“In 1988, another revolutionary ploy became the methodology of many churchmen, the demonstrations at abortion clinics designed to violate the laws of picketing and protest and ensure arrest for impeding access. It is questionable whether or not these demonstrations saved the lives any unborn babies: the women seeking abortions simply went elsewhere. Even more, the demonstrators set a precedent in violating civil laws of various sorts. What is to prevent pro-abortion people from blocking access to churches, or even entering them to disrupt the services? If we allow lawless protest to one side, we justify it for all.
No Scriptural justification is offered by these demonstrators. The closest thing to a text to justify them is Acts 5:29, the answer of Peter and the other apostles, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” What does this mean, however? There is no civil government anywhere which does not disobey God at some points, and, for that matter, there are no perfect churches either. The best of churches fall short of perfect obedience. Are we then justified in obeying only when we believe that God’s Word is faithfully observed? Then are those around us or under us entitled to rebel against our authority whenever they feel we fall short of or neglect God’s Word? Nothing in Scripture gives warrant to that. David’s respect for Saul, despite Saul’s sin, gives us another model.
Where freedom of God’s Word in the church, its schools, its families and members is denied, then we must obey God, not the state. We do not disobey to save our money nor even our lives but where God’s Word and its proclamation is at stake.
The moral anarchy which revolutionists advocate is being brought into the church by some men. Not surprisingly, they impugn the Christian character of those who criticize them, men such as Dr. Stanley, and Rev. Joesph Morecraft III.
To believe in the efficacy of violence to change society means to abandon peaceful means. Not surprisingly, peaceful, legal action is being neglected. A pro-abortion justice on the U.S. Supreme Court has said that, in a new case, abortion would lose. Such a case would require much funding and highly competent legal help. The money to do this is being spent in sending people from one end of the country to the other to take part in demonstrations, to bail them out of jail, so on.
The methodology of such demonstrations has been borrowed from non-Christian and revolutionary sources. From one end of the Bible to the other, no warrant can be found for this methodology. To us ungodly means is a way of saying that God’s grace and power are insufficient resources for Christian action. It means abandoning Christ for the methods of the enemies….
Such methodology can be effective, but not for the triumph of grace….
There is a long history of injustice at the hands of mobs. There is no Christian calling to create mobs and to violate laws to achieve a purpose.
The sad fact is that, once we adopt a position, the logic of that faith carries us forward. Thus, I am finding that those who approve of demonstrations, and of the violation of the properties of abortion clinics, find it easy to justify violence against the property (bombing) and against the persons who are abortionists (which means murdering them).
… Just as we believe that the spheres of the church and of the family should not be violated by the state, so we should avoid trespassing on the state’s sphere. The early church faced many evils in the civil sphere: abortion, slavery, and more. Paul spoke against a revolutionary move against slavery but counseled the use of lawful means (I Cor. 7:20-23). The early church took a strong stand against abortion and disciplined severely all who were guilty of it. It organized its deacons to rescue abandoned babies (who had not been successfully aborted earlier), and it took strong stands without ever suggesting violence.
Humanism gives priority to man and the will of man over God, and His Law-Word. If we place saving babies above obedience to God, we wind up doing neither the born nor the unborn any good, and we separate ourselves from God.
It is amazing how many people on all sides of issues are so prone to violence as their first and last resorts. They believe, when they see a serious problem, in taking to the streets, getting their guns, fighting the Establishment, and so on and on, without even using the many peaceable means which are at hand. For them, violence is not a last resort when all other means have been exhausted, but a first resort. Instead of providing answers, resorts to violence mean the death of civilization. The use of violence, whether by Christians or non-Christians, is a way of saying that voting, the law courts, mean nothing, or, that faith and the power of God are irrelevant to the problems of our time.
The resort to revolution or to revolutionary tactics is thus a confession of non faith; it means the death of a civilization because its people are dead in their sins and trespasses. They may use the name of the “Lord,” but they have by-passed him for ‘direct action.’… By assuming that everything depends on their action, they have denied God and His regenerating power.
And they have forgotten our Lord’s requirement: “Ye must be born again (John 3:7).” Regeneration, no revolution is God’s way.”
R. J. Rushdoony
Roots of Reconstruction
Chapter — Revolution or Regeneration, pg. 427-428
Category: Uncategorized
Epiphany #2 — The Baptism Of The Lord Christ
Significance of Christ’s Baptism
Baptism — Baptism was not new to John’s ministry. In the OT it was a means by which there was a setting apart to a unique and holy purpose. This idea of setting apart by means of washing goes back to priestly ablutions (washings) prior to offering sacrifices (Leviticus 16:4 ,Leviticus 16:4,16:24 ).
4 He shall put on the holy linen tunic, and the linen undergarments shall be next to his body, and he shall be girded with the linen sash and attired with the linen turban (these are holy garments). Then he shall bathe his body in water and put them on…. 24.) He shall bathe his body with water in a holy place and put on his clothes, and come forth and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people.
So, the OT had categories for purification rites accomplished by water. When John takes this up, the Hebrew people would have had categories to understand what John the Baptist was doing.
We are going to suggest this morning four ways in which the Baptism of the Lord Christ was significant in its Redemptive-Historical setting. It is significant for more than just these four ways we will be looking at. I won’t have time to go into, for example, its significance in terms of its Trinitarian bearing.
