued, tell-me-more nod]

As we talked, it became clear to me that as hurtful as gossip can be in the moment, there are much further reaching and deeper consequences that I had just not considered (and that I’m grateful were shared with me). What they said is too good not to share.

Ironically, if someone feels they haven’t been shown the grace, care, or love they desire and takes issue with that, by gossiping they are actually depriving others of the very same. There’s no grace in gossip and depriving others of something we clearly value so highly just doesn’t make sense (Leviticus 19.18, Matthew 7.12).

By involving others in the airing of our annoyances (an awkward position that nobody wants to find themselves in) instead of speaking with the source, we’re actually withholding the opportunity for it ever to be made right. We find ourselves, maybe without even thinking, doing the very thing we claim to be offended by, and we totally miss the moment to see the Gospel at work among us.

Imagine:

“He/She ‘did this’ or ‘said that’ and therefore didn’t treat me right … so I think I’ll complain to someone else about them and by doing so not treat them right …”

Barriers to Seeing the Gospel At Work Among Us

One wonderful aspect of the Gospel is that when we accept that we are sinners (Romans 3.23), when we accept that we can’t earn our righteousness nor prove ourselves good enough (Romans 3.20, Isaiah 64.6), we have the opportunity to turn to God in repentance and faith to find grace and forgiveness (Daniel 9.9, 1 John 1.9, Isaiah 45.22, Joel 2.12-32).

Gossip, however, cuts off this crucial step of acceptance. We simply cannot repent of things we’re totally unaware of. Leviticus gives specific commandments for sins committed in ignorance but even they have to first be accepted before the sacrifice can be offered (4.1-2, 27-28). Gossip, again, removes the first step to forgiveness: an acceptance of sin by the sinner. When gossip is present, the rest of the beautiful process that is forgiveness and reconciliation will never be allowed to continue.

Let’s be clear: gossip is a serious sin (Romans 1.29, 32) and contradicts Jesus’ very clear teaching on conflict among believers (Matthew 18.15). As I read recently,

“It hurts others, divides friends, and damages relationships.” 1

Beyond this short and straight truth it causes, as I have learned in conversation and through experience, collateral damage that (hopefully) nobody intends. We deprive others of forgiveness as we plunge ourselves into sin.

Gossip is the opposite of the Gospel.

It’s bad news that cuts people off, not Good News that restores.

I saw this in 2022 more than any other year. It was, honestly, the hardest year of my pastorate to date. The times that hurt the most and the times that were not-so-easily rectified in a Scriptural and edifying manner contained a case of gossip, specifically that which Paul describes in 1 Timothy 3.8 as being ‘double tongued’:

“…must the deacons be grave, not double tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre…” (KJV, emphasis added)

The Spirit working through Paul chose the word there, δίλογος:
δί, meaning double, or two,
and λογος, meaning words, speeches, or subjects.

Practically, it means saying one thing with one person on a given subject and another with another person (specifically with the intent to deceive one or more of those parties). Gossip and being double-tongued are, simply, sin-siblings.

On multiple occasions in 2022 an act of double tongue-ness (is that a word?) was in play, and the damage it caused to relationships was real, the hurt it caused me personally was (at times) devastating, and the impact it had on certain areas of the church family was tangible. It’s unbelievably frustrating, and upsetting, to find out that a relationship you perceive as friendly, polite, supportive, and mutually respectful is simply a veil as the other party is actively saying otherwise to other people.

Gateways to Seeing the Gospel At Work Among Us

Friends, it must not be like this among those who claim the same Lord and Saviour in the risen Jesus.

Writing on the conduct expected of believers and demonstrated by our Lord, Peter quotes Isaiah 53 and says:

“To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

‘He committed no sin,

and no deceit was found in his mouth.’”

(1 Peter 2.21-22, NIV, emphasis added)

There should be no gossip or deceitful double-tongue found coming forth from the mouths of those who profess to follow Jesus;

We should speak the truth in love to and about one another (Ephesians 4.15).

We should speak highly of one another to one another for the good of one another (Ephesians 4.29-31).

We should speak to one another for one another’s strengthening, encouragement, and consolation (1 Corinthians 14.3).

To find out that you have been spoken about to another in ways that completely contradict how you have been spoken to face to face is personally heart-breaking and potentially community-splitting.

I hope and pray that you will join me now in committing to doing our earthly best to avoid this in 2023 and beyond.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

References

1 Matt Mitchell, “What is Gossip? Exposing a Common and Dangerous Sin,” Desiring God. Last modified May 26, 2021, https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-is-gossip.

]]>
Did Jesus Claim to be God? https://calvarychapel.com/posts/did-jesus-claim-to-be-god/ Mon, 24 Oct 2022 21:07:28 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=48648 ]]>

In the part of the world that I currently live and work in, Bahrain in the Arabian Gulf, it’s possible to say something without actually saying it. When we arrived almost ten years ago, despite having family history here that dates back to the 1960s, it still took a little getting used to. The communication style is, generally, very hot culture: indirect and conservative. Subjects are often talked around before they are talked about. It is

“…high context, meaning that people from this region take into consideration all the different aspects of a certain event in order to get the true understanding of it. Hidden meanings can be found by analysing the situation as a whole.” (UKEssays, 2018m emphasis added).

For a cold-cultured person such as myself, this can be a real challenge. I grew up in a particularly straightforward part of the UK where words are used sparingly and truth is valued over story-telling prowess. To a degree, I’m still learning how to best communicate with those around me from a different cultural background.

A common objection to the orthodox Christian faith revealed in Scripture that today’s believer— be it in a hot culture or a cold culture— faces is this:

“Jesus never actually claimed to be God, you’re drawing that conclusion yourself.”

Particularly those in the modern West who value truth straight from the source may struggle with this. It’s true, to a degree: open your English Bible and try as you might, you will never see Jesus saying “I am God”.

But, for a moment, let’s remember the culture and the context into which Jesus was born. The context in which He lived, ministered, died, rose, and from which He ascended. It wasn’t the straightforward, cold-cultured, Western world where truth is valued above relationship, above history, and above connection to one’s forebears. History is veryimportant in this part of the world: how you relate to those who came before can seem disproportionately important for those not from here.

As such, the fact that Jesus didn’t just say plainly and simply, “I am God” is not a big problem. He said it without saying it. Let me tell you why it’s not a big problem and let me help you answer more conclusively the next time this objection crosses your path.

First, we need to remember that in this part of the world, the wider Middle East region, it’s possible to say something without (specifically) saying it. Words are but a part of the bigger picture: an often non-essential part. In typical style for the region in which He lived, Jesus said many things without saying them.

For one example, He said that whilst we are not under law to tithe, we should still do it (Luke 23.23). In the same style, He did claim to be God.

