The Cross: My Worth or His
I once heard a preacher explain Jesus' payment on the cross with this statement:
For Jesus, the idea of living without you was more painful than enduring the cross.
Sorry, should have introduced that with a "barf bag alert." When stated that bluntly, we realize the perspective cannot be accurate. Was I the "joy set before Him" (Hebrews 12:2)? Consider this quote, from The Supremacy of God in Preaching by John Piper [p35-36]
For Jesus, the idea of living without you was more painful than enduring the cross.
Sorry, should have introduced that with a "barf bag alert." When stated that bluntly, we realize the perspective cannot be accurate. Was I the "joy set before Him" (Hebrews 12:2)? Consider this quote, from The Supremacy of God in Preaching by John Piper [p35-36]
It horribly skews the meaning of the cross when contemporary prophets of self-esteem say that the cross is a witness to my infinite worth, since God was willing to pay such a high price to get me. The biblical perspective is that the cross is a witness to the infinite worth of God's glory and a witness to the immensity of the sin of my pride. What should shock us is that we have brought such contempt upon the worth of God that the very death of His Son is required to vindicate that worth. The cross witnesses to the infinite worth of God and the infinite outrage of sin.
posted by danny2 @ 1:39 PM
4 Comments:
At 2:23 PM,
DL said…
This flows from Arminianism. If one refuses to accept that God is radically God-centered, this is the inevitable result. I don't care how one packages it - Arminianism diminishes the God-centeredness of the Gospel, and makes it all about man. Okay everybody, shoot away! I'm a big boy. :)
At 7:51 PM,
Anonymous said…
Calvinism is radically Arminian centered.
Why does everything need to be about two 16th century dead guys?
I disagree that self-centeredness "flows" from Ariminianism. Self-centeredness is a natural occurrence in natural men, regardless of their theological perspective, and will crop up everywhere the flesh is unmortified.
At 8:24 PM,
danny2 said…
actually fish. he's not kidding, he is a big boy. not heavy, but tall and broad shouldered. i wouldn't tangle.
however, i will state that we can hate the labels, but most coming to this blog (or atleast courageous to comment) would agree that calvinism could be called biblism (for it is consistent with the Word of God...or at least more so than Arminianism).
but everything from the calvinist to arminian to catholic to baptist call themselves biblical. we need the labels to help clarify what approach to scripture we are talking about.
you're right. self centeredness started at the fall and perpetuates through all of us. however, i'd also agree with darby that arminianism allows for a system that retains more of that self centered nature.
At 9:56 PM,
Anonymous said…
Ok, I'm a Calvinist, Minus Infant Baptism, Minus Heretic Burning, Minus... (stop me when I hit the sweet spot, I've only got so much room on my Church sign).
Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for his influence and teaching. I'm grateful for many Calvinists' contributions. It was through reading A.W. Pink's The Sovereignty of God that opened the flood gates for me.
But I am also grateful for the "Arminmian" preacher who preached the Gospel the night I was saved, and for the now ex-"Arminian" friend (don't worry, Your secret's safe with me) who faithfully witnessed to me for years prior to that night and then later discipled me into a conservative church.
I am opposed to such labels, other than what the Bible would commend me to have (Acts11:26). Leaves are meaningless, fruit is what matters.
Sorry to derail your post (I'm done) on what was a good topic : the Cross
"But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."
Post a Comment
<< Home