The Significance of the Lord Christ’s Baptism is found
I.)In Baptism The Lord Christ Identifies w/ His People As Their Sin-bearer
II.) In Baptism The Lord Christ Identifies As Our Priest — (“Fulfilling all Righteousness”)
III.) In Baptism Identifies as our Sacrifice (Suffering Servant Connection) (Isaiah 42:1)
IV.) In The Baptism Of Our Lord Christ The New Creation Has Been Established
I.) Identifies w/ His People As Their Sin-bearer
John’s Baptism was for the remission of sin (Mark 1:4).
4 John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
John recognizes that Jesus has no need of being Baptized and so protests that the roles should be reversed. So, this tells us that Jesus had no need for Baptism unto remission of His own personal sins. As such we have need to ask ourselves why, if the Lord Christ had no sins, did He submit to Baptism.
And the answer is found in the reality that in His Baptism Jesus identifies with sinners. The Baptism of the Lord Christ thus is a covenantal action whereby covenantally the Lord Christ, via His Baptism, is set apart as being the Representative head of His people. He Himself had no sins but He would become the representative head for those who had sins that needed to be satisfied.
Scripture teaches of the Lord Christ,
21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
As such, we might say that in and with His Baptism the Lord Christ becomes the covenantal head of a great company of sinners for whom He will do and preform all things necessary for their salvation.
In this we find the covenantal nature of our Redemption. Christ is our appointed Champion and the success or failure of His mission will be our success or failure. We see again then the covenantal nature of Christianity. God saves His people as they are united with their covenantal head the Lord Christ. His Baptism objectively and covenantally unites Himself to them and His Death objectively and covenantally unites us to Him.
Of course this has implications.
1.) It implies that there is no approaching of the Father apart from being united to the Son
The adherents of false religions who are “nice” people remain dead in their trespasses and sins and remain strangers and aliens to eternal life.
2.) It implies that Christ is our righteousness
The Christian is defined as one who is eager for good works, created in Christ Jesus for good works, one who is filled with the Spirit and so walks in terms of God’s authoritative law and so are doers of the word. Christians are those who show their faith by their works yet at the same time we insist that all our righteousness is in Christ alone who is our righteousness from God.
II.) In Baptism The Lord Christ Identifies As Our Priest — (“Fulfilling all Righteousness”)
As the book of Hebrews informs us, with the coming of Jesus
12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. 13 For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord [a]was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests.
We remember that the Aaronic Priesthood of the Old Testament was only a shadow of the Priesthood of Christ, which would be the fulfillment that all the Aaronic Priesthood foreshadowed and anticipated. With the coming of Christ there is a change in the Priesthood and there is a change in the law inasmuch as the sacrificial laws are fulfilled in the Lord Christ. Because we have a change in Priesthood and law there is a necessity for the fulfilled Priesthood of Christ to be consecrated in keeping with God’s law. It was this law of consecration that Jesus was referring to when He said “For thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.”
Of course this reminds us that with this new Priesthood from the tribe of Judah (as opposed to Levi) there remains a respect unto God’s law. Yes the Law has undergone a change from shadow to reality but with this defined and restricted change the broader Law of God is respected.
And the broader Law of God that is respected is found in Numbers 8:5-7,
5 ¶ And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 6 Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and purify them.
7 And thus shalt thou do unto them, when thou purifiest them, Sprinkle water of purification upon them,
So, with the coming of Christ we have a new Priesthood but this new Priesthood is inaugurated in keeping with God’s Law so that this New Priest, from the Tribe of Judah, can be consecrated in keeping with God’s law.
When Christ says,
“For thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness”
This is the Righteousness that is being fulfilled.
a.) So, we are saying that the need to fulfill all righteousness is suggestive of the need to fulfill some concrete law.
b.) We see a harmony between what Jesus is doing and the necessity of Water in the Numbers passage. In Numbers the Priests are consecrated by the sprinkling of water. Here the Lord Christ is being consecrated to His work by the sprinkling of the Waters of Baptism.
c.) The Lord Christ was about to enter His Priestly work as member of a different tribe then those who were appointed the role of Priest. As such He understands His need to submit to the law of consecration. Remember Jesus says of Himself that He always is about the will of His Father. This OT consecration of the Priests was the will of the Father that Jesus is about here.
Implications
** — Christ is our Sin-Bearer, our Priest, and (as our next point will tease out) our Sacrifice. His Baptism connects all those realities. In Baptism He is being set aside to our be Champion before the Father. As such this Baptism is crucial to His ministry and work of Christ. In the Baptism of Christ, the Lord Christ goes from a private Person to a Public Person vested with authority (Spirit’s anointing, Father’s Imprimatur) to accomplish His work that He is set apart to do.
** — As our High Priest He can provide sacrifice before God for the sins of the People, but unlike the old Aaronic Priesthood His sacrifice is once and forever complete.
III.) Identifies as our Sacrifice (Suffering Servant Connection) (Isaiah 42:1)
Christ is not only the one who bears away our sin but He is also the atoning sacrifice in whom the Father is well pleased.
A.) In this phrase of “well pleased” there may even be a hint of sacrificial language. Remember in Genesis 4:4 it was said of God
And the Lord was pleased with Abel and his offering…
In Philippians 4:18 God being pleased is connected to a sacrificial aroma
18 … I am full, having received from Epaphroditus the things sent from you, a sweet-smelling aroma, an acceptable sacrifice, well pleasing to God.
In the Old Testament, sacrifices, done in faith, were pleasing to God. Christ is the one in whom the Father is “well pleased.” As such this “Well Pleased” language may be foreshadowing the work of Christ as the sacrifice that the Father is well-pleased with unto the turning away of His wrath.
