Christ Church

Surveying the Text: Job

Joe Harby on

Introduction

This book is widely regarded as a masterpiece of human literature, even by non-believers, and yet this high regard is not always accompanied by a high level of understanding. This is a very great book, and like many great things, our natural tendency is to get it down to a more understandable level, where we can piously misunderstand it. But one of the reasons this book shines so brightly is that there is no varnish on it. Job was an important figure. Consider Noah, Daniel and Job—two of the greatest men of righteousness in the Old Testament were not Jews (Ez. 14:14, 20).

The Text

“For I know that my redeemer liveth, And that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, Yet in my flesh shall I see God: Whom I shall see for myself, And mine eyes shall behold, and not another; Though my reins be consumed within me” (Job 19:25–27).

Summary of the Text

We do not know who wrote this book, and some scholars have taken our lack of information as a generous invitation to wild speculation. That said, my own view is that the beginnings of this book are found in distant antiquity, and that it took its place in the Wisdom literature around the time of Solomon—with the possibility that Solomon was the author. I believe the events that are the kernel of the poem were historical. Job is not an Israelite, but rather an Edomite, as will be discussed later. No explicit reference to the history of Israel is found in the book.

The book of Job is filled with unanswered questions, and things that human beings simply cannot know. But Job knows at least one thing, and it is stated here in our text—in the midst of his suffering, and in the midst of his wrongful complaint against God, we have this remarkable testimony of faith. This shining testimony sits in the midst of his complaints the same way the godly Job himself sat on the ash heap. Job knows that His redeemer lives, and that his redeemer is going to stand upon the earth at the latter day. Job also affirms his belief in the resurrection of the dead—after his body is destroyed by worms, Job affirms that in his body he is going to see God. Where did that come from?

The Structure of the Book

The first part of the book is the prologue in Heaven, where Satan challenges God with regard to Job’s motives. The result of this is a series of calamities that befall Job. The center of the book is made up of a series of debates that Job has with his three friends, cycling through three times. Then Elihu, a comparatively young man, enters the debate with his rebuke. After this God speaks to Job from the whirlwind, Job repents before God, and his prosperity is restored.

The Actual Situation

The land of Uz is likely part of Edom (Lam. 4:21), to the east of Israel. Eliphaz was a Temanite, and Teman was one of the great chieftains of Edom (Gen. 36:15). Bildad is a descendant of Abraham through Keturah (Gen. 25:2), and they all settled to the east, where Edom was. Zophar lived in the same general area as the other two. Elihu is identified as a Buzite, and Buz was the nephew of Uz.

We know from Scripture that Job was an enormously important man, the greatest of the men of the east (Job 1:3). For all intents and purposes, he was the king (Job 19:9). The Septuagint contains an additional paragraph at the end of the book that identifies Job with Jobab (Gen. 36:33-35), the second king of Edom. This means that the well-being of that society was dependent on Job prospering, since he was the head. So picture Job as the leader of that society, now come to disaster, and his three friends as cabinet members, trying to talk him into taking one for the team. This is not an example of three friends as private busybodies. This is politics. The future wellbeing of their whole society was at stake, and Job refuses to admit fault. He refuses to be the scapegoat.

Prosperity Theology

The problem with Job’s counselors is not that they were wrong, but rather that they were rightwoodenly. The Bible does teach that God is not mocked—there is a correlation between what a man sows and what he reaps (Gal. 6:7). That correlation is real, and this is why the wisdom of Proverbs teaches us to look for such correlations. Do you see a lazy man? Look for poverty (Prov. 24:33-343). Do you see a drunkard? Look for hallucinations (Prov. 23:31-35). Do you see a skirt-chaser? Look for death (Prov. 7:27). But don’t look for these things within thirty minutes (Ps. 37:35), and don’t affirm the consequent (John 9:3). Just because it is a fact that sin leads to hard consequences, it does not follow that hard consequences mean that there had to have been sin.

We do live in a world where there is moral cause and effect, but we are cautioned by this book (as by little else) not to be too tidy about it. At the same time, how does the book end? Job has all his prosperity restored.

