Latest / Reformed Thinking / Christology: Doctrine of Christ

Transcript

Christology: Doctrine of Christ · Reformed Thinking

• 0:00
  Hello and welcome back to Reform Thinking.
• 0:02
  I am so thrilled you were joining us today because we are
• 0:05
  tackling what is arguably the single most essential subject in
• 0:08
  our entire library. We have a massive stack of notes
• 0:11
  on the desk, primarily drawing from The Moody Handbook of
• 0:14
  Theology by Paul Ends, and we are going to be conducting a
• 0:17
  serious deep dive into Christology.
• 0:19
  It is so good to be here, and you know you are right about the
• 0:22
  gravity of this topic. When we talk about Christology,
• 0:25
  we are talking about the doctrine of Christ.
• 0:27
  It is the center of the target. If you miss the bull's eye here,
• 0:30
  you miss Christianity entirely. Yeah, that is the premise we are
• 0:34
  working with today. Who is Jesus, really?
• 0:37
  Because the cultural water we swim in usually says he was a
• 0:40
  good teacher, or maybe a revolutionary or a moral
• 0:42
  example. But the source material we are
• 0:45
  looking at today argues that those definitions are woefully
• 0:48
  insufficient. They are insufficient because
• 0:50
  they ignore the data. Our mission today is to move
• 0:54
  past the Sunday School basics. We need to understand the
• 0:57
  mechanics of the God man. We need to look at the nature of
• 0:59
  the Atonement. And honestly, we need to
• 1:01
  understand why the specific definitions of His nature matter
• 1:04
  so much for salvation. We are approaching this as we
• 1:08
  always do, from a Reform perspective, holding to the
• 1:10
  Westminster Confession. But we will see how ENDS breaks
• 1:13
  down the biblical data to support that historic faith.
• 1:16
  Let's jump right into Section 1 which ends titles the pre
• 1:19
  existence and eternality of Christ.
• 1:21
  Now I think for a lot of people the story of Jesus starts in a
• 1:24
  Manger in Bethlehem, but ANS makes a very strong point right
• 1:28
  out of the gate that if you start there you have already
• 1:30
  lost the plot. That is spot on.
• 1:32
  ANS argues that the eternality and the deity of Christ are
• 1:35
  inseparably linked. You cannot have one without the
• 1:38
  other. If Jesus is God, he must be
• 1:40
  eternal because God is eternal. If he is not eternal, if there
• 1:43
  was a time when he did not exist, then he is a created
• 1:46
  being. And if he is a created being, he
• 1:49
  cannot be God. So the logical necessity here is
• 1:52
  absolute. If you deny his eternality, you
• 1:55
  are denying His deity. It is a simple logical chain,
• 1:58
  but the implications are massive and the source material provides
• 2:01
  some heavy artillery from the New Testament to prove this.
• 2:04
  One of the most famous verses is John 1.1.
• 2:06
  In the beginning was the word. I feel like we hear that so
• 2:08
  often we just sort of glaze over it.
• 2:10
  But Anne digs into the Greek grammar here to show us what is
• 2:13
  really happening under the hood. He does, and it is a crucial
• 2:16
  distinction. The verb translated as was in
• 2:19
  the word was is the Greek imperfect tense.
• 2:21
  Hen. The imperfect tense stresses
• 2:23
  continual existence in past time.
• 2:25
  It is not a snapshot, it is a video.
• 2:28
  A better translation, or at least one that brings out the
• 2:30
  nuance, would be in the beginning the word was
• 2:33
  continually existing. No matter how far back you push
• 2:36
  the beginning to the origin of the universe, or before, the
• 2:38
  word was already there existing. That sets the stage beautifully.
• 2:42
  It pushes Jesus right off the timeline of created things.
• 2:44
  Then we have John 8.58, which is just a microphone drop moment.
• 2:47
  In the Gospels, Jesus is arguing with the religious leaders and
• 2:51
  they're talking about Abraham. Abraham lived 2000 years before
• 2:54
  Jesus stood there, and Jesus says before Abraham was born.
• 2:58
  I am. Right, the grammar there is
• 2:59
  explosive. He contrasts Abraham's coming
• 3:02
  into existence with his own eternal existence.
• 3:05
  But more than the timeline, he uses the phrase I AM.
