THE SCREAM OF THE DAMNED...was Jesus really damned by God for our salvation?

UPDATED

CJ spoke of our Savior's cry, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken Me?" And though I have contemplated that amazing cry often, never did it hit me as hard as in CJ's message, when he referred to it as "the scream of the Damned." Then there was break and music and announcements, and John Piper stood up to bring his message. Several of us had prayed in a back room that God would anoint John, and pick right up where He left off in the previous message, and wow, did He. John referred repeatedly to the "scream of the Damned," and then moved into Romans 8. A flood of tears came as God preached the message to me yet again. That Deity would be Damned. That the God who is called upon righteously by the saints and angels in heaven to damn people, and called upon habitually by unbelievers flippantly and unrighteously to damn people, would in fact damn his Son, would (from the Son’s willingness to drink the cup) damn himself…for us. That it could be said of the Beloved One, “God damned Him,” and that He screamed the scream of the Damned….it was too much for me. It is too much for me this moment. And in the ages to come it will continue to be too much for me. -RANDY ALCORN

John Piper from his sermon on 'The Screamed of the Damned. Everything exists to magnify the worth of the scream of the damned. That’s the point of the universe. What we will do forever in heaven is magnify the worth of the scream of the damned. Calvary will not be forgotten. It is the most-horrible, most sinful, most agonizing event that ever was - it will be the center of heaven forever. Hell exists, cross exists, sin exists, heaven exists, you exist, universe exists, in order to magnify the worth of the scream of the damned. What is the apex of the revelation of the grace of God? And the answer is the scream of the damned on the cross.

Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect,

so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God,

to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

-Hebrews 2:17

I have listened now several times to two messages from the 2008 Resolved Conference by CJ Mahaney and John Piper. The shocking phrase they both chose to use to describe Jesus' finished work of redemption on the cross for the elect was, The Scream of the Damned. No, they are not referring to unregenerate people in hell, or the weeping and gnashing of teeth from perdition's flames, but using this to describe the sinless, holy Son of God as our divine Substitute. The Lord Jesus Christ the Righteous now called: The Damned. This is unthinkable. Those words not only stunned me, but it did stir my interest afresh to go back and study again the atoning work of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross with those provocative words in mind.

Both of these men are good communicators; passionate about the things of the Lord; both strive to be biblical in their sermons; and both are men of God. As most know, Piper has a reputation for creating phrases for shock value and being provocative (i.e., anyone remember Christian Hedonism?). I am all in favor of being creative in our writing, but it must stay in line with biblical truth as well. There can be no artistic license when speaking of God, His attributes, His character, our Lord's ministry, the cross, or the persons and nature of Jesus Christ Himself in incarnation for our redemption. We must pursue godly discipline with the purposed constraint to God and His truth that careful and circumspect study of Scripture affords when mining these great and essential truths of the Christian faith.

In all of my research, I haven't been able to find anyone who referred to Jesus' suffering on the cross as "the damning of Jesus"; and not one early church father that referred to Jesus as "The Damned" when speaking of the cross and substitutionary atonement. If someone knows of any early church father (or anyone for that matter except Piper and CJ) who use the term The Damned to refer to the loving, holy sacrifice of our Lord Jesus on the cross, I would be most interested to see the source and context. Thank you.

For context, CJ and Piper attribute the saying, "The Scream of the Damned", to Jesus' words on the cross: "And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34). Christ was forsaken as our sin-bearer and propitiatory sacrifice (Heb. 1:3), but this is not the cry nor the language of damnation. This is a quote taken from Psalm 22:1. In saying these words, Jesus is fulfilling the prophetic words of the Psalmist and declaring Himself to be the one true Messiah. He is also expressing the agony and mystery of enduring God's wrath against us and our sins, so that we may have peace with God forever (Rom. 5:1). God forsaken of God... who can fully comprehend it? What great love by the Father (Rom. 5:8-9) and the Son (John 15:13) to endure such suffering for those He came to save (Heb. 2:9, Phil. 2:5-11). "Looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God" (Hebrews 12:2). Amen?

Do you think that this is a picture of Jesus being damned beloved, or it is a picture of humiliation, substitution, propitiation, redemption, justification, and imputation? Are these two things compatible or antithetical according to God's Word?

Words matter; especially when expounding God's Word

Some initial questions I have about this disturbing phrase are:

• is it biblical?
• does the Scripture speak of the substitutionary death of Jesus for the elect as Christ being damned?
• is this just cultural contextualization?
• is it emotionalism run amuck?
• is it sensationalized passion?
• shock the flock nomenclature designed to wake up tired ears?
• is this sound doctrine, theatrics, dramatics, blasphemy, or truth?
  

Let's look briefly at this issue.

The Scream of the Damned seems like language that is meant to provoke thought, solicit listenership, entice questions and entreat discussion rather than expound and exegete Scripture. But, I am absolutely convinced, it is language that is foreign to the biblical record. Nowhere in Scripture, beloved, is our Lord Jesus Christ ever referred to as "the damned" - even while enduring the wrath of God on the cross in vicarious penal substitutionary atonement. To do so misappropriates the truth of this great biblical doctrine and does injustice to the very nature of our sinless Savior who was holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners.

Substitutionary death is not equal to the damnation unbelievers suffer, it is far superior because it is not due. His cry was not the cry of the damned but the perfectly obedient and sinless cry of the Son to His Father. Amen?