My Redeemer Lives

This passage is a great creedal statement. Job knows that it is going to be momentous, and wants what he is about to say to be graven on a rock with a pen of iron. This is important, what he is about to say. And given what he was saying earlier in the chapter, it appears to come from the wild blue random.

The word rendered redeemer here is the word for kinsman. Because Job has a kinsman- redeemer who will stand in the latter day upon the earth, Job is confident that he also is going to stand upon the earth. He is going to do so in his body after his body has been destroyed. Although Job is restored in this life by the end of the book, he has no expectation of that here. He is looking forward to something else, something outside, something beyond. This is the hope of the resurrection—and our great Justification has led the way.

Read Full Article

Surveying the Text: Acts

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

After the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, this book represents the pivot of God. In this book, we move from the world of the Jewish to the world of the
Gentile church. We move from a largely agrarian world to an urban world. We move from God’s work in one nation to a cosmopolitan work among all nations. The book begins at the Ascension of Christ (c. 30 A.D.) and ends with Paul’s first imprisonment in Rome (c. 60-61 A.D.) The book begins in Jerusalem, and ends in Rome, and that is a fact filled with metaphorical significance.

The Text

“But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

Summary

In this text we see two important things identified—the ruler, and the realm. First, the ruler is Jesus Christ, working in the power of His Spirit, poured out at the beginning of the book. The realm is the entire world. This verse contains, in effect, a table of contents for the expansion of the gospel through the rest of the book of Acts. First Jerusalem (Acts 2:14), then Judea (Acts 2:14), then Samaria (Acts 8:5), and then out to uttermost part of the earth (Acts 28:16).

In the previous book, Luke tells us that we had read about all that Jesus had begun to do and to teach (Acts 1:1). The implication is that here, in this second book, we will see what Jesus will continue to do and to teach by means of His body in the world. We see this reality also in the words that Jesus speaks to Saul on the Damascus road. Saul is persecuting Christians, and Jesus asks why he is persecuting Jesus (Acts 9:4). By means of His Spirit, Jesus is identified with His people, and continues His ministry on the earth. And in a very real way, we can find additional encouragement in the way the book ends so inconclusively. It is almost as though Luke said to be continued . . . And it has been, down to the present day.

Exoneration

The book of Acts is filled with prisons. There are about twenty references to them, and in addition we find references to gates, doors, and guards. Because of the hostility of those who hated the gospel, trouble was stirred up everywhere the disciples (particularly Paul) went. The goal was to make it look as though they were the troublemakers. But Luke has a corresponding goal—he fills this book with exonerations, angelic and otherwise. The praetors of Philippi arrest Paul and Silas, but have to apologize for it (Acts 16:19ff ).

Gallio throws a case against the Christians out of court (Acts 18:12ff ). Paul is friends with the pagan Asiarchs at Ephesus, and the town clerk vindicates Paul against the charge of insulting Diana (Acts 19:31). Festus and Agrippa II agree together that Paul deserves neither death nor imprisonment (Acts 26:32). Luke wants to show, and does show, that the Christians are not that kind of threat to the empire.

A Question of Timing

As you are trying to arrange the books of the New Testament in some kind of order, one question that will arise is the placement of Galatians in the chronology of Acts. A problem is created by the fact that there were two Galatias, one ethnic and the other administrative. Are we talking about Dakota, a sub-tribe of the Sioux, or Dakota, as in North and South? So when Paul writes to the “Galatians,” who is he writing to? If he is writing to the Galatians of the Roman province, then this places his book in the chronology of Acts. If he is writing to the ethnic Galatians up north, then we don’t quite know how and when Paul got acquainted with them.

This is important for several reasons. One is that an early date for Galatians gives us a mature statement of justification by faith alone very early on in the history of the church. It was not a late “add-on,” a Pauline afterthought. Second, the details in Galatians blend very nicely with Acts on this view. For example, the “famine relief visit” (Acts 11:28-29) is the visit that was in response to a revelation (Gal. 2:2). And third, it explains why Paul didn’t appeal to the decision of the Jerusalem council in a letter dedicated to the very same controversy. He didn’t appeal to it because it had not yet happened. It also explains the heat of Galatians.

