review of Hermeneutics of Biblical Writers

The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers by Abner Chou (Grand Rapids MI, Kregel Academic, 2018, $23.99)

Abner Chou gives us a different way to look at hermeneutics. His hermeneutic centers upon two important features: Intertextuality and Prophetic hermeneutic. He holds the New Testament writers follow the hermeneutic and logic and was the modus operandi of the apostolic rationale.  He contends that Prophetic hermeneutic of the Old Testament continues in both apostolic and Christian hermeneutic.

He says there are presuppositions that evangelical hold: (1) Authorial Intent. The quest is impossible and pointless if we cannot know authors intent. (2) The meaning and significance of the text. They are not the same. We are to what Scripture says (meaning), how it applies (significance). (3) The reality of Intertextuality. These are allusions to other text to help us understand the author’s intent and rationale. This method dates back to ancient hermeneutical practice. It shows in the interconnection of Scripture. All three of these presuppositions have long be held and practiced among scholars. Interestingly, he did not use these when asking the question did Jesus misuse the Scripture in the use of Exodus 3:6. Jesus used it as a text for resurrection, yet the Exodus passage does not use it as such. The author says Jesus is not interpreting the text but extracting an implication from the text. However, he does not make implication part of the presuppositions or mythology. He notes Jesus was sound in doing so.

The rest of the book argues strongly for the prophetic hermeneutic. His thesis seems to be that intertextuality of the Old Testament demonstrates the exegetical and theological work of the prophets. He maintains the prophets knew the Scripture and used it in their writings. He maintains, although complex, that the prophet’s accuracy handled the Word, and did not engage in hermeneutical revision. They expounded upon the theological ideas of law and covenant. The concept is not novel.

One the key concepts is that the prophets wrote mostly for the future, in accord to past revelation. The New Testament writers continued the same style of Hermeneutic. He gives the evidence for initial evidence for continuity. Author views the New Testament apostles parallels the prophets.  He writes on the New Testament passages of Old Testament quotes. All though not will agree with his observations and interpretations (cf. Dan. 7).

The book is not easy to read. It is a challenge to understand and  I recommend some understanding of hermeneutics. However, it is worth consideration for the Bible student, Pastor, and scholar.

 A free copy was provided by Kregel Academic of Grand Rapids in exchange for my personal review.

Reflections on Romans #9

ROMANS 1:19-32

We have seen that the wrath of God is revealed on all unrighteousness and glory (1:18). This section (1:19-31) now give what this involves. The section opens with the word “Because” which indicates the reason God is evident within them and to them. It connects verse 18 with 1:19-31, which expand the reason for wrath’s revelation.  

It seems that this section can be divided into three sections:

The natural revelation of God (1:19-20.)  In creation, mankind was created in His image (Gen. 1:26-27). The image is reflected in mankind. Paul reflects this in the statement “that which may be known of God is manifest in them” (1:19). It is an act of internal revelation. The word manifest[1] means to bring to light, to show, to reveal. The object of the manifestation is “to or in them.” It preposition is connected with the dative plural personal pronoun and could be translated, “in them,” “in their midst,” or “among them.”[2] No matter which translation is preferred, it is clear God had revealed Himself so He can be known to all. Verse 19-20 has a two-fold purpose:[3] (1) To justify the truth of suppressing the truth. (2) To show men are without an excuse regarding God’s wrath because of their sin.
The thought here concerns the revealing of the creative God. “God has shewed it unto them.” The revelation involves the following features: [1] “The invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen” (1:20). The heavens declare the glory of God. Murray identifies the invisible as not received by the senses but apprehended in the mental conception.[4] However, the language is that of visibility (seen)[5] and mental apprehension (understood).[6] Notice this knowledge is in conjunction with the creation (“being understood by the things that are made”). The context indicates in creation both external observation and apprehension. It shows there is a creator and reflects God’s glory. The invisible things are God’s attitudes of “His eternal power and Godhead.” These attitubes explain there is a God, but not who he is nor all of his work. Origen (Ad Romonos) first made the distinction of what can be known about God and that which may not be known and requires more revelation. Paul has in mind the essential qualities of the power of God and His deity. The word[7] for Godhead means divinity, devine majesty, or deity. These attitubes are general but clear enough to show God’s deity. The results of this type of revelation are mankind being inexcusable. 

