Two things jump out here and they are two very important doctrines that are kind of glossed over: The idea of Christ as advocate and the idea of Christ as propitiation.
Christ as Advocate
Men naturally like the idea of human intermediaries. Praying in the name of Christ seems OK, but it just seems more real to us if we have someone else we can see and touch. But when man sins, as man will, there is only one person we can turn to, only one we can trust and only one who is able to act as advocate and intermediary for us: Jesus Christ. There is no longer a Levitical priesthood needed or desired to acts as priests for us. We have a High Priest and His name is Jesus Christ and we need and desire no other. Every Christian has this same advocate in Christ, so we do not have to go to a pastor or confess to a priest or pray to a dead "saint" or light candles or any other of the myriad of religious rituals we have created to try to gain favor with God. All the favor and righteousness we will ever need has been bought with a price by Christ at the cross and He stands at the right hand of the Father still today to act as intermediary and advocate for His sheep.
Christ as propitiation
Why do we have Christ as our advocate? Because of the cross. Propitiation is one of those high falutin' theological terms that no one likes, but it is a Biblical word and one that conveys a meaning that I don't think you can get with a different word. It is so vital to understanding the cross. It encapsulates so many ideas: man's sin, God's holiness and justice, the Garden, the atoning sacrifices of the temple, grace. I don't want to do a full study of propitiation here because this is supposed to be more devotional in nature and quite frankly I am not sure I am theologically mature and astute enough to give it a proper treatment. Suffice it to say that at the cross my sin met the holiness of God and was propitiated by grace. The propitiation of the cross shatters all human pride and self-reliance, it destroys the idea of meritorious works in salvation because it exposes the true nature of sin and the white hot wrath of God against that sin, a perfectly just and holy righteous reaction to the rebellion of sin. His death should have been my death, His cross should have been my cross. There was nothing I could do to make God love me more and nothing I can do to make God love me less. An important point that could be overlooked here. When John writes: not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world, that is not some sort of universalist statement or a defense of man's sovereign free will. Christ died for the sins of the elect in all places and at all times. It was not a limited scope propitiation for just Jews or for just that time period but it also was not a purposeless propitiation. In Christ, at the cross, the sins of all those predestined to salvation were propitiated in full. The cross was infinite in sufficiency but effective only for those ordained from before time began to be saved by grace through the gift of faith. When we examine passages like this, we need to read them in light of the entire Scripture and not imprint our man-centered ideas in place of Biblical doctrines like predestination, election and particular atonement.
13 comments:
The scripture does read that "Christ died for the sins of the whole world."
On the cross, Jesus asked his Father to forgive his enemies, those that killed him (us).
The Father aswered that prayer in the resurrection.
But this grace must be accessed by faith. Faith that is given to us by the Holy Spirit as a gift.
So, he died for all, he forgave all, but not all come to faith.
When we believe, God gets all the credit. We we reject Him, we get all the blame.
Does your understanding of John's use of the word "world" (kosmos) in 1 John 1:2 come from John?
-Alan
Alan,
Is that directed at me or Steve, because I have no idea if it is the same greek word in 1 John and John.
Steve,
If Christ indeed died for the sins of the whole world, wouldn't the whole world be forgiven and thus all would be saved? I would argue that even if we see faith as the "activator" of salvation, faith itself is a gift from outside of us and sovereignly granted to those God elected. Either way, whether through election or simple foreknowledge, Christ knew every person that would ever come to faith in Him and died for them.
Arthur,
My question was directed to you... sorry for the confusion.
Actually, you could use the Gospels or any of the Epistles of John, but I don't think you'll find John using "world" (kosmos) in the way that you're using it. Yours is a theological definition that is not part of the semantic range of the word "world". Does that concern you?
-Alan
Alan,
It seems that the idea of "world" is used in a lot of places that don't imply a universal sense of "every person". I obviously have no background in greek but in for example John 18:20 Jesus says:
Jesus answered him, "I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. (Joh 18:20)
Jesus clearly had not spoken to the whole world at that time, nor even every person in that vicinity. Maybe it is not the same greek word.
Arthur,
No, the word "world" does not always mean "all people". But, I don't think it ever means "the elect" either. John uses the word "world" several times in 1 John. It might be interesting to compare your definition of the word in this passage to his usage later in the same chapter.
-Alan
I think where I am coming from is more focusing on "propitiation" instead of focusing on "world". World is used in lots of ways in lots of places, but coupled with "propitiation" it seems clarified what John is saying here.
Arthur,
I don't think I understand. Are you saying that "propitiation" means "the elect"? :)
John wrote that Jesus is the sacrifice ("propitiation") for our sins and for the sins of the whole world.
It seems pretty straightforward, especially with the combination of the adjective "whole" with the noun "world".
-Alan
I am not saying propitiation means elect at all, but I am saying that the propitiation was for the elect.
Maybe I need some clarification. Are you saying that John is saying that the sins of "the world" meaning all people have been appeased at the cross? Would that not imply that all are saved because the penalty for their sins has been paid? If Jesus died for the sins of all people without exception, than wouldn't all people stand before God free from the penalty of sin?
Arthur,
Thank you for asking those questions. It is much better to start with what Scripture says, and then deal with our theological interpretation, instead of starting with our theological interpretation to tell us what Scripture says.
I'm saying that John said that Jesus is the propitiation for our sins and for the sins of the whole world. That's what John wrote, and I think that's what John means.
Am I a universalist? No. Am I an inclusivist? No. Do I believe that Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world? Yes.
This passage doesn't say that all are saved. It only says that Jesus is the sacrifice for all sins.
-Alan
I guess I am still confused. If the cross made satisfaction for the sins of all men, then on what basis does any man perish?
Arthur,
Since John has not dealt with your question up to this point in his letter (except for perhaps vs. 3 and the idea of "fellowship with the Father and with his son), perhaps it would be best to continue studying John's letter and see how John answers that question.
Of course, since I believe that Scripture presents a united picture, you could also examine other passages after studying 1 John. (Your recent post on free will is a good example of how I would answer your question.)
-Alan
Post a Comment