• 3:09
  That is a direct claim to the title of Yahweh from Exodus 3.12
• 3:13
  where God tells Moses I AM WHOIM.
• 3:18
  Jesus is applying the covenant name of God to himself.
• 3:21
  He is claiming equality with Yahweh.
• 3:23
  That is why the leaders picked up stones to kill him.
• 3:25
  They understood the claim he was claiming to be the eternal God.
• 3:28
  It is not just the New Testament though the source points to
• 3:31
  Micah 5.2. We usually hear this at
• 3:33
  Christmas because it prophecies that the Messiah will be born in
• 3:35
  Bethlehem, but there is a second-half to that verse that
• 3:38
  gets overlooked. Yeah, Micah prophesized the
• 3:40
  location of the birth, but then he adds a description of the
• 3:42
  person being born. He says his goings forth are
• 3:45
  from long ago, from the days of eternity.
• 3:47
  It is a stunning contrast, a baby born in a tiny,
• 3:50
  insignificant town, yet his origins are from the days of
• 3:53
  eternity. It establishes that the birth in
• 3:55
  Bethlehem was not his beginning, it was just his arrival.
• 3:58
  Ends also did some fascinating detective work using indirect
• 4:02
  proofs. I love this part because it
• 4:03
  requires you to connect the dots.
• 4:05
  For example, creation. John 1.3 says Jesus created all
• 4:09
  things. The logic there is airtight.
• 4:11
  If Christ created all things, then he cannot be a created
• 4:14
  thing himself. If he were created, He would be
• 4:17
  part of the all things category. He must stand outside of
• 4:20
  creation to be the creator of it.
• 4:21
  Therefore He is uncreated and eternal.
• 4:24
  Another piece of detective work involves the titles used in
• 4:27
  Scripture. There is this connection ends
• 4:29
  makes between Isaiah seeing a vision and John commenting on
• 4:32
  it. Can you walk us through that?
• 4:34
  This is a really great connection.
• 4:35
  In Isaiah 6, the prophet has a vision of the Lord sitting on a
• 4:38
  throne high and lifted up. The seraphim are crying.
• 4:41
  Holy holy holy Isaiah is seeing Yahweh the Lord.
• 4:44
  But in John 12.41 the apostle John refers to that event and
• 4:48
  says Isaiah saw his glory referring to Jesus.
• 4:51
  John is explicitly identifying Jesus as the Yahweh that Isaiah
• 4:54
  saw in the temple. If Jesus is Yahweh and Yahweh is
• 4:57
  eternal, then Jesus is. Eternal.
• 4:59
  That leads us to the concept of theophanies.
• 5:02
  This is one of those theological terms that sounds intimidating,
• 5:04
  but it's actually really cool. It basically means an appearance
• 5:07
  of God. Ends focuses specifically on the
• 5:11
  Angel of the Lord. A theophany is a pre Incarnate
• 5:14
  appearance of Christ. The Angel of the Lord in the Old
• 5:17
  Testament is a unique figure. He is not just an Angel in the
• 5:21
  sense of a created messenger. In Judges 6, for instance, he is
• 5:24
  called the Angel of the Lord, but then a few verses later he
• 5:27
  is simply called the Lord or Yahweh.
• 5:29
  He accepts worship. He speaks with divine authority.
• 5:33
  But he is also distinct from Yahweh in some passages, right?
• 5:35
  Like in Zechariah, he talks to Yahweh.
• 5:38
  Precisely that gives us a glimpse of the Trinity.
• 5:40
  He is distinct from the Father, yet he is fully God, and the
• 5:44
  clue that seals it for ends is the disappearance of this
• 5:46
  figure. The Angel of the Lord appears
• 5:49
  frequently throughout the Old Testament, to Hagar, to Abraham,
• 5:51
  to Gideon, that after the birth of Christ in the New Testament,
• 5:54
  the Angel of the Lord never appears again.
• 5:57
  He ceases to exist as a separate figure because the incarnation
• 6:00
  has happened. The shadow has given way to the
• 6:02
  substance. That is such a compelling
• 6:04
  argument. It really shows that Jesus
• 6:06
  didn't just show up at year zero.
• 6:08
  He has been active in redemptive history from the very beginning.