The Rejection of God by man (1:21-31). While God was evident to mankind, they rejected the revelation of creation. Johnson observes: “The section moves from the declaration of Gentile sin (1:18-32) through Jewish sin (2:1—3:8) to the climax of the apostolic diagnosis that "all the world" is guilty, with every mouth stopped, speechless in the terror of condemnation before a holy and righteous God (3:9-20).”[8]  

This section is divided into two sections.

First, the stages of rejection (1:21-23). These give the reason for the wrath of God being displayed. “When they knew God.” contorls the verses, designates they had the knowlege of God. They rejected God despite this knowledge. 

(1)   “They gloried [him] not as God.”  

(2)   “neither were they thankful.” 

(3)   “became vain in their imaginations,”

(4)   “their foolish heart was darkened.” 

(5)   “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,”

(6)   “Changed the invisible things of Him into image make like corruptible man, to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.”

These are all the actions of mankind, not God! Mankind rejected God, in no the other way around. The cause was sin and their blindness of heart. Thus, they “exhanged” the glory of for an image. It is evident in every primitive culture that existed. Most Jews could hardly identify with this because of the superior attitude as God’s chosen. As false as that belief may be. Schreiner observed: “They would not smile on the sins of others but condemn them, whereas the evil of the Gentiles was outside the covenant of the one true God.”[9] However, such an exchange is spoken of the Jews in the Old Testament (Psa. 105:20 LXX; Ex. 32; Jer. 2:11). They are not exempt from the process or the condemnation.

Second, is the reaction of God (1:24-31). Paul’s argument was to mankind was intended was to sonship God’s power and divinity. However, they descended to worship idols made of gold, silver, or stone. It denotes mankind’s rebellion. “Wherefore,”[10] in this case denotes its resulting action of God. Cranfield says the word indicates the response to the perverseness described 22-23.[11] The action of God is described three times as “giving them up or over” to certain things (1:24, 26, 28). The phrase describes the wrath of God in its primary stages. Thus, there are three statements of divine punishment of God for their rejection and rebellion.

God gave them over to three things: [1] Physically he came them over “to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts.” It speaks of God abandoning them to their lifestyle. Wrath is not God seeking revenge! Instead, it is a withdrawn from these people to go and do their destructive way of life. Paul classifies this lifestyle as “uncleanness” which generated from the “lust of their own heart.” Uncleannesss is the evil desires of the heart being carried out in their ego, personality, and will.[12] John Robinson is quoted as saying, “He leaves pagan society to stew in its own juices.”[13] God’s wrath is His withdrawn because of their idolatry (1:25)

[2] Emotionally, God “gave them up unto vile affections.” (1:26). The word “vile”[14] means primary dishonor. These affections turn to that which is unnatural, distorted, and perverted. The conjunction “even” expands on vile affections. It also clarifies the sexual impurity of verse 24. Paul’s argument is against homosexuality which involves females and males (1:26-27). Why does Paul draw attention to this sin? The reasons are: [1] It is a sin that was prominent in the Roman world. [2] It was built in many of the temples and religious systems. [3] It was justified as normal. [4] It was deplored by the Old Testament (cf. Lev. 10:13; 20:22). [5] The justice of God: “receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet” (1:28). Here we see that law of the harvest is in effect, what we sow we reap.

[3] God gave them up intellectually “to a reprobate mind.” Denney says this is a “mind which cannot stand trial.”[15] The cause for such a mind is because they “did not like to retain God in their knowledge.” God is light, were there is no God there is only darkness. The emphasis of the text is on man and their rebellion against the knowledge of God.

The reprobate mind controls the person. The word reprobate originally uses in mining and is primarily used for metals that would not pass the test, thus not approved. The reprobate mind is a mind that will not pass the test of God’s justice. Such a mind leads to vice; thus, Paul list these vices:

(1)   Filled with unrighteousness.

(2)   Fornication.

(3)   Wickedness.

