I've been thinking a lot about blood lately. I've been preaching through the Gospel of Matthew in recent weeks and we are at a major turning point. The confession of Peter at Caesarea Philippi changes the narrative drastically. No longer is the story about life, vibrancy, and public miracles. Instead, its about suffering, judgment, wrath, a public death, and blood. Blood. The Bible is, to say the least, a very bloody book. Not just because it is full of tales with murder and war, but God is a God that requires a lot of it.
It is this thought that moved me to the wonderful book Precious Blood: The Atonement of Christ edited by Richard D. Phillips with contributing chapters by Philip Ryken, Carl Truman, RC Sproul, Joel Beeke, and several others. The book is basically broken up into two parts: biblical/systematic theology and historical theology.
The book begins looking at the biblical/systematic theological truth of the atonement. Why is the cross necessary? The contributers walk the reader through what Scripture says and why penal substitution is the root meaning of the cross. The first chapter is fascinating. Written by Beeke, the author looks at the Passover and relates it to Christ. The parallels between the lamb in Exodus and the Lamb in the Gospels is striking and Beeke draws some conclusions that I had not seen before. Likewise, the chapter looking at the atoning work of the cross is helpful. Walking the reader through the images of the temple (propitiation), the market (redemption), and the courtroom (justification) is a helpful way to understand the precious blood of Jesus Christ.
The section on historical theology is pretty straightforward. There's a chapter on the early church and their soteriology, on medieval theology, the Reformers (of course!), the puritans, etc. The two most helpful chapters here are the ones on the theology of the Early Church and on the more contemporary issue of responding to those in the non-violent atonement camp.
Regarding the Early Church, the contributor slowly guides the reader through the complications of asking what the early church believed on this issue. We must remember, the author notes, that the early church, though wrote theology, were as much apologists for the gospel. They were having to fight off Gnosticism, Marcionism, docetism, all the while running for their lives from various persecutions. But that does not mean that nothing is said on the subject. The author lays out the case in their belief in the recapitulation theory, the ransom theory, and even penal substitution.
But the most helpful chapter to me personally was the last chapter which was a response to the critics of penal substitution. It is increasingly popular in evangelicalism today to write off penal substitution as a form of "divine child abuse." The chapter walks the reader through what has been said on the subject and how a right view of God, man, Christ, and the cross - as the Bible presents it - demands a correct understanding of penal substitution without all of the unnecessary rhetoric. The author makes an excellent point here. All of the talk about being open to other views on the atonement, and the author agrees that there is something to Christus Victor and others, this is all really an effort to undermine penal substitution. It is, if you will, a "anything but propitiation," campaign that has gained a lot of traction.
Overall this is an excellent book on an important subject that you need in your library. The gospel is under assault and books like this will contribute to the recovery of the gospel. I conclude with the books conclusion:
But what about the culture? Is it true that our postmodern world does not register with the legal considerations of penal substitutionary atonement? If this is so, might it be that the world so little knows the truth about God and that our culture has, in its sensual addictions, as Paul puts it, suppressed the truth of God in unrighteousness and 'exchanged the truth about God for a lie' (Rom. 1:18, 25)? If this is the case, and an assessment of postmodern culture based on a belief in the authority and truth of Scripture is bound to reach such a conclusion, then for Christians to collaborate in so deadly a deception will neither advance the true cause of the gospel nor reflect the merciful love of God towards the world.
But is it really true that the biblical gospel of Christ's atoning death as our penal substitute cannot hope to reach today's world? Once we see that the gospel reveals not another warmed-over version of failed humanistic thinking but, rather, a rejection of Western individualism for a saving, covenantal solidarity with God's own Son, who loved us enough even to take our sins t the cross, then perhaps Williams is right when he suggests that, contrary to its critics, 'penal substitution has a bright future and will preach well.' -225
There are some doctrines every Christian should cherish, study, and rejoice in. The cross of Christ is one of them. There are some books most Christians and every pastor should read. The late John Stott's The Cross of Christ is one of them. I have been told and now concur that this is one of the best and most important books on the cross of Jesus Christ and how we are to understand it.
Stott opens the book asking a simple, yet important, question. In search of a symbol, and every movement and religion has one, why did Christianity settle on the cross? There were, after all, multiple options; the ichthus, empty tomb, Noah's Ark, creation, the manger, etc. Yet at the end of the day, the church chose a Roman cross - an instrument reserved for the worse of criminals - as their symbol. The reason is simple: their is no Christianity without the cross. Their is no gospel without the cross.