Is the word damned in the Bible?
The word damned is only used three times in all of Scripture (Mark 16:14; Roms. 14:23; 2 Thess. 2:12); and used for the unregenerate to everlasting perdition. Not even is that language used in describing the elect saints of God. Though we are all conceived in sin, dead in trespasses and sin, and by nature children of God's wrath, before we come to salvation by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ who are regenerated unto life are not called “The Damned.” Consider Romans 9 where Paul distinguishes between vessels of mercy whom God prepared beforehand for eternal life AND the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction (v.21-23). He does not say that the vessels of mercy, though elect - but yet not saved, are vessels of damnation... Foolishness.

While I appreciate the ministries of CJ and Piper, God's truth is preeminent over any person's individual proclivity to be clever. None of us can assign new meaning to words about the nature, person, character and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ that the Scriptures have not assigned to Him already. To say that Jesus was Damned on the cross, is unbiblical and quite honestly, irresponsible.

Biblically, being damned is an irrevocable, final act of eternal judgment for those who are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. It is not descriptive of Christ's substitutionary work on the cross. In fact, I would say it is blasphemous.

Notice how God Himself describes the profound account of Jesus on the cross prophetically in Isaiah 53. He uses language such as:

"Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed.

Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief;"

The Spirit of God in writing God's Word never one time refers to our Lord Jesus Christ as being “the damned” or the cross as “the damnation of Christ.” (Frankly, it is even disturbing to type that phrase.) If it is so key to understanding the cross, why does not the Author of the Scriptures not use it? It would have been easy for Him to do so, but He does not. And I believe the Word of God is silent on such perturbing nomenclature is for one reason... the cross was not the damnation of Jesus.

Here is how the Bible speaks reverently and solemnly about our Lord upon the cross:

• He was made a curse for us (Gal. 3:13);
• He was delivered up because of our transgressions (Rom. 4:25);
• He died for our sins according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:3).
• He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross (1 Peter 2:24);
• He died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust (1 Peter 3:18);
• He became the propitiation for our sins (Rom. 3:25-26; Heb. 2:17; 1 John 4:10);
• and He was our divine substitute (Heb. 2:9; Rom. 5:8-9).

In like manner, 2 Cor. 5:21 is referring to imputation, not damnation:

"He who knew no sin became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

Jesus was holy throughout all aspects of the cross even when drinking the cup of wrath. He was our sin bearer or sacrifice. He was neither guilty of sin, or sinful, nor did He actually become sin itself. That would be heresy. Even in substitution, imputation, and justification the Word does not speak of Him as being damned, but God's holy once for all sacrifice for our sins.

The Bible speaks of the truth of His vicarious penal substitutionary atonement conveyed in five key words: substitution, justification, imputation, redemption, and propitiation. Nowhere is the damnation of Jesus on the cross a biblical term representing a biblical truth. Biblical terms do matter; and more importantly, biblical terms represent biblical truth written so by God Himself for our benefit and instruction. IOW, words matter.

Bible words are too boring; it needs "punching up" to speak to us... today
There seems to be a trend today to nuance or contextualize biblical truth and biblical terms. Whatever the motive, it can lead to the erosion of the fidelity of God's Word. (The Prodigal God; The Shack, etc.). We don't need the truths of Jesus on the cross punched up or embellished in someone's preaching for it to impact us. The Scriptures are sufficient enough to move us and inform us about the crucifixion and all that Christ did on behalf of satisfying the Father and redeeming His elect.

The need for the shocking, the sensational, the dramatics or the theatrics, etc. adds nothing to the real meaning of the text, or the cross and usually invokes something that is foreign to Scripture - which I believe has unfortunately occurred here. I know this is common within the emerging/emergent church community, but should not be among orthodox expositors of God’s Word. Men like CJ and Piper should be more careful when trying to rightly divide the Word (2 Tim. 2:15).

Jesus "became a curse for us"; but was He damned?

As to the text most cited by those who are trying to introduce apocryphal language as biblical, is Galatians 3:13:

“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree"—

Notice here, Jesus was not cursed; but He became a curse for us. There is a difference. John Calvin agrees also to this difference. Christ saved us from the curse of the Law. What is the curse of the Law? Sin and death. To transgress the Law is to sin; and the wages of sin is death. Jesus redeemed us from the curse of the Law. How? By “becoming a curse for us.” The full weight of the penalty of the Law fell on Christ on the cross so that by His sinless life (His active obedience) and His perfect once for all sacrifice (His passive obedience) we might be redeemed and given by imputation the full righteousness of Christ. We are not made righteous; but we are clothed with His perfect righteousness. He was not cursed, but our sins and the curse of the Law was imputed to Him; and in that sense, He became sin and became the curse of the Law.

He bore the fullness of that curse upon Himself at the cross. Man could not do this for we are under the curse and our own righteousness is nothing but filthy rags deserving of the eternal justice and punishment of hell itself.

