Grace and Government

I've gotten several comments over the years about not losing sight of the whole principle of human responsibility when I talk about Divine sovereignty. That's a fair criticism in one sense, we are absolutely responsible in our behaviour down here, and we all will be manifest at the Judgment Seat of Christ.

On the other hand, I've been very aware that the Gospel is a message of pure grace. God, who justifies the ungodly, freely justifies all who believe from all things (Acts 13:38--39, Romans 4:5). Our Christian life begins and ends with God's sovereign grace. He acts toward us the way He wants to, with no consideration for what we earn. This is, after all, pretty much the definition of grace.

In my experience, there is a real fear of grace among Christians. It's almost like they're afraid that if we give the Gospel as Scripture gives it, people will see that as a license to sin. And I suppose that's true in some sense: Romans 6 begins with the question, if we really believe that grace over-abounds where sin abounds, why not just live in sin and get more grace? (Romans 6:1).

But if we don't teach the Gospel as Scripture teaches it, we're not doing anyone any favours. The danger that someone might see the Gospel as license to sin (and it's not really hypothetical: there are plenty of people who do just that) doesn't give us the right to fall short on giving God the glory for who He is. We're really casting aspersion on the Person and Work of Christ if we don't teach a complete, full, free, and abounding forgiveness of all our sins.

But Scripture goes on from the Gospel to teach a human responsibility as well. Yes, we can just go out and sin, but we shouldn't. Why not? Well, there are a few reasons:

• because we're dead to sin (Romans 6)
• because the one who sins becomes a slave to sin (Romans 6:15--18)
• because we weren't saved from sin just to dive back into it (Colossians 3:1--17, 1 Thessalonians 4:1--7)
• because we're to walk worthy of our high calling (Ephesians 4:1--3)
• because we're to represent Christ on earth (John 17:13--21)
• because we're called to come into God's presence as worshipers, and sin can't come in there with us (Hebrews 10:19--22)
• because we all must appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ to give an account for the deeds done in our bodies (2 Corinthians 5:9--11)
• because we are subject to the discipline of our Father (Hebrews 12:5--13), and the discipline of the assembly (1 Corinthians 5)

As much as we don't believe it, God's desire for us to walk free from sin is for our own good. Sin has a corrosive affect on us: it rots our souls. When we play fast and loose with sin, we're not escaping the consequence it has on us. When we sin, we become a slave to sin. Sin damages the one sinning as much as it damages the one(s) sinned against. But this is not always easy to believe: it seems pretty abstract.

But there's more than just the Father's desire for the best for His children: there is also the principle of God's government.

The whole issue of government is that God has created the heavens, the earth, and everything in them. He asserts His rights as Creator to be honoured in and by His creatures. And it's important to understand the God's government is quite a distinct thing from His saving sinners. I don't mean to say they're quite separate, but they're certainly not the same thing. God saves individual sinners, and has in all ages. He came and found Adam when he sinned, He saved Abel, and He is still saving sinners. And He's going to be saving sinners right up until the end.

And God only saves sinners on the principle of grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8--9). That's the plain teaching of Romans 4. Neither Abraham (without Law) nor David (under Law) were justified by works: they were both justified by faith (Romans 5:1). Sinners from Adam until the end are justified by faith on the principle of grace. This is the only saving principle: the principle of God's giving freely, looking for nothing to recommend us to Him. There is no other way a sinner could possibly be justified. If God were to act on any other principle, there would be no one justified, because we are all hopelessly lost. Only God acting in His own character and on the principle of what He is, with no regard to what we are, can possibly reach someone as lost as we all are.

But the other, parallel truth is that God will be vindicated in His creation. He will eventually have all creation bow to Him (Philippians 2:9--11; 1 Corinthians 15:20--28; Hebrews 2:5--9). So a day will come when there will be judgment, when God will judge the world through Christ Jesus (Acts 17:30--32).

When Paul preached judgment to the Athenians, he spoke in general terms of one day; but if we're to examine Scripture on the subject, we find that there are several judgments that are coming:

• the judgment of the dead at the Great White Throne (Revelation 20:11--15)
• the judgment of believers at Christ's seat (2 Corinthians 5:9--11)
• the judgment of the nations (Matthew 25:31--46)
• the judgment of the Church (Revelation 2--3)
• the judgment of Babylon (Revelation 18)

There are others, but these demonstrate that there is not a single Judgment Day coming. In fact, Scripture teaches that judgment will happen in several stages, as God brings His Son to the head of the Kingdom, and the Son subdues all things, then hands them over to God (1 Corinthians 15:24).

