Latest / Reformed Thinking / Jesus the Messiah: From Covenant Promise to Crucified, Risen King

Transcript

Jesus the Messiah: From Covenant Promise to Crucified, Risen King · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Imagine holding a receipt for a massive debt.
0:03
Right. A debt you could not possibly
0:05
pay. Yeah, one that, you know,
0:06
legally demands your life in a court of law.
0:09
Now imagine that piece of paper is stamped with a single ancient
0:13
Greek word. A word that permanently,
0:16
completely clears your Ledger. Yes, welcome to Reformed
0:20
thinking. I am so thrilled to have you
0:22
joining us today. It is great to be here.
0:24
You know, usually when we crack open modern literature on
0:28
spirituality, there is a certain expectation of a soft landing.
0:33
Oh. Absolutely.
0:34
You open a book and the writer immediately tries to validate
0:37
your feelings. Right, offering gentle advice on
0:40
how to be a you know, a slightly better, more optimized version
0:44
of yourself. Yeah, it is comforting.
0:45
I mean, we like things to be therapeutic.
0:47
We want to hear that we are basically on the right track.
0:50
Yeah, that we just need a little course correction.
0:52
But then you step into the material we are looking at today
0:55
and suddenly that soft landing just vanishes.
0:59
It is gone. The theological landscape we are
1:01
stepping into is stark. It pulls absolutely no punches.
1:05
Not at all. Today you and I are taking a
1:07
deep dive into a very rigorous theological essay.
1:11
It is titled Jesus the Messiah from Covenant Promise to
1:15
Crucified risen King. That is a heavy title.
1:18
It is, and our mission for this deep dive is to break down this
1:21
text. We are going to unpack its
1:23
strict Greek exegesis, its historical context, and, you
1:28
know, it's very strong doctrinal stances.
1:30
Making all these dense concepts accessible and, well,
1:34
fascinating for you as you listen.
1:36
Yes, because joining me is our resident expert, someone who has
1:40
an unparalleled ability to synthesize these massive
1:44
theological concepts and make them click.
1:46
Oh well, thank you. This text is incredibly dense.
1:49
It really is. And what is fascinating here is
1:51
that the author refuses to start where modern audiences want to
1:54
start. Yeah, they do not give you that
1:56
warm opening. Right.
1:57
The writer demands that we begin where God begins.
2:00
Which immediately creates friction.
2:02
Oh, huge friction with contemporary sensibilities.
2:05
If you want a self help manual, this is just the wrong place to
2:08
look. OK, let's unpack this.
2:09
The essay does not open with a therapeutic message about
2:12
reaching your potential. No, the opening hook is a hard
2:15
contrast. Very hard.
2:16
It is a contrast between secular humanism on one side and
2:20
absolute human depravity on the other.
2:23
Right. The argument laid out is that
2:25
the world is steeped in a delusion.
2:27
A delusion that preaches man is inherently good.
2:30
Or maybe just a little broken. Yeah, that we just need the
2:33
right environment or, you know, therapeutic guidance to
2:36
flourish. But the text asserts the direct
2:39
opposite. Stating that humanity is quote
2:42
dead in trespasses and sins. That is courting the apostle
2:46
Paul in Ephesians 2. Right.
2:48
And it traces the skedition all the way back to the Garden of
2:51
Eden and Adam's fall. Which results in what
2:53
theologians call total depravity.
2:56
And we really need to define total depravity mechanically.
2:59
Yeah, we do, because it is a phrase that often gets
3:01
caricatured people. Hear it and think, oh, that
3:04
means every human is as evil as they can possibly be.
3:07
Right, like we are all just monsters in our daily action.
3:09
But that is not it. No, people can still do civic
3:12
good. They can love their children.
3:14
They give to cheer. They build hospitals, sure.
3:16
Rather, total depravity means that the fall of Adam, acting as
3:20
our federal head, plunged the entire human race into a state
3:24
of radical spiritual corruption. Every part of human nature is
3:27
touched by it. Yeah, the mind, the will, the
3:31
emotions, the physical body, it is all tainted by sin.
3:35
Because of this, humanity is born alienated from God.
3:38
Bound by the penalty of the law and justly condemned.
3:41
The author is establishing the absolute baseline of the human
3:45
condition here. Because if you get the diagnosis
3:47
wrong, the cure will be useless. I want to push back on that
3:51
concept of federal headship for a second.
3:53
Go for it. Because modern individualists,
3:55
you know, they hear that and think, wait a minute.
3:58
Why am I responsible for Adam? Right.
4:00
Why am I held responsible for something a guy named Adam did
4:03
thousands of years ago? It just does not sound fair.
