Christ Church

Christ Entire

Ben Zornes on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction:
You may have picked up on “one of the things we say around here,” which is “all of Christ for all of life.” But what do we mean by that exactly? It may sound very spiritual, but if it doesn’t mean anything, it can’t mean anything very spiritual.

The Text:
“And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence” (Col. 1:17–18).

Summary of the Text:
Jesus Christ is our entry point into everything. He is before all things (v. 17), prior to all things, antecedent to every contingent mote of material reality. He is the Head of the body, His own body, which is the church. We as believers make up that body, and so it is that He is the head for us. Paul then says that Jesus Christ is the arche. The translation here says beginning, but do not think of beginnings as measured by stopwatches. It is the same word that is used in John 1:1. Rather Paul is saying that Christ is the ultimate unity, the integration point for all things, the cornerstone and capstone both. He has been manifested as the heir of this position by His resurrection from the dead (Rom. 1:4), or as Paul puts it here, He is the firstborn from the dead. The end result is that we are to see Christ as having the preeminence over absolutely everything (v. 18).

The Fragmentation of Death:
Now I used the phrase integration point. Why is this important? As naïfs schooled in the catechisms of modernity, we tend to think of death as cessation. If something dies, that means it konked. If someone dies, that means their atoms return to the great cosmic slurry, and “they” cease to be (whatever “they” were). Even if we deny this formally as Christians who believe in the resurrection, we are still too much affected by the assumptions that swirl around the idea of death as cessation.
But death is actually separation. When our bodies die, the soul and body are separated (2 Cor. 5:8). When our first parents took the forbidden fruit, they were separated from their fellowship with God (Gen. 3:8). This was spiritual death, which is spiritual alienation. “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world” (Eph. 2:1–2).

So intellectual death is also separation—intellectual fragmentation. You have so many opinions, but they are all shattered on the floor. Nothing ties them together, which is why the Christian task is to bring all those thoughts into submission to Christ. “Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5). Before they are brought to the obedience of Christ, they—like the thinker generating them—are dead. And if you manage to get them published, and into libraries and bookstores, that just makes them deader.
Only in Christ can we find life, which means that only in Him can we live in a universe. Only in Christ can there be such a thing as a university. If Christ is not raised, then all our thoughts are nothing more than ten thousand tons of confetti dumped into an F-5 tornado. And the tornado really is a poor image of this, in that it exhibits far too much order.

A Ministry of Reconciliation:
Now if death is separation, then restored life is a reunification. Resurrection means reconciliation, and the message of the resurrection is the ministry of reconciliation.

“And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18–19).

This is the grand project. Notice that phrase—in Christ, reconciling. That is as much as to say in Christ, resurrecting. This is what God has determined to give to a world that did not deserve its restoration. This is the word that we have had entrusted to us. This is what we are talking about.

“That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him” (Eph 1:10).

“And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven” (Col. 1:20).

Grace and Peace:
Now all of this should rejoice every believing heart. But let’s push it into the corners, shall we? In what ways have we among the Reformed made their accommodations with the ideology of death? Systematic theology is one of the glories of the church, but done the wrong way it results in us going into the mausoleum instead of the museum, and results in us sorting out bones instead of studying the exhibits. What do I mean by “the wrong way?” I mean separating things instead of making distinctions between them. The former is the death of the mind; the latter is the life of the mind.

Our temptation is to separate the doctrine of God from God Himself. It is to separate the graces of God from God Himself. It puts the truth about God here, and God over there, somewhere. But God does not store love, joy, peace, patience (or any other grace) in vats. They are not impersonal spiritual fluids running down to your deep sea diving suit through a hose. If you have anything at all from God, then you have all of Christ for all of life. Christ is not parceled out to us in bits and pieces.

Remember that virtually every New Testament epistle begins with “grace and peace” from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. This is not a separation of these graces from two persons of the Trinity, and an exclusion of the Holy Spirit. As Jonathan Edwards argued, this is likely saying that the Holy Spirit is that grace and peace, and proceeds from the Father and the Son. And this makes wonderful sense. As C.S. Lewis put it once, “He has, in the last resort, nothing to give us but Himself.”

