Ichthys Acronym Image

Home             Site Links

Redemption:

The Blood of Christ, Christ our Passover,

and The Passion of the Christ

Word RTF

Question #1:  Hi Doc!  I was given other views on the Sabbath and wanted your view on it. He believes that the sabbath is also for us. This is what he said:

"You are to have the same law for the alien and the native-born. I am the LORD your God (Lev. 24:22)": The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the alien living among you. (Num. 15:16). One and the same law applies to everyone who sins unintentionally, whether he is a native-born Israelite or an alien (Num 15:29). Are you sure it was only given to the Jews? And how about this one: Therefore let us keep the Festival [of Unleavened Bread], not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth. (1Cor. 5:8). Here Paul tells Gentiles to keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The New Testament never does away with the commandments, it just gives them a newer and deeper meaning. Now we don't celebrate being released from slavery in Egypt, but use the same festival to celebrate being saved from sin."

Any truth to this?

Response #1:  The key passage here from 1st Corinthians chapter five is quoted only in part. Paul had just finished saying that "Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us" in verse seven. Therefore beyond all argument Paul is not talking about the Jewish Passover but about the true reality which lay behind it: the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ on our behalf. This is always what is at issue throughout the New Testament, namely, the replacement of shadow and ritual with the revelation of the reality of the truth (cf. Col.2:17; Heb.8:5; 10:1). Jesus is represented in all of the Old Testament sacrifices, but He has now come in the flesh, suffered and died for us all, and has been raised again. Therefore continuation in the old ways is not just pointless, it is in fact an offense against the Person and the work of our Lord on our behalf (because it is like saying what He did never happened). That is what Paul says very clearly over and over again in Hebrews (esp. Heb.6:6). When we say we need to keep a day-Sabbath, it is like saying Christ did not in fact "give us rest" as He promised – we still have to foreshadow this rest with a ritual one-day observance (whereas in fact of course we should be entering into His rest at all times).

I think it is well to recall that our Lord ran afoul of the Pharisees over and over again for deliberately "breaking the Sabbath" (e.g., Jn.5:18), and indeed went out of His way to do the Father's work on the Sabbath. No clearer role model could be wanted for how things really stand now than our Lord, who was "always working" for the Kingdom (Jn.5:17). We are called as Hebrews 4 tells us quite clearly to "enter into that rest", the constant faith-rest in Jesus who has now appeared and been resurrected, rather than going back to the old, symbolic ritual.

By engaging in Old Testament rituals, we have returned to the old things which have been superseded (Gal.4:9; Col.2:20), whereas in fact we should instead do what the context at issue commands us to do, namely, to keep our new "feast", "not with the old", literal bread, but with the new symbolic "bread": sincerity and truth, which do honor to our new Passover, Jesus Christ Himself.

And having taken the bread and blessed it, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body which is being given on your behalf. Be doing this in to remember Me".
Luke 22:19 (cf. Matt.26:26; Mk.14:22; Jn.6:51-59; 1Cor.11:23-25)

In the One who is the completion of the Law . . . for all who believe (Rom.10:4), our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Bob L.

Question #2:  I forwarded your reply to one of my church friends who likes to study theology. I wanted to know where you think he's in error.

Is it pointless to celebrate Christmas since it commemorates something that has already come to pass? Is Easter pointless since it celebrates something that happened long ago and today can only be considered a "shadow picture" of the actual resurrection? Is celebrating your birthday pointless since you are already born? Of course not! That's what celebrations are all about - something that has already happened. You don't do away with celebrations when something happens. That's when the celebrations start. If Jesus hadn't died for us, we would have no reason to celebrate the Passover (or any of the other holidays). But he did die for us and that is a reason to celebrate. Jesus is our Passover lamb and commemorating his death on the day that he died (see John 18:28) is not denying what he did for us. It is quite the opposite.

