The Untruncated Gospel

May 20th, 2012 | Posted by Brandon Melton in Jesus Christ | Justification | Practical Theology | Salvation | Sanctification | Systematic Theology | The Gospel | The Holy Spirit | Theology - (0 Comments)

In recent years there have been the beginnings of what some have labeled a resurgence of gospel-centrality in the evangelical church. Christians are returning again to the centrality of the message of God’s grace, not simply as the means by which non-Christians are converted to Christianity, but also as the means by which Christians grow in grace and godliness. This is a good thing, and a positive trend in contemporary Christianity. I have experienced a personal gospel-resurgence in the last two years of my life as well, and it has only served to enhance my joy in the glories of the gracious God of the Scriptures.

But as I reflect on this gospel-resurgence, both in my personal experience and the church at large, I have seen one potentially major weakness. In both my own experience and in the church at large, there seems to be a type of gospel-reductionism, namely, a good and helpful focus on the objective nature of the gospel (justification) such that the subjective nature of the gospel (sanctification) is neglected (which is neither good nor helpful).

Definition of Terms

Justification is the objective, forensic act of God whereby – by virtue of our union with Christ and his objective life, death, resurrection, and ascension on our behalf – guilty rebel-sinners are declared righteous. Sanctification is the process whereby – by virtue of our union with Christ and the subjective, transformative work of his Spirit within us – we are progressively transformed in to the image of Christ, becoming more and more (imperfectly) holy. The righteousness of justification is an imputed righteousness – a righteousness that comes from outside ourselves and is credited to us despite our personal unrighteousness. The righteousness of sanctification is an imparted righteousness – a righteousness that is powerfully worked within us by the progressive work of the Holy Spirit, overcoming and transforming our unrighteousness into personal (imperfect) righteousness.

The Truncated Gospel

Justification is objective. Sanctification is subjective. But there is a wing of the gospel-centered movement that tends to define sanctification mainly in terms of the objective reality of justification. Their basic working definition of sanctification is that it is “simply getting used to our justification.” While it is true that remembering our justification is one way in which we are motivated to obedience, this is simply not the way in which the Bible describes sanctification. Ironically, those who use such terminology in an effort to be centered in the gospel are preaching a truncated gospel. It is not gospel-centrality that they preach, but rather justification-centrality. But the gospel is bigger than justification – it includes major themes such as sanctification, adoption, reconciliation, regeneration, election, glorification, etc. This truncated gospel stems, in my estimation, from the error of placing justification at the core of the gospel’s message. That is, those who neglect the subjective facets of the gospel do so because they believe that sanctification flows directly out of justification. Therefore, in their view, the best way to see people subjectively sanctified is to simply point them back to their objective justification. But sanctification does not flow directly out of justification. It is true that justification and sanctification are inseparable benefits of the gospel. But they are not directly connected to one another such that one (sanctification) flows naturally from the other (justification); rather, they both flow directly out of union with Christ. Union with Christ, not justification, is the core of the gospel. In Christ we are objectively counted as righteous before we ever perform a single act of personal righteousness (justification). In Christ we are subjectively transformed by the Holy Spirit in to the image of his likeness, progressively killing our sin and performing more and more acts of personal righteousness. We are both justified and sanctified through faith, but the faith that justifies is a resting faith (resting in Christ for our standing with God), while the faith that sanctifies is an acting faith (actively working for God’s pleasure and glory among the nations).

The Source of Truncation

This truncated view of the gospel stems, in my observation, from a theology that is mainly reactionary, rather than holistic in its approach. In recent generations, there has been a dangerous disconnect between the imperatives of the Bible and the indicatives of the Bible - the commands given to us in the Scriptures have been divorced from the declaration of what God has done for us in Christ. This has resulted in a preaching of morality that is devoid of gospel motivation. This is a dangerous trend that needs a counter-balance, because it results in a moralistic, legalistic religion that is grounded in what the Christian does for God, rather than what God has done for the Christian. The truncated justification-centered gospel, however, stems from an over-reactive theology which is preoccupied with avoiding and confronting legalism to the neglect of exhorting Christians to faith-fueled, grace-driven obedience.