The book is broken down into four parts, but it is parts 2 and 3 that get the most press and rightfully so. It is here that Stott the theologian does his best work. Stott seeks to unravel what the cross means and why it was necessary. Stott is an ardent defender of penal substitutionary atonement. To defend this thesis, the writer slowly walks the reader through some of the dominant atonement theories in history and argues that the atonement must be one of substitution and satisfaction. Thus Anselm was on to something with his satisfaction theory (with emphasis on God's honor), but falls just short. The cross satisfies God, but it does so as God in Christ stands as our substitute. Propitiation is made.
But to suggest that this book is just a good defense of penal substitution (as Tony Jones does on the back cover) is to fail to appreciate what Stott does. Stott defends in great detail penal substitution, but the atonement is not limited to that. The current debate over the atonement is really missing this point. Those who rightly affirm penal substitution are quick to reject any and all other theories. The same is true on the other side. Those who deny penal substitution as the root purpose of the atonement usually reject it outright. Stott shows, as I have argued before, that the cross does more and is more than this.
Think of the atonement as a rope with three strands each being important. Though penal substitution is the key purpose of the atonement, other theories are just as valid and ought to be embraced. These include Christus Victor and Christus Exemplar. Stott dedicates an entire chapter to these other two theories but clarifies what the Bible actually says about them. His chapter on victory is very good. His chapter on the cross as God's revelation (Christus Exemplar) rightly rejects Abelard's moral influence theory but does not deny that Scripture affirms that we are to look to the cross and follow Christ's example there.
With all that is great about this book, there were a few things that are worth mentioning that are unfortunate. First, Stott makes a brief comment regarding creation. He notes that the fossil record indicates that predation and death existed in the animal kingdom before the creation of man (67). He then adds that God apparently had a different plan for humans. I am sympathetic toward old earth creationism (though I still remain a young earth creationist), but Stott fails to consider the implications of OEC. He says nothing regarding original sin, the historic Adam, the interpretation of Genesis, etc. in light of an old earth creationism conviction. Instead, we are to just assume that the earth is old without any theological qualms as a result.
Secondly, chapter 10 on the cross and community was a little weak. I feel that Stott really missed a great opportunity to emphasize the church. This is not to suggest that Stott undermines or ignores the importance of the church in the book, but that this would have been a great opportunity to emphasize it. Each stage of redemption - creation, fall, the passion, and consummation - deals with three aspects: the individual, the community, and the cosmos. God establishes all three in creation, the fall distorts all three through, and cross redeems all three, and the eschaton renews all three. Thus when speaking of the cross and its work of redemption, it is imperative to highlight the church.
Finally, in his chapter on suffering, Stott heavily defends the passibility of God. I for one am stuck on the issue. Is God passible or impassible? Does God suffer or not? Stott gives an emphatic yes and I am not sure Scripture is clear enough on the subject and I'm not sure how Stott presents it is the best. For example, Stott uses the story of the execution of an innocent Jewish boy hung by the Nazis. "Where was God," the onlookers ask. "There hanging" comes the answer. The implication, then, is that God suffers with us. Let me say that I am not necessarily against passibility, however it is a difficult philosophical and theological issue. Stott uses it as a key answer to suffering and I'm not sure Scripture takes us there so clearly.
With all of this said, there is no doubt that this is an excellent book and portions of it will be featured on this site moving forward. His chapter highlighting the four images of the cross, including redemption, propitiation, reconciliation, etc., is an excellent way to explain the effects of the cross and I would recommend the reader to return to it often. Overall, buy this book, read this book, and love this book.
It has been said that Christianity is a bloody religion. critics
usually make this accusation, pointing to the wars, inquisitions,
trials, and executions carried out over the years in the name of
Christianity. We must admit that blood has been wrongly shed in the name
of so-called Christianity, but Christianity would be a bloody religion
regardless. it is a blood religion not because o the blood shed by
people in wars and inquisitions, but because of the blood shed by Jesus
Christ. (1)
To read the Bible with any
seriousness and sober discernment is to see the shedding of blood or the
implications of it on practically every page. If the history of
redemption is a story told in pictures, the blood of Christ is the paint
with which the story is portrayed. (2-3)
The Bible is a bloody book. One can barely turn a page of Scripture without seeing its distinct stain on the page. From the sacrifice of an innocent animal to cover the nudity of Adam and Eve, to the murder of Abel, to the Day of Atonement, to the countless murders, wars, and rapes, to the cross itself, to the martyrdom of the first saints, and even in the end when Christ returns with a sword. There is an over-abundance of blood throughout Scripture.