4:05
That is the natural modern reaction for sure.
4:07
Yeah, but the text operates on a covenantal understanding of
4:11
representation. Like a legal representative.
4:14
Yeah, think about how a nation's president or Prime Minister can
4:16
declare war. OK, I am tracking.
4:19
When they sign that declaration, the entire country goes to war.
4:22
The citizens might not have been in the room holding the pen.
4:25
Exactly. But because that leader is, as
4:28
their federal head, their representative, well, the
4:32
consequences of that action fall on everyone.
4:34
That makes a lot of sense. The argument here is that Adam
4:37
was the appointed representative for the entire human race.
4:40
So when he rebelled. The legal status of the entire
4:44
human race changed. From innocent to guilty.
4:47
Right. And it is not just a legal
4:49
status, it is an inherited nature.
4:51
The corruption is passed down. The text makes the case that you
4:55
are not a Sinner because you sin.
4:56
You sin because you are born a Sinner.
4:58
Spot on. That is a staggering diagnosis.
5:01
It really is heavy. And it brings us to the central
5:03
tension of the entire essay. It asks a massive question.
5:07
How can a perfectly just, holy God reconcile with totally
5:11
depraved, rebellious sinners? Without denying his own justice.
5:15
Right, because if God is truly just, he cannot just sweep sin
5:20
under the rug. Let me offer a real world
5:22
analogy to illustrate the logic here.
5:24
I love your analogy. Imagine you walk into a
5:26
courtroom. There's a criminal on trial,
5:29
someone who has committed terrible violent crimes.
5:32
And the evidence is undeniable. Yeah, it is all on video.
5:36
Now imagine the judge looks at this guilty criminal and says,
5:39
you know what? I am a very loving person.
5:42
Oh boy, I feel a lot of love today so I am going to let you
5:45
walk free. All charges dropped.
5:47
We would not call that Judge Loving.
5:49
No, we would call that judge corrupt.
5:52
A good judge must punish the crime.
5:54
That analogy captures the logic perfectly.
5:57
If God simply dismissed his justice, it would be a denial of
6:01
His own holy nature. He would be like your corrupt.
6:03
Judge right? Therefore, the writer insists
6:06
that a divine human mediator was an absolute necessity.
6:10
Someone had to step in. Someone to satisfy the legal and
6:13
moral demands of justice. While simultaneously extending
6:16
mercy to the guilty party. And what is fascinating here is
6:19
how the text points to the very moment this solution was
6:22
announced. It goes straight to Genesis
6:24
3.15. What theologians call the proto
6:26
Evangelium. Or the first gospel.
6:28
Yes, the promise of the seed. The text highlights the Hebrew
6:33
word 0. Let's look at the mechanics of
6:35
that specific verse. Adam and Eve have just rebelled.
6:39
God is handing down the curses. To the serpent, to the woman, to
6:43
the man. But right in the middle of
6:45
handing down the curse to the serpent, God makes a promise.
6:48
Precisely before the curses of the Fall even fully settled on
6:52
the earth. God says to the serpent, I will
6:55
put enmity between you and the woman.
6:57
And between your offspring and her offspring.
6:59
He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.
7:03
That word for offspring is zira, meaning seed.
7:06
And the author frames this single promise as the watershed
7:10
moment of all human history. Everything that follows in the
7:13
biblical narrative. The genealogies, the kings, the
7:16
prophets. It all flows from this one
7:18
point. God is stating that a specific
7:20
human descendant born of a woman.
7:22
Will arrive to decisively crush the head of the serpent.
7:25
Destroying the works of the devil.
7:26
Even though the seed himself will suffer A bruised heel in
7:29
the process. So if centuries of animal
7:32
sacrifices and human kings essentially serve as a flashing
7:36
warning sign. Saying hey, this isn't working,
7:38
humans cannot fix this. Then the solution could not just
7:41
be another human philosopher. It required a specific promised
7:46
rescuer. I want you, the listener, to
7:48
pause and consider how this changes your entire worldview.
7:52
Yeah, think about it. If you define the human problem
7:55
as a lack of education. Then the solution is a teacher.
7:59
If the problem is 4 societal structures.
8:02
The solution is a politician. But if you define the human
8:05
problem the way this text does. As needing rescue from divine
8:08
wrath and total spiritual death due to a shattered covenant.
8:12
Then the required solution alters completely.
8:14
You need a rescue operation that only God himself can execute.
8:18
Fulfilling that specific Genesis promise.
8:20
That is a massive paradigm shift.
8:22
It really is. Now, moving from the garden into
8:25
the historical timeline, the author builds what is called a
8:28
covenantal architecture. Yeah, and the essay explicitly
8:31
rejects higher critical scholarship here.