• 6:12
  Moving on to Section 2, let's talk about the mathematical and
• 6:14
  probability of prophecy. Enz lays out what he calls the
• 6:17
  Lineage funnel. It is a great visual.
• 6:20
  Imagine a funnel starting wide and getting narrower and
• 6:23
  narrower. God gives a promise in Genesis
• 6:25
  3.15 that the seat of the woman will crush the serpent.
• 6:28
  That is the whole human race potentially.
• 6:30
  Then it narrows to the line of Shem, then to Abraham, then to
• 6:34
  Isaac, not Ishmael, then to Jacob, not Esau, then to the
• 6:38
  tribe of Judah, and finally to the House of David.
• 6:41
  It is incredibly specific and that within that lineage you
• 6:44
  have the prophecy of the virgin birth.
• 6:46
  From Isaiah 7.14, ENS mentions the Hebrew word alma.
• 6:50
  There's always debate about whether that means virgin or
• 6:52
  just young woman. ENS stands firm on the Orthodox
• 6:55
  understanding here. While Alma can mean a young
• 6:58
  maiden, in the seven times it appears in the Old Testament, it
• 7:01
  never refers to a woman who has lost her virginity, and the
• 7:04
  context of Isaiah 7.14 is the giving of a miraculous sign.
• 7:08
  A young woman giving birth is not a sign that happens every
• 7:10
  day. A virgin conceiving is a sign.
• 7:13
  Matthew 1.23 quotes this and uses the Greek word parthenos,
• 7:16
  which explicitly means virgin. So the New Testament commentary
• 7:20
  settles the Old Testament definition.
• 7:21
  Then we get into the specifics of his rejection and death.
• 7:24
  Psalm 22 is honestly chilling me to read it alongside the
• 7:27
  crucifixion accounts. It was written by David, but
• 7:29
  David died of old age in a bed. He never experienced what is
• 7:31
  described in the Psalm. No, he didn't.
• 7:34
  Psalm 22 is a clear instance of the Spirit of Christ speaking
• 7:37
  through David about the Messiah. It describes the piercing of
• 7:40
  hands and feet. It describes the disjointing of
• 7:43
  bones. It describes the intense thirst.
• 7:46
  It even predicts the gambling for his clothing.
• 7:48
  And it opens with the cry My God, my God, why have you
• 7:51
  forsaken me? The very words Jesus screamed
• 7:53
  from the cross. It is a photograph of the
• 7:56
  crucifixion, written hundreds of years before crucifixion was
• 7:59
  even invented, as a method of execution.
• 8:01
  That detail about crucifixion not being being invented yet is
• 8:04
  wild. It really underscores the divine
• 8:07
  authorship. Then there is Isaiah 53, the
• 8:10
  Suffering Servant, the image of the Lamb being silent before its
• 8:13
  shears. It speaks to the voluntary
• 8:15
  nature of his sacrifice. He did not defend himself.
• 8:18
  He went to the slaughter willingly.
• 8:20
  And that connects to the resurrection prophecy in Psalm
• 8:22
  16.10 where David says God will not abandon his soul to shield
• 8:26
  or let His Holy One see decay. Peter uses this exact argument
• 8:29
  in Acts 2. He tells the crowd, look,
• 8:31
  David's tomb is right over there.
• 8:32
  His body decayed. So he couldn't be talking about
• 8:34
  himself. He was talking about the Christ.
• 8:36
  It is a comprehensive picture. You have the lineage, the birth,
• 8:39
  the manner of life, the specific details of death and the
• 8:43
  resurrection all mapped out centuries in advance.
• 8:46
  Let's move to Section 3, the incarnation and humanity.
• 8:51
  We have established He is eternal God, but the incarnation
• 8:55
  is where the rubber meets the road.
• 8:57
  ENS defines incarnation literally as in flesh.
• 9:00
  The definition is vital here. ENS highlights that the
• 9:03
  incarnation is the eternal Son taking to Himself an additional
• 9:06
  nature. It is not the subtraction of
• 9:08
  deity, it is the addition of humanity.
• 9:11
  He did not stop being God to become man.
• 9:13
  He remained fully God while becoming fully man.
• 9:16
  There is a bit of a puzzle in the source material regarding
• 9:19
  the genealogies. Matthew gives a genealogy and
• 9:21
  Luke gives a genealogy and they are different.