So when the Lord Jesus said that the one who doesn't believe will not come into judgment (John 5:24), we understand that He was talking about a specific judgment; because Scripture teaches that even "we" (that is, believers) will appear before Christ on His judgment seat. In fact, the Lord Jesus was specifically talking about the judgment of condemnation. There is no condemnation to the one who believes (Romans 8:1). But there is a judgment not to condemnation: this is the judgment of His servants. This isn't a criminal judgment, it's the assessment of the Christian life. As I understand it, there is no possibility of our sins coming up at that judgment, because Christ has taken them away. They're gone forever from God's sight. The one who believes is one to whom God does not at all reckon sin (Romans 4:6--8). If God does not at all reckon sin to me, then they certainly won't be brought up at Christ's judgment seat. But He will judge the life I've lived: there will be a judgment of the deeds done in the body. As someone else has said, it's very possible to have a saved soul and a lost life. It's possible to be justified once-for-all, with no fear of condemnation, but then to squander our life, having nothing to show for it when we are manifested before Christ.

So there is a sense where all will meet Christ in judgment. Those who believe will meet Him at the judgment seat of Christ, those who don't will meet Him in the second resurrection (Revelation 20:11--15).

Now, God's purpose is to see all men honour the Son (John 5:21--23), and then the Son will subject all things to God. The subjection of all to the Son is inevitable: either you can bow now, or you can bow then. If we don't bow now, when we have a choice; then we'll be made to bow then, when we won't.

But aside even from every creature bowing, there is the whole purpose of God in human government over the earth. It is not the God deals with men only as individuals, He also deals with groups. This is really the whole point of Revelation 18: God is judging not the individuals, but the system they set up. Similarly, there is a judgment of the Church in Revelation 2--3. This isn't the judgment seat of Christ, this is the judgment of the Church in her responsibility as the habitation of God on earth. It's not individual, it's corporate.

Where God has put His creatures in a place of responsibility, He will judge them with respect to that responsibility. This isn't a matter of eternal salvation only, but a matter of God's character. God is Judge of all the earth (Genesis 18:25), and He must be seen to be just. So He will come and require an account of His creatures in the responsibilities He has given them.

Notice, this is all quite aside from the consequences of our sins. In addition to the governmental issues of God, there is the very real fact that our actions (and words and thoughts) matter: they produce effects. If a true believer were to go out and murder someone, he or she is justified freely from it: God won't hold that sin against him or her. But the murder victim is still dead. Similarly, if a true believer were to go out and fornicate, he or she might end up with some gnarly disease. This isn't God's punishment for that sin, it's just the way the world works. God has created this world to be an orderly machine: when you push something it generally moves; when you drop something it falls. Our actions have consequences: those aren't God's judgment, they're just the rules of this creation.

Sadly, a lot of Christians have used the term "consequence" as a euphemism for "punishment", and that has led to some heretical and even blasphemous teachings. Consequences aren't imposed by God, they're just what happen as a result of our actions.

Now, in addition to consequences, there is God's discipline (Hebrews 12:5--13). We notice the Scripture doesn't teach that there is discipline for our sins: Christ has born the punishment for our sins, and God doesn't at all reckon sin to those He has justified. Discipline is what God does because of what we are, not what we have done. Consider Job: the Scripture insists that Job didn't sin (Job 1:22), even when Satan attacked him. It wasn't that Job was sinning, it was that Job was a sinner. So when God came and spoke to Job, Job began to understand who God is, " I had heard of thee by the hearing of the ear, but now mine eye seeth thee: Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes." (Job 42:5--6, JND). God's discipline on Job wasn't a result of Job sinning, it was a result of His desire to reveal Himself to Job, and a desire to reveal Job's own faults (not sins, faults) to himself.

It is a frequent misunderstanding that God disciplines us for a specific sin we've committed. That is really a denial of the Gospel. Discipline isn't about our sins but our sin. It's about God molding us, shaping us, and making us into what He wants us to be.