John Gill soberly brings this great truth of Gal. 3:10 to our self-righteous hearts and minds... pleading with sinners to trust in Christ alone:

they are under the curse, that is, of the law; they are under its sentence of condemnation and death, they are deserving of, and liable to the second death, eternal death, the wrath of God, here meant by the curse; to which they are exposed, and which will light upon them, for aught their righteousness can do for them; for trusting in their works, they are trusting in the flesh, and so bring down upon themselves the curse threatened to the man that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm; not only that trusts in a man of flesh and blood, but in the works of man; his own, or any other mere creature's: besides, by so doing, he rejects Christ and his righteousness, whereby only is deliverance from the curse of the law; nor is it possible by his present obedience to the law, be it ever so good, that he can remove the guilt of former transgressions, and free himself from obligation to punishment for them: nor is it practicable for fallen man to fulfil the law of works, and if he fails but in one point, he is guilty of all, and is so pronounced by the law; and he stands before God convicted, his mouth stopped, and he condemned and cursed by that law he seeks for righteousness by the deeds of:


Man is left hopeless and helpless trusting in his own ability to please God by perfect obedience to His law. This, beloved, is an effort in futility. We can never perfectly satisfy God and His holy standards by our own religious practices, or charitable acts of philanthropy, or reverent displays of adoration. It is all rubbish in His sight and worthy of the manure dump. We must "be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—" (Phil. 3:9) if we are to have an unshakable hope of eternal life. Christ Jesus bore the curse of the Law for us; by His sinless life and His once for all complete sacrifice on the cross. He was "delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification" (Rom. 4:25).

Charles Spurgeon comments on the unfathomable love of our Lord Jesus in "becoming a curse for us" by reason of substitution:

“The curse of God is not easily taken away; in fact, there was but one method whereby it could be removed. The lightnings were in God's hand; they must be launched; he said they must. The sword was unsheathed; it must be satisfied; God vowed it must. How, then, was the sinner to be saved? The only answer was this. The Son of God appears; and he says, "Father! launch thy thunderbolts at me; here is my breast—plunge that sword in here; here are my shoulders—let the lash of vengeance fall on them;" and Christ, the Substitute, came forth and stood for us, "the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God."

This is moving, powerful, stirring language and biblical in its truth about the worthy Lamb who was slain before the foundations of the world. Jesus was not Damned, He did not suffer damnation; but He willingly died in our place and took the punishment that we deserve upon Himself. O, hallelujah to the King of kings and Lord of lords!

Albert Barnes gives us some word of helpful caution as to what this phrase does not mean:

Being made a curse for us. This is an exceedingly important expression. Tindal renders it, "And was made a curse for us." The Greek word is katara; the same word which is used in Galatians 3:10. There is scarcely any passage in the New Testament on which it is more important to have correct views than this; and scarcely any one on which more erroneous opinions have been entertained. In regard to it, we may observe that it does not mean, (emphasis by SJC)

(1.) that by being made a curse, his character or work were in any sense displeasing to God.

(2.) He was not ill-deserving, he was not blameworthy. He had done no wrong, he was holy, harmless, undefiled. No crime charged upon him was proved; and there is no clearer doctrine in the Bible than that, in all his character and work, the Lord Jesus was perfectly holy and pure.

(3.) He was not guilty, in any proper sense of the word. The word guilty means, properly, to be bound to punishment for crime. It does not mean, properly, to be exposed to suffering; but it always, when properly used, implies the notion of personal crime.

(4.) It cannot be meant that the Lord Jesus properly bore the penalty of the law. His sufferings were in the place of the penalty, not the penalty itself. They were a substitution for the penalty, and were, therefore, strictly and properly vicarious, and were not the identical sufferings which the sinner would himself have endured. Eternity of sufferings is an essential part of the penalty of the law--but the Lord Jesus did not suffer forever. Thus there are numerous sorrows connected with the consciousness of personal guilt, which the Lord Jesus did not and cannot endure.

(5.) He was not sinful, or a sinner, in any sense. The sense of the passage before us is, therefore, that Jesus was subjected to what was regarded as an accursed death. He was treated in his death AS IF he had been a criminal. He was put to death in the same manner as he would have been if he had himself been guilty of the violation of the law.

Spurgeon says it this way:

“Ah! my hearers, how humbling is this doctrine to our pride, that the curse of God is on every man of the seed of Adam; that every child born in this world is born under the curse, since it is born under the law; and that the moment I sin, though I transgress but once, I am from that moment condemned already; for "cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them."—cursed without a single hope of mercy,”

John Gill deals with this profound verse by saying:

“becoming the surety of his people, he was made under the law, stood in their legal place and stead and having the sins of them all imputed to him, and answerable for them, the law finding them on him, charges him with them, and curses him for them; yea, he was treated as such by the justice of God, even by his Father, who spared him not, awoke the sword of justice against him, and gave him up into his hands; delivered him up to death, even the accursed death of the cross, whereby it appeared that he was made a curse: "made," by the will, counsel, and determination of God, and not without his own will and free consent; for he freely laid down his life, and gave himself, and made his soul an offering for sin...

The curse of God, in vindicating his righteous law, was visibly on such a person; as it was on Christ, when he hung on the cross, in the room and stead of his people; for he was made a curse, not for himself, or for any sins of his own, but for us; in our room and stead, for our sins, and to make atonement for them.”

John Calvin brilliantly reflects on the Paul's words to the Galatians in saying:

It is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. Now, Christ hung upon the cross, therefore he fell under that curse. But it is certain that he did not suffer that punishment on his own account. It follows, therefore, either that he was crucified in vain, or that our curse was laid upon him, in order that we might be delivered from it. Now, he does not say that Christ was cursed, but, which is still more, that he was a curse... If any man think this language harsh, let him be ashamed of the cross of Christ, in the confession of which we glory. It was not unknown to God what death his own Son would die, when he pronounced the law, “He that is hanged is accursed of God.” (Deuteronomy 21:23.)