If I am understanding you correctly (please correct me if I'm wrong), you are saying that we should not keep these holidays since the things they forshaddow have already come to pass. The problem is that this is not entirely true. Each festival forshaddows a different event. Passover forshaddowed Christs death. The days of Unleavened Bread symbolized his sinless life. The Feast of Firstfruits forshaddowed his resurrection. The Feast of Weeks prophesied the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. All these things have come to pass but not the four that are left. The Feast of Trumpets (which was yesterday) forshaddows Christ's second coming. The Day of Atonement is a shaddow picture of the day of judgement. The Feast of Tabernacles and the weekly Sabbath both point to the millenial reign of Christ on earth. None of these things have happened yet. If we are to stop celebrating a holiday once the thing it forshaddows comes to pass, it follows logically that we should keep those holidays until those things come to pass. That would mean that those last four festivals - including the weekly Sabbath - should still be kept because the things they point to haven't happened.

The New Testament defines sin as a violation of the Law (I John 3:4). If Jesus broke even the least of the commandments, that would make him a sinner and that is something that we both agree he was not. Jesus never violated anything in God's Law. That includes the laws concerning the Sabbath. What he did break was the additional regulations the rabbis had added over the centuries that made keeping the Sabbath (and other commandments) a burden instead of a delight. In fact, some of those rabbinical rulings were contradictory to God's laws and Jesus rebuked them for that (see Matt. 15:3-9). Why would he have done that if he came to do away with the law they were contradicting?

Response #2:  Yes, Christmas and Easter are later traditions and ritualistic. They have nothing to do with true Christianity and are in fact harmful to it in many insidious ways. I don't make a point of telling people this (since it should be obvious to anyone who reads scripture that these are not biblical "celebrations" but rituals dreamed up by later generations) and I don't feel it appropriate to "rain on anyone's parade" unnecessarily, but if someone wants to make an issue of these things, then it is important to point out the truth. Birthdays don't have anything to do with the Bible. And unlike all of the above, which are "celebrations" which at least commemorate past events, Passover was an anticipation as are all of the Old Testament Mosaic Law rituals. Continuing in them is to "crucify the Son of God afresh", because it says, in effect, that what Jesus did didn't matter (since we are still anticipating that someone will come and die for sin). That's hardly "celebrating"; at best it's "trivializing".

Different festivals had different emphases, it is true, but all involved animal sacrifices representing the work of Christ yet to come. Thus, all are specifically forbidden as "crucifying the Son of God afresh", and the observing the Law generally is condemned over and over again in the New Testament, largely, I would argue, for that very reason. Going down this road of legalism instead of grace is antithetical to salvation in the long run. This can be seen from the history, present practices, and present spiritual state of the Roman Catholic church, for they have done exactly the same things: priests, altars, festivals, temple-cathedrals, rituals, salvation by works, all approximating in their own way every aspect of the Mosaic rituals (that is what Easter et al. really are, after all).

Jesus didn't break the Law; He fulfilled the Law. As Lord of the Sabbath, He was not bound by its restrictions: He is our peace (i.e., our "Sabbath rest"; Eph.2:14; cf. Phil.4:9; 1Thes.5:23; 2Thes.3:16; Heb. passim), having died under the Law to free us from its curse (Gal.3:13). Being in Christ, we likewise have died to the Law (Rom.7:4). Therefore we are no longer under the Law, but under grace (Rom.6:14). Scripture is very clear that Jesus and His disciples did not abide by the Sabbath restrictions as they "were understood". That is to say, they did not keep the Sabbath in the old, ritualistic way as understood by the Pharisees et al.; rather they kept a true Sabbath, day by day, and that is what we are to imitate. In fact, I would argue, that we should learn from the fact that our Lord did not let the disciples follow the tradition but instead led them in the truth which was being revealed in Himself; likewise if we revert to the old Pharisaic way of doing things, ignoring the reality of the truth in Jesus Christ for hollow, superseded ritual, we are going to do ourselves serious spiritual damage.

On Christ described as "our Passover", my point very clearly was that this passage is talking about "Christ" being our Passover, not saying we should celebrate the Jewish Passover but exactly the opposite: He has replaced that ritual with the reality of Himself, the true Passover Lamb sacrificed on our behalf that we might have eternal life.

In Jesus,

Bob L.


Question #3:
 

 

I visited your website. I was wondering where you stand on certain issues. I believe that when Christ had rent the veil, went into the holy of holies, offered his blood. But some of my friends disagree with me, they said:

He didn't offer his blood in the temple on this earth. He went straight to the Father to offer his blood. 24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Hebrews 9:24-26

Is this true?