• 9:23
  Critics love to point this out. How does ENS resolve it?
• 9:25
  It is a classic, difficult, but the solution is quite elegant.
• 9:29
  Matthew is writing to a Jewish audience establishing Jesus
• 9:32
  legal right to the throne. So he traces the line through
• 9:35
  Joseph, the legal father. Joseph descended from David,
• 9:39
  specifically through the royal line of Solomon.
• 9:42
  Luke, however, focuses on the humanity of Jesus.
• 9:45
  He traces the line through Mary, showing Jesus's blood descent
• 9:48
  from David, but through Nathan, another son.
• 9:51
  So Matthew gives the legal claim.
• 9:53
  Luke gives the biological reality.
• 9:55
  That makes perfect sense now regarding his true humanity.
• 9:59
  Ends is very concerned with countering an old heresy called
• 10:02
  Dusatism, which claimed Jesus was just a phantom or a spirit
• 10:06
  who looked human. Right.
• 10:07
  If Jesus is is not a real man, he cannot represent us.
• 10:10
  Ends points out the physical proofs Jesus grew and developed
• 10:13
  as noted in Luke 2.52. He got hungry, he got thirsty,
• 10:16
  he fell asleep from exhaustion in the boat.
• 10:18
  These are not things a phantom does.
• 10:19
  And it wasn't just physical. He had emotional responses.
• 10:21
  I think we sometimes view Jesus as this stoic, unfeeling statue,
• 10:26
  but the text says he was troubled in spirit.
• 10:28
  He wept at the tomb of Lazarus. He felt grief over Jerusalem.
• 10:33
  He was in anguish in Gethsemane. ENS points out that he had a
• 10:36
  human soul and a human spirit. This matters because redemption
• 10:40
  isn't just for our bodies, it is for our whole person.
• 10:43
  He had to assume a full human nature, mind, will and emotions,
• 10:47
  to redeem our mind, will and emotions.
• 10:49
  So we have full humanity now. Section 4 brings us back to the
• 10:52
  deity of Christ. We already touched on pre
• 10:55
  existence, but this section focuses on his life on earth.
• 10:58
  The source references CS Lewis's famous trilemma.
• 11:01
  Yes, liar, lunatic, or Lord, the source argues.
• 11:04
  You cannot simply call Jesus a good teacher.
• 11:06
  Good teachers don't claim to be God.
• 11:08
  If a man claims to be God and he isn't, he is either a deceiver,
• 11:11
  a liar, or he is delusional, A lunatic.
• 11:14
  The only other option, if the claim is true, is that he is
• 11:17
  Lord. You have to make a choice.
• 11:19
  And ENDS provides evidence of divine attributes to displayed
• 11:21
  while he was on earth. Even though he was human, he
• 11:24
  showed qualities that belong only to God.
• 11:26
  Take omnipresence, he tells the disciples.
• 11:29
  I am with you always. A mere human cannot be with
• 11:31
  everyone always, or omniscience. He knew the Samaritan woman's
• 11:35
  past without being told. He predicted the details of his
• 11:38
  own death. And omnipotence, He calmed the
• 11:41
  storm and draws a parallel to Psalm One O 7 there.
• 11:44
  Psalm One O 7 describes Yahweh stealing the storm in the waves.
• 11:48
  When Jesus stands up in the boat and commands the wind and waves
• 11:51
  to be still, the disciples are terrified.
• 11:53
  They ask, who is this? The answer, implying Psalm 107
• 11:57
  is that this is God exercising control over nature.
• 11:59
  He also forgave sins, which the scribes correctly noted is a
• 12:02
  prerogative of God alone. One of the strongest points for
• 12:05
  me in this section is the issue of receiving worship.
• 12:08
  Jesus was Jewish. The culture was fiercely
• 12:11
  monotheistic. Worshiping a man was blasphemy.
• 12:13
  Absolutely. And yet we see the blind man in
• 12:15
  John 9 worshiping him. We see disciples worshiping him
• 12:18
  in the Book of Revelation. Angels refuse worship.
• 12:21
  Peter and Paul refuse worship. But Jesus accepts it.
• 12:24
  He never tells anyone stand up. Don't do that.
• 12:26
  By accepting worship, he is implicitly declaring his deity.