There's a whole lot more we could say about God's government in our lives, just like we could say more about His grace: I've already written a lot more than I'd intended. But when we consider God's ways with us, it's helpful not to conflate ideas that are really distinct. The principles on which God acts aren't always revealed the same way: there are different aspects to God's dealings. And the consequences of our confounding them can be much greater than we realize.

The Judge of all the earth does what's right. We ought not to lose sight of that as we bask in His grace. Indeed, it's because we recognize what He is, and what we are, that we understand something of His grace.

Updates

I've been meaning to share some updates, but I've been very, very busy--- too busy to post on my blog.

Weekend before last (November 10 & 11), we had a sort of mini-conference at the meeting hall. It was really the outgrowth of some conversations some of us had been having about perhaps having some sort of classes on foundational doctrine. The target audience was middle school children and older, but we didn't want to exclude anyone.

Well, with one thing and another, we ended up with a little more complicated deal than I (for one) had envisioned. But there were a lot of people who jumped in and made things work. If it weren't for Ames (and several others), it would have been a disaster. But it actually worked out rather well.

One thing I hadn't planned on was taking some of the sessions. We'd hoped to get others in to give the talks, but we couldn't get anyone on such short notice, and we ended up a giving the talks ourselves. It wasn't what I had in mind, but it seems to have worked.

I gave two talks, one on the Gospel, another on the Church. We also planned a couple Q&A sessions where the kids could ask questions, make comments, etc. on the talks we'd had. I ended up being more involved in that than I'd planned.

My buddy gave a talk on Christ as King, Priest, and Bridegroom. He gave another talk on an overview of dispensationalism. I enjoyed both of them. Another brother gave two talks, one was a sort of lexicon on doctrinal terms (What is the difference between "sin" and "sins"? What is "redemption"?) and the other was an overview of Romans. They, too, were excellent.

For the two sessions I took, I prepared handouts and gave them to the kids. I promised to share them online, so they're here: The Gospel and The Church.

We learned some lessons for next time. I suppose the main take-away lesson is that there ought to be a next time. Everyone seemed to enjoy it, and everyone seems to think it was worth the weekend. But there were some challenges, and lessons for next time. We ordered lunch from Subway Catering, and it was great. We also ordered pizza from a delivery place a mile or so from the meeting hall, and they got our order wrong. Oops. We also realized we tend to be last-minute people, and most people require more advanced notice than we gave. So here are some logistical considerations we need to take next time:

• We need to start praying about the next one now.
• We need to plan further in advance: a month isn't long enough. Next time we'll try three.
• People will show up to help, even if we don't ask and don't expect them to. Next time we need a list of things for helpers to do: they'll be there.
• We need to publicize our plans better, and included more schedule details. We did send them 'round, but people still asked what the plans were. Next time we'll inundate people with email notices, on Facebook, etc.
• People don't RSVP. We just need to accept that.
• Catering is absolutely worth the cost. Subway Catering in particular is good food, reasonably priced. It's a life-saver.
• Next time we'll choose a closer pizza place, and call an hour in advance to confirm the order before pickup. We called both Subway and the pizza place 24 hours in advance, but Subway called back to confirm order details, the pizza place didn't.
• People were confused about who was invited: we'd mentioned the idea that we were targeting middle schoolers and up, and people thought we only wanted kids there. Next time we'll not say anything about a target audience.

So it wasn't perfect, but it went well. Everyone I've talked with was pleased with the results, and we're looking to have another go in the Spring. All in all, I'm very pleased.

More Reading

We're having some "special meetings" this weekend to cover some foundational doctrines. It wasn't my intention to do any actual speaking in them, merely to organize, facilitate, cook, etc. But I've ended up having two lectures, so I'm preparing for those. If you think of it, I'd really appreciate prayer for this weekend.

But I've got writer's block (speaker's block?) right at the moment, so I thought I'd blog a minute or two.

I've a friend who's read Darby's Synopsis cover-to-cover. Another friend has commented that Synopsis is one of his go-to resources for Bible study. Well, I've never been able to get into the Synopsis: every time I've opened it, I've found it doesn't really say anything that's not completely obvious. It's not much of a commentary. It's not that I'm not a fan of Johnny D., it's just that Synopsis hasn't ever really grabbed me.

But still, when two friends highly recommend a book, there might be something there.