8:34
It completely rejects the idea that the Old Testament is a
8:37
disjointed collection of moral fables.
8:39
Or myths that evolves over time. Right.
8:42
Instead, it traces specific concrete legal contracts.
8:46
Covenants that God made with humanity.
8:48
Yes, the author views redemptive history as operating through
8:51
distinct, sovereignly administered covenants.
8:54
Two specific ones are highlighted to trace the path of
8:57
that promised seed. 1st we have the Abrahamic covenant found in
9:01
Genesis 12 and 15. God pulls Abram out of UR.
9:05
And makes an unconditional guarantee.
9:07
He promises a specific seed through whom all nations of the
9:11
earth would be blessed. Along with a promise of land and
9:14
descendants. This localized the cosmic
9:16
promise of Genesis 3.15 down to one specific ethnic line.
9:21
The nation of Israel. And the way the covenant was
9:23
ratified is so crucial. God tells Abraham to cut several
9:26
animals in half and. Lay the halves opposite each
9:29
other. In the ancient Near East, this
9:30
was a vassal treaty ritual. Right, both parties will walk
9:34
between the bloody animal pieces.
9:35
Essentially saying, you know, may this be done to me if I
9:38
break my end of the contract? But the text points out that God
9:42
put Abraham to sleep. Only God appearing as a smoking
9:46
firepot and a flaming torch passed between the pieces.
9:49
That is a brilliant detail to bring.
9:51
Up By walking through a loan, God was taking both sides of the
9:55
covenantal obligation upon Himself.
9:57
He was saying I will fulfill my promise to you.
9:59
And if you or your descendants break this covenant, I will pay
10:03
the penalty for your failure. It is a unilateral,
10:06
unconditional guarantee. Wow.
10:08
And then centuries later, we see this narrowed down even further.
10:12
With the Davidic covenant in sick and Samuel 7.
10:14
God promises King David an eternal throne.
10:17
A permanent Kingdom. And a royal descendant who would
10:20
rule with a rod of iron. The seed is no longer just a
10:22
human or just an Israelite. He must be the rightful king of
10:26
Judah. Because the author is operating
10:28
from a strict dispensational framework.
10:30
Those covenantal promises to ethnic Israel are not
10:33
spiritualized away into the church age.
10:36
Right. The author demands A literal
10:37
interpretation of the Land and Throne promises.
10:40
Which completely sets the stage for how they view the 1st
10:43
century expectation of the Messiah.
10:46
That is right, the text paints a highly detailed, incredibly dark
10:51
backdrop for the arrival of the Messiah.
10:53
You have the brutal reality of the Roman Empire.
10:56
The Pax Romana was maintained by the sword.
10:58
The Jewish people were subjugated.
11:00
Forced to pay heavy taxes to a foreign Pagan emperor.
11:04
And constantly threatened by the horrors of crucifixion.
11:07
Which the Romans used as a psychological terror weapon
11:10
against rebellion. And internally you have the
11:12
apostate legal of the Pharisees. Let's talk about the Pharisees
11:16
for a second. They had taken the Law of Moses
11:19
and built thousands of tiny fence laws around it.
11:22
If the law said, remember the Sabbath.
11:25
They created hundreds of rules about how many steps you could
11:27
take on a Sabbath. Or what kind of knot you could
11:29
tie. It was a suffocating, impossible
11:32
burden. Exactly.
11:33
So the common people are crushed by Rome from the outside.
11:35
And crushed by the religious elite from the inside.
11:38
OK, but this raises a huge question and I have to play
11:40
devil's advocate here. The text says the Jewish nation
11:43
was waiting for a political zealot to smash the Roman yoke.
11:46
Did they totally misunderstand their own prophecies?
11:49
I mean, they had the schools of Isaiah.
11:51
They had the covenants. How did they miss the point so
11:54
completely and expect a military general instead of a suffering
11:58
servant? It is a great question.
12:00
The argument laid out is that they misunderstood their
12:03
greatest enemy. Because the Roman occupation was
12:05
so visible, so physically brutal.
12:08
They assumed Caesar was their primary problem.
12:11
Their theology became horizontal rather than vertical.
12:14
But the text asserts their true enemy was not Caesar.
12:17
It was sin, death, and the wrath of God against their continued
12:21
rebellion. They wanted political liberation
12:24
and an earthly Kingdom immediately.
12:26
But God was sending a mediator for spiritual liberation first.
12:29
So they wanted the crown without the cross.
12:32
Precisely, and the author explains that the entire Old
12:35
Testament system, especially the Levitical sacrifices.