Stephen, the One Who Saw

At the very end of Stephen’s life, he saw a vision of the Lord Jesus in Heaven (Acts 7:55). At the very beginning of Saul’s Christian life, he saw a vision of the same Lord Jesus, shining like the sun (Acts 26:13). One of the central reasons why Saul came to see Jesus is because he had had an earlier encounter with Stephen. Stephen is actually one of the most important figures in church history. He was the first disciple to actually “get” the big picture. And his impact on Saul was enormous.

Stephen was ordained as a deacon, but had the power of working miracles and was a marvelous preacher. He came into a dispute with certain men who were
from the synagogue of the freedmen. They were from, among other places, Cilicia. The principal city in Cilicia was Tarsus, Saul’s home town. Stephen shut them all down, so they arranged for some men to falsely testify against him. The charge was that he was blaspheming Moses and the holy place (Acts 6:11,13). This, after Stephen was doing miracles, just like Moses had. And when they hauled him in, his face was shining like an angel’s—just like Moses’ face had. He defends himself masterfully—God was with Abraham in Mesopotamia (Acts 7:2), with Joseph in Egypt (Acts 7:9), and with Moses in Midian (Acts 7:33). Wherever God is, that is holy ground.

Now imagine an unregenerate Saul, seething with hostility and genius, losing an argument with a Christian deacon. It is hard to imagine him taking it well. But he would also be smart enough to know that killing a man is not the same thing as refuting him. The first appearance that Saul makes in the Bible is when he is holding the cloaks of the men that “others” had suborned, while they killed Stephen. He then went off in a fury, trying to shut up the voices in his head. In this relay race, Stephen had been struck down, and the baton clattered to the track. But in the wisdom and providence of God, the next man to pick it up—in order to run the good race—was an unlikely convert named Saul.

Read Full Article

Surveying the Text: Ruth

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

The book of Ruth seems like a quaint little story, off by the side of the road, but it is actually a crucial part of the story of the coming Messiah. The fact that these events were recorded long before the arrival of David shows the sense of expectancy that attends this story.

The Text

“And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias” (Matt. 1:4–6).

Summary of the Text

When we do research in our family tree, which is usually an innocent activity, we are not generally looking for the horse thieves. We like to find distinguished ancestors, like the great great-grandfather who held Robert E. Lee’s horse at Appomattox. But among the Jews it was different—their interest in genealogies was rooted in their desire to find a distinguished descendant. A good portion of the Old Testament consists of telling us the story of how God was narrowing down the options, leaning into the future. First, He chose Abraham (Gen. 12:1). Then from Abraham’s sons He chose Isaac over Ishmael (Gen. 21:12). After that, so that God’s sovereignty might be highlighted, He chose the youngest twin Jacob over his brother Esau (Gen. 25:23). Jacob had twelve sons, and one of them had to be “the one,” and it was Judah (Gen. 49:10). Tamar had twins by Judah, and Perez pushed out ahead of Zarah the firstborn who had the scarlet thread tied to his wrist (Gen. 38:30).

Achan was a great prince in Israel, who caused Israel to stumble by his covetousness (Josh. 7:1), and he was removed from the messianic line by means of execution, his whole household perishing with him. That house was cut off. A distant cousin to Achan named Salmon, a cousin from a rival house, was a man descended from Perez, and we should not be surprised when Salmon married Rahab, the woman who marked her household by means of a scarlet rope (Josh. 2:21). Salmon and Rahab had a son, whose name was Boaz.

And after Boaz married Ruth, we are still leaning forward, yearning for the Messiah to come. The thing to note about this is that messianic expectation is not something we project backward with the benefit of hindsight. They looked forward, with the benefit of promises. What was the blessing given to Boaz through Ruth by the people of her city, and by the elders? “And let thy house be like the house of Pharez, whom Tamar bare unto Judah, of the seed which the Lord shall give thee of this young woman” (Ruth 4:12). And Boaz was like Perez, making his move in the back stretch.

