Mark 10.28-31

A sermon preached in Trinity Term 2007:

Mark 10.28-31 (15:36, 1.78MB)

Athanasius – On the Incarnation (4)

There’s so much about which I could post on Athanasius’s On the Incarnation – the way he refutes the Jews by showing how Christ fulfilled their Scriptures, displaying a superb grasp (as Pete has noted in a comment on my first post on the book) of redemptive history, passing the question of visions and prophecies on the way, the way he refutes the Gentiles by its effect on idolatry and on individuals’ lives. Perhaps these will get a mention in due course. At this point, however, I want to reflect on Athanasius’ devotion to Scripture.

Athanasius views his letter to Macarius as a starting point, but doesn’t want Macarius simply to take his word for it. He exhorts him to go to the Bible to test what he is saying and from which to learn further. He is committed to the nature of the Bible as God’s word written. He writes:

“This will give you a beginning, and you must go on to prove its truth by the study of the Scriptures. They were written and inspired by God.” p. 95

In those Scriptures, Macarius will read of the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in glory “no longer in humiliation but in majesty, no longer to suffer but to bestow on us all the fruit of His cross – the resurrection and incorruptibility.” On that day, he will judge “each and all according to their deeds done in the body, whether good or ill. Then for the good is laid up the heavenly kingdom, but for those that practise evil outer darkness and the eternal fire.”

But how is Macarius going to be able read and understand the Scriptures? By living a holy life.

“But for the searching and right understanding of the Scriptures there is need of a good life and a pure soul, and for Christian virtue to guide the mind to grasp, so far as human nature can, the truth concerning God the Word. One cannot possibly understand the teaching of the saints unless one has a pure mind and is trying to imitate their life.” p. 96

He’s so right, isn’t he? If at the deepest level of our being we do not want to go God’s way, we will not understand the Scriptures (cf. John 7:16-17). If we live in disobedience and refuse to submit to Scripture, then our understanding of it will be distorted to suit our own ends. We will see what we want to see and we will not see what we don’t want to see.

So let us heed the advice of Athanasius and, recognising that the Bible has as its author God, humble ourselves in obedience to it, so that as we diligently study it, the truth of what we have been taught about Christ may be confirmed, and so that we may grow in our knowledge and understanding and love of him.

Athanasius – On the Incarnation (3)

We shall now consider the revelatory purpose of the Incarnation. We are made to know God. Athanasius asks, “Why should God have made them [men] at all, if He had not intended them to know Him?” Originally, we bore God’s image and through this God was made known to us. Knowledge of God, even from the beginning was meant to be distinctly Trinitarian:

“The good God has given them a share in His own Image, that is, in our Lord Jesus Christ, and has made even themselves after the same Image and likeness. Why? Simply in order that through this gift of God-likeness in themselves they may be able to perceive the Image Absolute, that is the Word Himself, and through Him to apprehend the Father; which knowledge of their Maker is for men the only really happy and blessed life.” p. 38

God ‘provided the works of creation also as a means by which the Maker might be known’ as well as making himself known through the law and the prophets, so that through looking at creation, through acquaintance with the prophets and reading of the law, men might learn to know God. Interestingly, Athanasius notes the intention of the law for the revelation of God to the whole world, not just to the Jews, which of course fits in very well with Deuteronomy 4.5-8, where God reveals his law to Israel, who are then to keep it in the sight of the peoples, who too will come to see wisdom and understanding.

However, through the Fall and the ensuing wickedness, this knowledge of God is hidden. Again, this problem is a supremely God-centred one:

“Things being as they were, what was the use of their [men] ever having had the knowledge of God? Surely it would have been better for God never to have bestowed it than that men should subsequently be found unworthy to receive it. Similarly, what possible profit could it be to God Himself, Who made men, if when made they did not worship Him, but regarded others as their makers? This would be tantamount to His having made them for others and not for Himself.” p. 40

Salvation is therefore also about the renewing of God’s image in human beings and this is only possible through the coming of Jesus Christ, who is the image of God.

“What else could He possibly do, being God, but renew His Image in mankind, so that through it men might once more come to know Him? And how could this be done save by the coming of the very Image Himself, our Saviour Jesus Christ.” p. 41

Creation is insufficient for this task. It can only be through Christ alone.

“Creation was there all the time, but it did not prevent men from wallowing in error… Men had neglected to consider the heavens before and now they were looking in the opposite direction. Wherefore in all naturalness and fitness, desiring to do good to men, as Man he dwells, taking to Himself a body like the rest; and through his actions done in that body, as it were on their own level, He teaches those who would not learn by other means to know Himself, the Word of God, and through Him the Father.” pp. 42-43

Athanasius – On the Incarnation (2)

For Athanasius, the Incarnation of Christ had a twofold purpose: redemption and revelation. Much of the redemption theme has already been dealt with as part of my series of reviews of Pierced for Our Transgressions, but it bears repetition here.