The good news of Jesus Christ by which men are saved, the church is established, the Kingdom is inaugurated, and the cosmos retaken itself is a bloody gospel. To many such a theme is confusing and strange especially in the 21st century. In his book Blood Work: How the Blood of Christ Accoplishesh Our Salvation (Reformation Trust, 2013), Anthony Carter delves into the theme of blood and how it assures our propitiation, salvation, justification, reconciliation, ransom, redemption, cleansing, sanctification, peace, and every major soteriological theme in Scripture.
I picked up this book simply because I have become convinced that missing from Christianity is an emphasis on blood. As the author illustrates throughout the book, the great hymns of old were filled with blood. "What can wash away my sin," the hymn writer asks. "Nothing but the blood of Jesus." Another reminds us "There is a fountain filled with blood drawn from Immanuel's veins." A fountain full? What happened to the blood.*
Perhaps the greatest benefit of Carter's book is it clear reminder that one cannot speak of grace or salvation without an emphasis on blood. The blood of goats are not enough, the writer of Hebrews tells us, and cannot save. Instead what we need is the penal substitutionary blood of the Lamb of God.
The outline of the book is simple. Each chapter looks at a major theme of soteriology and shows how blood defines it. So perhaps we could sum up the contents of the book as follows:
Blood purchases us
Blood Propitiates the Wrath of God
Blood justifies us
Blood brings us near to God
Blood makes peace
Blood cleanses us
Blood sanctifies us
Blood elects us
Blood ransoms us
Blood frees us
A couple of thoughts. First, the theology is sound and Reformed. As the above outline shows, there is an entire chapter dedicated to the subject of election and the author makes reference and develops it throughout the book. Beyond the question of predestination (and I am reformed myself), defends orthodox soteriology and though the language of blood might be strange for us today, this book would not have been so unique in the past. What I find helpful about Carter's approach to this subject is it reminds us that Scripture utilizes a number of images and ideas to describe and define salvation. Redemption reminds us of our slavery to sin. Justification reminds us of our guilt before God. Cleansing reminds us of the filthy nature of sin. We should not be surprised, then, that blood covers them all.
Secondly, this is not an academic book. Carter is not interested in old debates over the nature of Scripture, various theologies of salvation (liberation theology, liberalism, the social gospel, etc.), or atonement theories (moral influence, Christus Victor, etc.). Carter seeks to explain what role blood plays and how it accomplishes our salvation as revealed in Scripture. An academic book typically finds itself in debating both debates of the past and debates of the present. Carter avoids this. This is neither a praise nor criticism of the book, but a confession as to what sort of book this is. This also means that Blood Work is accessible to the average Christian.
Thirdly, the writer is good but it is not great. This brings with it the benefit of it being more accessible to the average Christian new to theology and the theme of blood, but at times the writing is almost too simple. I do not want to suggest, however, that there are no memorable quotes or powerful paragraphs. Consider the following.
Regarding sin:
How do we know that someone understands the blood of
Christ in his life? We know it by the fact that he or she is not out for
revenge, but is living out redemption. 10
The human condition is not just a bucket of errors; it is an ocean of iniquity. 34
Thus, it is important to see that the Bible portrays sin not just as an action but also as a tyrannical master. 43
The tragedy of sin is not just that it kills, but that it defiles, it
violates, and it dirties our consciences, our hands, and our lives
beyond our ability to clean them. 71
Regarding the blood of Christ:
The blood of Christ gives us a home. The blood of Christ becomes the
flag and color under which we stand. The blood of Christ takes those who
were once strangers and makes them family. As the Bible says, we are
“no longer strangers and aliens, but . . . fellow citizens with the
saints and members of the household of God (Eph. 2:19). Simply put, the
blood of Christ brings us near to God. As Stott reminds us:
And this nearness to God which all Christians enjoy through Christ is a privilege we take too frequently for granted. Our God does not keep his distance or stand on his dignity, like some foreign potentate, nor does he insist on any complicated ritual or protocol. On the contrary, through Jesus Christ and by the Holy Spirit we have immediate “access” to him as our Father. We need to exhort one another to avail ourselves of this privilege. (40)
Regarding the blood of Jesus and reconciliation:
The blood of Jesus tears down the walls of hostility and brings peace
and prosperity of soul. It takes a people who are not His people and
makes them His people under God, indivisible. The blood of Christ,
spilled at the cross, is so powerful that it destroys all the foolish,
oxymoronic statements we sometimes hear: “selfish Christian”—there is no
self at the cross, only Jesus; “stingy Christian”—the cross is the
greatest motivation for giving there could ever be; “proud
Christian”—the ground at the foot of the cross is the humblest in the
history of the world; or “racist Christian”—at the cross there is no Jew
or Gentile, black or white, Arab or Asian. There is only Christ and
those who are washed in His blood.