“Now these are the generations of Pharez: Pharez begat Hezron, And Hezron begat Ram, and Ram begat Amminadab, And Amminadab begat Nahshon, and Nahshon begat Salmon, And Salmon begat Boaz, and Boaz begat Obed, And Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David” (Ruth 4:18–22). So we have narrowed it down quite a bit further. We have now come to the one who would give his name to Jesus. Jesus was the son of David (Rom. 1:4), He was Jesus ben-David, or, as we would put it, Jesus Davidson. This is what the book of Ruth is about.

Zeal for the Law

One of the things we learn from this book is that David’s ancestors were pious and devout, even during a time when Israel as a whole frequently was not. The law was given to Israel, and we see how the law is honored by them. The laws concerning gleaning are honored by Boaz (Lev. 23:22). The laws about the kinsman-redeemer were honored (Lev. 25: 25, 47-49). The laws concerning inheritance are carefully followed (Lev. 25:23). The laws concerning solicitousness for the alien are observed (Deut. 10:18). Remember that zeal for the law is nothing other than zeal for love.

Empty or Full

The book is about loss and restoration, about emptying and filling again. Bethlehem, the house of bread, suffers a famine. Elimelech and Naomi go to Moab. Their two sons marry there, but Elimelech dies as do his two sons. Naomi is left desolate, with two Moabite daughters-in-law. There is an ancient rabbinical midrash that says Ruth and Orpah were sisters, daughters of the Moabite king Eglon, the one assassinated by Ehud. There is no biblical warrant for this, but it helps us identify other assumptions we may have had about Ruth that are equally unsupported.

Naomi returns to Bethlehem with Ruth, both of them with empty arms. But the barley and wheat harvests are good—a master image of abundance and filling—and their arms and hearts are filled, in ways beyond imagining.

The harvesters work gathering in the grain. Ruth works hard also, gathering in what she is able to glean. Boaz makes sure extra grain is available for Ruth, so that she may gather much. In addition, Boaz expresses the wish that God would gather Ruth under His wings (Ruth 2:12). Ruth echoes that language in the next chapter when she asks Boaz to spread his garment over her, gatheringher in (Ruth 3:9). Boaz does so, but also gathers six measures of barley to give her. And at the culmination of the book, Naomi gathers Obed to her arms so that she might hold on her lap the grandfather of the greatest king Israel would ever have. Naomi, who had been bitter and empty, was now privileged to hold in her arms all the promises of God.

Fullness of Christ

When we come to Christ as supplicants, we come with nothing. When we cry out for salvation, we are crying out for something we do not have. But notice how Boaz responds to Ruth’s request. Boaz is the kinsman-redeemer, and he does not put a mercenary construction on Ruth’s request. He is (probably) twice her age, and he could easily have interpreted her request as the move of a gold-digger. But he did not. “And he said, Blessed be thou of the Lord, my daughter: for thou hast shewed more kindness in the latter end than at the beginning, inasmuch as thou followedst not young men, whether poor or rich” (Ruth 3:10).

The fact that we need to be saved by Christ alone does not mean that we might not be tempted to look for salvation elsewhere. When people try to save themselves, when people try to figure out for themselves what kind of help is most suitable for them, then they do what Boaz praises Ruth fornot doing. She went where there was real help, not where there was apparent help—younger and good-looking help. Ruth was a woman who walked by faith.

Read Full Article

State of the Church 2015

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

One of the things that characterizes the writings of the apostle Paul is his regular practice of giving thanks to God for the saints of various churches he was writing to. Not only does he thank God for them, but he insists on telling them that he thanks God for them.

The Text

“Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers;” (Eph. 1:16). “We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you” (Col. 1:3). Also see 1 Thess. 1:2, 3:9, and 2 Thess. 2:13.