(4)   Covetousness.

(5)   Maliciousness.

(6)   Full of envy.

(7)   Debate.

(8)   Deceit.

(9)   Malignity.

(10)           Whisperers.

(11)           Backbiters

(12)           Haters of God.

(13)           Despiteful.

(14)           Proud.

(15)           Inventors of evil things.

(16)           Without understanding.

(17)           Covenant breakers.

(18)           Without natural affection.

(19)           Implacable.

(20)           Unmerciful.

The Summary of Results of Sin (1:32). By their actions, Paul is declaring that apart from Jesus Christ, Gentiles and Jews remain unrighteous sinners. Therefore, summarize it all in three great truths.  

[1] “Knowing the judgment of God.” It is the natural knowledge man has within them. It is not supernatural knowledge. Moo points out that the absence of law is not without significance in this passage.[16] Paul is not dealing with those under the law. The judgment of God is still upon them.

[2] They know the consequence that they deserve judgment and death. The continual consequence of the fall of humanity onward (cf. Gen. 3).

[3] Yet, knowing these truths man persists on going his own way. They take “pleasure in them that do them.” Sadly, this is the universal history of humanity. It can only be changed by faith and grace of Christ (Eph. 2

---

[1] ///////////////////////////////////////////////////efanerwsen [verb; aorist active indicative], pain, clear, or manifest. 

[2] Richard N. Longenecker, NIGTC: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2016], 206.

[3] Douglas J. Moo, NICNT; THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1996], 103.

[4] John Murray, NICNT; THE EPISLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1975], 38.

[5]  Kaqopatai meaning to look, to perceive, discern.

[6]  Nooumena to perceive, observe, to be attevtive.

[7]  qeiotnV. Meaning dvine nature, deity.  

[8]  S. Lewis Johnson, “God Gave them Up,” BIOLIOTHECIA SARA, April 1972, 125.

[9] Thomas R. Schreiner, BECNT: ROMANS [Grand Rapids, Baker,1998], 81.

[10] Dia, [conjunction] meaning wherefore, on the account of, therefore. In this context it denotes reason bases of what was said.

[11] C.E.B Cranfield, ICC: ROMANS, [Edinbugh, T& T Cark 1980]. 120.

[12] R.C.H. Lenski, ROMANS, 108.

[13] Richard N. Longenecker, NIGTC: ROMANS, 216.

[14] atimiaV, [genitive], meaning dishonor; shame; vile; or infamy.

[15]  James Denney, EGT: ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, reprint 1983], 594.

[16]  Douglas J. Moo, NICNT: ROMANS, 121.

Reflections on Romans #8

ROMANS 1:18:

GOD’S WRATH REVEALED

Lloyd-Jones says in many ways this is the most crucial part of the Epistle.[1] It is the introduction as to the need of salvation (1:18-32). Without seeing our need, we will never come to God by faith. It is a counterpart to the righteousness of God; it is the wrath of God. Both are revealed (1:17, 18) in the gospel. It is a universal statement: “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” This is the negative form of verse 16.

It has been popular among scholars to see the source of this section as being from the extra-biblical account of the Wisdom of Solomon.[2] However, Longenecker seems to negate this indicating that much wider sources were available to Paul: Scripture, other Judaism writings, the message of the Baptist, and, or course, Jesus own teaching.[3]  The exact identification of the source is almost impossible, and it is best the not speculated.

There is a natural contrast between verse 18 with verses 16-17. The theme of the verse is the negative side of verse 16 presenting salvation, but here the theme is the wrath of God. The wrath of God is not a human emotional response, but a display of God’s character. It is righteous anger against injustice and unrighteousness. Godet notes that “wrath appears as the holy disapprobation of evil, and the firm resolves to destroy it.”[4] Wrath is not a passion in God: “Fury is not in Me”; in Him, it is the principle, the love of order, a determination to maintain equity, a resolution to punish sin. It results, therefore, from the perfection of His nature.