B.) This affirmation of the Father from heaven confirms Jesus identification as the servant of the Lord spoken of in Isaiah 42:1
Behold, my servant: I will stay upon him: mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my Spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
This same Servant of the Lord we learn then later in Isaiah is a suffering servant who is wounded, bruised, and chastised for His people. As such, this identification of the Son in connection with the Father being “well-pleased” harbors Old Testament hints that the Father’s pleasure is based upon the work the Son will preform.
But in the suggestion of the Lord Christ’s humiliation with this phrase “My Son in whom I am well pleased” there is also the suggestion of His eventual exaltation as we see this Sonship language used to trumpet His Kingship.
Psalm 2:6 — “Even I have set my King upon Zion mine holy mountain. 7 I will declare the decree: that is, the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt crush them with a scepter of iron, and break them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.”
So, yes there are strong undertones in the Baptism of the Lord Christ of His Humiliation but in that song of humiliation there remains a delicate sub-theme in the music of His coming Exaltation.
IV.) Event Communicates that the Lord Christ is the One in whom is found the New Creation
(Compare Spirit hovering in Genesis 1:2 w/ Spirit descending in Mt. 3:16)
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him,[b] and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Just as the Spirit overs over the Creation unto the end of work of Creation, just so the Spirit is involved in the work of the New Creation that has come in Christ. With the descending of the Spirit upon the Lord Christ we find the promised new age is dawning with the coming of He who is the New Creation.
Consistent with this we find the themes of coming of the Kingdom. John’s message is “Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.” Just so, shortly after the Baptism of Christ, our Lord Christ can preach the same message. In Christ, the Kingdom of God has come. In Christ the New Creation is present. And the means of entering into this new Creation — this coming Kingdom — is by repentance and by being united with He who is the Kingdom and the new Creation.
Here we must remember our “Now, Not Yet,” hermeneutic. In the arrival of Christ the Kingdom and New Creation has come in Principle and yet it continues to come progressively as more and more men are swept into the reality of that present and coming Kingdom.
So, the Baptism of the Lord Christ is a significant event in the unfolding of Redemptive History and it is a significant event for us personally. In the unfolding of Redemptive History it is the entry point wherein Christ is anointed a Public Person and a Representative for His people. In the unfolding of Redemptive History the long promised Kingdom and New Creation has come. It is a significant event for us personally because we can be confident that in Christ’s Baptism He identifies with us and so can be our sacrifice, our sin-bearer and our High Priest. It is significant for us because when understood properly it comforts and assures us in our personal struggle with sin. We may fail in overcoming but Christ as our representative has overcome for us.
Conclusion,
So we might ask, what is our proper response to the Lord Christ identifying with His people? Might I offer that the proper response of gratitude is to identify with Christ? The Lord Christ identified with us in our sins and we might well respond in gratitude by identifying with Him in the extension of His Kingdom.
Trading burdens in the covenant is central to the economy of Gods kingdom. “Bear one another’s burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ.” He bore the burden of our sins and we bear the burden of seeking His kingdom, a much lighter burden than our sins.
___________________________
Random notes
Baptism — Baptism was not new to John’s ministry. In the OT it was a means by which there was a setting apart to a unique and holy purpose. This idea of setting apart by means of washing goes back to priestly ablutions (washings) prior to offering sacrifices (Leviticus 16:4 , 16:24 ).
4 He shall put on the holy linen tunic, and the linen undergarments shall be next to his body, and he shall be girded with the linen sash and attired with the linen turban (these are holy garments). Then he shall bathe his body in water and put them on…. 24.) He shall bathe his body with water in a holy place and put on his clothes, and come forth and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people.
So, the OT had categories for purification rites accomplished by water. When John takes this up, the Hebrew people would have had categories to understand what John the Baptist was doing.
This morning we will be considering
I.) The Opening of the Heavens in the Baptism account
II.) The Baptism proper
III.) The Voice and the Words of the Father in the Baptism Account
IV.) The Spirit as Dove in the Baptism Account
I.) Heaven Opens
The heavens were opened (Greek Schizo) torn open, the same word used in Mark 15:38 ” And the veil of the Temple was rent (Torn) in twain, from the top to the bottom.” At His baptism heaven is suddenly torn open and the Father and the Holy Spirit come together to bless and affirm what the Son was doing and about to do in His ministry.
So, “opening” is too mild of a word here to convey the idea of the word Mark chooses. You are familiar with the Greek word schizo from its use in psychiatric terms such as schizophrenic. Outside that specialized use, the word schizo means to rend, to tear apart, to rip open. What is happening here in the Baptism of the Lord Christ is in keeping with Isaiah’s prayer,
“Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!” (Isaiah 64:1)
-
With the rending of the Heavens in Jesus’ Baptism Mark is demonstrating that God has come down in the Person of Christ.
-
So, again, Mark uses the word twice, once near the beginning of his Gospel and once near the end. When a unique word is used in this way, Theologians sometimes refer to it as an inclusio. An inclusio is a literary technique by which the author creates theological “book ends” at the beginning and end of the text for added significance and meaning. This tearing for St. Mark represents the precise beginning (the baptism) and the precise end (the death) of the earthly career of Jesus.
The ripping open of the heavens is a figurative way of saying that the barrier between heaven and earth is being removed and that God is coming among us through his Spirit-anointed Son. God has come near to His fallen world to heal it in Christ.