Read Full Article

Easter 2017: A New Kind of New

Ben Zornes on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction:
We have all heard about the new life in Christ. It is not possible to function in Christian circles without hearing that phrase. It is not possible to read through your Bible without realizing that Christ says that He makes all things new (Rev. 21:5). And if any man is in Christ, he is a new creation—old things have passed away (2 Cor. 5:17). But our hearts are slippery, and so we often miss the point by equivocating on the meaning of the word new.

The Texts:
“What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him” (Rom. 6:1–8).

Summary of the Text:
Paul has started to answer objections to the gospel that he laid out in the first chapters of Romans. If we are saved by grace, plus nothing, what is to prevent us from becoming morally dissolute? The answer to that question is that grace comes to sinners in one form only, and that form is the glory of death and resurrection. Sinners cannot take advantage of grace, because when grace comes near the sinner dies.

Shall we abuse grace by continuing in sin (v. 1)? God forbid it, Paul says. How can people who are dead to sin continue to live in sin (v. 2)? Do you not know that everyone who is baptized into Christ is baptized into His death (v. 3)? That is what baptism with the water of grace means. So if we were baptized into His death, this means that in an analogous way we are raised up from the dead by the glory of Father, in order that we might walk in newness of life (v. 4). If we have been planted in the pattern of His death, this means that we will also be planted in the pattern of His resurrection (v. 5). We know this. Our old man, our body of sin, is both crucified and destroyed, so that from this point on we might no longer be slaves to sin (v. 6). Freedom from sin is attained by those who die (v. 7). So if we are dead with Christ, it necessarily follows that we will also live with Him (v. 8).

Union with Christ:
As you have heard many times before, Jesus did not die so that we might live. It is appropriate to say that in a form of shorthand, but only if it is shorthand, and only if you know what it is shorthand for. The truth of the gospel is here: Jesus died so that we might die. He was buried so that we might be buried. He was raised from the dead so that we might be raised from the dead. He ascended into Heaven so that we might reign with Him from the right hand of the Father. The gospel is the gospel to us only through true union with Christ.

In this short passage, Paul makes this profound point three times. If we share His death, then we will share His resurrection (v. 4). If we have been planted together with Him in the likeness of His death (which is what baptism is), then it will be the same with the resurrection (v. 5). If we are dead with Christ, we will also live with Him (v. 8).

Different Kinds of New:
There are two ways that we could take the word new. One is quantitative and the other is qualitative. A new day would be a quantitative illustration. Today is Tuesday, not Monday, but it is another day just like the previous one. You got a new car, but it was a used new car, meaning that it was new to you. New to you, but not new. But there is another sense we need to have if we are to understand the potency of the gospel. Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week, on Sunday. But this day was qualitatively different. There had been a previous Sunday, just seven days before, but this Sunday was entirely and completely different. The world had been born again. The times of regeneration had been inaugurated. Jesus really had made all things new.

Water New or Spirit New?
Paul is explicit here on what our baptism means. We do not have the authority to contradict the meaning of our baptism on the basis of the meaning of our carnal logic. In other words, we are not allowed to say that grace means liberty to sin when our baptismal grace says that it means death to sin. Look down a few verses (Rom. 6:14). If we persist in contradicting our baptisms in this way, it will not be long before our baptisms rise up in order to contradict us. If Tyre and Sidon will be able to accuse Capernaum on the last day, then the baptisms of hollow Christians should certainly be able to rise up to accuse them.

“But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit [same word for newness], and not in the oldness of the letter” (Rom. 7:6). The newness that indicates salvation is a spiritual newness.

Both Kinds of New:
Someone can move into Christianity the same way you might move into a new house, or buy a new car, or take a new job. It is new in the quantitative sense. This is not a sinful thing, and it does apply to everyone who comes into the faith. Someone might be truly converted, and still need to get used to the ordinary new things. Christians form an actual subculture on the earth, and the lingo and the customs and the government might be new to you in the same way that the analogous things would be new if you joined the Navy. But those who are actually planted together with the Lord’s death are those who actually walk in a qualitative newness.

If this has happened, then it means that you are walking where Jesus is. And where He is must be described as being on this side of death to sin.