He could not cease to be the object of his Father’s love, and yet he endured his wrath. For how could he reconcile the Father to us, if he had incurred his hatred and displeasure? We conclude, that he “did always those things that pleased” (John 8:29) his Father. Thus, “he was wounded for our transgressions...”

But what made the atonement so wonderful, so glorious, so benevolent, what made it an atonement at all, was, that innocence was treated as if it were guilt; that the most pure, and holy, and benevolent, and lovely Being on earth should consent to be treated, and should be treated by God and man, as if He were the most vile and ill-deserving. This is the mystery of the atonement; this shows the wonders of the Divine benevolence; this is the nature of substituted sorrow; and this lays the foundation for the offer of pardon, and for the hope of eternal salvation.

THE WICKEDNESS OF THE CROSS...by John MacArthur

The crucifixion of Jesus Christ was the climax of redemptive history, the focal point of God’s plan of salvation. God’s redeeming work culminated in the cross, where the Lord Jesus bore the sins of the world. But also in the crucifixion of Christ the wickedness of man reached its apex. The execution of the Savior was the vilest expression of evil in human history, the utter depth of man’s depravity. The death of Jesus Christ was therefore the supreme revelation of the gracious love of God while also being the ultimate expression of the sinfulness of man.

"Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole Roman cohort around Him. And they stripped Him, and put a scarlet robe on Him. And after weaving a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand; and they kneeled down before Him and mocked Him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” And they spat on Him, and took the reed and began to beat Him on the head. And after they had mocked Him, they took His robe off and put His garments on Him, and led Him away to crucify Him. And as they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross. And when they had come to a place called Golgotha, which means Place of a Skull, they gave Him wine to drink mingled with gall; and after tasting it, He was unwilling to. drink. And when they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments among themselves, casting lots; anti sitting down, they began to keep watch over Him there. And they put up above His head the charge against Him which read, “THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS .” At that time two robbers were crucified with Him, one on the right and one on the left. And those passing by were hurling abuse at Him, wagging their heads, and saying, “You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross.” In the same way the chief priests also, along with the scribes and elders, were mocking Him, and saying, “He saved others; He cannot save Himself. He is the King of Israel; let Him now come down from the cross, and we shall believe in Him. He trusts in God; let Him deliver Him now, if He takes pleasure in Him; for He said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” And the robbers also who had been crucified with Him were casting the same insult at Him." (Matthew 27:27-44)

Man's Depravity; God's Sovereignty
And whereas John’s gospel focuses on the crucifixion primarily from the perspective of God’s redemptive love and grace, Matthew’s focus is primarily from the perspective of mans wickedness. Man’s wickedness attempted to kill Jesus shortly after His birth, tried to discredit His teaching, and made every effort to mislead and corrupt His disciples. Man’s wickedness had betrayed Him, denied Him, arrested, maligned, and battered Him. But the incomparable manifestation of man’s wickedness was in His crucifixion.

David Thomas wrote:

[For thousands of] years wickedness had been growing. It had wrought deeds of impiety and crime that had wrung the ages with agony, and often roused the justice of the universe to roll her fiery thunderbolts of retribution through the world. But now it had grown to full maturity; it stands around this cross in such gigantic proportions as had never been seen before; it works an enormity before which the mightiest of its past exploits dwindle into insignificance, and pale into dimness. It crucifies the Lord of life and glory." (The Gospel of Matthew [Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1979 (reprint of 1873 edition)], p. 536)

Jesus’ enemies so hated Him that even His death seemed to be a disappointment, because it ended their opportunity to spew venom on Him even as He suffered the agony of crucifixion. The heartless intensity of the evil words and deeds of those who participated in His death beggar description.

The Ignorant Wicked
Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole Roman cohort around Him. And they stripped Him, and put a scarlet robe on Him. And after weaving a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand; and they kneeled down before Him and mocked Him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” And they spat on Him, and took the reed and began to beat Him on the head. And after they had mocked Him, they took His robe off and put His garments on Him, and led Him away to crucify Him. And as they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross. And when they had come to a place called Golgotha, which means Place of a Skull, they gave Him wine to drink mingled with gall; and after tasting it, He was unwilling to drink. And when they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments among themselves, casting lots; and sitting down, they began to keep watch over Him there. And they put up above His head the charge against Him which read, “THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS .” (27:27-37)

The ignorant wicked were the callous Roman soldiers who actually performed the crucifixion under orders from Pilate, who finally had succumbed to the intimidation of the Jewish religious leaders. The Roman governor had publicly declared Jesus’ innocence several times, but for fear of a riot that almost certainly would have cost his career and possibly his life, he capitulated to the execution. He had perverted Roman justice by agreeing to convict a man whom no one was able to legitimately charge with a crime against the state. He had sinned against his own convictions, integrity, and conscience, and against the truth. He bargained his eternal soul for temporary security.