Concerning the Temple we hear, “And the curtain of the temple was torn (schizo) in two, from top to bottom” (Mark 15:38). The Temple curtain was a symbolic separation of sinful people from the holy God.
What adds interest to this “tearing” inclusio is that the ancient writer Josephus tells us what was pictured on the curtain that was later torn:
Portrayed on this tapestry was a panorama of the entire heavens….
You see the outer veil of the Jerusalem temple was actually one huge image of the starry sky! Thus, upon encountering Mark’s statement that “the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom,” any of his readers who had ever seen the temple or heard it described would instantly have seen in their mind’s eye an image of the heavens being torn, and would immediately have been drawn back to Mark’s earlier description of the heavens being torn at the baptism.
So Mark’s Gospel is framed by the ripping open of barriers between God and humanity, the barriers that keep God from coming to us, the barriers that keep us from coming to God. This removing of the barriers is what happens through Jesus Christ. It is a result much to be desired.
II.) The Baptism itself — The WhyA.) Fulfilling the Law Requirement For The Change In Priesthood
Jesus is, emphatically, our Great High Priest. As High Priest the Lord Christ is the fulfillment of all that the Aaronic line shadowed. Aaron’s line was the echo while Christ is the original.The Aaronic priesthood which was shadow anticipating Christ as High Priest belonged to the tribe of Levi, and were the descendants of Aaron.
Jesus belonged to another tribe, ‘of which,’ as Paul says, ‘no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident our Lord sprang out of Judah, of which tribe, Moses spake nothing concerning the priesthood.’ Heb. vii. 13, 14, and in verse twelve, he says, ‘For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.’
The point here is that there cannot be a change to the Priesthood without there also, at the same time, being a change to the law as it pertains to this matter.
Now, when the Aaronic priesthood was first instituted, the tribe to which it pertained was, in a formal manner, consecrated, set apart to this high calling.
Numbers 8:5-7″ ‘And the Lord spake unto Moses, Take the Levites from among the children of Israel and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them: SPRINKLE WATER OF PURIFYING UPON THEM.’ ”
So now we have this great change occurring where another Tribe is given the Priestly task and we should expect the new High Priest to fulfill this requirement.
And Jesus himself hints that this is what is going on when he says to John the Baptist in the Matthew account,
14 But John earnestly put him back, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 Then Jesus answering, said to him, Let be now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill [t]all righteousness. So he suffered him.
Now, remember, the fulfilling of righteousness has to do with Christ relationship to the Law. Something in the law has to be fulfilled.
What is the righteousness that needs to be fulfilled of which our Lord Christ speaks?
I would contend that the righteousness that needs to be fulfilled … the conformity to the Law that God strictly required, is the consecration of the Lord Christ to this office of High Priest that was previously only owned by the Aaronic line.
What bends us in this direction?
P.– “It is CERTAIN, according to Jesus own words, that there was some law with which he must comply. This is why he spoke about the necessity of His Baptism so that all righteousness might be fulfilled.
“Again, it is CERTAIN that in complying with the law, it necessitated the use of water.
“Again, it is CERTAIN that he felt that he must comply with that law, because he was entering upon his priestly work, not as a descendant of Aaron, or of the tribe of Levi, but as a member of another tribe — Judah.
“Again, it is CERTAIN that the law quoted was for the very purpose for which Jesus wished to be baptized.
“Again, it is CERTAIN that if this is not the law to which referred, then no such law was in existence.
“Again, it is CERTAIN that if there was no such law on record, there would have been no propriety in Jesus saying it was necessary for him to be baptized to comply with the law.
So, one thing the Baptism accomplishes is it uses the same ceremony that set apart and consecrated the Aaronic Priesthood to set apart and consecrate the Priesthood of Christ as coming from a different tribe. And the law that was changed that the book of Hebrews speaks of is that the ceremonial law has been fulfilled in Christ.
And keep in mind that this consecration was done, both in the OT with the Levites and with the Lord Christ in Baptism, by sprinkling and not immersion.
B.) God’s Second Adam Leading His People through Another Exodus
Leaning upon a reading of the text that is harmony with all of the OT we might observe that just as Israel was led by Moses and had to go through the sea at the Exodus to enter the promise land, and just as the second generation re-enacted that water passage into the Promised land with Joshua and through the Jordan river, so now that the one has come who will lead His people into the New Creation He brings with Him, there is a need for a water passage Exodus to identify with the greater Moses and the greater Joshua as the Lord Christ leads His people into the greater promised land — the New Creation.
Jesus Baptism signifies thus not only the beginning of a new Exodus but also a new creation, as he has come to reverse the fall and the curse.
III.) The Voice & The WordsWe are in the Epiphany season of the Church calendar and Epiphany begins with Christ’s Baptism and the Father speaking from heaven,Baptism — Mark 1:11 — Then there was a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
, and on the Church calendar Epiphany ends with the Transfiguration and the same voice from heaven (Mark 9:7).
Transfiguration — Mark 9:7 And there was a cloud that shadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.
There is on other time the Gospels find the Father speaking audibly to the Son.
A few days prior to death — John 12:28– Then there was a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
In two of these three occasions the Father announces that He is “well pleased” with the Son. There may be overtones of sacrifice in that language. Consider that in the OT this idea of God being pleased often comes in connection to the sacrifices.