Response #3:
 

I have to say that my position is different from both of the views you send. Please note in the verses you quote that it doesn't say anything about Jesus' literal "blood". The "blood of Christ" is a metaphor. Christ's suffering for us on the cross involved so much more than bleeding. Indeed, when the Roman soldier pierced His side with a lance, Jesus was already dead, yet blood and water came out (proving that Jesus did not bleed to death). What our Lord did do for us on the cross was to go into the darkness for us, to die in our place while we were His enemies, to bear our sins in His body and the tree, and to wash our sins away by His death and sacrifice. When animals were slaughtered under the Mosaic Law, they shed literal blood – but they did not literally take away our sins. When Christ died on the cross He did not pour out His literal blood (although He did of course bleed, yet He did not bleed to death), but He did literally atone for them. In the case of ritual sacrifice under the Law, the propitiation of our sins is foreshadowed by the death of the animal, but the reality was fulfilled by Christ. The metaphor, "the blood of Christ", connects the real work of Jesus on the cross in dying spiritually for our sins in paying the penalty for them with the sacrifices of literal blood designed to teach and foreshadow our Lord's provision of salvation by His death. In the type (animal sacrifices), the blood is real, but the atonement is merely represented; in the antitype (the cross), the "blood" is a metaphor representing spiritual death, but the atonement provided by that death is real. The blood of Christ is a metaphor connecting what our Lord did for us to all those teaching examples in the Old Testament, but the satisfaction of the Father's justice in His death for all of our sins was a reality, the great reality which saves us forevermore. Thus the phrase "blood of Christ" encompasses all that Jesus did for us on the cross to "provide purification for our sins" (Heb.1:3). For more on this topic at Ichthys at the following links:

A note on the blood of Christ

Communion and the Blood of Christ

Transubstantiation

Please feel free to write me back about any of this.

In the One who died on the cross and washed away all of our sins with His blood, our dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Bob Luginbill


Question #4:
 

Our small group will be looking at "Why we needed a Redeemer". Can you help me with some comments on this?

Thanks


Response #4:

Redemption can be found on the site in BB 3B under "God's Forgiveness of Sin", while Peter #9 speaks about the essentials briefly (please see the links). I will give you a few comments here which speak about the subject directly.

"Redemption" is a biblical metaphor which explains our common human plight in terms of our relationship with God absent the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the effect of His work on the cross on our behalf, and the resulting freedom we have from sin when we accept the gift our heavenly Father offers us in Jesus. In the metaphor, we are "slaves" (Rom.7:14; cf. Rom.3:9), with no way to buy our freedom on our own. The Greek and Hebrew words which speak about our release from sin in this metaphor all have this same central idea of "ransoming" or "buying out of slavery" or "paying a price on behalf of" someone else who has no means to do so him/herself, and the coin that pays the price is in all cases the "blood of Christ" (cf. Rom.3:24; Gal.3:13; 4:5; 1Cor.6:20; 7:23; Heb.9:15; Rev.5:9):

In whom (i.e., Christ) we possess our ransoming [from sin] (i.e., redemption) through His blood, the forgiveness of our transgressions according to the riches of His grace.
Ephesians 1:7

In whom (i.e., Christ) we possess our ransoming [from sin] (i.e., redemption), the forgiveness of our sins.
Colossians 1:14

The blood of Christ can't really be separated from any detailed discussion of redemption, since it is the blood of Christ which redeems us from sin. We are "slaves", we are headed for death and condemnation, headed for the fires of hell with no way, no means to prevent either our imminent physical death or the eternal death that will inevitably follow – unless someone intervenes. God is just, and cannot overlook sin. But God is also merciful, and in His great mercy He devised a way for us to be saved, sinners though we are. He sent His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh into the world to be judged for sin in the flesh that we might be saved (Rom.8:1-4). Jesus paid our redemption price, without which payment we were lost and already condemned in principle, a price which we had no means to pay ourselves since the Father's justice could be assuaged by no less than a perfect substitute, a Lamb without spot or blemish, our dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