· The verse opens with the same preposition—gar (for or because). There is some debate as to the exact use of the preposition. Is it an explanatory conjunction, or adversative conjunction? It seems to me that the word as a somewhat transitional from verses 16-17. I agree with Douglas Moo that the word “for” is best taken as explanatory.[5] It answers why the gospel is needed. It is also transitional from the gospel to the plight of humanity. Just as the gospel is revealed, so is the wrath of God. The world revealed connects God to both. Paul uses it as both eschatologically and presents judgments. For Paul, the full disclosure of the gospel and wrath of God is eschatological anticipated in history, yet a present reality which is moving toward the final disclosure.

The student of the Word should notice three things:

· The word revealed is present tense, which carries the idea of a continual event. It is a present reality. Wrath is revealed now and moves toward a goal of the last judgment. Morris brings out that the wrath of God is not a human discovery, but is something made known.[6] How it is revealed: conscience, the Word of God, and by active providence. It cannot be escaped because God is Holy, Just, and Omniscience.

· Its focus: “against all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness” The nature of God is against either the offense or the offender. Some think this refers to the gentiles. However, the text uses the more generic men. Nowhere within this section of the text does use the term gentiles or Greek come into view.[7] Paul is referring to the general sinfulness of fallen men no matter the nationality. Man have renounced their creator and his gifts to them, willfully withholding their knowledge, thanks, and worship. It indicates impartiality. Men had the truth, but muted it in unrighteousness; and therefore, they are “without excuse.” The phrase two nouns introduced the adjective “all” has the idea of hendiadys (one idea by roughly two synonymous).[8] Stam simply a definition of the two synonymous: “ungodliness is simply a disregard for God and His claims. An ungodly person is one in whose life God and His claims.”[9]

· It significance: [1] It supplies a warning to sinners. [2] It urges the necessity of salvation.

---

[1]  D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, ROMANS: THE GOSPEL OF GOD, [Grand Rapids MI, Zondervan, 1985], 310.

[2] Sanday, William, and Arthur C. Headlam, ICC: A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO ROMANS, [Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1895], 52. James Dunn, WBC; ROMANS 1-8, [Nashville, Word, 1988]

[3] Richard N. Longenecker, NIGTC: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2016], 195.

[4] F. Godet, OMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapid, Zondervan, reprint 1956]. 99.

[5] Douglas J. Moo, NICNT: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1996], 99.  C.E.B. Cranfield, ICC: ROMANS [Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1980), says there is no justification for taking it any other way, 106.

[6]  Leon Morris, PNTC: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1988], 77.

[7] C.E.B. Cranfield, ICC: ROMANS, 1:105.

[8]  Richard N. Longenecker, NIGTC: ROMANS, 203.

[9]  C.R. Stam, CMMETARY ON THE EPISLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, [Chicago, Berean Bible Society, 1981]. 42.

Reflections on Romans #7

The Theme of Romans

Romans 1:16-17

It is almost universally accepted that the theme of Romans is the Gospel of Righteousness. Romans 1:16 notes a shift of focus. The word “for” is a conjunction of reason and is found 3 times in these verses (1:16-17). Moo points that the theme is present in four subordinate clauses, each building on the other.[1] The theme is directly connected to “the gospel”, thus not altogether separate from Paul’s longing to preach the gospel at Rome. Paul now explains about the gospel, which is the theme of Romans. Newell says in these verses “we have the text of the whole Epistle of Romans.”[2]

It seems to me that Paul in stating the theme of this epistle does so in one major truth (The Gospel) describe in three key elements (Power, Faith, and Righteousness).

The word gospel is found 12 times in Romans. Paul opens the epistle declaring that he was set apart unto the gospel. Now he declares “I am not ashamed of the gospel” (1:16). The word “for” at the beginning of the phrase is understood by most as a causal or explanatory of what precedes.[3] However, Longenecker suggests it is a “transitional conjunction to indicate the continuation of Paul’s writing.”[4] While there is a logical connection to what went before, it is also transitional in nature to what follows.