In Christ, the ethnic and racial identities that separate and often become the source of animosity and even enmity lose their power to divide. The blood of Christ overcomes them. There- fore, Christians must remember that there is only one family of God. We not only fly the same flag and fight under the same banner, but we share the same blood. That blood has brought us near—to God and each other. Racial and ethnic bloodlines are not omnipotent. The blood of Christ is.When the blood of Christ brings us near, it brings us to the cross and asks us this question: “Do you remember?” Let us remember that the blood of Christ has reconciled us to God, ended the hostility, and transformed us from enemies to friends. Let us remember to pray as the songwriter suggests:Lest I forget Gethsemane, Lest I forget thine agony, Lest I forget thy love for me, Lead me to Calvary. (57-58)
Consider also some of the following helpful illustrations. First a story about Augustine:
The story is told that Augustine, the fourth-century theologian and
bishop of Hippo in North Africa, after confessing faith in Jesus Christ,
ran into a former mistress on the street. Immediately upon recognizing
her, Augustine reversed his course and began moving swiftly in the
opposite direction. The woman, surprised at seeing Augustine and
equally surprised at the reversal of his route, cried out, “Augustine,
it is I.” Augustine, continuing to move away from her, replied, “Yes,
but it is not I.” (79)
Secondly a legend about Abraham Lincoln:
The story is told that Abraham
Lincoln went down to the slave block and there noticed a young black
girl up for auction. Moved with compassion, he bid on her and won. Upon
purchasing her, Lincoln told the disbelieving girl that she was free.
In her surprise, she said, “What does that mean?” “It means you are free,” he replied. “Does that mean,” she asked, “I can say whatever I want to say?” “Yes, my dear, you can say whatever you want to say.” “Does that mean I can be whatever I want to be?” “Yes, you can be whatever you want to be.” “Does that mean I can go wherever I want to go?” “Yes, you can go wherever you want to go.” At that, the girl, with tears streaming down her face, said, “Then I will go with you.” Admittedly,
this account is probably more legendary than legitimate. Yet it does
communicate an important spiritual truth. Like the young girl on the
slave block, we, too, have been redeemed and set free. The Bible reminds
us in 1 Peter 1:18–19 that if we are in Christ, we have been “ransomed
from the futile ways inherited from [our] forefathers, not with
perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of
Christ.” The blood of Christ is of incalculable value, and for that
reason it alone is able to ransom sinners from their slavery to sin.
(99-100)
More could be given, but this should make the point. Carter is not a great writer, but is a memorable one. Then again, when one proclaims the wonderful gospel, how can we not be? Carter wants the reader to not just have his head filled with a better understanding of the biblical theme of blood and the role it plays in our salvation, but to instead use this great theology to bring us to praise. It is not an accident that the great hymns and praise songs quoted throughout the book are used. If this is true regarding the blood of Jesus, and it is, then how can we not worship.
O precious is that flow That makes me white as snow. No other fount I know Nothing but the blood of Jesus
* The author provides an entire appendix of his book to songs on the subject of blood.
Reformation Trust was kind enough to provide a free copy of this book for the purpose of this review.
Today has been a crazy day to say the least. A roller coaster ride from sun up to now sun down. I am reminded that no matter who I meet, the situations I find myself in, or the confusions I have it is the following message found in the video below that must motivate and move us. The gospel of Jesus Christ is our only hope. Let us not forget that.
The following video is a sermon clip from Pastor Mark Driscoll who ministers in Seattle, WA. One of the most secular and unreached cities in America. It is good to hear the gospel being preached in such a dark place and we desperately need it in our Bible-belt town.
Here is the audio and sermon notes from the Easter message. I hope everyone had a excellent Resurrection Sunday. Amanda and I are exhausted but we enjoyed the day nonetheless. Here is the description:
Was the cross necessary? Perhaps no other question is more important than that one. Why did Jesus have to bear the cross? Couldn't have God redeemed man, showed His love, and forgiven our sins another way? When we understand the exchange of Barabbas for Jesus, we then understand the necessity of the cross and penal substitution.
Posts