The place of the Incarnation in redemption is profoundly God-centred. It takes place to resolve the dilemma that the Fall produces. God’s truthfulness must be upheld and so the penalty of death for transgression must be upheld. But God’s goodness must also be upheld and so his creation cannot be undone by sin:

“It would, of course, have been unthinkable that God should go back upon his word and that man, having transgressed, should not die… It was unworthy of the goodness of God that creatures made by Him should be brought to nothing through the deceit wrought upon man by the devil; and it was supremely unfitting that the work of God in mankind should disappear, either through their own negligence or through the deceit of evil spirits… Surely it would have been better never to have been created at all than, having been created, to be neglected and perish; and besides that, such indifference to the ruin of His own good work before His very eyes would argue not goodness in God but limitation, and that far more than if He had neer created men at all. It was impossible therefore, that God should leave man to be carried off by corruption, because it would be unfitting and unworthy of himself.” p. 32

This tension between God’s goodness and truthfulness is perhaps something that needs to be recovered and expounded alongside the more usual presentation of the cross as the place where God’s love and justice are shown to be in perfect harmony.

Athanasius then goes on to explain that repentance would not be sufficient to address the prolem because “if death did not hold dominion over men, God would still remain untrue” and it doesn’t address the fundamental issue of human nature being corrupted.

Redemption can only be wrought through penal substitutionary sacrifice, received by faith. Corruption was ‘the penalty for the Transgression’ and so Christ suffered death in the place of sinners. There are hints that Athanasius thought that sex was sinful, hence the need for virgin birth, but his basic argument is sound:

“Taking a body like our own, because all our bodies were liable to the corruption of death, He surrendered His body to death in place of all, and offered it to the Father. This he did out of sheer love for us, so that in His death all might die, and the law of death thereby be abolished because, when He had fulfilled in His body that for which it was appointed, it was thereafter voided of its power for men. This He did that He might turn again to incorruption men who had turned back to corruption, and make them alive through death by appropriation of his body and by the grace of resurrection.” p. 34

The Incarnation is necessary, because ‘corruption could not be got rid of otherwise than through death; yet He Himself, as the Word, being immortal and the Father’s Son, was such as could not die. For this reason, therefore He assumed a body capable of death, in order that it, through belonging to the Word Who is above all, might become in dying a sufficient exchange for all.’ Here again is the idea of substitutionary atonement. In terms of terminology, it is worth noting that Athanasius uses ‘body’ and ‘human nature’ apparently interchangeably.

Perhaps slightly inconsistently, Athanasius insists on the need for ‘appropriation of his body’ for men to be made ‘alive through death’ yet teaches that through the ‘union of the immortal Son of God with our human nature, all men were clothed with corruption’ as a consequence of the ’solidarity of mankind’.

Mark 10.28-31

As it happens, my last post was the 200th.

Any suggestions for babies to be killed are very welcome. Bonus points for readers who can identify whither I’ve pinched illustrations.

If you have any thoughts on my ideas for Romans 5.1-5, too, do feel free to comment – the post is a couple of posts down.

Introduction

Shackleton’s advertisement in the Times
A cost involved for wallet, comfort, safety; possibility of reward slim
Only for most intrepid
Mark 10.28-31 – issue of following Jesus
What will journey be like? Cost? Something at the end? Worth committing to?
Answer affects whether come to Jesus & trust him & persevere in committing lives to him or whether brush aside or hold back
Give headings

1 Following Jesus is costly (vv. 28-29)

Jesus has taught that to enter kingdom & inherit eternal life, have to receive like a little child
= coming as a nobody with nothing
Dependent entirely on Christ who died on the cross in the place of his followers
Grace alone through faith alone
Also means following Jesus as a nobody with nothing, willing to give up everything, living with him as master
Costly because that has implications
As if life a blank cheque signed & given to Jesus to fill in details
Disciples knew cost – ref to Mk. 1
Impact of faith in Christ on other family members – Luke 12.51
Writer to Hebrews spoke of believers having property plundered

For Jesus’ sake & gospel – gospel work not an optional extra but integral part of following him
=holding fast to the gospel, personal involvement in making it known, supporting others in the work

Example of Thomas Bilney

Cost for us?
Loss of reputation – in this age of secularism & pluralism believe Bible to be true & long to share message
Loss of friends – will not engage in activities of our friends – drunkeness, sexual immorality, inappropriate humour
Pass over City job – demands on time/energy which would harm walk with God & involvement and service of church