In an even worse way, the Jewish leaders had perverted not only scriptural principles of justice but their own rabbinical traditions. Although they had been unable to properly charge Jesus with sin against God, they were determined to destroy Him, whatever the cost to Scripture, justice, truth, or righteousness. Although the soldiers of the governor were under his orders to scourge and crucify Jesus (v. 26), they exhibited their own wickedness by far exceeding what basic duty required. As they took Jesus into the Praetorium, they decided to make public sport of their prisoner and gathered the whole Roman cohort around Him to watch.

The Roman Cohort
A full Roman cohort amounted to 600 soldiers, and because this particular cohort served the Roman governor at his Praetorium at Fort Antonia in Jerusalem, it was probably composed of elite legionnaires. They were not necessarily all, or even mostly, Italian, because Rome typically conscripted soldiers from among its occupied countries. Because most men would be reluctant to fight against their own countrymen, they were frequently sent to neighboring regions that spoke the same or similar language. We can be sure that none of this cohort was Jewish, because Rome had granted a special exemption of Jews from Roman military service. It is likely that the contingent in Jerusalem was composed largely of Syrians, who spoke Aramaic, the most common conversational and trade language of Palestine.

Because Pilate’s primary headquarters were in Caesarea, this cohort may have been stationed there, traveling from place to place with the governor as his military escort. If so, they would have been even less familiar with Judaism than the average Roman soldier in Jerusalem and probably had never heard of Jesus. To them, He was simply another condemned prisoner, whom they were free to abuse as much as they pleased, as long as he was not killed before the designated execution. If they considered Jesus to be in any way unique, it was only in that He had apparently claimed to be some sort of king. What they did to Him was therefore unrelated to religious or personal animosity. Their torment of Jesus was wicked and inexcusable, but it was done out of spiritual ignorance.

Jesus’ face was swollen from the slaps and beatings He received from the Temple police and was covered with spittle from His Jewish tormentors. He was bleeding profusely from the scourging, with terrible lacerations from His shoulders down, exposing muscles, ligaments, blood vessels, and perhaps even internal organs. Because He had not spoken for the past hour or so, the soldiers may have considered Him mentally deranged and worthy only of ridicule. They played Him as the fool, making sport of the comments they had overheard about His claim to kingship.

It did not matter to them that Jesus had never personally harmed them or that technically He was innocent according to Roman law. They had been trained to obey orders, which frequently required killing and torture. Jesus had been officially condemned, and no sense of justice or propriety, much less of mercy or compassion, tempered their cold-hearted entertainment at Jesus’ expense. Although in an extreme way, they expressed the natural wickedness of every human heart that is ignorant of God.

Pilate's Propitious and Perilious Ways
Pilate did not initiate the mockery, but neither did he oppose it. Despite his half-hearted efforts to acquit Jesus, Pilate was noted for cruelty and mercilessness. Having ordered Jesus’ scourging and crucifixion, he would hardly have had qualms about the relatively mild abuse of mockery. It is possible that the soldiers performed their derisive actions under the governor’s amused eye. The soldiers probably shared their commander’s hatred of Jews and took this opportunity to vent their malice on a Jew condemned by fellow Jews. With every nerve in agony and His body quivering in pain, Jesus became the object of a fiendish game.

The Scourging of Christ
Jesus was either naked or nearly naked for the scourging, after which He was probably clothed with His seamless inner garment. First, the soldiers stripped Him of that garment and put a scarlet robe on Him, still further irritating His exposed, bleeding flesh. The scarlet robe probably belonged to one of the soldiers, who used it to keep warm while standing guard on cold nights. Mark and John report that the robe was purple (Mark 15:17; John 19:2), suggesting that the actual scarlet color was the closest the soldiers could come to purple, the traditional color of royalty.

Although it was far from the soldiers’ intent, the use of scarlet was reminiscent of Isaiah’s declaration that “though your sins are as scarlet, they will be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they will be like wool” (Isa. 1:18). Just as the soldiers clothed Jesus in the scarlet robe, He willingly clothed Himself in the scarlet sins of the world in order that those who believe in Him might be freed from that sin.

To add to the pain as well as to the ridicule, after weaving a crown of thorns, the soldiers put it on His head. Many kinds of thorns were prevalent in Palestine at that time, and the particular variety used is unknown. The purpose was to mimic the wreath that Caesar wore on official occasions and that could be seen on Roman coins that bore his image. As the mock crown was pressed on His head, blood ran clown from the new wounds to mingle with the blood that already covered the rest of His body. Like the scarlet robe, the crown of thorns became an unintended symbol of the sins that Jesus was about to take upon Himself. After the Fall, thorns and thistles became painful reminders of the curse that sin had brought to the world (Gen. 3:18), the curse from which the world ever since has longed to be freed (Rom. 8:22).

Jesus’ face was now even more unrecognizable and His pain more intense. But still not content, the soldiers next placed a reed in His right hand. Like the robe and the crown of thorns, the reed was meant to represent royalty, mimicking a monarch’s scepter, the symbol of his authority and power. Such a scepter could also be seen in Caesar’s hand on Roman coins.

To complete the sarcastic taunt, the soldiers even kneeled down before Him and mocked Him saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” The Jewish religious leaders had mocked Jesus as a prophet (Matt. 26:68), and now the Roman soldiers mocked Him as a king. Then, just as the Jews had done, they spat on Him, casting on Him what was considered the ultimate indignity.