12:38
Was designed as a schoolmaster. Think about the sheer volume of
12:42
blood spilled in the temple over centuries.
12:44
Millions of lambs, bulls and coats.
12:47
The constant daily shedding of animal blood was meant to prove
12:51
something. To prove over centuries that the
12:54
blood of bulls and goats could never actually take away human
12:57
sin. If it worked, you would only
12:59
have to do it once. But they had to do it every
13:01
single day. It was meant to drive sinners to
13:04
despair of their own efforts. And look for the true final
13:08
sacrifice. So if centuries of animal
13:12
sacrifices essentially served as a flashing warning sign.
13:15
Saying this isn't working. Humans cannot fix this.
13:18
Then the solution could not just be another human prophet.
13:21
It required something outside the system entirely.
13:24
And that brings us to how the author frames the Gospel of
13:27
John. Not as a standard biography, but
13:29
as a cosmic invasion. Before diving into John's text,
13:32
we have to look at the author's rejection of evolutionary
13:34
theories of religion. The essay specifically attacks
13:37
the JEDP documentary hypothesis. Let's define what JEDP is for
13:41
context so you, the listener know what we're talking about.
13:43
It is a theory taught in many secular universities and liberal
13:46
seminaries. Suggesting that the early books
13:49
of the Bible, the Pentateuch, were not written by Moses.
13:52
But we're stitched together by various anonymous editors.
13:55
The Yalist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and Priestly
13:58
sources over many centuries. And the reason the author views
14:02
JEDP as an existential threat to the Gospel is purely logical.
14:07
If JEDP is true, then the Old Testament is just a patchwork of
14:11
evolving human myths. If that is the case, then the
14:14
intricate prophecies of Genesis 3.15.
14:17
The precise details of the Abrahamic covenant.
14:19
And the Tabernacle types are just retrofitted coincidences.
14:22
The author insists that if you destroy the sovereignly inspired
14:26
historical baseline. You destroy the entire
14:29
architectural argument that Jesus is the planned eternal
14:32
word. That makes total sense.
14:33
If the foundation is just human myth, then the fulfillment in
14:37
Christ is just a nice literary parallel.
14:39
Not a divine rescue mission. So, having established the
14:42
absolute authority of the Scripture, the text locks on to
14:45
the Gospel of John. Specifically, it points to John
14:48
20.31. Which reveals the apologetic
14:50
purpose of the book. Quote These are written so that
14:53
you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and
14:57
that by believing you may have life in his name.
15:00
John states his thesis explicitly.
15:02
But the author of our text draws our attention to the prologue.
15:06
John 1.1 through 18. This prologue is described as
15:10
the grand foyer to the entire Gospel narrative.
15:13
It does not start with a genealogy like Matthew tracing
15:16
Jesus back to Abraham. It does not start with Adam like
15:19
Luke. It starts outside of time,
15:21
outside of space. With the eternal uncreated
15:24
reality of the Godhead. In the beginning was the Word,
15:27
and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
15:30
Here is where it gets really interesting.
15:32
The author makes a structural argument that you cannot isolate
15:36
the crucifixion in John 19 from the prologue in John 1.
15:39
Think about the gravity of that concept for a second.
15:41
The exact same being who spoke the universe into existence.
15:45
The one who formed galaxies and planets.
15:47
The one who holds the molecular structure of the universe
15:50
together by the word of his power.
15:51
Is the very same being hanging naked and bleeding on the Roman
15:55
cross. That contrast is absolutely
15:57
staggering. It is staggering and the author
16:00
traces a very specific four part progression to highlight this
16:04
throughout John's gospel. 1st we have the sovereign descent of
16:07
the mediator. The infinite God invading time
16:10
and space, stepping into the mess of human history. 2nd The
16:14
earthly manifestation of divine glory.
16:16
We see Jesus controlling nature, raising the dead, opening blind
16:20
eyes. 3rd The climax of substitutionary atonement on the
16:24
cross. Where he absorbs the wrath of
16:26
God. And 4th The sovereign surrender
16:29
and resumption of life in the resurrection.
16:31
And this structure is vital because, according to the text,
16:34
it guards against reducing Jesus to a moral example.
16:38
Or a social justice advocate. If you understand that he is the
16:41
pre-existing creator, you cannot just treat his life as a series
16:45
of inspiring ethical suggestions.
16:47
He did not come just to teach us how to be nice to our neighbors.
16:49
Or how to advocate for the poor. He came to pay a legal debt we
16:53
could not pay. And the text gets incredibly
16:56
precise about the mechanics of this in the next section.
16:58
Zeroing in on the Greek linguistic analysis.