Less appealing than Shackleton’s expedition? Too much to give up? Not prepared to do it?
What Jesus says next liberates us from thinking like that

2 Following Jesus is rewarded (v. 30)

The one who follows Jesus receives much, much more
Blessing in present – seen as part of church
Acts 4.32-37 – echoes of Jesus’ words to Peter?
Future blessing in new creation
Not merited – what Christ has purchased by death on the cross & what has revealed by resurrection, the guarantee & pledge of followers’ resurrection
What have to receive like a little child

Illustration of Indian ruler asking beggar for food, receives 5 grains of rice, gives 5 grains of rice made of gold in return

See how liberating that is?

Losing reputation doesn’t matter – status of being a member of God’s people now, will reign with him in New Creation
Losing friends doesn’t matter – gain Christian family & will one day stand as part of innumerable multitude
Losing out on worldly wealth doesn’t matter – doors, cupboards, wallets of many beleivers open to follower of Jesus to support in need now & will inherit eternal life

Nice? But does it really matter? Could leave or take Shackleton’s expedition
With Jesus, different – response has consequences of vital importance

3 Following Jesus is essential (v. 31)

First = those who from outside appear to have status & grounds for confidence
Like rich young man in preceding verses – financial standing & great possessions & thought had good moral standing
Many like that last
Because, like him, unprepared to face cost of letting go of everything & receiving kingdom as a child, coming as a nobody with nothing, entirely dependent on Christ & following him
Wealth, status etc. doesn’t count for anything before God
Guilt remains & will not inherit eternal life, kingdom of God
Excluded, face what Jesus calls hell, the unquenchable fire
Line from Avarice by George Herbert

Last first = those who are like children, come as nobodies with nothing, no self-sufficiency, prepared to give up everything
Like Jesus’ disciples
Because come as nobodies with nothing, depend entirely on Jesus, heirs of eternal life, qualified to enter the kingdom

Illustration of a Christian minister asked whether possible for people from less privileged backgrounds to be trained as Bible teachers
Reply – not possible for God to use anybody from a privileged background until have been deeply humbled

Will we do that? Prepared to be last? Only way to truly be first & enjoy God’s favour now & in eternity
Or will continue to strive to be first in this age – reputation, friendships, career – ultimately find ourselves to be last & condemned by him

Conclusion

Suggest how might advertise following Jesus in the Times a la Shackleton’s advertisement
May God give us the grace to follow Jesus now & always

Athanasius – On the Incarnation (1)

In order to address my negligible knowledge of the writings of the Church Fathers, I am embarking on Athanasius’s On the Incarnation. I have been very impressed so far and am lamenting the sad fact that I never discovered him sooner.

All references are to the St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press edition (Popular Patristics Series), ISBN 0-913836-40-0

Athanasius begins with creation because creation and salvation are part of the same grand work. The purpose of the Word’s incarnation in salvation is to restore God’s creation which has been brought into decay through sin. He writes:

“He has been manifested in a human body for this reason only, out of the love and goodness of His Father, for the salvation of us men. We will begin then, with the creation of the world and with God its Maker, for the first fact that you must grasp is this: the renewal of creation has been wrought by the Self-same Word Who made it in the beginning. There is thus no inconsistency between creation and salvation,; for the One Father has employed the same Agent for both works, effecting the salvation of the world through the same Word Who made it in the beginning.” p. 26

Athanasius considers various pagan opinions about the creation of the world, such as that “all things are self-originated and, so to speak, haphazard, a view held by the Epicureans who “deny that there is any mind behind the universe at all”. Isn’t that strikingly contemporary? He then moves on to consider the Christian doctrine of creation, particularly that of man, upon which alone of all creatures is impressed his image, with the intention that they enjoy “the blessed and only true life of the saints in paradise”, a blessing that is conditional upon the obedience of man to God’s commandment.

Men of course “turned from the contemplation of God to evil of their own devising” and so came under the dominion of death. The consequence of sin is, in effect decreation. Athanasius writes:

“For the transgression of the commandment was making them turn back again according to their nature; and as they had at the beginning come into being out of non-existence, so were they now on the way to returning, through corruption, to non-existence again.” pp. 29-30

What is particularly noticeable about Athanasius’s writings is that every step of the way he is arguing from the Bible, and from the Bible in its breadth. To prove that the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and not another was indeed the creator of the world, he does to Matthew 19.4-6 and John 1.3. To show that there is a mind behind the universe and that the universe was created ex nihilo he takes us to Genesis 1.1 and Hebrews 11.3. The conditionality of the blessing in Eden is shown from Genesis 2.16f. And when expounding the plight of men who “in their sinning surpassed all limits”, “devising new kinds of sins”, making the world a place where “adulteries and thefts were everywhere”, filled with war and violence, he grounds it in the worlds of the apostle Paul in Romans 1.16f. Here is a man who was steeped in Scripture, a true Bible-beaver, who thought and taught systematically from it, and what a model and a challenge that is to us all. May we too have such a grasp of God’s word and allow our thinking to be so shaped by it.