So this last week I decided to give Synopsis another try, but this time I decided to start reading at the beginning rather than flipping it open to a given passage. I was wrong and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I completely missed the point of the book(s). Synopsis really is worthwhile reading, but I had to start at the beginning to get it.

I'm not going to try and review the book here, I've only read through the commentary on Genesis and the first ten or so chapters of Exodus: it's too early for a review. But I have to say I'm a convert.

Here's why: Synopsis isn't really a verse-by-verse commentary on the Bible, and if you think of it that way, you'll wonder why anyone actually published it. I did exactly that for years, and I always wondered why anyone bothered to read it. I was thinking of it as a commentary; it's not. It's an "Old and New Testament Survey" written into a set of books. It's like sitting in a Sunday School class taught by JND.

I told my dyed-in-the-wool Synopsis friend I had finally started reading it from the beginning. He was very polite and didn't point out I had been an idiot. But he concurred with my description of the set, and explained it this way: "If you want to know what Darby thought about John 4, you can't just read the chapter on John 4. You need to read the whole section on John." That's exactly what I'm realizing. Synopsis develops themes over whole books, and indeed over the whole Bible. You need to read it all to really get what Johnny's saying in context.

So I have several weeks of reading before me, but I have to say it's been really good reading so far. So all those times I referred to Synopsis as "Darby Lite", I was wrong. It's certainly the most approachable of Darby's writing, but it's not a lightweight read. I was just missing the point.

Not living; dying

I am not living in this world, I am dying here

(J. N. Darby, "The Path and Character of the Christian")

Eternal Life

It has been observed that John's Gospel doesn't really present Christ as dying for sins. In John's Gospel, Christ comes to give life to the world. This is different (not contradictory, different) from Paul's Gospel in Romans, where Christ has died so that we can be justified. Paul talks about justification, John talks about new birth.

John 5 presents the Son as the Son of Man who will judge all men and as the Son of God who raises the dead. He is the one who gives life to the dead. John 6 takes this farther and discusses how exactly He is going to give them life. In John 5, the Son of God will call the dead out of their graves; but in John 6 the Son of Man is the One who offers His flesh as food and His blood as drink: the one who eats His flesh and drinks His blood has eternal life.

We understand "eternal life" is not physical life: it's not that our bodies will never die. We understand that because the Lord Jesus specifically says so, "He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood has life eternal, and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:54, JND). The one who eats His flesh and drinks His blood has eternal life, but he still needs to be raised up at the last day. So having eternal life doesn't mean his body won't die. It does mean he will be raised up. Notice this is the truth taught in Romans 8, "if Christ be in you, the body is dead on account of sin, but the Spirit life on account of righteousness" (Romans 8:10, JND). So our bodies are still subject to death, even though we may have eternal life. Of course that will change when He comes to get us: He'll change our bodies to be like His (Philippians 3:21). But until then, we live in mortal bodies.

But the Lord Jesus offers eternal life to dying (and dead) sinners. We are born dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1--3), but He came to give us life. John 6 gives us further insight into how He accomplishes this: He will give us His flesh to eat and His blood to drink. This is an offensive statement, and it offended the people who were listening to Him. And we understand from the passage that He wasn't meaning a literal eating of His flesh and blood. The Lord Jesus told the people, "the words which I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life" (v. 63, JND). It was a spiritual, not physical truth He was relaying to them.

In fact, the passage begins with an important statement, "Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom *he* has sent" (v. 29, JND). It's not literal eating and drinking that the Lord Jesus is discussing. It's not even sacramental observance. He specifically says the only work God has for us is to believe. The entire discussion begins on this ground: that the work God has for us to do is to believe.

But it is a striking image nonetheless, and it's an image we'd rather not dwell on. But it conveys a very important truth: it was not merely that He in His deity would call the dead from the grave, but that He would give them life at great personal cost. It would cost Him His flesh and His blood to give us life. This is not the Son of God commanding, this is the Son of Man dying. And it puts a responsibility on His hearers. In John 5, the Son quickens whom He will (v. 21). There's no part for us to play in this, the Son quickens the ones He wants to quicken. But here in John 6, there is a responsibility on the recipients: if you want eternal life, you need to eat. So John 5 is all about God's sovereignty, but John 6 brings in human responsibility.