17:01
We are talking about strict, rigorous exegesis here.
17:05
Looking at the original coin Greek, let's look at John 1.14.
17:09
The author contrasts 2 specific Greek verbs used by John.
17:13
The words a geneto and ark. I love when we get into the
17:17
original languages because it unlocks so much nuance.
17:19
So in John 1.1 the text says in the beginning was the word.
17:23
That word was is the Greek verb on.
17:26
Right on is an imperfect active indicative verb.
17:30
In Greek, this implies continuous ongoing existence in
17:33
the past without a starting point.
17:35
The word eternally existed. There was never a time when the
17:38
word was not. But then you drop down to John
17:41
1.14 when it says the word became flesh.
17:44
The verb switches entirely. John uses a geneto.
17:46
This is an aorist middle indicative verb.
17:49
The aorist tense indicates a specific Puntilier point in
17:52
history where a new state came into existence.
17:55
So the eternal uncreated Word who always existed, stepped into
17:58
time and took on a new state of being at a specific moment in
18:02
history. The author uses this verb change
18:04
to attack what is called the Canotic Heresy.
18:06
Let me clarify what that means with an analogy.
18:08
Some people read Philippians 2 where it says Jesus emptied
18:11
himself. And they argue that when when
18:14
Jesus became human, he emptied himself of his divine
18:18
attributes. They picture it like dumping a
18:20
cup of water onto the ground until the cup is empty.
18:24
They say he subtracted his deity to become a man.
18:27
But the author says no. The Greek grammar forbids that.
18:31
It is not about emptying the cup.
18:32
It is about adding flavor to the water.
18:34
He added humanity without losing a single drop of his eternal
18:39
deity. That is an excellent way to
18:41
visualize the hypostatic union. He did not subtract deity, He
18:45
added humanity. Two distinct natures, one
18:48
person. And the author goes further into
18:50
the Greek unpacking the verb S connixon in John 1.14.
18:54
Our English Bibles usually translate this as dwelt or
18:57
tabernacled among us. The Word became flesh and
19:00
tabernacled among us. This word draws a direct,
19:02
unmistakable physical line back to the wilderness Tabernacle in
19:06
the Book of Exodus. Let's paint that picture for the
19:08
listener. In Exodus, after the Israel
19:10
lights are freed from Egypt, they are wandering in the
19:12
desert. God commands them to build a
19:14
very specific tent, the Tabernacle.
19:16
And in the center of that tent is the Holy of Holies.
19:19
Containing the Ark of the Covenant.
19:20
And what happens? A localized, visible
19:24
manifestation of God's glory. A pillar of cloud by day and
19:29
fire by night. The Shekinah glory.
19:32
Descends and dwells inside that physical tent in the middle of
19:35
the camp. Exactly.
19:37
John uses this specific word, eskonjin, to tell his Jewish
19:42
readers that Jesus is the ultimate final Tabernacle.
19:45
The glory of God is no longer dwelling in a tent made of
19:48
badger skins and woven fabric. It is dwelling in human flesh.
19:52
Jesus is the meeting place between God and man.
19:54
Which brings the entire architectural argument to its
19:57
climax at the crucifixion in John 19.30.
20:00
And the massive weight of the single Greek word to tesselsty.
20:04
Translated in English as it is finished.
20:06
The text spends a significant amount of time breaking down the
20:09
grammar of this single word. Yes, because the grammatical
20:12
tense of Tedelestai carries immense theological weight.
20:15
It is spoken by Christ right before He yields his Spirit.
20:18
The word is in the Greek perfect tense.
20:20
In Greek, the perfect tense is highly specific.
20:22
It describes an action that was completely finished in the past.
20:26
But it has ongoing, permanent, irreversible results in the
20:30
present. It is an accounting term.
20:31
Right, right. In the 1st century, if you paid
20:33
off a debt, the tax collector would take your receipt and
20:36
stamped A lest I across it. Paid in full, so when?
20:39
Jesus shouts this from the cross.
20:41
It is not a cry of defeat, like I'm finished, they beat me.
20:45
It is a shout of absolute victory.
20:47
It means the debt is paid in full back then and the Ledger
20:50
remains permanently cleared forever.
20:52
And the essay uses the perfect tense of this specific verb to
20:56
dismantle two major widespread theological systems. 1st The
21:01
text addresses the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Mass.
21:04
The logic presented is that the Mass, particularly the doctrine
21:08
of transubstantiation, treats the sacrifice of Christ as an
21:11
ongoing, unbloody offering. That must be continually
21:14
presented to God to appease wrath.