In John 10.30, Jesus said, “The Father and I are one.”

Those present knew very well what was being said. They knew Jesus was claiming to be God by asserting His equality with God. Look at their reaction:

“The Jewish leaders picked up rocks again to stone him to death. Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good deeds from the Father. For which one of them are you going to stone me?” The Jewish leaders replied, “We are not going to stone you for a good deed but for blasphemy, because you, a man, are claiming to be God.” (John 10.31-33, NET, emphasis added)

Those present, those who heard Him, knew exactly what was being communicated, and their reactions show us that without a shadow of a doubt.

Jesus made another statement claiming to be God in John 8.58:

“Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!” (NET)

The reaction is the same (John 8.59) because the claim is the same: Deity.

Did Jesus claim to be God? Yes, in many ways (Matthew 14.33, cf. Luke 4.8) and with many words. Perhaps not the words we might use ourselves, but He certainly did.

Sometimes it pays to look at the very words of Scripture, the individual combinations of letters that the Biblical authors were Divinely given right down to their grammar, their gender, their plurality, and their repetition. At other times, it pays to look at what is being communicated, even if it is not said, because, as we read earlier,

“…meanings can be found by analysing the situation as a whole.”


Ref.

UKEssays. (November 2018). The Communication Style In Middle East Cultural Studies Essay. Retrieved from https://www.ukessays.com/essays/cultural-studies/the-communication-style-in-middle-east-cultural-studies-essay.php?vref=1

]]>
Peccability VS Impeccability: Could Jesus Have Sinned? https://calvarychapel.com/posts/peccability-vs-impeccability-could-jesus-have-sinned/ Mon, 22 Aug 2022 13:00:37 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=47340 ]]>

In my last article, I answered the question, ‘Did Jesus cast aside His Deity in the Incarnation?’ If you didn’t read it, you can do so here.

Following on from that (without giving away the answer to that question!), there are implications for His character and His time walking among us on earth. Here then, we will answer the question of sin; could He?

Terms

Before we delve into the finer points of this long running debate and discussion, peccability vs impeccability, it is important to first define the terms we are working with.

First, peccability from the adjective peccable. This can be defined as meaning ‘liable to sin or error’. Interestingly, and to add a greater depth to this definition, the same resource further specifies that when being defined in the U.K., peccable can have the aforementioned meaning, plus ‘susceptible to temptation’.

These two definitions can actually mean something relatively different. Liable to sin, in my own mind at least, is something that is possible and likely to happen, whereas, being susceptible to something gives nothing away in terms of the likelihood of it occurring.

Second, impeccability. The same resource defines this as ‘faultless, flawless, irreproachable, not liable to sin…’. Again to add depth, the U.K. section of the dictionary site adds ‘incapable of sinning’. Again, the difference between not being liable to sin and being incapable of sinning is slight in wording, but great in meaning.

What does the Word say?

Now we turn to the inerrant, inspired, ineffable and infallible Word of God. Quite possibly the stand out verse for many when thinking of the moral character of our Lord and Savior will be 1 Peter 2.22, which reads,

‘He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth.’

Here Peter is very clear; Jesus Christ committed no sin at all, and was never deceitful in word or deed.

Isaiah 53.9 also confirms this, speaking of our Lord and Savior as follows,

‘And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.’.

Writing on this verse, David Guzik states,

‘The line because He had done no violence, nor was any deceit in His mouth is important. It shows that even in His death, even in His taking the transgressions of God’s people, the Messiah never sinned. He remained the Holy One, despite all the pain and suffering.’.

Numerous other verses abound when talking about the fact that Jesus Christ, sinless and spotless lamb of God, did not sin;

‘For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.’ (2 Corinthians 5.21).
‘For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.’ (Hebrews 4.15).
‘For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.’ (Hebrews 7.26).
‘You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin.’ (1 John 3.5).

So, could Jesus have sinned?

However, given that the question is not ‘Did Jesus Christ actually commit sin?’ – which we have conclusively answered in the negative above – we now turn to the hypothetical question, ‘Could Jesus have sinned?’.

The two sides of this debate form the backbone of this article; did Jesus have the ability not to sin, or was He actually incapable of sinning?

Ryrie summarises this point well when he writes,

‘…there are two views of impeccability. One says that He was able not to sin while the other states that He was not able to sin. In either case, He did not sin…’.

Again, encouraging to read of the Biblically orthodox view here that despite the debate on the possibility and potentiality of Christ to sin, Ryrie holds to the statement that He did not actually commit sin.

The somewhat hypothetical question posed by many, and the question debated for many hundreds of years, is as follows,

‘”Could Jesus have sinned? If He was not capable of sinning, how could He truly be able to ‘sympathize with our weaknesses’ (Hebrews 4.15)? If He could not sin, what was the point of the temptation?”’.

Peccability

To fairly present both sides of the argument, those who hold to peccability, those who say it was possible for Christ to have sinned but that He held the ability not to sin, would proffer something as follows,

‘If Jesus was tempted, how can those temptations be real if there was no possibility of Him sinning?’.

Charles Hodge states,

‘“This sinlessness of our Lord, however, does not amount to absolute impeccability. It was not a non potest peccare. If He was a true man, He must have been capable of sinning. That He did not sin under the greatest provocations; that when He was reviled He blessed; when He suffered He threatened not; that He was dumb as a sheep before its shearers, is held up to us as an example. Temptation implies the possibility of sin. If from the constitution of his person it was impossible for Christ to sin, then his temptation was unreal and without effect and He cannot sympathize with his people.”’

To once again cite the writings of Ryrie in rebuttal of this view, he states,

‘[Hebrews 4.15] does not say that Christ was tempted with a view to succumbing to sin. He was tested with a view to proving He was sinless. It does not say that He was tested in every particular test that man can be put to. It does say that His tests were in all the areas in which a man can be tested…’.

The verse at the center of this is Hebrews 4.15 which reads,

‘For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.’.

Ryrie once again provides clear and concise commentary on the subject. He writes,

‘The phrase [as we are]…means that He could be tested because He took the likeness of sinful flesh.
[Yet without sin] means that, having no sin nature, He could not have been tested from that avenue, as we can [be] and usually are.
His temptations were really not to see if He could sin, but to prove that He could not.
Nevertheless, they were real, for the reality of a test does not lie either in the moral nature of the one tested or in the ability to yield to it. And, of course, His ability to sympathize with us does not demand a one-to-one correspondence in the particulars of the tests.’.

Sympathizing means sinning?

Much debate on this point seems to stem from the word translated as ‘sympathize’ here from the Greek ‘sympatheō’. Interestingly, this word can have among its definitions, ‘…to feel for, have compassion on.’.