Next in their brutal amusement they took the reed from His hand and, to further ridicule His supposed authority, began to beat Him on the head, which was already swollen, lacerated, and bleeding. It was as if to say, “Your kingliness is a joke. Look how easily we strip you of your dignity and your authority. We beat you with your own scepter. Where is your power? Where is your royal army to defend you from your enemies?” From John we learn that they struck Jesus with their fists as well as with the reed (John 19:3).

One day Christ will wield a true scepter, a rod of iron with which He will rule the world, including His subdued enemies (Rev. 19:15). Then the tables will be turned, and the mocking and derision will be by God of the ungodly. Then He who sits in the heavens will laugh, and the Lord will scoff at them (Ps. 2:4).

But in His incarnation, Jesus’ humiliation was essential to God’s plan for the Son, “who emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Phil. 2:7-8).

As A Lamb to the Slaughter
Through all of that torment and pain Jesus said nothing either in defense or in reproach. He had predicted His mocking, His suffering, and His crucifixion long before Pilate or his soldiers knew who He was (Matt. 16:21; 20:18-19). That was God’s plan countless ages before it was the plan of wicked men, and it was for that very purpose that He had come to earth. As men fulfilled their evil and destructive design, God fulfilled His gracious and redemptive design. Christ was on the divine schedule, which even His enemies were unwittingly fulfilling in minute detail.

We learn from John that during this time Pilate brought Jesus out before the Jews, asserting again that he found no fault in Him. Jesus stood again on the porch of the Praetorium, “wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And Pilate said to them ‘Behold, the Man!’” (John 19:4-5). Although he had agreed to the crucifixion and had permitted Jesus to be brutally beaten and mocked, the governor obviously still hoped, perhaps due to his wife’s warning, that Jesus’ life could be spared. But “when the chief priests and the officers saw Him, they cried out, saying, ‘Crucify, crucify!’” As if to wash his hands of the whole unjust affair again, “Pilate said to them, ‘Take Him yourselves, and crucify Him, for I find no guilt in Him.’ The Jews answered him, ‘We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God.’ When Pilate therefore heard this statement, he was the more afraid” (vv. 6-8). Although they repeated only the religious charges against Jesus, the clear implication is that the Jewish leaders were insisting on Rome’s complicity in His execution. In effect, they refused to crucify Jesus by themselves, even with Pilate’s permission.

Taking Jesus back into the Praetorium, Pilate asked Him where He was from but received no answer. When he then told Jesus that he had power of life and death over Him, the Lord responded, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me up to you has the greater sin” (John 19:10-11). Although he had little comprehension of what Jesus meant, Pilate was convinced all the more of His innocence of any civil crime and once again “made efforts to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, ‘If you release this Man, you are no friend of Caesar’” (v. 12).

The Sanhedrin's Judgment
Still holding out against them, Pilate brought Jesus to “the judgment seat at a place called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha,” and mockingly said, “Behold your King!” Infuriated by Pilate’s continued defiance of them, the Jewish leaders “cried out, ‘Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him!’" In one last taunt, Pilate asked, “Shall I crucify your King?” to which the chief priests hypocritically replied, “We have no king but Caesar.” Frustrated and exhausted, Pilate resigned himself to the injustice and “delivered Him to them to be crucified” (John 19:13-16).

As representatives of the people, the chief priests here pronounced the culminating apostasy of Israel. Rejecting God’s Son, they publicly, although insincerely, declared allegiance to the pagan emperor. Picking up the account at this point, Matthew reports that after they had mocked Him further, they took His robe off and put His garments on Him, and led Him away to crucify Him.

Some interpreters suggest that only the cross-beam or the upright post was carried, but in all probability it was the entire cross, weighing in excess of 200 pounds, that the victim carried. He would normally be surrounded by a quaternion, four soldiers who would escort the prisoner through the crowds to the place of execution. A placard bearing the prisoner’s indictment was often placed around his neck, giving notice to others of the high price to be paid for the crime.

A Sermon of Suffering
It was during the grueling procession through the streets of Jerusalem that Jesus gave His last, and very brief, public message. “There were following Him a great multitude of the people, and of women who were mourning and lamenting Him,” Luke reports. Turning to them Jesus said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, stop weeping for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed.’ Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’ For if they do these things in the green tree, what will happen in the dry?” (Luke 23:27-31).

Having children was considered the greatest blessing a Jewish woman could have, and only a tragedy of awesome dimensions could cause her to wish otherwise. Jesus’ reference to the green and dry tree related to a popular proverb that meant if something bad occurred under good circumstances, it would be much worse under bad. His point was that if the Romans did such a terrible thing as to crucify one innocent Jewish man, what could they be expected to do to the guilty nation of Israel? If they executed a man who had committed no offense against them, what would they do to a people who rebelled?

The Lord was, of course, referring to A.D. 70, when the Temple would be utterly destroyed and the majority of its inhabitants slaughtered by the Roman legions of Titus. From that holocaust the nation of Israel has not yet fully recovered even in modern times, because there is still no temple in Jerusalem, no sacrifices, no priesthood to offer them, and no priestly records to verify lineage. That was the horror of which Israel should have been fearful, Jesus said.
Because He was sinless and completely undefiled in body as well as in mind and spirit, Jesus was physically all that Adam was before the Fall and more. But Jesus’ severe beatings and the scourging had made even Him too weak to carry the heavy cross. Not only was He suffering excruciating physical pain, but He had had no sleep the previous night and was suffering the added agonies of betrayal, defection, and denial. In addition to that, He was still suffering the accumulated pain of having been tempted by and being in continual spiritual battle with Satan. There were now no angels sent to minister to Him as they had after the wilderness temptations, and His body was all but depleted of strength. More even than all of that, He knew perfectly that He faced the indescribably painful prospect of taking upon Himself the sin of all mankind, of becoming sin for their sakes. And for that He would suffer the wrath of His heavenly Father which that sin deserved.