On sixteen different occasions in the book of Leviticus alone, an “aroma” is mentioned as something pleasing to the Lord. Specifically, the aroma of a sacrifice is important to God. What makes the sacrifice pleasing is that the sacrifice represents the substitutionary atonement for sin.
Genesis 8:21 — Noah’s burnt sacrifice upon leaving the ark is said to be a “pleasing aroma” to God.
Leviticus 1:9 13 says, “The priest is to burn all of it on the altar. It is a burnt offering, a food offering, an aroma pleasing to the LORD.
Leviticus 2:2 — Despite the fact that this offering involved grain rather than meat, it had “an aroma pleasing to the LORD.”
Leviticus 23:18 (Feast of weeks which focused on Redemption of sinners) — “Present with this bread seven male lambs, each a year old and without defect, one young bull and two rams. They will be a burnt offering to the LORD, together with their grain offerings and drink offerings—a food offering, an aroma pleasing to the LORD.”
(Ezekiel 6:13, ESV) — Offerings made to false gods were also described as having a “pleasing aroma” as well—to the idols, at least
That the Lord Christ was being seen as a “well pleasing” sacrifice, in the Baptism context, is underscored by St. John’s Gospel, where just before what transpires is that John the Baptist cries out, in reference to the Lord Christ, that he is ‘the lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world. So, the Father is well pleased with the Son because the Son is the propitiation for Sin.
The New Testament reveals Christ as the final sacrifice for sin, the ultimate propitiation: “Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God” (Ephesians 5:2).
Jesus, the Son of God, was the only One who could provide the eternally pleasing sacrifice. He alone is the One of whom the Father says, “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased” (Mark 1:11).
And on top of all that we find echos of this “well pleased” language in one of the suffering servant passages in the OT.
Behold my servant, whom I uphold,
my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my Spirit upon him;
he will bring forth justice to the nations. (Is. 42:1)So we find this divine witness of the Father’s voice three times in the ministry of the Lord Christ. Once at the beginning of Christ’s Ministry where He is consecrated unto High Priestly work where he will offer up Himself as our Sacrifice. Once at the clearest demonstration of Christ’s divinity as the fulfillment of the law and the Prophets — both of which pointed to the Lord Christ’s death. And once just before He accomplishes His work on the cross. At each of these speaking the Father places His imprimatur of approval upon the Son’s set apart-ness to be our substitutionary atonement.
IV.) The Spirit as Dove
Of course Christians have rightly seen in the Baptism of the Lord Christ a proof for the Trinitarian Character of God. The Son is Baptized, the Father Speaks and the Spirit descends as a dove. Note the importance that the three are working in agreement and harmony. This is the character of the Tri-oneness of God.
Considering the Spirit, it is not the first time we see the Spirit in the context of water and creation
A.) Genesis — And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
The picture of a separation of waters in tandem with the mention of the Spirit of God placing people in a new land seems to go all the way back to Genesis.
Gen 1:9 ¶ God said again, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Then our first parents are made in God’s image to be fruitful and multiply and have dominion.
“The same pattern occurs with Noah, where toward the end of the flood we find Gen. 8:1-3a teaching ‘God caused a wind [ruah, often rendered as Spirit] to pass over the earth, and the water subsided …. and the water receded steadily from the earth.” Thus Noah and his family were able to live on dry land again to the end of being fruitful, multiplying and having dominion. The flood was, as you will recall, a starting afresh. God took Noah and His people, through the waters to the safety of a cleansed promised land.
A new and better covenant comes and a greater Noah is on the scene and this greater Noah must rescue His people also. And so the greater Noah goes through the waters to a new Creation just as the lesser Noah had, and He goes through the waters to a New Creation that is provided in His person. After going through the water He takes dominion and multiplies by the way of calling disciples.
And just as Noah goes through the flood and sends out a dove, so God sends His Spirit as a Dove to hover over the waters and His divinely appointed Covenant head who is bringing His people into a new creation.
So, the Baptism of the Lord Christ is not only a re-play of the waters of the Red Sea and the waters of the Jordan unto the promised land it is a recreation in light of the recreation found in the Noahic story — complete with the sent Dove hovering over both the waters and the New Creation.
The Common Bond of Theonomic Alienism and International Marxism
Lately a debate has arisen in some quarters from Bulgaria, wherein it is denied that Marxism, in its quest for a NWO for all of mankind, requires the elimination of all familial, ethnic and racial distinctions. Here are a few quotes from Dr. Francis Nigel Lee on the subject. This is followed by a couple short quotes from prominent Reformed Theologians in History who insist that the distinctions that men are created with are normative and God honoring. Many more quotes like these are peppered throughout Iron Ink.
“Already in his First Draft of the ‘Civil War in France’-The Character of the Commune, Marx approvingly recorded that “loudly announcing its international tendencies … Paris announced the admission of foreigners to the commune as basic policy, immediately elected a foreign worker [Leo Frankel] (a member of the international) in its executive committee. [and] decreed [the destruction of the] symbol of French chauvinism-the Vendôme Column!””
– Dr. F.N. Lee
“In the final rendition of his Civil War in France, Marx wrote that “if the Commune was thus truly representative of all the healthy elements of French society, and therefore the truly national Government, it was, at the same time, a working men’s Government, [and,] as the bold champion of the emancipation of labor, emphatically international …. The Commune annexed to France the working people all over the world … The Commune admitted all foreigners to the honor of dying for the immortal cause … The bourgeoisie had found time to display their patriotism by organizing police hunts upon the Germans in France.