The Untruncated Gospel

As powerful as the objective realities of the gospel are, and as helpful as justification is in 1) countering legalism, and 2) motivating grateful obedience, the untruncated and biblical gospel is so much more powerful. Not only are we objectively counted as righteous in Christ, but our dominating sin-nature is subjectively put to death with Jesus. Not only did Jesus objectively resurrect from the dead displaying his objective victory over Satan, sin, and death, but we are also subjectively raised to walk in newness of life by the Spirit. Not only are we objectively delivered from the penalty of sin via justification, but we are also subjectively delivered from the power of sin via sanctification. Not only do we have an objective future hope for eternal life, we also have a subjective present hope for a progressively holy life. Not only do we hope in our objective once-for-all victory over sin through Jesus’ cross, but we also hope in our subjective daily victory over sin through the Holy Spirit.

Brothers and sisters, let’s strive to understand, believe, and obey the untruncated gospel of God’s objective work outside of us in Christ, as well as his subjective work inside of us in Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace.

, ,

The Doctrines of Grace | The History Behind the Controversy

April 30th, 2012 | Posted by Brandon Melton in Historical Theology | Salvation | The Doctrines of Grace | The Gospel | The Sovereignty of God | Theology - (2 Comments)

[This post is part of the Doctrines of Grace series]

What is Calvinism (or, as I prefer, the doctrines of grace)?

Many people, particularly in Baptist and Pentecostal circles, think of the five points of Calvinism as being a negative alteration of historic Christian teaching on how the gospel saves sinners. There is a common idea among non-Calvinist Christians that Calvinism is a dissent from traditional Christian doctrine. This is due largely in part to the fact that, in modern western Christianity, Reformed theology is not the popular view. The majority of confessing evangelical Christians would not classify themselves as Reformed. However, that has not always been the case. In order to understand how the doctrines of grace came about and why they were arranged as “the five points of Calvinism,” it is necessary to understand the theological controversy that took place in early-seventeenth-century Holland.

The Arminian Protest

Calvinism was not, in fact, an attempt to alter historic Christian doctrine. Rather, it was quite the opposite. In 1610, the followers of Jacob Arminius drafted five articles of faith which were based upon Arminius’ teaching. These articles (hereafter, Remonstrance) were drafted as a protest to the Belgic Confession of Faith and the Heidelberg Catechism, which were the official doctrinal statements of the Churches of Holland. In their protest, the Arminians demanded that the doctrinal statements be amended so as to conform to the Remonstrance. The Arminian Remonstrance objected to the doctrines upheld by the Confession and Catechism related to God’s sovereignty, human inability, sovereign election, the nature of the atonement, and the perseverance of faith among the saints. It was regarding these specific issues of theology that the Arminians wanted the churches of Holland’s revision.

This Remonstrance contained five articles of disagreement, which can be summarized as:

  1. God elects (and reprobates) on the basis of foreseen faith (and unbelief).
  2. Jesus died equally for all men.
  3. Man is corrupted by original sin, but not to the point that he cannot savingly believe the gospel.
  4. Man is never so controlled by God that he cannot resist the gospel.
  5. It is possible for a truly regenerate believer to lose his faith, and therefore his salvation.

The Rejection of Arminianism

In 1618, a synod was called to meet in Dort to examine and evaluate the views of the Armininan movement in the light of Scripture. This synod met on November 13, 1618. There were 154 sessions held during the seven months in which the synod met to evaluate Arminian doctrine, the last of which was on May 9, 1619.

Upon carefully examining the merit of the “five points” of Arminianism in light of Scripture, the synod overwhelmingly and unanimously rejected them. The synod, however, felt that simply rejecting the five points of Arminianism was not a sufficient response. So they set out to define the true Calvinistic teaching on the matters which the Remonstrance addressed. This Calvinistic response to the five Arminian articles has since been known as “the five points of Calvinism.”

Augustine vs. Pelagius

Despite common misconception, John Calvin and Jacob Arminius did not invent the theological systems which bear their names (Calvinism and Arminianism, respectively). The basic concepts of each system can be traced back hundreds of years before Calvin and Arminius lived. For example, the basic Calvinistic position was argued by Augustine in the fifth century against Pelagius.

Pelagius denied that original sin had corrupted the human race. He argued that the only negative thing that flowed out of Adam’s transgression in the garden of Eden was the poor example that it set for the remainder of the human race. Pelagius’ most basic concept was that man has absolute, autonomous freedom; therefore, man is capable, within his own power, to believe the gospel and obey God’s law.

Augustine, however, argued that man has been so corrupted by Adam’s original sin that he is, in himself, completely incapable of both believing the gospel and obeying God’s law. Augustine taught that divine grace is absolutely essential for the salvation of men, and that this effectual grace is only extended to those men whom God has, in his mercy, predestined for adoption as his sons. The act of faith, Augustine taught, does not come from the freedom of man’s will (contra Pelagius), but rather from the freedom of God’s grace to grant faith to those whom he has elected for salvation.