21:16
But the author argues that the Greek perfect tense of Tedalesta
21:20
destroys that concept. If the action is perfectly
21:22
completed with irreversible results, it cannot be repeated
21:25
or continued. It is a one time historical
21:28
event. And secondly, the author asserts
21:30
that this single word shatters the theological system known as
21:34
Arminianism. The argument laid out is that
21:37
Arminianism teaches a potential or universal atonement.
21:42
Meaning Christ died to make salvation a mere possibility for
21:45
everyone. Provided that humans add their
21:48
own synergistic faith or free will to complete the process and
21:52
make it effective. Right, the idea that Jesus did
21:54
99% of the work, but you have to do the final 1% to cross the
21:58
finish line. Precisely, But the author
22:00
vehemently rejects this. Arguing that Tedelestai proves
22:04
Christ actually accomplished the salvation of his elect on the
22:06
cross. The Greek grammar, according to
22:08
the essay, demands definite particular redemption.
22:11
The work is not waiting for human permission to be
22:14
effective. Christ did not say I done my
22:16
part. Now the rest is up to you.
22:18
He said it is finished. It is an accomplished reality.
22:21
So we have all this high level, rigorous Greek analysis.
22:25
But we have to ask, who is John actually writing this to?
22:27
We need to contextualize the original audience.
22:30
The people receiving this gospel, we're not sitting in
22:33
comfortable academic offices debating Greek syntax over
22:37
coffee. No, they were a late 1st century
22:39
church facing severe Roman persecution.
22:42
And they were dealing with a rising tide of heretics known as
22:44
proto Gnostics. Contest is everything here.
22:47
The Gnostics were heavily influenced by Platon iconic
22:50
philosophy. They taught a rigid, dualistic
22:53
view of the universe. They believed that the spiritual
22:56
realm was inherently good and pure.
22:58
And that all physical matter, the earth, our bodies, flesh and
23:02
blood. Was inherently evil and corrupt.
23:05
So a subset of these Gnostics, a group called the Dosatists,
23:08
looked at the Christian claim of the Incarnation and recoiled.
23:12
They claim that Christ, being a pure spiritual emanation from
23:16
God, could never have actually touched evil physical matter.
23:20
They taught that Jesus only appeared to have a physical
23:22
body. Like a ghost or a hologram.
23:25
And This is why John's vocabulary is so aggressive.
23:27
In John 1.14 he does not just say the word became a man or the
23:31
word took on a body. He uses the Greek word sarks.
23:35
I was going to bring that up. Why did John specifically use
23:38
the word sarks? I mean sarks literally
23:40
translates to meat. Blood, bone, muscle, sinew.
23:44
It is a very raw, almost crude physical word.
23:48
It is the stuff you buy at a butcher shop.
23:50
He used sarks to violently confront the Gnostic error.
23:54
The author explains that John intended to produce a visceral
23:57
shock in his original audience. By using the most graphic
24:01
physical word available, John assured believers that God did
24:04
not despise their humanity. He united himself with it
24:07
forever. If God took on sarks, meat and
24:10
bone, then the physical world is not inherently evil.
24:14
And the incarnation is a concrete, historical, physical
24:17
reality. God sweated.
24:18
God bled. God felt pain.
24:20
I want you, the listener, to put yourself in the shoes of those
24:23
1st century Christians for a second.
24:25
Imagine you are facing the threat of Caesar's Lions in the
24:28
Coliseum. Your property is being
24:30
confiscated. Your family is in hiding.
24:32
The sand of the arena is a very real physical threat.
24:36
If Jesus was just a spiritual phantom who never truly suffered
24:39
in the flesh, what comfort is that to you?
24:41
You face physical torture. But the declaration of the
24:44
physical incarnation combined with the permanent irreversible
24:49
Tetalesti. Was meant to provide absolute
24:52
confidence. The author notes that neither
24:54
the physical persecution of the Roman Empire nor the
24:56
philosophical accusations of heretics could undo their
25:00
justification. It moves the concept of
25:03
salvation from an abstract intellectual theory to an
25:06
unbreakable anchor for the soul in the midst of extreme
25:11
suffering. And the essay connects this
25:12
historical anchor to the grand sweep of redemptive history.
25:16
Dealing with types, shadows, and the future millennial Kingdom.
25:20
Let's define types and shadows quickly.
25:22
The author views the entire Old Testament levitical system.
25:26
The Passover lamb in Egypt. The bronze serpent Moses lifted
25:29
up in the wilderness to heal the Israelites.
25:31
All of these are not random historical events.
25:34
They're prophetic types. The text calls them promissory
25:37
notes waiting to be cashed in at Golgotha.
25:39
Everything points forward to the cross.
25:41
But the author does not stop at the cross.