The first item that Paul declares the gospel is that he is not “ashamed” of it. This is a negative aspect of his positive view of the gospel. He was not ashamed of the gospel. Paul is using a figure of speech known as litotes, which is a negative of a contrary condition or assertation.[5] It is an understatement. Paul is not ashamed of the gospel, he is saying rather was proud of it and gloried in it (Rom. 5:2, 11; cf. 2 Cor. 10:17; Gal. 6:14). The gospel was dear to the heart of Paul It should be ours as well. We are not to be ashamed of it, rather gloried in it. It should be our motive in all that we do. We should not under to downgrade the value of the gospel.

Standing behind this declaration is the worldly environment. Cranfield observes:

Paul knows full well the inevitability of the temptation to be ashamed of the gospel in view of the continuing hostility of the world to God, on the one hand, and, on the other, the nature of the gospel itself, its unimpressiveness over against the impressiveness of the world, the fact that God…has intervened in history for the salvation of men not in obvious might and majesty but in a veiled way which was bound to look to the world like abject weakness and foolishness.[6]

The Gospel has three vital elements:

· “For it is the power of God for salvation” (1:16 cf. 1 Cor. 1:18). The word “for” denotes why Paul is not ashamed of the gospel. Elsewhere he equates the gospel of God with the “word of the cross” that is “the power of God to us being saved” (1 Cor. 1:18). Romans 1:16 and 1Cor. 1:18) bringing out the same three points: gospel, power, and salvation.

It is the gospel that is the power of God. It speaks of the divine saving power of God. Power is the inherent capability to effect transformation. The gospel is clearly defined in 1 Cor. 15:3-4 as (1) Christ died for our sins, (2) He was buried, (3) He was raised the third day—all according to the Scriptures. Newell says the gospel “is the great wire along which runs God’s mighty current of saving power.”[7]  The second word “for” is not the same as the first English word “for” (gar), but is the word eis, meaning unto, with a view to. Thus, the power of God is directed toward salvation and makes it effectual. It is God’s power that saves everyone who believes. Salvation is the greet need and hope of man. Lloyd-Jones declares “Salvation is the deliverance of man from the consequences of the Fall and of sin, and our definition of salvation must never be less than that. It must include all that, in all its fulness”[8] Salvation effects the past in the forgiveness of sin; present in that it brings us into a new spiritual condition before God; future in that it delivers us from end time judgment.  Salvation equals restoration of the sinner to share in God’s glory. Constable observes: 

"Salvation" restores people to what they cannot experience because of sin. Salvation is an umbrella term; it covers all aspects of deliverance. The terms justification, redemption, reconciliation, sanctification, and glorification describe different aspects of salvation.[9]

· Paul indicates the means of this salvation as being one of faith (cf. Eph. 2:8-9). Faith is described as “to everyone who believes: to the Jew first, and also to the Greek”. This phrase of faith is used four other times in Romans (3:22; 4:11; 10:4, 11). This clearly indicates the universality of the gospel and effective only by faith. Paul has already declared that his purpose and commission to bring faith to the Gentiles (Rom. 1:5). It speaks of the scope of the gospel. The only limitation is faith (or believing one). The gospel is accepted though faith by Jew and Gentile alike. There is now no difference between Israel and the Gentiles (Rom. 12-13 cf. Rom. 11:30-32). Salvation is available to all by faith in Christ. Salvation is available regardless of nationality.

· The third element of the gospel is righteousness. “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall liveby faith” (Rom. 1:17). Stam points out that righteousness is the basic theme in which all else revolves around Romans.[10] The gospel is revealing the righteousness of God. The postpositive (gar, for) functions as an eplanatory conjunction.[11]  The antecedent is clearly the gospel. From in the gospel, righteousness is revealed. Righteousness is most prominent in this epistle and Paul. The word or a form of it is used at lease 42 times in this epistles. It is clearly a major motif in Romans.

The phrase modifies the righteousness: “from faith to faith.” This, phrase is somewhat an engigma. It is a difficult statement. A number of interpretations are given to this phrase.[12] Most views are unsatisfactory. One of the oldest is that it speaks of faith of the law to the faith of grace or OT faith to NT faith.[13] However, it cannot be so, since the gentiles were never under the law or part of the Old Testament. Their faith could not progress from faith in the law. Many scholars today hold to Calvin’s daily progress view. Interpretation is dificult. A satisfactory view must involve: (1) a faith connected to righteousness. The context demands such a connection. Paul associates the righteousness of God with the response of faith (1:16; 3:21-22; 10:3).[14] (2) A faith that is effectural. (3) A faith that is progressive. 