To follow logically then, it is not necessary for Jesus to have sinned for Him to be described as our ‘…high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses…’ as in His great Omniscience His sympathy comes from knowing how we feel rather than empathizing with how we feel through personal experience.

To continue through this verse to help ascertain a firm position on either side of the peccability debate, we can look at the word translated ‘tempted’ in the phrase, ‘…one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.’.

Here the original Greek word is ‘peirazō’, and can mean

‘To try, make trial of, test: for the purpose of ascertaining his quality, or what he thinks, or how he will behave himself…in a good sense.’.

This adds weight to the position of Ryrie and other orthodox scholars who hold to impeccability.


The testing and temptation of Jesus was, then, a demonstration of His inability to sin, rather than a demonstration of His ability not to sin.

A fine linguistic and semantic distinction on the one hand, and a profound and worldview-changing clarification on the other.

Orthodoxy

If we hold to the Biblically orthodox view that the Holy Spirit drove Jesus into the wilderness to begin His forty days of temptations (Luke 4.1-2, Matthew 4.1), then we can assuredly and confidently say that the major purpose of Christ’s temptations was not to seriously and tangibly ascertain whether or not the theanthropic person of Jesus would sin, rather, it was to demonstrate that His character is flawless, He truly is sinless and spotless and always shall remain that way, and that even the greatest temptations known to mankind are beyond even the slightest consideration of causing Jesus to sin.

We can say this, simply, because of the words of James 1.13, which states,

‘Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.’.

As simply as possible then, if it was God the Holy Spirit who led Jesus into the wilderness, it would be illogical and un-Scriptural for that time of temptation to be anything more than a demonstration of Christ’s impeccable character, person, and behaviour.

God’s Word clearly states that God tempts no-one, God the Spirit drove Jesus into the wilderness, therefore the purpose cannot have been temptation, rather demonstration.

Due to Jesus’ theanthropic nature, both fully God and fully human, the Bible believing, orthodox thinking Christian must surely hold to the position that Jesus Christ, was, and still is, impeccable. It is surely beyond the realms of possibility that Jesus as God incarnate, the physical representation of God in the flesh, would even be capable of sinning.

As we so clearly read in Paul’s letter to the Colossians, the full Deity of God Himself dwelled in Jesus (Colossians 1.9, 2.9). It follows logically then that due to Jesus being God, and the full Deity of God dwelling in Jesus, to say that Jesus could have sinned is equal to saying that God could sin. The Bible teaches very clearly that God is perfect, holy and incapable of sinning (Psalm 92.15, Mark 10.18, Matthew 5.48, Deuteronomy 32.4, Psalm 18.30, James 1.13).

The following statement summarises well, I believe, the incapability of God to sin, and, by extension as discussed above, the incapability of Jesus to sin,

‘Sin is by definition a trespass of the Law. God created the Law, and the Law is by nature what God would or would not do; therefore, sin is anything that God would not do by His very nature.’.

Very clear, then, that to sin is not something that there is even a remote statistical possibility of God – the Father, the Son or the Spirit – doing. To paraphrase, sin is something that God cannot do, and therefore for Jesus to even have the ability to sin would be a contradiction of who He is.

Truth never contradicts truth.

Christian apologist and astrophysicist Hugh Ross wrote these words regarding the timeless truths of God,

‘What’s true will never contradict what’s true.’.

We know very well that Jesus is true (John 14.6), and God’s inspired, infallible and inerrant Word declares that He is also true (John 3.33, 8.26). To use the aforementioned words of Ross, then, it is impossible for what is true to contradict something else that is true, therefore, we may draw a sound logical corollary and say that Jesus will never contradict God the Father.

H.C. Thiessen in his excellent book ‘Lectures in Systematic Theology’ writes on the orthodox view of the person of Christ. He writes,

‘The Council of Chalcedon, in 451, established what has been the position of the Christian church.
There is one Jesus Christ…He is truly God and truly man…
He is consubstantial with the Father in his deity and consubstantial with man in his humanity, except for sin…
Jesus is not split or divided into two persons; he is one person, the Son of God.’.

To build on the work here of Thiessen, it is simply impossible to bifurcate the person of Christ and to take the position that Christ could have potentially, possibly, perhaps sinned in His humanity but absolutely not in His Deity. As Thiessen writes,

‘There is one Jesus Christ…He is truly God and truly man…’.

Therefore, to try and bifurcate the person of Christ into two, to say that one of His natures could have sinned but the other could not is simply not possible, and the distillate of this bifurcation is, simply, heretical.

The will to sin?

Many times in the Word we read of Jesus’ submission to the will of God (Matthew 26.39, 42, John 6.38, 1 Corinthians 15.28, Hebrews 5.8). This in itself is a strong proof of His impeccability. It is beyond logical, Scriptural thinking to imagine that God would send Christ to take on flesh, live among us, die for the sins of the world, but also sin whilst here. John F. Walvoord writes on this,

‘The ultimate solution of the problem of the impeccability of Christ rests in the relationship of the divine and human natures. It is generally agreed that each of the natures, the divine and the human, had its own will in the sense of desire. The ultimate decision of the person, however, in the sense of sovereign will was always in harmony with the decision of the divine nature. The relation of this to the problem of impeccability is obvious. The human nature, because it is temptable, might desire to do that which is contrary to the will of God. In the person of Christ, however, the human will was always subservient to the divine will and could never act independently. Inasmuch as all agree that the divine will of God could not sin, this quality then becomes the quality of the person and Christ becomes impeccable.’

To sin and to give in to temptation stems from our fallen, sinful, human nature. However, as previously established, Jesus Christ did not have a sinful nature, therefore, although His temptations were as real as they come, stemming from the same elements of our own human nature, the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life (1 John 2.16), there was no possibility or potentiality of Him sinning.

William Shedd writes on this,

‘It is objected to the doctrine of Christ’s impeccability that it is inconsistent with his temptability. A person who cannot sin, it is said, cannot be tempted to sin. This is not correct; any more than it would be correct to say that because an army cannot be conquered, it cannot be attacked. Temptability depends upon the constitutional susceptibility, while impeccability depends upon the will. So far as his natural susceptibility, both physical and mental, was concerned, Jesus Christ was open to all forms of human temptation excepting those that spring out of lust, or corruption of nature. But his peccability, or the possibility of being overcome by those temptations, would depend upon the amount of voluntary resistance which he was able to bring to bear against them. Those temptations were very strong, but if the self-determination of his holy will was stronger than they, then they could not induce him to sin, and he would be impeccable. And yet plainly he would be temptable.’.

To quash another potential heresy of this debate, some may say that Jesus in His third combined nature did not or could not have sinned, but, that of course, Christ’s humanity could have sinned. Charles C. Ryrie answers this in his book ‘A Survey of Bible Doctrine’. He writes,

‘Orthodoxy has always held that Jesus Christ was fully God and perfect man, and that these two natures were united in one person without forming a third nature (as Eutychius said) or two separate persons (as Nestorius taught).’.