The Commune made a German working man its Minister of Labor … The Commune honored the heroic sons of Poland by
placing them at the head of the defenders of Paris.””– Dr. F.N. Lee
“And as Lenin pointed out in his Paris Commune, the Commune “was able to eradicate ‘common national’ and ‘patriotic’ aberrations in the ranks of the young proletariat.””
– Dr. F.N. Lee
“Lenin’s 1918 Constitution of R.S.F.S.R. (art. 22) proclaimed that: “The Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic, recognizing that all citizens enjoy equal rights without distinction of race or nationality, declares that it is contrary to the fundamental laws of the Republic to grant or tolerate any privileges or advantages based on race or nationality, and to oppress national minorities or impose any limitations whatsoever on their rights.””
– Dr. F.N. Lee
“Well known are the words of the Manifesto of the Communist Party: “The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality. The working men have no country. National differences and antagonisms between peoples are daily more and more vanishing … The supremacy of the proletariat will cause them to vanish still faster. In proportion as the exploitation of one individual by another is put an end to, the exploitation of one nation by another will also be put an end to. In proportion as the antagonism between classes within the nation vanishes, the hostility of one nation to another will come to an end.” Thus too Lenin.”
– Dr. F.N. Lee
“Clearly it is the case that you can’t have Socialism/Communism without Alienism’s desire to break down natural familial affections and ties. This is so because the goal of all International Marxism is a muscular egalitarianism whereby even man’s heritage and lineage is so equal that the heritage and lineage is irrelevant. International Marxism, with its Anti-Christ desire to eliminate all distinctions as ordained by God, even eventually pushes to the point where distinctions between men and women, and children and adults begins to fade away.
Of course Reformed Theologians have always held that God delights in inherited and God given distinctions.
“Paul had two classes of brethren; those who were with him the children of God in Christ; these he calls brethren in the Lord, Philip, i. 14, holy brethren, &c. The others were those who belonged to the family of Abraham. These he calls brethren after the flesh, that is, in virtue of natural descent from the same parent. Philemon he addresses as his brother, both in the flesh and in the Lord. The Bible recognizes the validity and rightness of all the constitutional principles and impulses of our nature. It therefore approves of parental and filial affection, and, as is plain from this and other passages, of peculiar love for the people of our own race and country.
Charles Hodge
Commentary Romans 9
“It is admitted that nations as well as tribes and families, have their distinctive characteristics, and that these characteristics are not only physical and mental, but also social and moral. Some tribes are treacherous and cruel. Some are mild and confiding. Some are addicted to gain, others to war. Some are sensual, some intellectual. We instinctively judge of each according to its character; … admitting that these dispositions are innate and hereditary, and that they are not self-acquired by the individual whose character they constitute, we nevertheless, and none the less, approve or condemn them according to their nature. This is the instinctive and necessary, and therefore the correct, judgment of the mind.”
—Charles Hodge
Systematic Theology, Vol. 2.5.6
Origin of Man: the “differences between the Caucasian, Mongolian, and negro races, which is known to have been as distinctly marked two or three thousand years before Christ as it is now…. these varieties of race are not the effect of the blind operation of physical causes, but by those cause as intelligently guided by God for the accomplishment of some wise purpose… God fashions the different races of men in their peculiarities to suit them to the regions which they inhabit.”
Charles Hodge
Systematic Theology Pt II Chapter 1
“Nationalism, within proper limits, has the divine sanction; an imperialism that would, in the interest of one people, obliterate all lines of distinction is everywhere condemned as contrary to the divine will. Later prophecy raises its voice against the attempt at world-power, and that not only, as is sometimes assumed, because it threatens Israel, but for the far more principal reason, that the whole idea is pagan and immoral.
Now it is through maintaining the national diversities, as these express themselves in the difference of language, and are in turn upheld by this difference, that God prevents realization of the attempted scheme… [In this] was a positive intent that concerned the natural life of humanity. Under the providence of God each race or nation has a positive purpose to serve, fulfillment of which depends on relative seclusion from others.”
~ Geerhardus Vos
Biblical Theology
Body Mutilation Considered
Leviticus 19:28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am Jehovah.
Body mutilation — and here I’m not talking about a pierced ear or a tiny tiny pierced nose or a tiny flower on one’s hip — is one of the sure signs that we are returning to anti-Christ paganism. In cultures influenced by and seeped in Biblical Christianity the problem of guilt is understood, by the “in Christ individuals” in that culture, as having been dealt with in the finished work of Jesus Christ. Further, any real moral guilt that comes into a believer’s life subsequent to their union with Christ is confessed, repented of, and taken to the Cross of Christ and left there in light of the pronounced absolution of sins that happens week by week in Church, by the voice of Christ as heard over the vocal chords of the minister, or that is everywhere pronounced in Scripture. Christians don’t carry their guilt around because they have a Great High Priest and Savior who has relieved them of their guilt. For a Christian to carry their guilt around is to announce that Christ’s death, resurrection and ascension is not sufficient.
However in cultures where sin and guilt have no answer, the individuals in that culture must provide themselves ways to deal with their guilt. The only options that are available are either for one to pay for that guilt one’s self — thus leading to masochism — or for one to try to fob off their guilt on someone else, thus leading to some form of sadism. Guilty people will always try to find ways to relieve themselves of their guilt burden. If they refuse Christ’s sacrifice for guilt they will offer up themselves or someone else as a guilt sacrifice.