It seems to me that the Greek text reads: from faith to faith. The word ek is a subjective genitive function as the subject of the verbal idea and denotes the basis or source of faith.[15] Eis is a preposition with the accusative, meaning to, as far as, or to the extent of. To me, the NIV translation, “by faith from first to last” is a distortion of the text. The first reference to the first word faith speaks of the source, which is the faith of Christ or divine faithfulness. It leads to human faith. This is a common ideal in Paul (cf. Romans 3:22; Gal. 2:16; 3:22; Phil. 3:9). Both the faith of Christ and the believer’s faith is found together. Stam notes the gospel by Paul declares “His faith (subjective) to our faith (objective).”[16] Thus, the statement in Romans 1:17 is consistent with Paul’s message. The idea of human faith is involved and supported by the Old Testament quote: “The righteous man shall live by faith” (1:17). 

The theme of Romans is clearly the gospel, which is the power of God for the salvation of all people, by the means of faith. It involves the righteousness of God which the gospel reveals and is accepted by faith. The book reveals how righteousness works in salvation and the life of the believer, from our need to our acceptance to the practical outcome in our lives. This theme is continually repeated in Romans. 

---

[1]  Douglas J. Moo, NICNT: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS [Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1996], 63.

[2]  William R. Newell, ROMANS: VERSE BY VERSE, [Chicago, Moody Press, 1938], 18.

[3]  For example, see Moo, ROMANS,64.

[4] Richard N. Longenecker, NIGTC: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 2016] 158. He says the usage is found 60 times by Paul.

[5] MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY, says it is an “understatement in which an affirmative is expressed by the negative of the contrary (as in "not a bad singer" or "not unhappy")  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary.

[6]  C.E.B. Cranfield, ICC: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1975], 1:86-87.

[7] Newell, ROMANS, 21.

[8] D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, ROMANS: THE GOSPEL OF GOD, [Grand Rapids MI, Zondervan, 1985], 273.

[9]  Thomas Constable, NOTES ON ROMANS, [Soniclight.org], 21.

[10]  C.R. Stam, COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, (Chicago IL, Berean Bible Society, 1981), 36. 

[11] Richard N. Longenecker, NIGTC: ROMANS, 167,

[12] See Leon Morris, PNTC: THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1988], 70-72. Richard Longenecker, ROMANS, 177-180.

[13] Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 5:13 / Origen, col. 861.

[14]  Douglas J. Moo, NICNT: ROMANS, 73.

[15]  Richard N. Longenecker, NIGTC: ROMANS, 178.

[16]  C.R. Stam, ROMANS, 40-41.

Last words of the cross (6)

CRY OF VICTORY

John 19:30

Jesus knew everything had been accomplished. After taking they vinegar to his mouth, he cried the sigh of victory— “It is finished.” His mission was complete (cf. John 4:34; 17:4). His mission can be characterized in three ways:

1. It was a great mission. The creator became our savior! The Hebrew equivalent of this expression, and which concludes Psalm 22 is the same as we have in Genesis 2:3. its nature and issues than the work of Creation. It made known the manifold wisdom of God’s Grace in a way which no creative acts could do.
2. It was a trying mission. But now that the last drop has passed His lips; now that the justice of God is satisfied, He gives vent to the relief felt in these words.
3. It was a definite mission. He came to give Himself to the justice of God for the sin of the world. He came as the lamb to take away sin (John 1:29; 1 John 3:5). His aim also was to reveal God (John 1:18). He came to fulfill the promises and fulfil them (Rom. 15:8-9). To live in perfect obedience to God (Hebrews 10:7). That was His ai

The word “finish” is used five times, normally translated “a accomplished.” Notice the importance of the word in regard to Jesus:

John 4:34 He came to finish the work.

John 5:36 He had been given work to do.

John 17:4 He finished the work.

John 19:30 He finished in victory.