25:43
The text drives forward into eschatology, the study of the
25:46
end times. And the author holds to a very
25:48
strict premillennialism. I have to play devil's advocate
25:51
again here. I know a lot of people, a lot of
25:54
traditions, read biblical prophecy, especially in
25:56
Revelation, as spiritual metaphors or apocalyptic poetry.
26:00
They read about 1000 year reign of Christ and think it just
26:04
symbolizes the church age right now.
26:06
Where Christ is ruling spiritually in the hearts of
26:09
believers. Why does the author insist on a
26:12
literal physical return and a literal 1000 year earthly reign?
26:18
The author's argument synthesizes everything we
26:21
discussed earlier about the Old Testament covenants.
26:23
Remember the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants?
26:25
God made literal, unconditional promises to David, specifically
26:30
regarding a physical throne in Jerusalem.
26:32
And to ethnic Israel regarding physical boundaries of land.
26:36
The logic presented is that if God fulfills his promises to the
26:39
letter. Those promises must be fulfilled
26:42
literally, not just allegorically in a spiritualized
26:45
church. So their author is saying that
26:47
if you spiritualize the end times, you are essentially
26:50
accusing God of bait and switch regarding his ancient promises.
26:53
That is the core of the argument.
26:54
The author asserts that Christ must return physically to the
26:58
earth. Rescue his bride via a pre
27:01
tribulational rapture. And then actually rule from
27:05
David's physical throne in Jerusalem for a literal
27:09
Millennium. To fulfill those specific
27:11
covenantal obligations made to the Jewish people.
27:13
Spiritualizing those promises, in the author's view, breaks the
27:17
integrity of God's Word. If the first coming was literal
27:20
literal virgin, literal cross, literal tomb.
27:24
Then the second coming must be equally literal.
27:27
Which brings us to the final major section of the essay,
27:29
focusing on application. Law, gospel, and modern
27:32
controversies. The text makes a very sharp
27:34
theological distinction between what is called the first use of
27:37
the law and the third use of the law.
27:40
This is crucial for understanding how the author
27:42
views the Christian life. The first use of the law acts
27:44
like a mirror. When you read the 10
27:46
Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount, it shows you God's
27:49
perfect standard of holiness. And simultaneously it shows you
27:52
your own radical failure to meet that standard.
27:55
It is designed to crush yourself righteousness.
27:58
And drive you to despair of your own works, forcing you to flee
28:01
to the cross for mercy. But once you do flee to the
28:04
cross, your relationship to the law changes.
28:07
That is the third use. Right.
28:09
The third use of the law applies only to the justified believer.
28:12
Once you are saved by grace entirely apart from your works,
28:17
the law no longer functions as a condemning judge.
28:20
Instead, it functions as a guide for grateful obedience.
28:24
You do not obey the law to get saved.
28:26
You obey the law because you are already saved and you want to
28:29
please the God who rescued you. And this specific view of law
28:33
and gospel is where the text gets highly confrontational with
28:37
modern church culture. The author takes a very hard
28:40
line regarding several modern trends.
28:42
And the logic flows directly from everything we've just
28:44
discussed about depravity and substitution.
28:47
The text explicitly attacks the seeker sensitive movement.
28:51
The seeker sensitive movement or the church growth movement often
28:54
relies heavily on demographic research marketing strategies.
28:57
And attempting to make the Sunday service as comfortable
29:00
and entertaining as possible for the unchurched person.
29:04
The author calls this a pragmatic fraud.
29:06
And the logic behind that critique is fascinating.
29:09
The argument is that if human beings are totally depraved and
29:12
spiritually dead, as we established in the beginning,
29:15
then. No amount of cool lighting,
29:17
relatable Ted Talk style sermons or coffee bars will wake a dead
29:20
soul. Only the preaching of the law,
29:22
the wrath of God, and the substitutionary atonement can do
29:25
that. By softening the message to make
29:27
it palatable, the author argues, these churches are hiding the
29:30
very cure the people desperately need.
29:33
Furthermore, the text takes a very firm stance against the
29:36
integration of critical race theory and what is broadly
29:39
called the Social Gospel into the Church.
29:41
The author views these as insidious infiltrations.
29:44
Let's walk through the logic of this critique.
29:47
The Social Gospel focuses heavily on horizontal
29:49
reconciliation. Fixing systemic societal issues,
29:53
poverty, political oppression and achieving a sort of earthly
29:56
utopianism. The author argues that these
29:59
frameworks attempt to replace substitutionary atonement with
30:02
Marxist sociology. The argument is about primary
30:05
versus secondary issues. If you view the primary human
30:08
problem as systemic societal oppression.