Body mutilation is one of the forms of masochism whereby our culture is reflecting that it is seeking to shed its real moral guilt via self mutilation (masochism). Where there is no understanding of guilt being taken by Christ in the Atonement there one should not be surprised to find a tattoo, piercing and body mutilation culture where atonement is being sought in punishment of self for one’s real moral guilt. They have no Christ to suffer for their guilt and so they do things to themselves to make themselves suffer for their real moral guilt.
Secondly, at the same time, one can see the body mutilation culture as an attack on the image of God in man. Man, is — both body and soul — created in the image of God. The self defacing of God’s handiwork, via body mutilation, is an attempt to cast off the image of God in favor of an image as created by the autonomous self. The rebel against God will not have God rule over him and one way to cast off and deny God’s rule is to mar one’s self so that the mirror doesn’t reflect back the image of God that is so violently hated. What better way to get rid of true moral guilt then by attacking the one whom one refuses to go to for the only relief from guilt possible? (By the way, this idea of attacking the image of God in one’s self, I believe accounts a great deal also for the rise of sodomy and lesbianism as well. As sexuality is tied up very closely with the image of God in men and women, overturning God’s intended order for sex in an effective short term attack on the image of God in men and women.)
Thirdly, I think a lot of the mutilation we see is a manifestation of the fixation our culture has with rejecting boring “whiteness” in favor of spiffy tribalism with its tatoos, piercings, weird hairstyles, goofy clothes, etc. Everywhere it is being shouted how evil white people are. (This is, by the way, another form of displaced guilt. Guilt is not taken to Christ therefore guilt will be passed on to white people in a sadistic fashion in order to relieve others of their guilt.) Body mutilation allows white people to seriously alter their whiteness thus relieving themselves of white guilt.
Finally, in body mutilation there is always the sinful “look at me” dynamic going on. Those outside of Christ are especially self centered, desiring to have all of reality and all attention orbit around them. Body mutilation allows the mutilator to be the center of constant attraction.
William Graham Tullian’s Washington Post Article
In the below link,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/wp/2013/10/17/the-missing-message-in-todays-churches/
William Graham Tullian (WGT) offers some good points and some points I’m not sure of. Because it is all confused and jumbled together the article could be confusing. I won’t be interacting with the whole article, so I encourage the reader to access the whole article to make sure and get the whole context.
WGT opens
America’s churches came back into the media limelight a few weeks ago after a well-publicized Pew study showed a meteoric rise of Americans claiming no religious affiliation, shooting up from seven percent in 1990 to 16 percent in 2010. The percentage more than doubled for those under the age of 30, reaching almost 35 percent. The group is now being referred to as “the religious nones.”
Bret offers,
It might have been helpful here had someone noted that it is impossible to be a “religious nones.” Now, certainly people may not self identify with a religion but that doesn’t make them any less religious then the person thought to be the most religious person on the planet. Part of what it means to come to intellectual maturity is to realize that religion is an inescapable category and that the lives of all people is conditioned by their religion. The flight from religion never happens apart from a flight to religion.
WGT
There has been no lack of theorizing to account for the numbers. Some chalk it up to a more visibly secularized society, others to doctrinal confusion, and others to the social media-fueled culture of distraction among today’s youth. Some dismiss the charge as alarmist, claiming that young people have always had a distaste for organized religion. The list goes on.
Bret
If my above paragraph is true (and it is) then it follows that societies never become more secularized as it is as impossible for societies to be a-religious as it is for individuals to be irreligious. If more secularized societies means that the society as a whole is operating apart from a religion foundation then the notion that societies become more secularized is ridiculous. Man, rather considered as a individual or in his societal role, is a hopelessly religious being.
WGT
In a recent column for CNN, Rachel Held Evans opined that, “what millennials really want from the church is not a change in style but a change in substance.” Speaking as someone who has spent the past forty plus years in the bosom of American Evangelicalism, she is certainly onto something. The “what” is the issue, not the “how.”
You don’t have to be a sociologist to know that we live in a culture of asphyxiating “performancism.” Performancism is the mindset that equates our identity and value directly with our performance. It casts achievements not as something we do or don’t do but as something we are (or aren’t). The money we earn, the car we drive, the schools we attend, aren’t merely reflective of our occupation or ability; they are reflective of us. They are constitutive rather than descriptive. In this schema, success equals life, and failure is tantamount to death.
Bret
If WGT is correct about “performancism” then what the culture needs above all is the law preached to them to remind them of their performance failure. The last thing these performance hounds need to hear is that God accepts their failures apart from a confessed recognition that all their performances (even the best of them) are as filthy rags before God. They should be told that their schema is correct. Success does equal life and failure is tantamount to death and the fact is that the most successful of them in the congregation are failures.
You see my problem with WGT is I sense that WGT wants to rush to the Gospel solution before setting the law hook. WGT’s message leads people to conclude, “It’s ok if my performance isn’t good enough because God isn’t exacting.” But God is exacting and God does demand performance.
My next problem is that the performance hounds are only self disappointed regarding their performance. An awareness needs to be opened to them that they need be more concerned about the fact that God is disappointed with them. The good news of the Gospel is not they have no need to be hard on themselves but rather that because of the Lord Christ God is no longer hard on them. This is not an unimportant distinction because, with notable exceptions, the emphasis on WGT’s article is how self is hard on self. The problem that those who refuse to attend church have instead is that God is more hard on them then they will ever be on themselves.
The fact that WGT’s article is anthropocentric regarding people’s performance issue makes me wonder about the article as a whole.