Look at where Athanasius’s fingers are pointing in this icon: are they not directing us to the word of God?

All this, only from the first chapter! By the way, according to Blogger the next post will be my two hundredth…

Why We Should All Read Old Books

In his Introduction to On the Incarnation by Athanasius, C. S. Lewis comments on the tendency to prefer reading modern books and secondary sources, rather than going back to the ancient, primary texts. I have to confess to having observed this phenomenon myself. I think of one History student who was covering the English Reformation and yet hadn’t actually read the Thirty-Nine Articles. Bizarre. Lewis goes on to say that this is no less the case than in area of theology and is an error. Listen to the reasons he gives on why we should read old books as well as new:

“A new book is still on trial and the amateur is not in a position to judge it. It has to be tested against the great body of Christian thought down the ages, and all its hidden implications (often unsuspected by the author himself) have to be brought to light.”

He goes on to say:

“Every age has its own outlook. It is specially good at seeing certain truths and specially liable to make certain mistakes. We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books. All contemporary writers share to some extent the same contemporary outlook – even those, like myself, who seem most opposed to it… None of us can fully escape this blindness, but we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books. Where they are true they will give us truths which we half knew already. Where they are false, they will aggravate the error with which we are already dangerously ill. The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can be done only by reading old books. Not, of course, that there is any magic about the past. People were no cleverer then than they are now; they made as many mistakes as we. But not the same mistakes. They will not flatter us in the errors we are already committing; and their own errors, being now open and palpable, will not endanger us. Two heads are better than one, not because either is infallible, but because they are unlikely to go wrong in the same direction.”

Where we have to be careful, I think, is to view the reading of old books, as Lewis does, as a means of attaining to a “mere Christianity”, a unity of Christian belief from “many Churches, climates and ages”. To see such a unity between groups of Christians who, for example, affirm the catholic creeds and yet espouse contradictory doctrines of salvation would be to go too far. Nevertheless there is still very considerable merit in reading old books to see the “familiar smell” which meets us in the writings of Christians from all over the world and down the ages, a oneness amongst those who profess authentic, Biblical Christian faith from different times and different places.

As a Clinical Medicine student, keeping hours similar to those in the workplace, only slightly less reasonable and unpaid, I lament the loss of reading time that I had during my vacations as an undergraduate. May I encourage those who have that luxury of time to make the most of it and read. By all means read Packer and Stott (and Jeffrey, Ovey and Sach!). But also take the time to read Augustine and Athanasius. Read old books.

I think I need to move to America

Click HERE for the interweb site of Christ Reformed Church, Anaheim CA.

Click HERE for the pastor’s weblog.

(They also want to sing my hymn, Christ has died for all his people, which is nice.)

Malachi 2.10-16

Because we have one Father and Creator, and because of the covenant, it is completely inappropriate to break faith with God’s people and he hates it, so do not do it.

10 Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our fathers?
11 Judah has been faithless, and abomination has been committed in Israel and in Jerusalem. For Judah has profaned the sanctuary of the LORD, which he loves, and has married the daughter of a foreign god.
12 May the LORD cut off from the tents of Jacob, any descendant of the man who does this, who brings an offering to the LORD of hosts!

13 And this second thing you do. You cover the LORD’s altar with tears, with weeping and groaning because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand.
14 But you say, “Why does he not?” Because the LORD was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.
15 Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth.
16 “For the man who hates and divorces, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers* his garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.” (ESV)

*For the LORD, the God of Israel says that he hates divorce, and him who covers – my preferred translation of those verses

Look over the passage – what’s the main theme? (Repeated concepts/phrases?)

Verse 10

From v. 10, why is it utterly inappropriate to be faithless? (What are the implications of God’s people having one Father? One creator? What right does the Creator have over his creation?)

What is the covenant in view here?

Read Genesis 17.1-8: What does God promise? What are the obligations on the part of covenant members? How does faithlessness profane the covenant? (What does it say about one’s view of the promises and obligations)

Is this at all relevant to Christian believers now? See Galatians 3.29

In what specific ways have God’s people been faithless?

Verses 11-12

Deuteronomy 7.3-4: Why is marrying foreigners forbidden?