For you know that it was not with perishable things [like] silver or gold that you were ransomed from the futile manner of life passed down to you by your ancestors, but [you were redeemed] with precious blood, like that of a lamb without spot or blemish, [that is, by the blood] of Christ.
1st Peter 1:18-19

Without a Redeemer, we would face only death and damnation. But through Christ's death for us in the darkness on the cross where He bore our sins in His body and washed them away with His blood, that is, by being judged for them in our place (see the link: in BB 3B "The means of atonement"), we are "bought out free" from the slavery whose end is judgment and condemnation, so that now as sons of God instead of slaves we anticipate only blessing and bliss in eternity in the presence of the One who bought us by dying in our place on our behalf, and not for us only, but for the entire world (i.e., "unlimited atonement": see the link: in BB 3B "Atonement is universal").

You can find more about the doctrine of "the blood of Christ" at the following links:

The Blood of Christ

Faith and the Blood of Christ (Peter #9)

The Sacrifice of Jesus Christ (in BB 3B)

In our Redeemer who bought us free from our sins, our dear Lord Jesus Christ.

Bob L.


Question #5:
 

 

I pray that all is well with you! I was hoping that you might have some in-depth information in your writings on the "story of Redemption".

Thanks and God Bless


Response #5:

Currently, the first best place to look for this at Ichthys is at the following link:

The Blood of Christ (in BB 3B)

[see also "Whose Blood?"]

Next, I do also give an introduction to the doctrine of redemption in Peter #9, "Faith and the Blood of Christ". The doctrine of redemption is scheduled to be given an in-depth treatment in part 4A of the Bible Basics series, "Christology" (due out later this year). Also, although it is not covered as the focal point per se, there is quite a bit of information about redemption in part 3B of Bible Basics, "Hamartiology" (see especially section III, "God's Dealing with the Collective Sin of Mankind", and IV "God's Dealing with the Sins of Individual Human Beings"). Then too, the way you phrase it here, i.e., "the story of redemption", it is also true that the entire plan of God (largely the focus of the Satanic Rebellion series) and the life of Jesus Christ (subject of the forthcoming Bible Basics 4A) are intimately connected to this story/history.

Redemption is a Latin word meaning, etymologically, to "buy back". In the Greek there are two main ways the Bible describes Christ's work as it is directed towards releasing us from sin: 1) [the more common] ransoming from an otherwise implacable force [lytr-] (e.g., Matt.20:28; Jn.8:31-38; Rom.3:24; 1Cor.1:30), and 2) buying us out of slavery [-agoraz-] (e.g., 2Pet.2:1; Gal.4:5). These two ideas are obviously very closely related and it is not uncommon for versions of the Bible to translate all the words involved in this concept the same way (i.e., with some form of the English root "redem-/redeem"). There are other very closely related concepts too (cancellation of charges against us in e.g., Col.2:14; and cleansing in e.g., Heb.1:3). But, generally speaking, under the concept of redemption God in Christ purchases us out from under the charges, penalties, and entanglements by which we are held through sin; that is to say, redemption is the work of Christ on the cross as it relates specifically to us, those He bought, fulfilling His mission by ransoming us from sin and death (1Tim.2:6).

[Jesus Christ] who gave Himself on our behalf to redeem us (lit., "ransom us") from all lawlessness (i.e., sin; cf. 1Jn.3:4) and to cleanse (cf. Heb.1:3) for Himself a people [to be His] own unique possession, zealous for good works.
Titus 2:14

God thus redeemed us from sin and death by paying for us in blood, the death of His Son our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross in our place whereby He bore all the sins of the world in His own body, and it really is the blood of Christ that is the consistent factor in this illustration of the effect that the work of our Savior on the cross has had for us in producing salvation (i.e., it has removed sin as an issue and made salvation possible: Heb.9:12; Rev.9:5). That is the "price" by which we have been bought/redeemed (1Cor.6:20; 7:23). Thus Christ "bought us out from under the curse of the law, having become a curse for us" (Gal. 3:13); therefore "in Him we have redemption (lit., "possess the ransoming"), [which is] the forgiveness of our transgressions" (Eph.1:7; cf. Col.1:14):

For you know that it was not with perishable things [like] silver or gold that you were ransomed from the futile manner of life passed down to you by your ancestors, but [you were redeemed] with precious blood, like that of a lamb without spot or blemish, [that is, by the blood] of Christ.
1st Peter 1:18-19

As redemption is a wonderful and wonderfully involved doctrine (and when related to the plan of God in general even more so), I would be very happy in the meantime to answer any specific questions you might have on the subject.