Clear then that this ill-conceived notion is a non-starter, the incarnation of Jesus did not produce a third nature of perfect divinity and humanity. Christ remained sinless and did not have the potentiality to sin in His One, united, unified and undivided person.

Presented with = indulged in?

To be presented with something that if indulged in would be sinful is not, of itself, sinful. Simply because a person puts something in our path that would cause us to sin does not make us a sinner. To have a sinful proposition suggested to us, as Jesus had presented to Him, does not mean we will either partake in that particular sin, or even have the desire to partake in that particular sin.

To add depth, Walvoord writes,

‘…it is true that Christ did not experience the temptations arising in a sin nature, on the other hand, He was tried as no other was ever tried.’.

It is the Biblically orthodox view to hold to impeccability. If we even consider the possibility that Jesus could sin, then can we consider Him the perfect sacrifice who died for the sins of the entire world? (1 John 2.2). Walvoord continues,

‘Orthodox theologians generally agree that Jesus Christ never committed any sin. This seems to be a natural corollary to His deity and an absolute prerequisite to His work of substitution on the cross.’.

Immutability and Impeccability

Finally, in favour of impeccability is Hebrews 13.8, which states,

‘Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.’.

This really does guide our thinking the way of impeccability. For Christ to have sinned in during His incarnational ministry and time living among us would mean that as He forever wed Himself to humanity, His sin nature would therefore stay with Him forever.

It should be pointed out that the unchanging nature of Jesus Christ, His immutability, is of course talking about His Divinity.


In the incarnation, there was no loss of this Divinity, only the addition of humanity.

Therefore, for Jesus to remain the same person today and forever, as the writer to the Hebrews asserts, this means that His sin would go with Him and be seated at the right hand of the Father (Acts 7.55–56, Romans 8.34, Ephesians 1.20, Colossians 3.1, Hebrews 1.3, 8.1, 10.12, 12.2, 1 Peter 3.22, Revelation 3.21, Matthew 22.44, Acts 2.33). Simply, this cannot be so.

To be seated at the right hand of God is the highest honor, and to have Christ there having sinned, or even having the potentiality to sin, would simply not be just and holy and right, all the things that God is.

Turning to Walvoord again for a more concise and succinct explanation of why Hebrews 13.8 is in favor of impeccablity, we read,

‘As Christ was holy in eternity past, it is essential that this attribute as well as all others be preserved unchanged eternally. Christ must be impeccable, therefore, because He is immutable. If it is unthinkable that God could sin in eternity past, it must also be true that it is impossible for God to sin in the person of Christ incarnate. The nature of His person forbids susceptibility to sin.’.

Simply, then, it is beyond reasonable and sensible question that Christ even had the potential to sin.

To say He had the potential to sin, the ability to sin, whilst walking among us is on par with saying that He could sin now, as Hebrews 13.8 shows. Christ’s immutability, His lack of ability to change who He was and who He is, prevents Him from having the ability to sin. The addition of humanity does nothing to change this, and it is worthless speculation to postulate that had Christ’s Divine nature left His human nature to its own devices then He could have sinned.

To again use the work of Walvoord – perhaps the preeminent evangelical Christological scholar – as a springboard, to think that the whole of God’s sovereign plan for the universe would hang on the potential of Jesus Christ not to sin and therefore get the job done, so to speak, is simply unthinkable.

Charles Spurgeon, in a sermon given on October 31st, 1886 titled ‘Our Sympathizing High Priest’ writes this, concerning the ability of the sinless Christ to atone for the world,

‘As a Saviour he is perfect. Being made perfect through suffering, he is able to fully discharge his office. Nothing is wanting in the character and person of Christ in order to his being able to save to the uttermost. He is a Saviour, and a great one. [We] are wholly lost, but Jesus is perfectly able to save. [We] are sore sick, but Jesus is perfectly able to heal. [We] have gone, perhaps, to the extreme of sin; he has gone to the extreme of atonement. In every office essential to our salvation Jesus is perfect. Nothing is lacking in him in any one point.’.

Clear, then, that in the mind of Spurgeon, the possibility of sin entering into the world and life of our perfect savior is simply unthinkable.

So, what does this mean for me?

1 Peter 1.14-21 sets out for us now the practical implications of Christ’s eternal impeccability,

‘As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance, but as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile, knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.’.

Clear, then, that Christ was appointed before the foundation of the world to be the sinless, spotless and supreme sacrificial Lamb of God needed to take away the sins of the world. Therefore, we can say with confidence, that the notion that Christ could have sinned is simply unbiblical, unorthodox and untrue, and that Jesus Christ is, was, and always will be, impeccable.

For us, we have a Saviour who is sinless, spotless, and supreme.

He knows the troubles you are facing, and He has defeated them.

There was never any doubt He would.

He is ready, waiting, and willing to help you.

Reach out to your impeccable Saviour.


References

Could Jesus have sinned (peccability or impeccability)?. GotQuestions.org. Retrieved 24 April 2018, from https://www.gotquestions.org/could-Jesus-have-sinned.html

Falzarano, J. (2018). Position #2, No, He could not have sinned. Lecture, Northeast Biblical Institute, NJ.

Guzik, D. (2001). Study Guide for Isaiah 53 by David Guzik. Blue Letter Bible. Retrieved 24 April 2018, from

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/guzik_david/StudyGuide2017-Isa/Isa-53.cfm? a=732009

Lexicon :: Strong’s G3985 – peirazō. (2018). Blue Letter Bible. Retrieved 30 April 2018, from
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3985&t=ESV

Lexicon :: Strong’s G4834 – sympatheō. (2018). Blue Letter Bible. Retrieved 30 April 2018, from

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4834&t=ESV

Ross, H. Hugh Ross Quotes. BrainyQuote. Retrieved 30 April 2018, from https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/hugh_ross_774911

PECCABILITY VS IMPECCABILITY 16 Ryrie, C. (1972). A Survey of Bible Doctrine. Chicago: The Moody Bible Institute.

Spurgeon, C. (1985). Spurgeon’s expository encyclopedia, volume III. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House.