There's another truth that comes out in this chapter: eternal life needs to be fed. We get eternal life by eating His flesh and drinking His blood (v. 53), and this is a one-time eating. But there's another eating, an ongoing feeding in vv. 54--56. It's one thing to get eternal life, it's another to sustain it. I don't mean to say we lose our eternal life if we don't feed it--- if we can lose it, it's not eternal. I mean to say that it's possible for us to have eternal life, but to let it wither and fade. We can have eternal life and not really live it: have it, but be content to keep it on the shelf (so to speak), never really experiencing it.

Notice this truth, too, is brought out in Romans 8: "if ye live according to flesh, ye are about to die; but if, by the Spirit, ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall live" (Romans 8:13, JND). All believers have eternal life as a present possession (cf. 1 John 5:11-13), but it's possible to have it so weakly that it doesn't affect us. The challenge of Romans 8 is, walk it out. Live it. Don't live after the flesh so that your life is a waste! Walk in the Spirit, so that our eternal life is obvious. Live now like it's eternity already.

Let's remember that the whole basis of John 6 is in v. 29. The work of God is believing. So it's a continual believing on Christ that feeds us. It's contemplating and meditating on Him that feeds the eternal life we have.

The Lord Jesus specifically talks about Himself as the "bread of life" (vv. 48--51) and contrasts Himself with the manna the "fathers" ate in the wilderness. That, He said, only gave them temporary life. He, on the other hand, gives eternal life. So we can consider the manna in the Pentatuech as a type of Christ. And we notice that the "fathers" only ate manna in the wilderness. Once they came to Canaan, the manna stopped (Exodus 16:35, Joshua 5:12). This suggests that Christ as our manna is only available while we are in the wilderness. Once our time here is done, we won't be able to feed on Him in this way. I'm not saying we won't feed on Him throughout eternity: He is our life (Colossians 3:1--4) and we'll never not need Him. But there is a sense where we have a limited opportunity to feed on Him in this way. The day will come when we'll be out of the wilderness, and the manna will stop.

Now, the manna stopped after the people had eaten the "old corn of the land" (Joshua 5:12). If we consider Christ as manna, we realize it is Him here to give His flesh to be eaten and His blood to be drunk. But now He's not here in humiliation: He's ascended back to Heaven, and He can't die again (Romans 6:9). And this is what He specifically says at the end of our passage in John 6:

But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmur concerning this, said to them, Does this offend you? If then ye see the Son of man ascending up where he was before? It is the Spirit which quickens, the flesh profits nothing: the words which I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life. (John 6:61--63, JND)

But there is a sense where we are to feed on Christ, not as the Man who died for us, but as the Man now at God's right hand. Consider 2 Corinthians 3:18,

But *we* all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit. (2 Corinthians 3:18, JND)

I'll suggest that this is the "old corn of the land." We can't feed on manna forever, eventually we make it out the wilderness and the manna stops. But when the children of Israel came into the land, the manna stopped after they ate the old corn of the land. In other words, they were feeding on both.

There are analogies to the Christian life in the story of the Israelites in the wilderness, there are analogies to the Christian life in the land too. We should really be living the truth of both. So we feed on Christ as the True Manna, but we feed on Him as the Old Corn of the Land too. The one is Christ in humiliation, the other is Christ in glory.

John 6 teaches us we need to feed on Christ as the Bread from Heaven to have eternal life. 2 Corinthians 3 teaches us we need to gaze on Christ to be like Him. I don't think they are the same thing, but the principle is the same. If we want to live now in the power of eternal life, we need to have hearts and eyes full of Him.

The Father and the Son

John 5 is to me one of the highest and most mysterious passages in Scripture. It takes us back into eternity before there was anything except God, and it takes us to the last day when Christ will judge all men. It pulls back the curtain a bit and gives us a rare and touching glimpse into the Godhead so we can see a bit of the eternal relationship between the Father and the Son.

The chapter opens with the Lord Jesus healing a man on the Sabbath, a man who'd been bed-ridden for 38 years. The Pharisees accuse Him of working on the Sabbath (which He had, in fact, done). The response of the Lord Jesus to the accusation of the Pharisees opens into an astonishing treatise on relationships in the Godhead.