In the One who bought us free from all our sins by His blood, our dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Bob L.


Question #6:
 

A friend of mine at church is telling me that nothing good can come about from watching this film "The Passion of the Christ". But I actually know two people who got saved watching this. I think that God could work all things for His good purpose (Rom. 8:28), even with this film. One of my friends gave me this article on how WRONG it is to watch this film. Here it is:

"The Passion of The Christ, A Warning

Although my Spidey-senses have been tingling, my fingers have been busy elsewhere. I apologize for the lateness of this post. I hope that you will finish reading this post before you throw it down in disgust and forever decide that you will never read my blog again. I must lay down a few things that this writing is NOT intended to do so that I can't be accused of saying something I didn't. I will not say that anyone that has went to see this movie is a horrible Christian, a blatant sinner, or even kicks puppies. I will not say that I will never watch this movie. I probably will when it comes out on video. I will not say that some people may make a life-changing decision with this movie as the catalyst. I believe God is sovereign and can use anything he chooses to bring a new child into the Kingdom. There are some things that I want to throw out as a caution on this movie. I know that many people have gone to see it. People in my church and youth group have gone to see it. I have told them my cautions when I've been asked about it.

Cautions about "THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST"; 1. Turn to the Book of Icon Productions, Scene 1, Paragraph two… or "TPOTC IS A MOVIE". Although this is an obvious statement it is a very important truth. TPOTC is a man's view of a small portion of scripture. (Only 10.6% or 402 verses out of 3779 in the gospel tell the story of the crucifixion, and I am being generous enough to include the Last Supper and the Garden of Gethsemane in that)There are many things in this movie that are not scriptural at all, many things that the scriptures are silent on, as obviously God's focus of the Crucifixion was not for visual consumption. Mel Gibson "assumes" that certain words were spoken in Aramaic, Hebrew or Latin. No where do we know what language Christ was arrested in, what language he spoke on the cross in or for that matter what "path" he trod on the way to Golgotha, these are insignificant for the purpose of salvation. And make no doubts about it the crucifixion was solely for the purpose of salvation. I will address that more in a short while. In the Old Testament we see one of the Ten Commandments address a danger of this film. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: (Exodus 20:4)" (Please don't be obnoxious enough to say that I am condemning any graven image I am giving the reason for the commandment.) The reason God did this is that many people willingly attribute HIS DIETY and HIS POWER to created things or created beings. "Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. (Romans 1:25)" An interesting thought occurs to me that the truth of God is found only in the WORD of GOD.

To many people this may be the only account of the crucifixion they will ever know, and I daresay that it is not far fetched to see this movie in some way "canonized" as a legitimate alternative to the Bible. Do you think that I exaggerate? Check out the "Shroud of Turin", the "Wood of the Cross", any Catholic relic, or icon (Hmmm, that's the name of Mel's production company). All are man made items assigned with a certain "power or holiness" to them, and all are extra-biblical. For those who did not know it, TPOTC follows the very uniquely Catholic "Stations of the Cross" which also contains extra-biblical material.

I find it disturbing that we need a visual representation to bring a saving knowledge of Christ to the world, as Christ himself says… Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed. (John 20:29)."

He then added to his personal note to me:

"If there is still some spiritual value in a movie filled with false doctrine, why not read the Book of Mormon and the Watchtower? There is certainly some "spiritual value" in those materials. Of course, it is the wrong spiritual influence. Just as the movie. Because you interpreted it through your "saved" eyes, doesn't mean the lost will get the same thing out of it. I can listen to a horrible secular song - and still be reminded of something of God (because of my indirect association with what they are saying), but that doesn't justify or excuse the wicked song."

I am open to correction and wanted to know if you agreed with the above.

Thanks in advance!