The definition of impeccability. (2018). Dictionary.com. Retrieved 24 April 2018, from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/impeccability?s=t

The definition of peccability. (2018). Dictionary.com. Retrieved 24 April 2018, from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/peccability?s=t

Theopedia.com. Retrieved 24 April 2018, from https://www.theopedia.com/impeccability-of-jesus

Thiessen, H. (2006). Lectures in systematic theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Walvoord, J. The Person and Work of Christ—Part VII:The Impeccability of Christ | Walvoord.com. Walvoord.com. Retrieved 1 May 2018, from http://walvoord.com/article/87#G61C11

]]>
Did Jesus Cast Aside His Deity In The Incarnation? https://calvarychapel.com/posts/47007/ Mon, 25 Jul 2022 20:03:30 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/?p=47007 ]]>

The passage of Philippians 2:1-11 seems to have been a source of contention for those on both sides of the orthodox fence, so to speak. On the one hand, we have those who say Jesus cast aside His Deity to become fully human. On the other, those who say that Jesus added humanity to His Deity. The heretical teachings to come from this are as vast as they are varied, so, what is the truth?

This article is in response to the essay titled, “Christ, Adam and Preexistence Revisited,” by Lincoln D. Hurst, found in Where Christology Began: Essays on Philippians 2 (full reference below).

Hurst begins by stating the main line of enquiry to be followed;

‘…does the passage refer to the action of a preexistent being who “empties himself” and “becomes” man, or does it refer from start to finish to the action of a human being, Jesus of Nazareth?’

Hurst then goes on to write that for the most part, scholarly opinion agrees that the “…referent of the language is the preexistent Christ…”. I must admit, although Bible scholar I am not, that this would be my own interpretation of this passage too; that the preexistent Christ is being discussed, not simply His human nature and body post-incarnation. When you really stop and think about the wider narrative of God’s Word, separating the man Jesus from the Divine Jesus seems to jar with the consistent message of the theanthropic Godman (John 1:14, 8.58; Colossians 2:9, 2 John 1:7, 10:30; Hebrews 2:14).

It is not surprising, then, given the dual-natured theanthropic person of Christ, that some may proffer that here in Philippians 2:1-11 the human natured, physical bodied Jesus of Nazareth is being discussed. It almost goes without saying that wherever there are two or more possibilities of a certain line of thinking, there will be two or more groups form who will then put forward their case for their own interpretation.

Hurst does a fine job of detailing the position of J.D.G. Dunn who asserts that the hymn of Philippians 2 is, in fact, dealing with the human nature of Christ, rather than Christ in His preexistent Deity, the “anthropological approach,” as Hurst titles it. The overall tone and style of Hurst’s writing gives the reader the impression that he has the utmost respect for the position and person of Dunn – Hurst calls Dunn’s case “…impressive…” – but nonetheless disagrees with the thought that the subject of the Philippians 2 hymn is the human nature of Jesus rather than the preexistent person of the eternal Messiah, Jesus Christ.

One passage, in particular, brought me to this conclusion. Hurst writes,

“One may agree strongly with…Dunn’s argument, that the comparison/contrast with Adam gives the best reading of the hymn, without accepting his unnecessary corollary that the Adam-Christ parallel therefore demands that we abandon the idea of Christ’s personal preexistence and equality with God in the hymn.” (emphasis added).

To further the case of either side, more research would need to be done. As previously stated, I would err on the side of the preexistent Divine person of Jesus Christ being the subject of the hymn, and consequently of the Adam-Christ comparison that so often is discussed here. This being the case, my own reading and study took me to places where this position can be strengthened.

Charles C. Ryrie, in his book, A Survey of Bible Doctrine, writes with great clarity on the kenosis of the Divine Christ. He states,

“The meaning of Philippians 2:1-11 has been greatly debated in relation to the person of the incarnate Christ.” (emphasis added).

Immediately, then, Ryrie seems to be of the position that the preexistent person of Jesus is the subject of the hymn, rather than the human natured Jesus of Nazareth. The second half of the quoted statement, in particular, gives this impression. To elucidate in the simplest possible way, the human natured human being of Jesus of Nazareth simply cannot be described as the person of the incarnate Christ.

The dispute, in the mind of Ryrie at least, seems to be around the kenosis, the act of emptying, rather than the vessel that is to be emptied, human or Divine. Interestingly, as he continues this line of thinking, Ryrie writes that the kenosis of Christ does not mean emptying or losing at all, rather, it means that Christ took on humanity. He states,

“… the kenosis cannot be understood to mean a subtraction of deity but the addition of humanity with its consequent limitations.”

A seminary professor of mine phrased it like this – “In the incarnation, there was no loss of Deity, only the addition of humanity.”


To elaborate a little further on the doctrine of kenosis, as it ties in so well with the aforementioned point, Ryrie writes,

“The concept involves the veiling of Christ’s preincarnate glory (Jn 17:5), the condescension of taking on Himself the likeness of sinful flesh (Ro 8:3), and the voluntary nonuse of some of His attributes of deity during the time of His earthly life” (Mt. 24:36, 1972, P59).

Clear to see, then, the weight of evidence and logic behind the position of Hurst and the previously mentioned scholars indicate that the referent of the passage of Philippians 2:1-11 is the preexistent, Divine Christ.

To further strengthen this position, we can turn to Henry Clarence Thiessen, who in his excellent book, Lectures in Systematic Theology, draws on something often sadly and tragically missing from Bible interpretation: proper and careful reading of the text. To elaborate, one must start at the beginning of what is now divided as Philippians chapter two.

“So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:1-5, ESV).

It is clear to see, for the careful and proper reader of the text, that we are reading here of non-physical things; encouragement, affection, sympathy (v.1), joy, the same mind, love, one mind (v.2), selfish ambition, conceit, humility (v.3), interests, the interests of others (v.4), and again, this mind (v.5). Paul then goes on to write ‘Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,’ (2:5). Clear, then, that Paul is writing about attitudes and in particular, attitudes of mind.

If, then, Paul is urging us to take on such attitudes, to adopt the aforementioned frame of mind, it goes by logical corollary that as he transitions into saying that we can do this and have this attitude through being in a right relationship with the risen Jesus (2:5), that he would go on to reference Jesus as our example of this attitude.

To exhort us to take on a specific frame of mind, but then reference some physical act of Christ which we are simply unable to emulate, would seem illogical. The Bible as a flawless, inerrant and logical living piece of literature would not, I believe, exhort the attitude then display the physical in one sentence.

To reference the correct definition of the kenosis above, and to consolidate this position, Thiessen writes that many have misunderstood or misinterpreted and that,

“They say that Christ emptied himself of his relative attributes…while retaining his immanent attributes…This, however, is not the case.”


When we begin to understand the kenosis correctly, we begin to see that the passage of Philippians 2:1-11 is urging us to adopt the attitude and frame of mind that Christ did, even though He in His Divine nature could not empty, change, or add to His perfect self.


As Christ voluntarily took on humanity, the “form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.” (Philippians 2:7), as Christ so readily and willingly demonstrated for us the attitude of humility which we should take, the attitude of humility which is to be the mark of our walk with the Lord, we see only more clearly that the referent of Philippians 2:1-11, that the subject of the contrast with Adam, is in fact the preexistent, preeminent and prestigious Divine Christ.