The Lord Jesus' answer to the charge of working on the Sabbath is actually fairly subtle, and I have to admit I didn't really understand it until fairly recently. The argument basically boils down to this: the Son can't do anything on His own, He only does what He sees the Father do (v. 19). And the Father works on the Sabbath (v. 17), so the Son must work on the Sabbath. It's what the Father has taught Him to do.

I find it interesting that the Scripture doesn't tell us that Christ didn't really break the Sabbath. That's not the point. The Son had been told to do something by the Father, and that meant He wasn't going to keep the Sabbath. Interestingly, there is an Old Testament precedent for this in Joshua. It was a few years ago that an older brother pointed out that Joshua and the people were told to encircle Jericho once every day for six days, and seven times on the seventh. No matter how you figure it, those people broke the Sabbath. But they did it because God told them to. Similarly, Christ broke the Sabbath because He was obeying the Father.

But He goes beyond explaining His actions in vv. 19--30. He starts with an explanation of the relationship between the Father and the Son: "the Father loves the Son and shews him all things which he himself does" (v. 20). There is an interesting image here: the Father is bringing the Son into the family business. The Son doesn't do what He wants, He does what He sees His Father do. The Father deliberately shows the Son what it is He's doing.

Notice the titles Christ uses for Himself here: He mainly refers to Himself in John 5 as "the Son", but in v. 25 He's the "Son of God" and in v. 27 He's the "Son of man." Each of these titles holds a distinctive meaning. When the Lord Jesus refers to Himself in relationship with the Father, He calls Himself "Son." When He talks about raising the dead, He's "Son of God"; and when He talks about eternal judgment, He's "Son of man". In fact, it's because He's Son of man that all judgment is given to Him (v. 27).

(We should be very careful when we discuss Christ, because none of us can really understand Him: "no one knows the Son but the Father" (Matthew 11:27, JND). But I think it's worth emphasizing that when the Scripture talks about eternal relationships in the Godhead, it uses the title "Son", not "Son of God". Certainly Christ is the eternal Son of the eternal Father, but the title that conveys that isn't "Son of God," it's "Son". I say that carefully, because I've heard a lot of people insist that Christ is the "eternal Son of God". I don't think that's what Scripture teaches: He's the "eternal Son"; the title "Son of God" is different. This certainly isn't a hill I'm willing to die on--- I appreciate they're only trying to highlight Eternal Sonship--- but I think a careful reading of Scripture indicates the eternal title is "Son", rather than "Son of God". cf. Hebrews 1 & 2.)

There are several passages in Scripture that specifically outline God's purpose. For example, in John 4 the Father is seeking worshipers. Exodus 29 tells us Jehovah saved the children of Israel "out of the land of Egypt, to dwell in their midst: I am Jehovah their God" (Exodus 29:46, JND). Here in John 5 we have another purpose of God verse, v. 23. It is the Father's goal that all men should honour the Son just like they honour the Father. This verse has been very important to me over the last 15 or 20 years. It's like God's grand plan is really just for all men to honour His Son.

Now, the Lord Jesus gives us three specific similarities between the Son and the Father:

1. He raises the dead (v. 21)
2. He is the judge of all men (v. 22)
3. He has life in Himself (v. 26)

Raising the dead is God's exclusive right. It's not simply that only God has the right to raise the dead, but only God has the power to do so. We can't raise the dead, no matter how much we'd like to. Sure, we might witness a "medical miracle" where someone who's as good as dead recovers. Or we might even see someone "clinically dead" recover after a brief time. But the Lord Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead four days later. He'd been wrapped and buried: he wasn't in a coma, he was dead. But death is no barrier to the Son of God, He raises the dead. And He quickens "whom He will" (v. 21). It's not that He's under any obligation: He raises whomever He wants to raise. No one else gets a say in the matter.

Now, He applies this to two cases. The first is what we might call a spiritual resurrection in v. 25. The Scripture often refers to man's fallen state as a spiritual death. Christ's solution to that is to raise and quicken us. Notice Ephesians and Colossians follow this same thread, but Romans takes the opposite view. In Romans it's the lost who are alive (Romans 1--3), and the saved are dead (Romans 6).

The second application is two physical resurrections in vv. 29 & 30. One is a resurrection to life, the other a resurrection to judgment. You can't be in both groups: if you're in the resurrection to judgment, you're not in the resurrection to life. Notice this is what He insists on in v. 24. If we hear His word and believe on Him who sent Him, we have life and don't come into judgment. It's not just that we're judged and acquitted, but we're never even summoned.