WGT,
Performancism leads us to spend our lives frantically propping up our image or reputation, trying to have it all, do it all, and do it all well, often at a cost to ourselves and those we love. Life becomes a hamster wheel of endless earning and proving and maintenance and management, where all we can see is our own feet. Before long we are living in a constant state of anxiety, fear, and resentment. A few years ago, Dr. Richard Leahy, an anxiety specialist, was quoted as saying, “The average high school kid today has the same level of anxiety as the average psychiatric patient in the early 1950s.”
Bret
Naturally self is always concerned about self. This is a succinct definition of sin. The last thing we need to tell the performance hounds is that God gives them permission to not be concerned about performance. In point of fact what they need to be told is that God is more demanding of them than they will ever be of themselves. Of course when they become convinced of their inability to live up to God’s standards then we give them the good news of Christ performance for them and that God is satisfied with Christ’s performance for them.
WGT
Sadly, the church has not proven immune to performancism. An institution theoretically devoted to providing comfort to those in need is in trouble because it has embraced the same pressure-cooker we find everywhere else.In recent years, a handful of popular books have been published urging a more robust and radical expression of the Christian faith. I heartily amen the desire to take one’s faith seriously and demonstrate before the watching world a willingness to be more than just Sunday churchgoers. The unintended consequence of this push, however, is that we can give people the impression that Christianity is first and foremost about the sacrifices we make rather than the sacrifice Jesus made for us – our performance rather than his performance for us. The hub of Christianity is not “do something for Jesus.” The hub of Christianity is “Jesus has done everything for you.” And my fear is that too many people, both inside and outside the church, have heard our “do more, try harder” sermons and pleas for intensified devotion and concluded that the focus of the Christian faith is the work that we do instead of the work God has done for us in the person of Jesus.
Bret
I’m going to need a list of all these pressure cooker Churches because I don’t know where they are at.
Still, there is much to like in this paragraph. I only wish we didn’t need to create false dichotomies as if emphasizing Christ’s performance for us means that our performance doesn’t matter. Even St. Paul could say,
“by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not found vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.
Obviously Christ performance is what is central — and the centrality of that needs to remain central — but the effect of Christ’s performance for us is dimly reflected in our performance for Christ and if we care not about our performance for Christ then we must ask ourselves if we care about Christ’s performance for us.
WGT
Furthermore, too many churches perpetuate the impression that Christianity is primarily concerned with morality. As my colleague David Zahl has written, “Christianity is not about good people getting better. It is about real people coping with their failure to be good.” The heart of the Christian faith is Good News not good behavior.When Sunday mornings become one more venue for performance evaluation, can you blame a person for wanting to stay at home?
As someone who loves the church, I am saddened by the perception of Christianity as a vehicle of moral control and good behavior, rather than a haven for the discouraged and dying. It is high time for the church to remind our broken and burned out world that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a one-way declaration that because Jesus was strong for you, you’re free to be weak; because Jesus won for you, you’re free to lose; because Jesus succeeded for you, you’re free to fail.
Bret
Again, we must beware false dichotomies. It is true that Christianity is not primarily concerned with morality but that doesn’t mean that Christianity isn’t proximately concerned about morality. Certainly St. James was concerned with morality. If one reads St. John’s epistles you can see that he is concerned about morality. St. Paul is concerned about morality when he asks, “What shall we say? Shall we go on sinning that grace might increase? God forbid! It is just not helpful when Christian ministers write as if morality is not a concern of the Christian God.
And the Zahl quote just isn’t accurate. Christianity is about good people getting better. It is true that none of our “good” in an absolute sense but by God’s grace alone we are transformed from glory unto glory (II Cor. 3:18). Christianity teaches that we are not what we will be, but it also teaches that we are not what we once were.
The fact that Christians do begin, with serious purpose, to conform not only to some, but to all the commandments of God indicates that by God’s grace alone we are being changed.
The fact that Christianity is seen about Christians being moral is seen in Paul’s words to the Ephesians,
But ye did not so learn Christ;
21 if so be that ye heard him, and were taught in him, even as truth is in Jesus:
22 that ye put away, as concerning your former manner of life, the old man, that waxeth corrupt after the lusts of deceit;
23 and that ye be renewed in the spirit of your mind,
24 and put on the new man, that after God hath been created in righteousness and holiness of truth.
25 Wherefore, putting away falsehood, speak ye truth each one with his neighbor: for we are members one of another.
26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:
27 neither give place to the devil.
28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labor, working with his hands the thing that is good, that he may have whereof to give to him that hath need.
But of course it is not only about good people being constantly renewed by Grace alone. It is also about comforting the afflicted who see that they are not yet what they are called to be. Christianity is also about helping real people cope with their failure of not being good. The Christian faith encourages people to press on
13 Brethren, I count not myself yet to have laid hold: but one thing I do, forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before,
14 I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
15 Let us therefore, as many as are mature, be thus minded: and if in anything ye are otherwise minded, this also shall God reveal unto you:
So the Church has a word of hope and comfort to the floundering and it has a word to those who are not floundering. To those who are floundering the word is, “It is true you are a great sinner, but Christ is a greater Savior.” To those who are not floundering the word is, “further in and farther up.”
WGT
Grace and rest and absolution–with no new strings or anxieties attached–now that would be a change in substance.
Was The Lord Christ attaching strings when he spoke of the necessity to deny one’s self, take up his Cross and follow?