• 12:29
  If you were not God, accepting that worship would be the
• 12:32
  ultimate sin. This brings us to Section 5,
• 12:34
  which I think is the most technically demanding part of
• 12:37
  our discussion, the hypostatic union and Kenosis.
• 12:40
  We have established He is man and He is God.
• 12:44
  How do those two fit together? The term hypostatic union
• 12:47
  describes the union of the two natures, undiminished deity and
• 12:51
  true humanity in one person forever.
• 12:53
  The key here, and where the Reformed tradition is very
• 12:56
  specific, is the no mixture rule.
• 12:58
  Right ends distinguishes between the Calvinistic view and the
• 13:01
  Lutheran view. Can you break that down for us?
• 13:04
  The Calvinistic view, which is the standard Reformed position,
• 13:07
  holds that the two natures are united but remain distinct.
• 13:10
  The divine does not become human, and the human does not
• 13:12
  become divine. There is no transfer of
• 13:14
  attributes. The finite cannot become
• 13:16
  infinite. So Jesus's human body is not
• 13:19
  omnipresent, it is local. His divine nature is
• 13:22
  omnipresent. They act in concert in the one
• 13:24
  person, but the natures do not blend into a third new nature,
• 13:28
  nor do they bleed into each other.
• 13:29
  And the Lutheran view differs how?
• 13:31
  The Lutheran view teaches a communication of attributes,
• 13:34
  specifically that the divine attributes can be communicated
• 13:37
  to the human nature. The classic example is the
• 13:39
  ubiquity of the body. They argue that because of the
• 13:42
  Union, Jesus physical body shares in the omnipresence of
• 13:45
  the divine, which is central to their view of the Eucharist.
• 13:49
  But the reformed view and ends his position is that this
• 13:51
  destroys true humanity. If a human body is everywhere,
• 13:55
  it is no longer a human body. So the practical implication,
• 13:58
  the why this matters part is about preserving the integrity
• 14:01
  of both natures. Precisely as Ends puts it, to
• 14:05
  rob the divine of an attribute destroys deity.
• 14:08
  To rob the human of an attribute, like being located in
• 14:10
  one place, destroy humanity. He must be fully both to be the
• 14:13
  mediator. He represents man to God because
• 14:16
  he is truly man. He represents God to man because
• 14:19
  he is truly God. Then we have the kenosis.
• 14:22
  This comes from Philippians 2.7 which says he emptied himself.
• 14:26
  The Greek word is keno. This has caused a lot of
• 14:28
  confusion over the years. Did he empty himself of his
• 14:31
  deity? Did he stop being God for 33
• 14:33
  years? Ends is very clear.
• 14:35
  Absolutely not. The liberal view often suggests
• 14:38
  he gave up his deity, but as we just discussed, he displayed
• 14:42
  divine attributes on earth. You cannot stop being God and
• 14:44
  then start again. God is immutable.
• 14:46
  So what did he empty himself of? He.
• 14:48
  Surrendered the independent exercise of His relative
• 14:50
  attributes. He submitted His will to the
• 14:52
  will of the Father and the Spirit.
• 14:54
  But the best way to view the canosis is not as a subtraction,
• 14:57
  but as an addition. He emptied Himself by taking on
• 15:00
  the form of a bond servant. He veiled His glory.
• 15:03
  Think of a king who puts on beggar's rags.
• 15:06
  He does not stop being king, He just veils His Majesty to walk
• 15:09
  among his people. He didn't lose his essence, he
• 15:11
  changed his status and form. That king in rags analogy is
• 15:14
  very helpful. He veiled the glory, but the
• 15:17
  glory was still there underneath.
• 15:19
  Now section 6 covers a debate that I think surprises a lot of
• 15:22
  people, the impeccability debate.
• 15:24
  The question is simple, could Jesus have sinned?
• 15:27
  It is a fascinating question. There are two camps.
• 15:30
  Peccability means he was able to sin.
• 15:32
  Impeccability means he was not able to sin.
• 15:35
  ENS notes that Charles Hodge, a giant of Reformed theology,
• 15:38
  actually held to peccability. Which seems counterintuitive for
• 15:41
  a Reformed theologian. What was Hodge's argument?
• 15:45
  Hodge argued from Hebrews 4.15 which says Jesus was tempted in
• 15:49
  all things as we are. Hodge's logic was if he could
• 15:53
  not sin, then the temptation wasn't real.