This brings up an important point: judgment is always related to our physical bodies. When the dead are judged, they're raised first. And how are they judged? They're judged for what they did in their bodies.

There is no escaping the judgment of God. If you die first, He'll raise you from the dead to judge you. There's no statute of limitations, there's no way to avoid the bailiff. The only escape is to believe and pass from death into life: Christ has already been judged for those who believe. He has taken their punishment, so there's no judgment left for them.

I should think to the Pharisees at the time, certainly the next claim would be been shocking. They would have known that Abraham called God "the Judge of all the earth" (Genesis 18:25, JND), and here Christ is claiming that He is the exclusive Judge (v. 22). The Father has given all judgment to the Son. The Father won't judge anyone, the Son will judge everyone. Now certainly the Lord Jesus is God. I'm not denying that. But within the Godhead it's the Son who will judge.

I find it interesting that He is Judge because He is Son of man. This is closely echoed by Paul on Mars Hill: it's by this Man God will judge the world (Acts 17:31). Paul goes further than John 5 and tells us God has announced this publicly through the Resurrection. The message of the Resurrection, Paul says, is that God has publicly named His Judge by raising Him from the dead. But again, it's the "Man Christ Jesus" that will be Judge. Christ won't judge all men as God (although He is God), but as Man. He will judge as One who knows exactly what it's like to be a Man in a fallen world.

William Kelly says God created this world for Christ to have dominion over it:

Man is called to rule, to have dominion. God was looking on to His Son, the Son of man. For Him the habitable earth is destined. God has not made it in vain. (William Kelly, Hebrews, Chapter 2)

God created the world and gave it to man to have dominion over it. But it wasn't really Adam God intended to rule; it was the Last Adam, Jesus Christ. It is as Man that He will take dominion, and it is as Man that He will judge.

The last similarity Christ reveals is "as the Father has life in himself, so he has given to the Son also to have life in himself" (v. 26, JND). I find this one of the most mysterious and difficult verses in Scripture. Here's a time when the Son pulls back the curtain and lets us see into the light unapproachable where God dwells, and we can't really understand what we see there.

I have no idea what it means that the Father has "given to the Son also to have life in himself." No clue.

But little as I understand it, this verse forms the basis of Christianity in a sense. Colossians 3 says, "When the Christ is manifested who [is] our life, then shall *ye* also be manifested with him in glory" (Colossians 3:4, JND). It's not just that Christ has life in Himself, but that He shares it with us. And it's not that He gives us a little piece of it and sends us on our way: but He Himself actually is our Life. John says it a little differently: "God has given to us eternal life; and this life is in his Son" (1 John 5:11, JND).

God has no blessing for me that's not in Christ, and He has no intention of ever taking it out of Christ to give it to me. God doesn't give me blessings per se. He gives me Christ, and in Him are all the blessings God has.

Christianity is not just that Christ has died for me. That's important, but it's not really Christianity. That's not much more than Abraham, Moses, and the prophets expected. The really amazing thing about Christianity is that the Son of God has died for us and has given us an eternal claim on Him. Christianity is not so much justification: it's the ongoing, eternal, and uninterrupted relationship we have with the Son of God. He's died for us, He also lives for us. And He is personally our Life.

We're going to spend eternity getting a better idea who Christ is. And when we get to the end of eternity (you know what I mean), we won't be done. Of course, the real goal is not to wait until we're there to get to know Him. I'm not sure I'll ever understand this chapter: I'm just a creature after all. But it's in looking at Christ that we become like Him (2 Corinthians 3:18). So maybe the point isn't understanding, but just in looking and enjoying.

Short Talk (Reprise)

A friend emailed me a comment on my last post, "Short Talk". I wanted to post it here.

Regarding your first point, God has spoken…

I have recently had these ponderings concerning what I would tell a believer about approaching the Word:

I would urge in the strongest terms that the Word be allowed to simply say what it actually says -- nothing more, nothing less.

This occurs in practice less often than we might imagine.

Consider the implications -- if what the Word actually says is actually true…

Consider the implications -- if it is actually believed that what the Word actually says is actually true…

What the Word actually says is actually true…

Isaiah 55

10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Not much to add here. I have to ask my self, do I read the Word as though what it says is actually true?