This flows so well when one looks to the text,

“Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped” (Philippians 2:5-6).

When this passage is read with the focus on the attitude we are exhorted to have, as Thiessen alludes to, it is almost impossible not to see it this way.

On this point, David Guzik writes,

“It is all too easy for us to read the following description of Jesus and admire it from a distance. God wants us to be awed by it, but also to see it as something that we must enter into and imitate. [Have this mind] means that it is something that we have choice about.”

To turn to the application of this point, as Hurst writes, the whole point and meaning behind this section is to inspire action for followers of Christ, and I believe it circles back to the attitude of humility discussed above.

Hurst states,

“…Christians have rights, but they must be willing to surrender those rights if they clash with a greater principle, love.”

Here the application lends itself to further strengthening the argument that the subject of the passage is actually the Divine Christ. The application calls for the humility of the believer with the model of the Divine Christ as the star to follow.

Hurst continues,

“…it would make more sense to say that the Christ of the hymn already possessed the right to be treated as equal with God, but freely surrendered that right for the sake of a greater principle – God’s purpose of love in the incarnation…there is no reason to abandon this principle in our understanding of the hymn of Philippians 2.”

For us to adopt this humble attitude that is so often called for in Scripture (1 Peter 5:5-6; James 1:21; Colossians 3:12; Ephesians 4:2, and many more), we look for the supreme example, and, as per usual, we find it in Jesus Christ.

He, “…though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Philippians 2:6-8).

I would wholeheartedly agree with Hurst who writes that the idea of contrasting the upward grasp of Adam in the garden with the humble taking-on of humanity by Christ helps to give context and understanding to the passage of Philippians 2:1-11. However, even though this is the case, we need not necessarily, “…abandon the idea of Christ’s personal preexistence and equality with God…” because of the contrast. All things above considered, I would stand by the assertion of Hurst, as previously stated, that the subject is the preexistent person of the Divine Christ.

So, preexistent Christ having added humanity to His Deity, or Divine Christ casting aside His Deity to walk as a man as an example to you and me of a human in right relationship with God; one is orthodoxy, one is a rehashing of ancient heresies such as Nestorianism.

God’s Word is clear on who Jesus is, are we?


References

Guzik, D. (2013). Enduring Word Bible Commentary Philippians Chapter 2. Enduring Word. Retrieved 6 April 2018.

Martin, R., & Dodd, B. (1998). Where Christology began. Louisville (Ky.): Westminster John Knox Press.

Ryrie, C. (1972). A Survey of Bible Doctrine. Chicago: The Moody Bible Institute.

Thiessen, H. (2006). Lectures in systematic theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

]]>
Personal Eschatology: What Happens When I Die? https://calvarychapel.com/posts/personal-eschatology-what-happens-when-i-die/ Thu, 14 Oct 2021 16:00:00 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/2021/10/14/personal-eschatology-what-happens-when-i-die/ Ask a Bible-believing Christian, “What happens we die?”, and the answer will probably be something like: “Well, we go to heaven.” The rationale for this...]]>

Ask a Bible-believing Christian, “What happens we die?”, and the answer will probably be something like:

“Well, we go to heaven.”

The rationale for this would likely be something along the lines of:

“Because the Bible says so.”

Let’s see if we can find a fuller answer in the pages of Scripture about personal eschatology, or simply, “What happens when we die?”

Eschatology

Eschatology can be defined as the study of the end times, or final things. The term is rooted in the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last times.” It can be further broken down into two parts: general eschatology and personal eschatology. Thiessen defines these two branches of eschatology as so:

General eschatology covers the sweep of future events from the return of Jesus Christ on to the creation of the new heavens and new earth.

Personal eschatology relates to the individual from the time of physical death until he receives his resurrection body.”

This paper aims to detail the latter of the distinctions, personal eschatology. This being so, when we talk of death, it will be focused on physical death, rather than spiritual death, or eternal death, which would be better discussed under the banner of general eschatology.

Being finite creations, we will all experience a physical death. Our bodies were not made to live eternally in their current state, simply evidenced by the fact there are no double-centurians in our midst. The oldest recorded and fully authenticated human life in modern times was one 122 years, 164 days. Therefore, personal eschatology is something that will certainly affect every one of us, and is consequently, something of the utmost importance to us. The Bible describes physical death as a judgement, a curse, and the separation of body and soul (Ecclesiastes.12.7; Acts 7.59; Romans 1.32; 5.16). Possibly, the most interesting of these referenced verses is Ecclesiastes 12.7, which says,

“…the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it (ESV).”

Here we read plainly and simply that our bodies have a finite end coming in which they return to the dust of the earth from which the Lord God formed them (Genesis 2.7), and our spirit returns to God.

Physical Death

Our physical death can be brought about by many sources and can happen for a variety of reasons. Clinically and medically, we could proffer the definition of death as the absence of a heartbeat, the absence of brain activity, or the absence of vital signs. Interestingly, all the aforementioned definitions include something missing, rather than the presence of something measurable.

However, to define death from more of a faith-based perspective, rather than a clinical one, we could say that physical death is a separation of body and soul.

Death, for the regenerate Christian who has put their faith in Christ, is simply a part of the process, so to speak. It is an entrance into the presence of our Lord and Saviour. Through His wonderful and all-conquering sacrifice on the cross, we are able to look at death as one more stop our train must take on the journey to our final destination as believers, being with Him forever.

Contrastingly, for the unbeliever, death brings a far less glory-filled experience. Rather than coming into the presence of Jesus Christ, the unbeliever faces condemnation, eternal judgement, and separation from the Lord (John 3.36).

Death…then what?

Following the physical death we all must experience, is the intermediate state. This can be defined as the:

“…condition of humans between their death and the resurrection.”

A clear and simple definition, then: the time between our aforementioned physical death, and the glorious resurrection of believers.

On this intermediate state between physical death and the resurrection of believers John writes about in Revelation 20.4-5, Theologian Millard J. Erickson writes this:

“The doctrine of the intermediate state is an issue that is both very significant and problematic…[because there is a] relative scarcity of biblical references to the intermediate state.”

The soul, being immortal and therefore not subject to the inevitable, physical decline and death our body is, continues to live on. First and foremost, we can say that the soul of the regenerate, Christ-believing, faith-filled person goes to be with our Lord and Saviour, Jesus. This should fill the believer with hope, joy, and peace in equal measure.

In Philippians 1.23 Paul writes,

“I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better” (ESV).

From his writing, we can see that Paul had no doubt that upon closing his eyes in death, he would open them in the presence of His Lord and Saviour. On this, David Guzik writes:

“Paul probably had many motivations to depart…he would finally be done with sin and temptation…he would see those brothers and sisters who had gone to heaven before him. Most of all, going to heaven meant being with Christ in a closer and better way than ever before.”