• 15:56
  It would be like tempting a rock to sin.
• 15:57
  If there is no possibility of falling, is the struggle
• 16:00
  genuine? He felt that to be truly human
• 16:02
  and truly sympathetic to us, the possibility of sin had to be
• 16:05
  there. But Ends and the expert
• 16:07
  consensus lean toward impeccability.
• 16:09
  Yes, and the defense is robust. It rests on the person of
• 16:12
  Christ. First, he is immutable.
• 16:15
  God cannot change. If God cannot sin, and Jesus is
• 16:17
  God, he cannot sin. Second, he is omnipotent.
• 16:21
  Sin implies a weakness of will or character. 3rd, and most
• 16:24
  crucially, the unity of the person.
• 16:26
  You cannot split Jesus into two people.
• 16:28
  You cannot say the human Jesus wanted to sin, but the divine
• 16:31
  Jesus stopped him. There is only one will of the
• 16:34
  person. Since the God man is one person,
• 16:36
  and God cannot sin, the God man cannot sin but.
• 16:39
  What about Hodges point? If he couldn't sin, was the
• 16:41
  temptation fake? Not at all.
• 16:43
  The temptation was real, but the outcome was certain.
• 16:46
  Think of it like this. An army attacks an invulnerable
• 16:50
  fortress. The attack is real.
• 16:52
  The explosions are real, the pressure is applied, but the
• 16:55
  fortress cannot be breached because of its nature.
• 16:58
  The will argument ends, uses is vital here.
• 17:01
  If his human will could choose sin, it would be operating
• 17:04
  independently of and stronger than his divine will.
• 17:07
  That creates a schizophrenia in Christ.
• 17:09
  The temptation proves that he would not and could not sin.
• 17:12
  It demonstrates his strength, not his potential for failure.
• 17:16
  That makes sense. The pressure was real, but his
• 17:18
  nature was such that he would never yield.
• 17:20
  Let's move to Section 7, the Atonement.
• 17:23
  This is the application of the incarnation.
• 17:25
  Why did he come to die? NS breaks down some key terms.
• 17:29
  First is substitution. This is the core of the Reformed
• 17:32
  understanding of the cross. We don't just believe Jesus died
• 17:35
  for our benefit, we believe he died in our place.
• 17:37
  NS highlights the Greek prepositions anti and hamper.
• 17:41
  Anti means instead of hupper means in place of.
• 17:44
  He didn't just die to show us how much he loves us.
• 17:46
  He died to take the bullet that was aimed at us.
• 17:48
  He died as us. Then there is propitiation, That
• 17:52
  is a word you don't hear in normal conversation.
• 17:54
  No, you really don't, but it is a beautiful concept.
• 17:56
  It means satisfaction. God is holy and just.
• 18:00
  Sin demands judgement. God cannot just wave his hand
• 18:03
  and say don't worry about it without violating his own
• 18:05
  justice. Propitiation means the righteous
• 18:08
  demands of God were fully satisfied by the sacrifice of
• 18:11
  Christ. The wrath of God against sin was
• 18:14
  poured out on him so it would not be poured out on us.
• 18:17
  Wrath was averted because justice was satisfied.
• 18:19
  And redemption ends connects this to the marketplace.
• 18:23
  Yes, the Greek word agarazzo. It refers to the slave market.
• 18:26
  We were slaves to sin. Redemption is the act of buying
• 18:30
  a slave out of the market to set them free.
• 18:32
  The price paid was his blood. Now the atonement isn't just the
• 18:35
  death, it is the resurrection. We talked about the prophecy of
• 18:38
  it, but ends list some specific proofs.
• 18:41
  I really like the detail about the linen wrappings.
• 18:43
  That is a detail from John's gospel that carries a lot of
• 18:46
  weight. When Peter and John run to the
• 18:48
  tomb, John looks in and sees the linen wrappings lying there.
• 18:52
  The tout implies they were retaining the shape of the body
• 18:54
  like a cocoon, but the body was gone.
• 18:57
  If grave robbers had stolen the body, they would have either
• 19:00
  taken the wrappings with them or unwound them and thrown them in
• 19:03
  a pile. They wouldn't have carefully
• 19:05
  preserved the shape. It convinced John immediately
• 19:08
  that the body had passed through the material.