Read Full Article

Palm Sunday 2017: The Crowded Heart

Ben Zornes on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction:
You have often heard here that we have no real reason to assume that the crowds that welcomed Jesus in the Triumphal Entry and the crowd that was gathered to scream for His crucifixion were made up of the same people. Those two events, just days apart, are often pointed to as evidence of “the fickleness of crowds.” But there is no good reason to identify the crowds with one another, and a number of good reasons not to. But there are still complexities.

The Text:
“Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him” (Mark 15:14).
“And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest” (Matthew 21:9).

Summary of the Text:
We have two crowds, exhibiting two completely different attitudes toward Jesus. One crowd wanted Him lifted up . . . on a cross. The other crowd wanted Him lifted up . . . in praise. One crowd was manipulated by men. “But the chief priests moved the people . . .” (Mark 15:11). The other crowd had no earthly leader—although it did have an earthly focus. They just appeared, rejoicing as they came. One crowd wanted blood—“crucify Him.” The other crowd wanted gladness and rejoicing. One crowd wanted a regicide. The other wanted a coronation.

Divided Jerusalem:
Now each crowd was unified in what it wanted. Each crowd had a very particular focus. Each crowd was single-minded. Each crowd had a defined goal. But they were going in decidedly opposite directions. But they were both Jerusalem crowds, and this meant that Jerusalem was divided. Each crowd was not divided, but the city was therefore necessarily divided. But in the struggle between the crowds, the city was making a decision. The city was in the process of making up its mind. One crowd chose wisely, but the city chose poorly.

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” (Matt. 23:37).
This is sometimes cited by those Christians who believe we have the capacity to withstand God’s election, but note carefully what Jesus says. He does not say “I wanted to gather you, but you would not.” He says “I wanted to gather them, but you would not.” The problem with Jerusalem was in the leadership. And they successfully held onto their control of the city, running it into an overwhelming judgment. We are talking, not about the salvation of individuals, but rather the damnation of a city.

You Are a City, Not a Monad:
Now many Christians make simplistic assumptions about themselves. A monad is an indivisible unit, and we think of ourselves that way—with a brake and an accelerator, and simple steering wheel. Life should be that simple, right?

But then you actually get into the turbulent life of your own soul, and discover that it is a lot more like Byzantine politics during a coup than like driving on a straight road in Nebraska. And you don’t know what side anybody is on.

“He that hath no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, and without walls” (Prov. 25:28).
And if you deal with the consequences of the political turmoil, while clinging tenaciously to the idea that you are simply driving on a straight road, your confusion about what is going on will be massive. But if sanctification is more like a new king learning the lessons of crowd control, and it is understood to be such, that clarity can be enormously helpful.

Double-Minded or Single-Hearted?
“A double minded man is unstable in all his ways” (James 1:8).
“Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded” (James 4:8).

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates” (Deut. 6:4–9).

What God wants from us is simplicity, not duplicity. What He wants is singleness of mind.

The Basics of Rule:
The word for rule in Prov. 25:28 carries the meaning of restraint, or holding back. The mobs of your heart, the ones from the bad side of town, are the parts of you that want to tip over cars and set them on fire. There are sections of your heart that want to throw rocks at the riot police.

Are you going to rule like Josiah, tearing down all the idols (2 Kings 22:2)? Are you going to rule like Manasseh (2 Chron. 33:3)? Or are you going to try to split the difference like Asa (2 Chron. 15:17)?

So What Do You Make of Jesus?
So then bring it back to the two Jerusalem crowds. Everything came down to just one thing. What do make of Jesus? Do you want Him to die, or do you want Him to reign? If you want Him to die, then you want Him to stay dead, and thereby stay out of your life. If you want Him to reign, that is good, because He is going to reign regardless.

Read Full Article

Real Forgiveness

Ben Zornes on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction:
Everyone knows that the Christian faith revolves around the forgiveness of sins. But because there is a gospel logic involved in it that eludes every form of carnal reasoning, we have to be careful to understand what is actually involved. What is real forgiveness?

The Text: 
“Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you” (Eph. 4:31–32).

Summary of the Text:  
There are two ways of conducting life together. One of them is the enemy of life together, and the other is the true friend of life together. One drives us apart and the other knits us together.

The first is the way is the way of keeping score, with the intention of winning. It is the way of bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, slander and malice (v. 31). This all sounds pretty bad, but we have to remember that all these plug-uglies travel under an alias. They call themselves righteousness, and have a deep commitment to being right. This approach makes koinonia community impossible.