Semi-Pelagianism

Augustine’s argument so drastically devastated the Pelagian position that it was fully discredited and eliminated as a possible view for the Orthodox Christianity. Soon after the demise of Pelagianism, however, a new system appeared. This new system, promoted by Cassian, taught that man, with his own natural powers, is able to make the first step toward his conversion, and that this first step merits the Holy Spirit’s assistance. This middle-way between Pelagianism and Augustinianism was called Semi-Pelagianism, and it took in elements from the two opposing views which it attempted to mediate. Cassian, with Augustine, taught that Adam’s original sin corrupted the nature of the human race. But, with Pelagius, he taught a system of universal grace that is extended equally to all men without exception, making the final decision in man’s salvation the exercise of that man’s free will. Modern day Arminianism shares some distinctives with pre-Reformation Semi-Pelagianism.

One of the most fundamental differences between these three historic systems is the necessity and efficacy of grace. For the Pelagian (and some Semi-Pelagians), grace is not initially necessary, as man makes the initial move in his salvation. For the Arminian (and some Semi-Pelagians), grace is extended equally to all but rejected by most. For the Calvinist, general grace is extended equally to all but rejected by most, while special grace is extended to only the elect and it effects them in such a way that they necessarily embrace it.

TULIP vs. Doctrines of Grace

These five points of Christian doctrine given in response to the five points of the Remonstrance were eventually arranged according to the acronym “TULIP,” as follows:

Total Depravity
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints

While this arrangement is helpful in terms of remembering the particular doctrines which make up the five points of Calvinism, they are unhelpful on a number of other counts. First, I don’t think they are arranged in the most helpful order in terms of explaining and understanding how each of the points leads to another. Second, I don’t think that the actual titles themselves give the best summary explanation of the doctrines they represent. We will see this in more detail as we progress through the series.

Rather than making use of the TULIP acronym, I prefer to refer to these doctrines as “the doctrines of grace.” That is exactly what a Reformed theology of salvation is, namely, a series of doctrines which describe how God’s grace saves sinners. Accordingly, the purpose of this series is to examine how God’s free grace plans, purchases, produces, and preserves the salvation of hardened rebel-sinners. As we progress throughout the series, these doctrines of grace will be summarized as:

  1. Necessary Grace
  2. Resurrecting Grace
  3. Electing Grace
  4. Redeeming Grace
  5. Preserving Grace

Conclusion

History makes it clear that the doctrines of grace, as drafted by the Synod of Dort in 1619, were in not intended to be a holistic confessional statement, making a full and complete case for Reformed theology. Rather, they were simply the response of the leading Protestant theologians to the objections of the Semi-Pelagian followers of Arminius. The doctrines of grace were not introduced by the Synod of Dort as a new system of theology. Rather, they were simply a denial of the new Arminian system and a affirmation of historic Protestant doctrine dating back hundreds of years.

The issues involved in this great historical controversy are, in fact, extremely important issues to discuss, for they explicitly shape the Christian’s concept of God, sin, and salvation. J. I. Packer explains:

The difference between them is not primarily one of emphasis, but of content. One proclaims a God Who saves; the other speaks of a God Who enables man to save himself. One view [Calvinism] presents the three great acts of the Holy Trinity for the recovering of lost mankind—election by the Father, redemption by the Son, calling by the Spirit—as directed towards the same persons, and as securing their salvation infallibly. The other view [Arminianism] gives each act a different reference (the objects of redemption being all mankind, of calling, those who hear the gospel, and of election, those hearers who respond), and denies that any man’s salvation is secured by any of them. The two theologies thus conceive the plan of salvation in quite different terms. One makes salvation depend on the work of God, the other on a work of man; one regards faith as part of God’s gift of salvation, the other as man’s own contribution to salvation; one gives all the glory of saving believers to God, the other divides the praise between God, Who, so to speak, built the machinery of salvation, and man, who by believing operated it. Plainly, these differences are important, and the permanent value of the ‘five points,’ as a summary of Calvinism, is that they make clear the points at which, and the extent to which, these two conceptions are at variance.

As this series continues, it will become clear just how truthful Packer’s words prove to be.

[NOTE: The purpose of this article is simply to provide a brief history of this theological controversy. No attempt has been made to defend the truthfulness of the doctrines of grace. This will be done in the following articles, now that the historical foundation has briefly been laid.]