• 19:10
  And the other proof is the transformation of the disciples.
• 19:13
  This is historically undeniable. On Friday, they're cowering in a
• 19:17
  locked room, terrified of the Jewish leaders.
• 19:19
  Peter has denied Jesus three times out of fear of a servant
• 19:22
  girl. A few weeks later, these same
• 19:24
  men are standing in the temple courts, boldly preaching that
• 19:27
  Jesus is Lord, facing arrest and death.
• 19:30
  What changed? You don't die for a lie that you
• 19:33
  know is a lie. The only explanation for their
• 19:35
  psychological transformation is that they saw the risen Lord.
• 19:39
  Finally, we arrive at Section 8, Present and future ministry.
• 19:43
  Jesus didn't just retire after the resurrection, He ascended.
• 19:46
  What was the significance of the ascension?
• 19:49
  It ended his limitation. He is no longer bound by
• 19:51
  geography. It ended his humiliation.
• 19:54
  He is returned to glory and very practically for us, it allowed
• 19:57
  for the sending of the Holy Spirit.
• 19:59
  Jesus said it is to your advantage that I go away so the
• 20:02
  Helper could come. And what is he doing right now?
• 20:05
  NS lists few current jobs. He is building his church.
• 20:08
  He is the head giving gifts to men.
• 20:11
  But personally for the believer, his role as intercessor is the
• 20:14
  most comforting. The word is paracletus, which
• 20:17
  means advocate or defense attorney.
• 20:19
  I really love that image. It is brilliant.
• 20:21
  NS says that when we sin, Satan is the accuser.
• 20:24
  He points at us and says look what they did.
• 20:27
  They are guilty. And he is right.
• 20:28
  We are guilty. But our defense attorney, Jesus
• 20:30
  stands before the Father. He doesn't argue our innocence.
• 20:33
  He argues his payment. He says yes, they sinned, but I
• 20:36
  paid for that sin on the cross. My righteousness covers them and
• 20:39
  the Father. The judge accepts the plea.
• 20:42
  That is why our salvation is secure, not because we stop
• 20:45
  sinning, but because He never stops interceding.
• 20:48
  He also holds three offices, prophet, priest and King.
• 20:51
  Briefly, as prophet, he reveals God to us.
• 20:55
  As priest he represents us to God.
• 20:57
  As King, he rules. ENS mentions the millennial
• 21:00
  reign here as well, the anticipation that his kingly
• 21:03
  office will eventually be fully realized on Earth with justice
• 21:06
  and peace. That is a lot of incredible
• 21:08
  material to take in. Let's try to summarize this deep
• 21:10
  dive. We have seen that Jesus is the
• 21:13
  eternal God, the great I am. He was prophesied with
• 21:16
  mathematical precision. He added humanity to his deity,
• 21:19
  living a real human life but without sin.
• 21:22
  He died a substitutionary death to satisfy God's justice, rose
• 21:25
  to prove the payment was accepted, and is now our
• 21:28
  advocate in heaven. It is the most robust, beautiful
• 21:31
  and logically consistent doctrine in the world.
• 21:33
  It holds together perfectly. I want to leave you, our
• 21:35
  listener, with a final thought. Ends brings up regarding the
• 21:38
  future work. We know Jesus is coming back,
• 21:40
  but Ends mentions John 14 where Jesus says he's going to prepare
• 21:43
  a place for us. It is a staggering thought.
• 21:46
  Jesus used the analogy of a wealthy father adding rooms to
• 21:50
  his house for his children. But think about the timeline.
• 21:53
  Jesus created the heavens and the earth, the galaxies, the
• 21:56
  mountains, the oceans in six days.
• 21:59
  He has been gone for 2000 years, preparing a place for us.
• 22:04
  If he can create the universe in six days, imagine the magnitude,
• 22:08
  the beauty and the glory of a place He's been working on for
• 22:11
  two millennia. That puts our future hope in a
• 22:13
  whole new perspective. It has been a pleasure unpacking
• 22:16
  this with you today. The pleasure was mine.
• 22:18
  And to you listening, thank you for joining us on Reformed
• 22:20
  Thinking. We hope this deep dive has
• 22:22
  strengthened your understanding of who your Savior really is.
• 22:25
  Until next time.