30:12
Your solution will be political reform and activism.
30:15
But the author's entire premise, starting from Genesis 3, is that
30:18
the primary humanist problem is divine wrath against cosmic
30:21
treason. Therefore, the true Gospel is
30:24
strictly about vertical reconciliation.
30:27
Liberation from God's eternal wrath through the blood of
30:31
Christ. The text argues that whenever
30:33
the church shifts its primary focus from vertical salvation to
30:37
horizontal social engineering, it loses the gospel entirely.
30:41
And obviously, our goal today is just to impartially outline the
30:44
author's arguments on these controversial topics so you
30:47
understand the logic driving the text.
30:49
Right, just reporting the text application of its own theology.
30:52
Finally, we see this rigorous theological system applied to
30:55
the modern charismatic movement. The author holds to a doctrine
30:58
called cessationism. Cessationism is the belief that
31:01
the miraculous sign gifts things like prophecy, healing on
31:04
demand, or speaking in tongues. Ceased with the death of the
31:08
original 1st century apostles and the closing of the Biblical
31:11
and. Why does the author insist on
31:14
this? A lot of people today are
31:16
seeking fresh words from God, new visions, or mystical
31:19
experiences. The author rejects the modern
31:23
hunt for new mystical revelations based on the
31:26
sufficiency of Scripture. The logic is that the sign gifts
31:30
were given specifically to authenticate the apostles as
31:33
they laid the foundation of the early church and wrote the New
31:36
Testament. Now that the Canon of scripture
31:38
is complete, the foundation is laid.
31:40
The text argues that seeking new, extra biblical revelations
31:44
implies that the Bible is not entirely sufficient for all
31:47
matters of faith and practice. It points back to the permanence
31:50
of that completed work. So what does this all mean?
31:53
How does the author land the plane?
31:55
The essay concludes this section with an urgent, almost
31:58
aggressive call for evangelism. Demanding fierce personal
32:01
holiness and a complete detachment from the world.
32:05
The believer is called to separate from worldliness, not
32:07
to try and blend in with the culture to win it.
32:10
But to stand apart as a distinct holy people living in the daily
32:13
hope of Christ's physical return?
32:16
It is a sweeping, comprehensive and incredibly demanding
32:20
worldview. Let's review the main thesis we
32:22
have covered today. The sheer scope of this deep
32:25
dive is immense. We started with the cosmic
32:28
problem of total depravity. And the first promise of a
32:31
conquering seed in Genesis 3. We moved through the
32:34
architectural framework of the Old Testament covenants, showing
32:37
how God unilaterally guaranteed a solution.
32:40
We broke down the precise coin Greek verb tenses in the Gospel
32:44
of John, contrasting the eternal on with the historical agenito.
32:49
And diving into the massive permanent implications of
32:53
Tedelesti. And it all culminates in the
32:55
text assertion of Christ's absolute exclusivity, echoing
32:59
Jesus's own words in John 14.6. I am the Way and the truth and
33:03
the life. No one comes to the Father
33:05
except through me. And the final hall of the text
33:08
is a strict, unyielding warning. The author states unequivocally
33:11
that liberal theology's version of Jesus, a good moral
33:14
philosopher, or a revolutionary social worker cannot save you.
33:18
The prosperity Gospels version of Jesus, a divine Butler
33:21
waiting to grant your earthly wishes for wealth and health,
33:24
cannot save you. And the Sacramento systems that
33:27
demand ongoing human effort to maintain a state of grace cannot
33:31
save you. The text demands total reliance
33:33
on the historical sovereign substitutionary mediator, Jesus
33:38
Christ. Speaking directly to you, the
33:40
listener, this theological framework views history not as a
33:44
random series of meaningless events or a cyclical wheel.
33:48
It views history as a linear timeline, moving with
33:51
unstoppable sovereign velocity toward a physical earthly reign
33:55
of the risen King. Every covenant made, every Greek
33:58
verb inspired, every historical shadow cast in the Old Testament
34:02
is driving toward that single, massive conclusion.
34:05
I want to leave the listener with a final thought to ponder
34:07
something that builds on the absolute core of everything we
34:10
have discussed today. The Gree perfect tense of
34:12
Tetelesti truly means the work is entirely and irreversibly
34:16
finished. If the cosmic legal debt of sin
34:18
is paid in full with permanent results.
34:20
How much of human religious activity today is actually just
34:23
a futile attempt to pay a debt that has already been cleared?
34:26
That is a question that stops you right in your tracks.
34:28
It forces you to evaluate every motive behind your actions.
34:32
Thank you for joining Reformed Thinking for this deep dive into
34:35
the text. We will see you next time.