, , , , , , , ,

The Doctrines of Grace | Introduction

April 27th, 2012 | Posted by Brandon Melton in Salvation | The Doctrines of Grace | The Glory of God | The Gospel | Theology - (2 Comments)

[This post is part of the Doctrines of Grace series]

About four years ago, I wrote a five-part blog series in defense of the doctrines of grace. Until recently, that series was available to be read here on my blog. However, that series has been unpublished. My original blog series was, at some points, rather raw – sometimes brash. In the last two years, though, my thinking has developed further. God has grown and matured me. His free and unmerited grace has humbled me, and he has taught me the importance of wisdom and charity in theological discussion. I hope this will be reflected in this series.

My previous blog series on this topic was written fresh after I became fully convinced of the merit of the doctrines of grace. I was so overwhelmed with the wonder and awe at my God-accomplished salvation and the internal coherence of the Scriptures, that I rushed into writing much too quickly. What resulted were blog posts that were a combination of my own thoughts and also the thoughts of others. Now, there’s nothing wrong with utilizing the work of others; however, in my previous series, there were times when made use of someone else’s argument without working through the particular text or argument for myself. Since then, I have seen the weakness in that. I have studied the passages, read many commentators’ views, traced the historical interpretations, and come to my own conclusions.

What follows is not the overflow of the unbridled excitement of a freshly convinced Calvinist. Rather, it is the result of my study, research, and reflection on these topics over the last couple years. My previous series was broken into five parts – one part for each of the five points. This series will be structured quite differently. One of the changes is that this series will include at least one post devoted entirely to the historical background of the doctrines of grace. Additionally, in my previous series, many of the articles were quite lengthy (sometimes approaching 5000 words). In this series, I will break each of the five points into multiple articles (all of which will be under or around 1500 words). I hope that these changes will make the series more readable and easier to follow.

The Goal of this Series

My goal through this series is not simply to convert as many people to Calvinism as possible; it is not to make much of John Calvin. I am only devoted to the teaching of John Calvin (or any other man) insofar as it matches up with the teaching of the Bible. Where John Calvin (or any other man) parts ways with Scripture (at least my understanding of it), I part ways with John Calvin. Though these doctrines so commonly bear his name, John Calvin did not invent the doctrines of grace. These precious doctrines are contained and explained in pages of the Bible, God’s written word.

Let me be perfectly clear so as to avoid any confusion: I do not follow John Calvin (or any other man). I follow Jesus Christ. My desire is to make much of him. My goal through this series is to systematically and theologically explain and defend the Bible’s teaching about man’s salvation. But, if systematic and theological explanation was the extent of my goal, this series would be virtually useless. Rather, my aim in this series is to exult over the doctrines of God’s glorious and free grace. Explanation of texts and doctrines is necessary and important, but if we stop short of exulting over those texts/doctrines and consequently exalting the God of those texts/doctrines, we do neither ourselves nor our brothers and sisters in Christ any service.

So this is my aim, namely, to serve the church by expounding texts and explaining doctrines in order that we might exult over God’s revelation of his gospel of grace, and exalt the God of grace who has freely saved us.

Why is this Discussion Important?

There are many people who will say that this discussion is not important. They say that this discussion does more harm than it does good, because it is so often the cause of division and strife among Christians. While there is some truth to that sentiment, it is not entirely true.

First, I don’t know if there is any other theological discussion among genuine Christians that is more important than the doctrine of salvation. It is vitally important that we understand the Bible’s teaching about our great salvation. To say that such a discussion is not beneficial is not a valid objection.

Second, the cause of division and strife among Christians is not theological discussion; rather, it is the attitude of those who sometimes participate in theological discussion. Whether or not we see eye-to-eye on all areas of theology, as Christians, we are united in the gospel of Jesus Christ. We are joint heirs to the promises of God. Do not misunderstand me – theological discussion is vitally important (hence this series). But, in discussing theology, it is also vitally important to do so with grace and charity toward our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ with whom we disagree.