From this passage of Scripture, we see that death is not made out to be tremendously better than life, meaning we should not go and seek it out (Philippians 1.21-22), but that when death does happen for us all, we are going to experience something that leads us to Christ (v.23).

Even though the Lord has blessed us with life abundant here on earth (John 10.10), we read that this intermediate state, being in the presence of Christ, “…is a condition to be preferred above the present state.”

This intermediate state is not to be confused with the rapture and glorification that will occur when only He knows, as this will be preferable to the intermediate state, which in turn is, as Paul writes, preferable to the current human condition (2 Corinthians 5.2-3). From this, we can see a clear chronology of events:

. Physical death

. Followed by the intermediate state

. Followed by resurrection and judgement

Writer Sam Storms puts it this way:

“In summary: the intermediate state for the Christian is immediate transition upon death into the presence of Christ during which time we experience holiness (no longer being at war with the flesh, although final glorification awaits the resurrection), happiness, a heightened sense of consciousness, and knowledge of Christ in its fullest. For the non-Christians a heightened sense of consciousness, but one of torment, agony, irreversible separation from Christ (Luke 16).”

Theology

To further support the soul’s conscious survival after the physical death we all will experience, we can gather theological evidence. Both the nature of human beings and the nature of God can be used to substantiate this claim, that the soul lives on after the mortal body has died.

We can confidently state that God is able to maintain the soul after the body cannot; He is creator, sustainer, and omnipotent, therefore surely able. However, as Geisler writes:

“…simply that God can cause the soul to survive does not mean He will – there must be sufficient cause for His doing so. That is rooted in His good will…God wills to keep the soul alive…because of His mercies…”

Further, we can assert that the soul lives on from the words of Genesis 1.27:

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (ESV).

This reason is, as Geisler writes, anthropological, and stems from the verse above; we are made in His image. This being so, we are made by God, in God’s image, and therefore, for God to destroy the truly individual part of us that resembles Him the most would be tantamount to God destroying Himself. Logically, this idea simply does not compute.

Clear, then, that the intermediate state is a real, positive, and logically proven stage on the journey of the believer from earthly mother to heavenly Father.

Resurrection

Following on from this intermediate state is the resurrection of the body. The intermediate state will be a joyful experience for the believer, but it is still incomplete. The Bible very clearly teaches that those who believe in the name of Jesus will be resurrected and glorified (John 5.28-29; Romans 8.11; 1 Corinthians 15.12-58; 2 Corinthians 5.1-10).

As a quick note of comparison, Jesus Christ Himself took on a human body and was resurrected in it, contrary to heretical teachings that confuse His two natures in one body, such as docetism, Arianism, and nestorianism, to name but three. The fact that Christ was resurrected in His human body gives credence to the notion that we are to be resurrected in our own earthly bodies, initially.

Geisler writes on the resurrections,

“There is overwhelming biblical support for the bodily resurrection of all human beings…one [for] the saved…and [one for] the unsaved…”

The resurrection, physically, of believers seems to occur immediately before Jesus returns to reign on earth for one thousand years, His millennial reign. 1 Corinthians 15.21-26 is illuminating on this point:

“For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death” (ESV, emphasis added).

From this, we can infer that those who died in Christ, as fully regenerate believers during their earthly lives, will reign with Him during the millennium, as the chronology present in the passage clearly shows that believers are raised prior to the millennium.

Further strengthening this point is Revelation chapter 20, which states:

“Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years” (ESV, emphasis added).

Again, quite clear that those who are raised physically in the first resurrection, having been in the intermediate state with Christ following their physical death, will reign with Him during His millennium.

As with the continuing existence of our souls post-physical death, we can assert theologically that we will be raised bodily. God’s omnipotence allows Him to create life, maintain life, but also resurrect life. This was evidenced through our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, the first fruits of resurrection (1 Corinthians 15.23).

However, just as with the prolonging of the soul, just because God can raise the dead does not mean He will. Without a benevolent, all loving, all good Father in heaven, there is no hope for us. On this, and with thanksgiving in heart, Geisler writes:

“Were it not for His mercy, His justice would allow the punishment of death to go unreversed. Thanks be to God’s omnibenevolence, for on its foundation He is moved to redeem us both in soul and body.”

Clear, then, that God is able to raise us from the dead to reign with Christ in His millennium, but also willing.

To again draw from the words of Genesis 1.27, God must certainly resurrect us bodily from our physical death as we are made in His image. To leave us dead and decaying would be to give up on His image, to allow His image to be less than perfect. This idea is simply contrary to the character of God the Bible so clearly details.

Summary

As human beings, we must all endure a physical death. From this point, regenerate believers will go on to be with Christ in the intermediate state, which, as discussed, is preferable to the current human condition. This is, however, not comparable to the next stage of the process, the coming physical and bodily resurrection of believers and the millennial reign of Christ on earth.

The final stage for the regenerate believer and unbeliever alike is the final judgement. As Erickson writes:

“For those who are in Christ, it is something to look forward to, for it will vindicate their lives.”

As with the previous eschatological elements discussed above, the final judgement takes place in the future, and is as certain to come as physical death, the intermediate state and the resurrections. In Matthew 11.24, Jesus Himself referenced the final judgement:

“But I tell you that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you’” (ESV).

The Apostle Paul also referenced the final judgement in Acts 17.31.

As with many other things that He could accomplish perfectly well without our help, Scripture points us toward thinking that Jesus will share the work of the final judgement with believers. Revelation 20.5 alludes to this, as does 1 Corinthians 6.2-3.

This, however, does not remove us as believers from the judgement itself. As Paul writes in Romans 14.10, we will all stand before God to be judged.

The comfort and confidence-inducing fact here for the fully regenerate believer in Christ is that, even though our sins will be brought before God and as we stand for judgement, those sins will be presented as forgiven due to the atoning sacrifice of Jesus on our behalf.

As one would expect from something titled “the final judgment,” its finality is assured, and there is no returning from this point. Both sets of people, those judged righteous due to faith in Christ, and those judged unrighteous, will be sent to their respective places (Matthew 25.46).

In conclusion, everything detailed above is certain to come, either due to the explicit teaching of the infallible and inerrant Word of God, or due to the logical and rational corollaries we can draw from the teachings of Scripture. For those who have placed faith and trust in Jesus Christ, the physical death, the intermediate state, the resurrection, and the final judgement should induce no apprehension.

On the contrary, it should steel the resolve for living in the here and now, it should cause the believer to overflow with thankfulness and gratefulness due to the certainty they hold about the future. It should cause the believer to be able to minister to a grieving brother or sister in Christ, and it should light a fire inside for them to reach those around them with the good news of Jesus Christ.