Summary of the Text

God gives us gifts in one another, and through one another. We are the body of Christ to one another. The recognition that God is behind all of it is central. When Paul gives thanks, he gives thanks to God. All the good works that we do for one another are repurposed gifts, redirected gifts. God first gives, and then as a consequence of this, we are able to give. But we can only give biblically if we ourselves are a gift. When we give, we are imitating God who always gives Himself in the gift. So this is why we render a two-fold thanks. When we say thank you, we say thank you first to God, and secondly to the instrument in God’s hand. We do good works because we are God’s workmanship (Eph. 2:10)—we render gratitude and glory to Him, but this in no way takes away from the gratitude we render to our fellow servants. Rather, it recognizes the true source of all good gifts. No true Christian wants to be an autonomous gift; we should all want to be the gift of one to another.

Gratitude by Name

The apostle is also not shy about naming names. There are many places where we know only two things about someone—his or her name, and the fact that the apostle Paul was grateful for him or her. From Epaphroditus to Junias, we know that Paul was grateful to individuals by name. We also know that his gratitude did not always result in giving us that name. “And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life” (Phil. 4:3).

Giving Thanks for You

And so, in what ways has this congregation been a cause for gratitude?

This congregation has been a “family-integrated church” for many years, and you were doing it before it was “a thing.” Our service is an hour and a half long, and we all worship together—from the seniors down to the littles. So we are grateful

to God for you, and for all the hard work that goes into keeping some sort of moral order in your row. Don’t be discouraged—we are coming up to the time of harvest. A child born when we first went to weekly communion is around fourteen now. Another fourteen years and he will have a four-year-old on his lap, explaining the wine and the bread to him.

Community is as community does. You are an extraordinary congregation of helping hands—whether we are talking about unloading moving vans, or preparing meals for families in need, or giving to those who are less fortunate. When help has been needed, the wordoutpouring would be a good way to describe what frequently happens.

We want to believe what the Bible teaches us to believe, and we want to behave the way the Bible says to behave. In the providence of God, this means that we often find ourselves off the beaten path. You have been taught some “odd” things, and I am grateful that you have been such good sports about it. God is God, and grace is grace. Everything else follows, and the earth will be as full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.

You are musically adventurous. We are very grateful to God for the music He has given us to sing, but for you old-timers, we have occasion to be even more grateful to God for the music we used to sing. We have a lot to do, and a long way to go, but we are very grateful for what we get to sing on the way.

You are committed, in a way that few North American congregations are, to providing our covenant children with a thoroughly Christian education. Learning to think like a Christian is not something that can be managed with one message on Sundays only. Our task is to learn how to love the Lord our God with all our heart, all our soul, all our mind, and all our strength. This is our task every hour of every day.

Hard to Satisfy

God is a perfect Father. The humblest effort to please Him does in fact please Him. He is very easy to please. At the same time, He is perfect, and therefore very hard to satisfy. Easy to please, hard to satisfy. He will not be satisfied until the work of His Spirit in us is final and complete. “Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily” (Col. 1:28–29).

We sometimes make the mistake of thinking that any expression of gratitude will make the one we are praising think that they have nothing else to do, that they have arrived. Since we don’t want that to happen, we withhold our gratitude because we don’t want anything going to anybody’s head. On the other hand, going the other way is thought of as discouraging. What we need is to know that we are already accepted in Christ, completely and finally. We are accepted in the Beloved, which means that there is no condemnation. We are set free to grow, without a gun to our heads. Grace is the only soil in which a true Christian can grow.

Read Full Article

Born of the Virgin, Mary

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

The doctrine of the virgin birth does not so much show us Mary’s absence of a relationship to a man—although it does do that. This doctrine centrally points to her Son’s relationship to God. Jesus was born the normal way, but He was not conceived the normal way. This tells us something of His identity as the holy Son of the Most High God.

The Text

“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Is. 7:14).

Summary of the Text

The text before us has a double meaning. King Ahaz, despite his resistance to it, was being given a word of reassurance by the prophet Isaiah. He was worried about an alliance between the Syrians and the northern kingdom of Israel. Isaiah tries to reassure him, and tells him that he can ask for any sign he pleases (vv. 10-11). Ahaz refuses to do so in a display of faux humility (v. 12), and so Isaiah gives him a unilateral, unasked-for sign.