This is an important discussion to participate in for a couple reasons. First, because we are pursuing the truth. Jesus tells us in John 8:31-32 that there is freedom in knowing the truth. We need to diligently pursue truth – even if it proves what we have believed our whole lives to be false. Second, because we are pursuing unity. As discussed above, theological discussion can have a tendency to divide. But this is not the way it should be. We should approach theological discussion with the mindset of coming out on the other side in agreement with one another. In John 17:20-21, Jesus prays that those who believe in Him will be one in the same way that He is one with the Father. This type of unity should be our goal in theological discussion. This type of unity in the church is best served, not by finding the lowest common denominator of doctrine around which all can gather, but rather by elevating the value of truth, stating the doctrinal parameters of the Scriptures, seeking the unity that comes from the truth, and then demonstrating to the world how Christians can love each other across boundaries rather than by removing boundaries. In this way, the importance of truth is served by the existence of doctrinal borders, and unity is served by the way we love others across those borders. If we approach disagreements with these things in mind, theological discussions will not be so intimidating. Doctrinal disagreements will no longer cast a long shadow of enmity on the body of Christ. We must demonstrate that we are capable of engaging one another in serious theological discussion, not in order to puff ourselves up or win an argument, but for the sake of knowing and defending the truth of the Bible in unity as the body of Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace. We must demonstrate that we are capable of loving one another across theological boundaries. But we can demonstrate neither unless we have theological conversation.

That is my goal in this series. I hope that you’ll join the discussion as we examine how God’s free grace plans, purchases, performs, and preserves the salvation of hardened rebel-sinners.

, , , ,

Week in Review (3/5 to 3/11)

March 12th, 2012 | Posted by Brandon Melton in Uncategorized - (0 Comments)

In case you missed it, here’s what I posted this last week.

Is Satan More Powerful than God? (A)

God is not passively standing by as people are condemned. God is active in condemning those who do not value, treasure, and worship him as his infinite worth demands. God is the one who actively saves, and God is the one who actively condemns. Therefore, God is victorious in both salvation and condemnation. Satan has no victory and, ultimately, Satan himself will be eternally condemned.

God’s supreme desire that his glory be displayed and treasured will be ultimately accomplished through both the salvation and condemnation of sinners. Therefore, Satan in no way frustrates God’s desires and purposes – not even through sin, tragedy, and death.

Is Satan More Powerful than God? (B)

Though it seems like the wicked will go unpunished forever and God will never vindicate his people (Psa 94:1-23; Jer 12:1-17, Rev 6:9-11), we hope in the reality that Jesus has already decisively won the battle against evil through his death and resurrection (Col 2:15), that he will return to consummate that victory and end all rebellion (Psa 2:9; 1 Cor 15:25; Rev 19:11-21), and that, when all is said and done, the entire history of the universe will culminate in the celebration of the worth of Jesus Christ (Rev 5:9).

For This Purpose: Unpacking the Reason for My Existence (A)

Jesus Christ is the second person of the triune Godhead, who came to earth in the flesh as a man, lived a perfect and sinless life of inward and outward devotion to, and worship of God – the life which is required by God of us. Though innocent and blameless himself, Jesus suffered the penalty which is rightly due to us for breaking God’s law and rebelling against him, namely, God’s infinite wrath. Jesus was tortured, crucified, and buried, but after three days he was raised from the dead, declaring his victory over Satan, sin, and death, and announcing that his atoning sacrifice on our behalf was acceptable to God. Over the next forty days, Jesus appeared to and taught his disciples, and then ascended to heaven where he presently rules and reigns will all power and authority as sovereign Lord and King of the universe. One day Jesus is coming again to restore fallen and sinful creation, destroy Satan and those who follow him in rebellion, and he will rule in righteousness for all eternity. And those who by faith put their trust not in their own righteousness, but in the righteousness of Jesus on their behalf for their acceptance before God, following Christ as their Lord and King, will share in Jesus’ victory and receive the reward of eternally enjoying Jesus’ righteous rule.

For This Purpose: Unpacking the Reason for My Existence (B)

Because Jesus obeyed perfectly in my place, I am free to imperfectly obey out of gratitude, joy, and faith. The burden of my spiritual standing is not on my shoulders – it was placed on Jesus’ perfect shoulders. The truth of the gospel is that, everything I need, in Christ I already possess. As I come to a deeper realization of that reality, I am far less likely to sin in order to achieve or gain that which I already have in Christ.

For This Purpose: Unpacking the Reason for My Existence (C)

This magnification of Christ in the gospel is really a magnification of all the persons of the Trinity: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit – who make up the one Christian God. The Son is the perfect image and likeness of the Father (Col 1:15, 19). No one has seen the Father except the Son, and Jesus came into the world to make the Father known (John 1:18). So when we see the glory of Jesus in the gospel, we are seeing the glory of the Father (John 14:9-11). And when we see the glory of Jesus, we are doing so by the power of the Holy Spirit, who glorifies Jesus (John 16:12-15). The glory of the triune God is seen most clearly in Jesus Christ, and the glory of Christ is seen most clearly in the gospel. Therefore, the gospel of Jesus Christ is the apex of God’s glory, and the celebration of the gospel is the celebration of the glorious triune God.