For a final word on the personal eschatology detailed in this paper, Erickson writes:

“In view of the certainty of the [the eschaton], it is imperative that we act in accordance with the will of God.”

For a final word on the response of the fully regenerate believer to the personal eschatology presented in this paper, it is hard to look past the words of Revelation 22.20b:

“Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!”

]]>
Family Before Ministry: Four Points for Maintaining Healthy Balance https://calvarychapel.com/posts/family-before-ministry-four-points-for-maintaining-healthy-balance/ Wed, 08 Sep 2021 15:00:00 +0000 https://calvarychapel.com/2021/09/08/family-before-ministry-four-points-for-maintaining-healthy-balance/ We’ve had some big changes in my home recently. Our young boys have started at a new school, and my wife has gone back to...]]>

We’ve had some big changes in my home recently. Our young boys have started at a new school, and my wife has gone back to work after a break. These are all positive changes for our family, things we’d prayed about for a long time. For me, they have meant a couple of enforced changes to my tried and tested routine. They’re good changes, positive changes, but my fallible and fallen flesh struggled to change my rhythms and routines for others, even my family. I was so wrapped up in what I was doing as the pastor, trying to prove to people how committed I was as their minister, that I (initially) missed a significant opportunity to prove to my family that they are my primary ministry.

So, how do we make sure that they are?

When I was taking my first steps into vocational ministry, an older and wiser mentor said that, come what may, my priorities should never change: faith, then family, then my ministry. I must admit, being all fired up about giving more of my life to the call I felt, this advice didn’t sit well at first and is something I’ve wrestled with for a few years now. I was excited to spend more of my day equipping the saints for their own ministry (Ephesians 4:10-13). However, the longer I thought about it, and the more time has passed, I’ve come to see that he was absolutely right. I’ve seen it this last couple of weeks more than ever because, honestly, I’ve had it wrong, and I’ve fallen short.

One of the peculiarities of living in this part of the world is that many take an extended summer break. It’s hot; it’s quiet, and many leave for a couple of months. My wife and boys did so this year, leaving me here to pastor and potter around by myself. Without really trying, I got into such a rhythm and routine. That meant I knew where I’d be on any given day at any given time, barring an emergency. When my family came back, I found myself, to my shame, feeling resentful of the extra responsibilities and commitments I now had, and the additional demands on my time that appeared as soon as the plane landed. This only got worse as school started for them all. After the initial sinful and selfish shock wore off, I remembered what my old mentor had said. I also thought that it couldn’t be just me that feels like this from time to time. So, I resolved to share how I have been working through these feelings and thoughts, using the framework from my mentor: faith, then family, then ministry.

Faith First

Those in vocational ministry must have a sincere, personal, and genuine faith. Such a thing might sound like a given, but sadly, scripture shows us that this is not always the case (Micah 3:11, Judges 17-18, Exodus 32:2-6, Zephaniah 3:4). As the old saying goes, “You can’t pour from an empty cup,” and we must have a genuine faith in, and relationship with the Lord, about which to tell others. Simply, faith first, because this is what will last (1 Corinthians 3:12-15).

Then, Family

It’s unscriptural to think that you can be an effective minister of the Gospel to others if you are not that for those closest to you. In a paragraph detailing the character required of those called to the spiritual leadership of the church, Paul writes this:

“…If someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for the church of God?” (1 Timothy 3:5, NET).

Thus, scripture explicitly tells us that family comes before church ministry.

How, then, do we do it? How do we make sure our families know that they are more important than our ministry?

Between 2015-2018, my life changed in almost every way possible: My wife and I had two children, I lost my job, I miraculously and spectacularly got another job. We moved house twice, I did a master’s degree, and I took over as the pastor of the international church we’d been part of for five years here in Bahrain. We had a busy few years, and I look genuinely terrible in photos from that period. This truth of faith, family, and then ministry was still valid during those hectic years. Let me share with you the four P’s that helped us through it.

1. Plan

You need to be intentional with your time. There’s an adage called “Parkinson’s Law” that says: “Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.”

You need to have a plan, and you’ll need to stick to it. If I had an hour to write a paper for seminary, I wrote it in an hour, and then I closed the computer. If I had 90 minutes while my little boys had a nap, I’d fill it with study. However, when they woke up, the family came first again. Make time for family time. I have rarely (if ever) had someone be mad at me for saying, “Sorry, can’t meet you on that day, I’m taking my son/wife to…”. If anything, people will respect you and your ministry more when they see you hold it in proper perspective. Plan to spend your time properly: faith, family, ministry, and then stick to it.

2. Present

When you’ve planned family time, be present. Not just physically present, but mentally, emotionally, energetically, and spiritually present. Don’t plan time for study and then think about study over coffee with your spouse. Don’t plan to take your kids to the beach and then let your mind drift to what you’re preaching about next week. Be present. Be there, all of you. A proper plan will help you be present because you know that you have time later/tomorrow to think about and work on whatever is trying to get in on your family time. Tell yourself, diligently, “No, I’ll do that tomorrow.” Commit your plan to paper, then commit to being present in all things.

3. People

Make a plan, be present, and involve people. When people want to help, as your brothers and sisters in the faith so often do, accept it. Is there something you are doing at church that someone else can be equipped, empowered, and platformed to do? If you can give more of yourself to your family by delegating tasks to someone else, shouldn’t you do it? This isn’t an excuse to cut short your core duties and responsibilities; I am simply encouraging you to consider including others in your plan if it helps you to be more present.

4. Pray

Finally, pray, pray, and pray some more. None of this will be possible without the Lord and His guidance. Sure, you could wake tomorrow and find a color-coded, hour-by-hour plan of your week miraculously waiting for you on your desk. However, more often than the miracle, God is going to guide you through the many, many prayers, the many times of reading and meditating on His Word, the many times you purposefully plan your time to honor Him, to show love to your family, and to serve His people and His church. More often than the miracle, God is going to guide you through the many prayers you pray.

Family is a precious gift that most would never consciously take for granted.

Sometimes, though, we unintentionally do so when we attempt to be all things to all people and forget who we are first. First, we’re known, loved, redeemed, forgiven, and accepted by the maker of heaven and earth. We’re made in His image to reflect His character and love to all creation, which defines us more than anything else. Secondly, He created us to love one another. For some, this takes the form of a physical family, a tremendous gift of God. For others, it’s a family of believing brothers and sisters. Beyond these two unequivocal commands (Matthew 22:34-40) comes our call, ministry, and mission to take God’s Good News of redemption and salvation through Jesus to those around us. I’ve got it wrong a few times and am ever thankful for a gracious, heavenly Father and a forgiving family.

As my old mentor said, “Faith, then your family, then your ministry.”

]]>