The rising power of Assyria was a real problem. In 738, the king Tiglath-pileser started to move against Syria and Israel. Judah wanted to stay out of it, and so Syria and Israel tried to depose Ahaz in order to force Judah to join their coalition. That is what Ahaz was worried about. The sign being given to Ahaz was not the sign of a remarkable conception, but rather the sign of a remarkable fall of the nations he was so worried about, within a very short time frame. A woman would conceive, but before her child had grown to the age of ethical discretion, knowing to refuse evil and choose the good, the kings that Ahaz was so worried about would both be gone. Before that child got to the age of being able to eat solid food, this northern challenge to Ahaz would be removed. The woman is unnamed, but she was clearly known to both Isaiah and Ahaz—it could have been one of their respective wives, or some other woman known to them.

Young Woman or Virgin

The word used here for young woman is almah, which can mean young woman or virgin. The word does not require virginity, but it does allow for it. Now this creates a very interesting translation and hermeneutical issue for us. The Hebrew word is more general, and it refers to two women—one a virgin and the other not. The Greek word that is used to cite this passage in Matt. 1:23 is parthenos and this is a word that has only one meaning, virgin. It also means that as far as Matthew is concerned, the sign of the first woman, the one given as reassurance to Ahaz, has dropped out of the picture. Parthenos does not refer to her, but it does refer to Mary.

Matthew is saying that Isaiah was talking about Mary. The language of fulfillment here is very strong. Mary has turned up pregnant, and Joseph knows that he was not the father. He is contemplating divorce (Matt. 1:20), but an angel reassures him. Mary is pregnant, but still a virgin, and all of this was done in order to fulfill what Isaiah had said. Isaiah’s prophecy is fulfilled,accomplished, completed, filled, finished in the conception of Jesus, which is quite a different thing than the conception of Jesus being projected onto a verse in the Old Testament that looks like it might be talking about something in the ball park. Additional support for this approach, rejecting the idea that Matthew’s reading is simply special pleading, is the fact that the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, rendered this as parthenos also. Before the Christian doctrine of a virgin birth resulted in God-with-us, there was a Jewish doctrine of a virgin birth resulting in God- with-us.

But Why?

It might be easy to assume that God was just performing random marvels so that everybody would know that Jesus was remarkable. Well, the point was to reinforce and demonstrate His remarkable identity, but it wasn’t just a random act of power.

“And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).

This is what Mary is told about how she will conceive. The Holy Ghost will come upon her. The power of the Most High will overshadow or cover her, with the result that the holy one born of her would be called Son of God. Jesus was born this way so that He could be a human being who was truly holy.

A Sinless Christ

We know from Scripture that Christ was sinless. He not only withstood the devil in the temptation in the wilderness, but He also remained sinless throughout the course of His entire life.

“For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Cor. 5:21). “Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth” (1 Pet. 2:22). “Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?” (John 8:46).

A virgin birth was necessary to produce a genuine human being who was at the same time not entailed in Adam’s sin. This apparently means that our covenantal participation in Adam’s rebellion is passed down through the human father. Men are the problem, as has been suspected from time to time. Not through any human ancestors who happened to be male, because Jesus had a grandfather on Mary’s side. Covenantal responsibility for sin is passed on through the human father.

This is the problem that Roman Catholics are trying (unnecessarily) to solve with their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. This doctrine refers to Mary’s conception, not the conception of Jesus, and is trying to keep Jesus from being tainted with Mary’s sin. So their doctrine says that a miracle was performed so that Mary was born without original sin, thus making her a fit vessel to bear Jesus. But that is not how sin is passed down. We are not sinners because we were borne by a sinful mother. We are sinners because we were begotten by a sinful father.

A Savior Without Blemish

We have been saved because we have a Savior. But we need more than someone willing to be a Savior—we need someone qualified to be a Savior. That qualification has to be absolute purity. We are redeemed “with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Pet. 1:19).

Read Full Article