Read. Comment. Share.

For this Purpose: Unpacking the Reason for My Existence (C)

March 11th, 2012 | Posted by Brandon Melton in Practical Theology | Theology - (1 Comments)

[This post is part of the For this Purpose: Unpacking the Reason for My Existence series]

This is the third of a three part mini-series, in which I unpack my personal purpose statement, pictured above. If you haven’t read the first and second posts, you should do that first.

In the first post, I unpacked the first three phrases of my purpose statement:

  • I exist to proclaim . . .
  • . . . the gospel of Jesus Christ . . .
  • . . . for the salvation . . .

In the second post, I unpacked the fourth phrase:

  • . . . [for the] sanctification . . .

In today’s post, I will unpack the final four phrases:

  • . . . [for the] satisfaction . . .
  • . . . of all peoples . . .
  • . . . to the praise of . . .
  • . . . the glorious triune God . . .

. . . [for the] satisfaction . . .

God is the ultimate value in the universe. Beholding his glory is the most satisfying experience in the universe – so long as we are not consumed by his awesome holiness. The only way that we, imperfect creations, can safely behold the perfect glory of our Creator is through the gospel of Jesus Christ, which removes our imperfections and transforms us after his likeness. God’s glory is infinitely complex, infinitely beautiful, and infinitely satisfying. We were made to see and be satisfied by God’s glory for all eternity. It is in and through the gospel that we see the apex of God’s glory. In the gospel of Jesus Christ we see the perfection of God’s wrath, justice, and righteousness. In the gospel of Jesus Christ we see the perfection of God’s love, mercy, and grace. In the gospel of Jesus Christ we see the perfection of God’s wisdom and creativity in putting these seemingly opposing attributes together in such a way that the integrity of each is upheld and magnified, Christ is most glorified, and we are most satisfied.

. . . of all peoples . . .

The gospel is cosmic in its scope. Through Christ, God is reconciling all things to himself – things on earth and things in heaven. The whole creation will be redeemed, renewed, and set at peace with God. This cosmic gospel has global implications. The gospel is for all peoples. God’s purpose to glorify Christ is multi-lingual and multi-ethnic. For all eternity, the worth of Jesus will be celebrated by the global, multi-ethnic church, which he purchased by his blood from every tribe and language and people and nation.

. . . to the praise of . . .

God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him. We praise most highly that which we value most highly. Therefore, as God’s people look deeply into the glory of the gospel and are progressively more captivated by and satisfied in Jesus, they will progressively speak and live in such a way that Jesus’ infinite worth is made evident.

. . . the glorious triune God.

The ultimate goal of the gospel is to create for Jesus a people who make much of him by treasuring him above all things. The gospel is meant to create a people who, through their praising and valuing of him, magnify Jesus, or make Jesus look great. There are two ways, however, in which something or someone can be magnified. We might call the first way microscopic magnification. A microscope takes something that is actually small, and makes it appear as though it were great. This is not the way that we magnify Jesus. A second way of magnification might be called telescopic magnification. A telescope takes something that really is great, and makes it appear as great as it really is. This is the way we magnify Jesus! Jesus is infinitely great and – like a telescope – when we praise and value him as his worth demands, we magnify him in such a way that we make him appear to be as valuable and praiseworthy as he really is!

This magnification of Christ in the gospel is really a magnification of all the persons of the Trinity: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit – who make up the one Christian God. The Son is the perfect image and likeness of the Father (Col 1:15, 19). No one has seen the Father except the Son, and Jesus came into the world to make the Father known (John 1:18). So when we see the glory of Jesus in the gospel, we are seeing the glory of the Father (John 14:9-11). And when we see the glory of Jesus, we are doing so by the power of the Holy Spirit, who glorifies Jesus (John 16:12-15). The glory of the triune God is seen most clearly in Jesus Christ, and the glory of Christ is seen most clearly in the gospel. Therefore, the gospel of Jesus Christ is the apex of God’s glory, and the celebration of the gospel is the celebration of the glorious triune God.

That is the purpose for the universe, that is the purpose for my existence, and that is the purpose of this blog – namely, to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ for the salvation, sanctification, and satisfaction of all peoples in and to the praise of the glorious triune God!

, , , , , , , , ,