Simon the Cyrene
All of those agonies-physical, emotional, and spiritual combined to utterly weaken His perfect but now emaciated body. Consequently, as they were coming out from the Praetorium, the soldiers found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross.

Cyrene was a Greek settlement located west of Alexandria on the North African coast of the Mediterranean, directly south of Greece in what is modern Libya. It was a prosperous trade center and had a large population of Jews. Simon was a common Jewish name, and in all probability this man was a pilgrim who had come to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover.

Simon was “a passer-by coming from the country” (Mark 15:21) as Jesus was being taken out of the city. Perhaps because he looked strong he was conscripted by the Roman soldiers to carry Jesus’ cross. Mark also identifies Simon as “the father of Alexander and Rufus” (v. 21), indicating that those two men were Christians known to Mark and to many other believers at the time he wrote his gospel. Because Mark probably wrote from Rome, Alexander and Rufus may have been active in the church there. This Rufus may have been the man Paul greeted in his letter to Rome, and, if so, “his mother and mine” would refer to Simon’s wife (see Rom. 16:13).

It may have been the carrying of Jesus’ cross that led Simon to faith in Him. What began as a forced and probably resented act of physical servitude became the opportunity for spiritual life. Not only Simon himself but his entire family came to salvation, and his wife became like a mother to the apostle Paul.

The Curse of the Cross
Because the Mosaic law required that executions be performed outside the city (Num. 15:35) and also because hanging on a tree was considered a curse (Deut. 21:23; cf. Gal. 3:13), Jesus was taken outside Jerusalem to be crucified. And because crucifixion was a vivid means of showing the populace the price for opposing Rome, crosses were generally erected beside a well-traveled road, if possible on a hill, bluff, or other promontory where they would be visible to all.

A Hill Called Calvary
The place chosen for Jesus’ crucifixion was a hill on the outskirts of Jerusalem called Golgotha, which means Place of a Skull. As an outcast both of Israel and of Rome, Jesus “suffered outside the gate” (Heb. 13:12). Luke refers to the hill of crucifixion as “the place called The Skull” (23:33), and as several gospels explain, Skull translates a Greek term (kranion) equivalent to the Hebrew/Aramaic Golgotha (see John 19:17). The name Calvary is derived from the Latin word (calvaria) for skull, or cranium.

Contrary to what some scholars have suggested, the Place of a Skull was not a burial ground where skulls were commonly found. Jews would not allow dead bodies to be exposed, and no part of a human skeleton was to be seen in Israel. Rather the name referred to a particular site that had the appearance of a skull. Such a hill, commonly called Gordon’s Calvary, is the traditional site and can still be viewed today a short distance from Jerusalem’s northern wall.

Before the soldiers nailed Jesus to the cross and it was placed upright in the ground, they gave Him wine to drink mingled with gall. The word translated gall simply referred to something bitter, which Mark identifies as myrrh (15:23), a narcotic that also was used as a perfume (see Ps. 45:8; Prov. 7:17), as an ingredient of anointing oil for priests (Ex. 30:23), and for embalming (John 19:39). It was quite expensive and was one of the gifts presented to the infant Jesus by the magi (Matt. 2:11).

Because crucifixion was designed to inflict maximum pain, the gall, or myrrh, was not offered as an act of mercy on the part of the soldiers. It was simply used to stupefy a victim to keep him from struggling violently as the nails were driven into his hands and feet.

From extrabiblical sources it is known that wealthy Jewish women would often provide wine mixed with myrrh to those about to be executed, especially by crucifixion. Contrary to the soldiers, their purpose was to ease the pain of “him who is perishing,” following the admonition of Proverbs 31:6. It may have been that such a group of women also offered Jesus the stupefying drink.

But Jesus did not want His senses dulled, and after tasting the mixture, He was unwilling to drink. As He had already declared in the garden, first in prayer to His heavenly Father (Matt. 26:39) and then to Peter as He was being arrested (John 18:11), He was determined to drink the cup the Father had given Him. He would endure the full measure of pain-physical, emotional, and spiritual. When they had crucified Him does not refer to the finished execution but to raising Him upright and placing the vertical beam into the hole prepared for it. It was at that point that the actual crucifixion began.

The History of Crucifixion
Crucifixion originated in Persia, where a deity named Ormazd was believed to consider the earth sacred, Because a criminal who was executed had to be raised above the earth in order not to defile it, he was suspended on a large pole and left there to die, The practice was picked up by the Carthaginians and then by the Greeks and especially the Romans, whose extensive use caused it to become identified with them. It is estimated that by the time of Christ the Romans had crucified some 30,000 men in Israel alone, primarily for insurrection. The crucifixion of only three men outside Jerusalem was therefore virtually insignificant in the eyes of Rome.

None of the gospel writers describes the procedure for securing Jesus to the cross. The literal Greek text is even less revealing than most English renderings, saying simply, “The having crucified Him ones parted His garments.” It is only from Thomas’s comments several days after the resurrection that we learn about Jesus’ being nailed by His hands and feet (John 20:25), rather than being tied with cords or thongs as was often the case.