Response #6:

I have not seen the movie – deliberately. I was unaware of some of the problems with it addressed here because I have not seen it, but of course since it is a Hollywood movie anyone who gave it a second's thought ahead of time would realize that it would have to be filled with many problems for that reason alone. As a Greek and Latin professor, I couldn't help finding out that the movie used Aramaic (they actually spoke Hebrew in Jerusalem in Jesus' day – that's how they recognize Peter is a Galilean, for example, and why they think Jesus is calling for Elijah on the cross when He is really quoting Psalm 22). And in spite of myself I heard some discussions which included one "quote" the actor playing Jesus makes on the way to the cross – which actually comes from Revelation!

But, really, none of this had anything to do with my not wanting to see the movie – or even any clips from it. What really had and has me concerned is rather that the power of video/film not be allowed to degrade or intrude upon the mental picture I have of my Lord from years of careful study of the Bible. All of us who are Christians love our Lord Jesus and are attempting through spiritual growth and the study of His Word to grow in that love day by day, to grow closer to Him day by day. "Though not having seen Him, you love Him", says Peter (1Pet.1:8), meaning that of course our love is based upon what we know about Him through the Bible, not from what we have seen with our own eyes. But if we attempt to reconstruct Him and His earthly life visually, that is art, not Bible study, and it can only lead to spiritual problems, not spiritual growth. That is because all art is off-center from reality (otherwise it would be reality, not art). Art imitates reality, but is not real. This movie is not real. We have no idea what our Lord looked like, and no true idea of the events beyond what scripture says – and visual descriptions are most definitely "beyond what scripture says". Even in the simplest descriptions of action in any of the gospels once these are represented in a movie, or a novel, or a play, or a musical, or a picture, etc., they immediately lose any claim to truth. But worse than that, since people – even intellectually "sophisticated" people who ought to know better – often are influenced to unconsciously accept such representations as truth, they run the risk of replacing or at least defacing the real truth in their hearts that has been placed there by the Spirit through faith as it came from the reading and teaching of scripture.

The best such things can do is not to do too terribly much harm. But a movie such as this one which is very dramatic and intense is likely to leave many lasting impressions and images which are not easy to control once they are in a person's mind, images that will not for better but for worse at least condition and color the picture a person has of the Lord. Since no one involved in this movie (or any movie) really has any sort of deep understanding of the Bible and its truths, that conditioning will inevitably be towards the false, even if only seemingly and imperceptibly so.

We are all climbing a spiritual mountain, and our Lord is waiting at the top. If we want to know what He looks like, sounds like, thinks, wants, says – as we should dearly want to know since we love Him so – all this is possible, one step at a time, one inch and one foot at a time, one verse and one truth at a time, until we meet Him in Person on top. But movies like this are detriments to what we are trying to achieve, like putting a huge, heavy rock in our packs which cannot help but get our attention: they just make it more difficult to climb this mountain, not easier.

As your blogger says, I'm not condemning anyone who sees it, but I'm certainly not encouraging it because I understand the harm that it may potentially do. Following fantasies like this when we have the entire Bible to enjoy which is all about Jesus is perhaps not so much a sin as it is a self-inflicted potential spiritual set-back. After all, this movie emphasizes, so I read, the physical torment of our Lord going to the cross – but the redemption He won for us came by His dying in the darkness for our sins. As I say in the soon-to-be-released Bible Basics 4A: Christlology:


Thus it is wrong to think of our Lord's sacrifice merely in terms of the punishment He suffered at human hands, as horrific as that was. It was only after being betrayed, forsaken, denied, abandoned, arrested, falsely accused and condemned, maligned, ridiculed, spit upon, tortured, beaten to the last reserves of His strength, was nailed to a cross, and shown the loss of everything He had, that our Lord entered the darkness to die for our sins. The gauntlet of suffering He went through to reach the time and place of judgment merely gives us some small idea of what our salvation cost Him, for the suffering of the death He endured in darkness exceeded those preliminaries by unknown orders of magnitude. For our Lord, those three hours of darkness must have lasted more than a lifetime. After all, He created the universe in an instant. But in those three hours, the history of the universe was written. They are the basis of all that ever was or will be good and blessed and glorious for us and for all who have gratefully accepted and delight in the ineffable gift of Jesus Christ.
 

In the invisible One we see through faith, our dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Bob L.

 


Ichthys Home

Bible Options
Bible Study Software