How does God feel about this?

How does it affect the people’s relationship with God?

How do we apply this as Christian people? See 2 Corinthians 6.14-16

Are there any more general applications of this principle?

Verses 13-16

How is divorce breaking faith?

Why does it matter so much? (Is there another party involved? What does God do? See 3.5 for more on ‘witness’. What purpose for marriage do we see God has here, and how does divorce affect that?)

How does God feel about this?

What effect does it have on the people’s relationship with God?

What is the application to the Christian believer? See Mark 10.2-12

Are there any more general applications of this for life in the church?

How can we practically guard ourselves to prevent this happening?

Romans 5.1-5

I shall, DV, be preaching in the Chapel of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, at Evensong on Trinity Sunday (June 3rd). My text is Romans 5.1-5. Do let me know your thoughts.

Introduction

Stanzas 2 & 3 of Ungratefulness
Belief in the Trinity: affirm, but little impact on thinking about God / a barrier, doesn’t make sense
Brilliance denies access, do not fully see riches
Statelier cabinet unlocked – a jewel betrothing human beings to himself in everlasting pleasure because through work of Trinity relationship with God established & guaranteed for eternity
2 ways

1 We have peace with the Father through the Son (vv. 1-2)

Quick explanation of justification by faith – God’s declaration that those who have faith in Christ, who simply trust promise of forgiveness through Christ’s death are justified, declared not guilty, have a right standing with him
By faith in contrast to works
Implication – peace with God
Objective status
By nature war between us & God
Wrath being revealed and will be revealed (Rom 2.8-9)
What all of us deserve
True of me: true of you?
Hope in degree, relationship, career, pleasure rather God; seek own glory, honour, success, disobeying God
If Christian believer, God who was at war with me now at peace
Trust in Christ –> justified –> wrath no longer upon me –> peace
Through Christ – death on the cross in the place of all who trust him
Result: access to grace (= access to the Father); permanent & established status
Consequence: hope of glory
George Bernard Shaw quote about heaven
Explanation of glory – resurrection, liberation of this world from bondage to decay
C.S. Lewis illustration from Last Battle – Farewell to Shadowlands
Consequence – joy

How can I be sure? Will it stand up?
Yes…

2 We know love from the Father through the Spirit (vv. 3-5)

Joy of Christian believer lasts in the midst of suffering
Suffering –> endurance; illustration of training for a rece
Endurance –> character (=proven, tested character); illustration of ‘acid test’ of authenticity of jewellery
Produces hope – certain
v. 5b – 2 past actions
Christians have been given the Spirit & have received God’s love
Not subjective feeling – can get those through listening to right music, often fades
Objective
Love shown in the death of Christ
Through the Spirit – pointed to death of Christ for us, weak ungodly sinners, thereby assured that God loves us
So may be sure will receive glory
Romans 8.32

Implications

For the believer:
See hope of glory – rejoice!
Difficult time of exams, personal life, relationships, home, health
Doesn’t make it any less painful
But glory awaits Christian so can rejoice
Secure because God loves you, demonstrated in the death of Son to which Spirit points

For the unbeliever:

See privileges belonging to the believer
Secure relationship with God possible because of work of trinity
Rather than be guilty & face anger forever, can be justified & have peace with God & hope of eternal life, everlasting pleasure
Even through difficulties of life – hope will not put to shame because will know love from the Father through the Spirit
Through faith – will you come?

Conclusion

Read stanza 2 of Ungratefulness again
Summary of points

Ungratefulness – George Herbert

Lord, with what bounty and rare clemency
Have you redeemed us from the grave!
If you had let us run,
Gladly had man adored the sun,
And thought his god most brave;
Where now we shall be better gods than he.

You have but two rare cabinets full of treasure,
The Trinity, and Incarnation:
You have unlocked them both,
And made them jewels to betroth
The work of your creation
Unto your self in everlasting pleasure.

The statelier cabinet is the Trinity,
Whose sparkling light access denies:
Therefore you do not show
This fully to us, till death blow
The dust into our eyes:
For by that powder you wilt make us see.

But all your sweets are packed up in the other;
Your mercies thither flock and flow:
That as the first affrights,
This may allure us with delights;
Because this box we know;
For we have all of us just such another.

But man is close, reserved, and dark to thee:
When you demandest but a heart,
He cavils instantly.
In his poor cabinet of bone
Sins have their box apart,
Defrauding you, who gave us two for one.

Anglican Chant

Apologies for the famine of posts at the moment – work and all that, I’m afraid.

In case my five readers haven’t given up looking at this weblog, THIS and THIS brightened up my morning.

(HT: David Field)