The alternative is kindness and tenderheartedness. And the way that kindness and tenderheartedness “live out” is by forgiving one another, and doing so in exactly the same way that God has forgiven us for the sake of Jesus Christ (v. 32).

What Forgiveness is Not:      
We often feel like we are asking God for His forgiveness when what we are really doing is asking Him to accept our excuses. And because we know that we are to forgive as we were forgiven, as per our text, we often seek to forgive others by agreeing beforehand to accept their excuses, when possible. But (unlike ourselves) they had better have a good one.

Our problem is that, when living together with other sinners, we frequently run smack into what can only be called inexcusable. And because it is inexcusable, our scheme with the excuses cannot work.

Forgiveness deals with sin. And sin, by its very nature, is inexcusable. But what is inexcusable is not (thank the Lord) unforgiveable.

Pardon Me and Forgive Me: 
If you accidentally back into someone during fellowship hour, and make them spill their coffee, you naturally say pardon me, or please excuse me. By this you mean to say that you did what you did to them in a way that was entirely unintentional. They respond accordingly—don’t mention it. No problem. The accident was an accident, and it was therefore excusable.

But suppose you looked across the fellowship hall, and there saw your enemy, as pleased with himself as a conceited Pharisee could be, and so you lowered your shoulder and ran straight into him, knocking him clean over. Under such circumstances, the only reason you would say “pardon me” would be if you had decided to taunt him after bowling him over. In this case, your behavior is inexcusable.

That doesn’t mean that nothing can be done about it. The inexcusable is not the same kind of thing as the unforgiveable.

A Mixed Bag: 
But there is another category. What if we don’t have something that is purely wicked or purely accidental? Suppose it is a mixed bag.

Yes, you snapped at the kids, but it was at the end of two days of migraine headache. Yes, you said some things to your wife that were rude and thoughtless, but she was the one who started the argument, and would not let it go, not even after you had asked her to. You asked her three times. Yes, you sent an email to your boss that you regret sending, but it was 2 in the morning, and the beer you had made you careless.

There are extenuating circumstances, in other words. But we should all remember two things about this. The first is that we will tend to stretch our legitimate excuse part to cover over our sin part. But the only thing that can actually cover sin is the blood of Jesus Christ. When apologizing, we lead with the excuse. “Bob, sorry about yesterday. I had a long day, and I didn’t really mean what I said.” And Bob often responds in kind (because he wants to play the same game when he needs to). “Oh, well, because you didn’t mean it, forget about it.” In other words, because the “you” who said those things was not the real you, he can let it go.

The second is that we want our excuses to be way stretchier than our neighbor’s excuses. But as C.S. Lewis pointed out one time, the chances are excellent that our neighbor’s excuses are way better than we tend to believe. And it is also true that our excuses are way lamer than we think they are. When we handicap the competition between us and our fellow Christians, we are not nearly as objective as we think we are.

A Variation on the Golden Rule:
The basic Christian response is to forgive as we have been forgiven. In our text, the apostle Paul is simply repeating what the Lord taught us when He taught us to pray. Every time we pray the Lord’s Prayer, we ask Him to forgive us as we forgive others. The way many Christians live, the room actually ought to become much quieter when we get to that part.

Lord, doubt the sincerity of my repentance the way I doubt his. Lord, dismiss my excuses with a wave of your hand the way I dismiss his excuses. Lord, keep a hidden tally so that if I sin in this area again, You can bring everything up again, and throw it in my face, the way I do with him. Amen.

The Golden Rule teaches us that we should do for others what we wish they would do for us. This is in the same spirit, but there is a higher level of danger in it. Here we are asking God to treat us the way we treat our brother. If I give my brother an orange, he might give me an apple. But if I give my brother a stone when he asked for bread, and then I ask God to treat me in the same way, I may find out the stone is one that will crush me. God can give me a much bigger stone than my brother ever could.

By Grace Alone:
But how is this consistent with salvation by grace alone? “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matt. 6:14–15). If you refuse to forgive your brother, you are not failing to earn your salvation. If you refuse to forgive your brother, you are revealing to the world that you have no understanding of what salvation by grace through faith actually is. Remember that Christ is all.

Read Full Article