Every believer has a mission or work to finished. In doing so we are to be found faithful like Paul (2 Tim. 4:7).

Last words of the cross (5)

John 19:28

Cry of Humanity

Crucifixion was a horrible way to die. It was painful unbelief. Hanging in the heat of the day made one weak. It was a continual struggle to pull up with his arms and legs to avoid asphyxiation. One would experience severe muscle spasms, and ended up with heart failure, fever, brain damage suffocation and shock. In support of Scripture and the end was nearing, Jesus aware of the Word concerning His crucifixion, Jesus saying “I thirst” for the purpose of fulfilling the Scripture. This is an allusion to Psa. 69:21. It is the cry of humanity.

This cry marks:

Christ as man. He was flesh and blood, not a phantom.

He identified with sinful humanity, yet without sin.

His pain was real. He physically suffered great pain. “I thirst” expresses the torture of His body. 

It teaches us:

            To bear suffering with patience and submission.

            The unselfishness of Divine love.

            The cost of redemption.

Last words of the cross (4)

Matthew 27:46

CRY OF THE SOUL

It was the 9^th hour and darkness covered the land. Spurgeon comments, “Our Lord was then in the darkest part of His way. He had trodden the winepress for hours, and the work was almost finished. He had reached the culminating point of His anguish.”[1] At this point came the cry of His soul: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” It declares the feeling of rejection. There are three reasons the Son was rejected:

            It was the moment our sin became His. It is not the result of any corporeal pain being endured. He bore at that moment the wrath of God on account of our sins. God rejecting God—who can understand this? It was the ingredient of His atoning sufferings. He was taking on our sin that was may be righteous before God (2 Cor. 5:21).

            God did not interfere on Christ’s behalf to terminate those sufferings and rescue Him from the hands of His enemies. His plan and will had to be carried out. The payment had to be paid. It was the manifestation of God’s regard for the honor of His law and will.

            The Son was left destitute of the sense of His Father’s care and protection. God’s comfort may be withdrawn, but not His presence! The will of men was free to carry out Satan’s desires. It was allowed of God, but not His doing.

How should this endear the Redeemer of the world to us, who was willing to suffer such things for our sakes. In this cry we see the completeness of Christ’s obedience. He paid it all!  

---

[1] Charles Haddon Spurgeon, CHRIST’S WORDS FROM THE CROSS, [Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1965], 51

Seven Sayings of the Cross (3)

Saying of Affection

John 19:25-27

At the Cross stood three women — “his mother, and his mother’s sister [the wife of] Cleopas, and Mary Magdalene.”[1] The disciple John was with them. When He sees them from the cross to His mother he says “Women, behold they son!” To the disciple He loved, “Behold they mother!” While these words may seem odd to our ears today, but they reflect certain truths:

In time of deepest sorrow and suffering our Savior put others first. There is a saying that no man dies in vain who blesses others from his death bed. Suffers cannot do away with love. No legacy, however precious, is equal to the Legacy of Love.

They are words of care and concern for His mother. An end of a relationship may be coming, but not responsibility. He made sure His mother would be taken care of. This is in keeping with the command to honor one’s parents [Ex. 20:12; Deut. 5:16].

The death of a loved one brings anguish of soul to those who remain. Now came of the prophecy— “a sword shall pierce thy soul also.” [Luke 2:35]. From this point on Jesus will no longer be her son, but her Savior.

The overlook person is John. The text centers upon Mary and Jesus, yet John is there he has a important part. In John we see the character of grace.

He receives teachable grace. The gracious teacher is not finished I teaching grace, love, and responsibility. He attentively stood observing, hearing, and accepting Christ’s instruction.

He acts in obedience of grace. John took Mary under his own root. A gracious act.

The text reminds to be an example to:

Honor our parents. Love them, care for them, and live up to our responsibility to them.

Be men His tender compassion. As believers we are to love each other. He confirmed the law of love.

Jesus is the provider of His people. His uses other believers to provide to His own. God uses His people by means of His gracious will.

This is a sacred charge to be remembered and acted upon.

---

[1] Some believe there were four women, see Leon Morris, NICNT: JOHN, [Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1971], 810-811.