Judging from nonbiblical descriptions of crucifixion in New Testament times, Jesus was placed on the cross as it lay flat on the ground. First His feet were nailed to the upright beam and then His arms stretched across the horizontal beam and nailed through the wrists just above the hand, allowing a slight bend at the knees when the body was extended. The cross was then picked up and dropped into the hole, causing excruciating pain as the weight of His body pulled at the already torn flesh around the nails.

In his book The Life of Christ, Frederick Farrar describes crucifixion as follows:

"A death by crucifixion seems to include all that pain and death can have of the horrible and ghastly-dizziness, cramp, thirst, starvation, sleeplessness, traumatic fever, shame, publicity of shame, long continuance of torment, horror of anticipation, mortification of intended wounds-all intensified just up to the point at which they can be endured at all, but all stopping just short of the point which would give to the sufferer the relief of unconsciousness.

The unnatural position made every movement painful; the lacerated veins and crushed tendons throbbed with incessant anguish; the wounds, infiamed by exposure, gradually gangrened [when a victim took several days to die]; the arteries-especially at the head and stomach-became swollen and oppressed with surcharged blood, and while each variety of misery went on gradually increasing, there was added to them the intolerable pang of a burning and raging thirst, and all these physical complications caused an internal excitement and anxiety, which made the prospect of death itself-of death, the unknown enemy, at whose approach man usually shudders most-bear the aspect of a delicious and exquisite release.

One thing is clear. The first century executions were not like the modern ones, for they did not seek a quick, painless death nor the preservation of any measure of dignity for the criminal. On the contrary, they sought an agonizing torture which completely humiliated him. And it is important that we understand this, for it helps us realize the agony of Christ’s death." (Vol. 2 [New York: E. P. Dutton, 1877], pp. 403-4)

Dr. Truman Davis gives an additional description of Jesus’ crucifixion:

"At this point another phenomenon occurs. As the arms fatigue, great waves of cramps sweep over the muscles knotting them in deep, relentless, throbbing pain. With these cramps comes the inability to push Himself upward. Hanging by His arms, the pectoral muscles are paralyzed and the intercostal muscles are unable to act. Air can be drawn into the lungs but cannot be exhaled. Jesus fights to raise Himself in order to get even one short breath. Finally, carbon dioxide builds up in the lungs and in the blood stream and the cramps partially subside. Spasmodically He is able to push Himself upward to exhale and bring in the life-giving oxygen...

Hours of this limitless pain, cycles of twisting, joint-rending cramps, intermittent partial asphyxiation, searing pain as tissue is torn from His lacerated back as He moves up and down against the rough timber; then another agony begins. A deep crushing pain in the chest as the pericardium slowly fills with serum and begins to compress the heart.

It is now almost over... the compressed heart is struggling to pump heavy, thick, sluggish blood into the tissues. The tortured lungs are making a frantic effort to gasp in small gulps of air." (“The Crucifixion of Jesus; The Passion of Christ from a Medical Point of View,” Arizona Medicine, vol. 22, Mar. 1965, pp. 183-87)

Matthew's Purpose
It was not Matthew’s purpose, however, to focus on the physical particulars of the crucifixion that led to Christ’s yielding up His life, but rather on the character of the crucifiers.

Through all of that torment the callous soldiers sat impassively, as they had done many times before. They had no idea who Jesus was, except for what was written on the sign above His head as a sarcastic taunt by Pilate. They doubtlessly were aware that Pilate, governor of the region and their military commander, had repeatedly declared Jesus innocent of any crime against Rome. But Jesus was probably not the first innocent man they had seen executed. They had no religious concern about Jesus’ identity and no moral concern about His innocence. Out of their wicked ignorance they, too, eventually joined in mocking Jesus, saying, “If You are the King of the Jews, save Yourself!” (Luke 23:36-37).

The Song of the Suffering Servant
Jesus had repeatedly told the disciples of His coming suffering, scorn, and death, and it had been predicted by Isaiah and other prophets hundreds of years before that. The Messiah would be “despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and like one from whom men hide their face, He was despised, and we did not esteem Him” (Isa. 53:3). Not only was He to suffer unjustly at the hands of wicked men but He endured that affliction for the very sake of those responsible for it-which, in the fullest sense, includes every fallen, sinful human being who has ever lived and who will ever live. “He was pierced through for our transgressions,” Isaiah goes on to say, “He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. ... The Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him” (vv. 5-6).

Christians in the early church are reported to have begged God’s forgiveness for the unknown sufferings they caused Jesus, realizing they could not conceive of the full extent of the pain He endured at men’s hands, a pain to which they knew their own sins had contributed.

Jewish men normally wore five pieces of clothing: sandals, an inner cloak, a headpiece, a belt, and an outer cloak, or tunic. The four soldiers divided up the first four pieces of Jesus’ garments among themselves by casting lots. Because “the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece,” they decided not to cut it into four pieces but to “cast lots for it, to decide whose it shall be” (John 19:23-24). Having done that, they sat down near the cross and began to keep watch over Him there. The quaternion was required to remain with the victim until his death was certain, making sure that friends or family members did not rescue him or seek to reduce his suffering by putting him to death by a swifter means.

As a final mockery of Jesus and affront to the Jewish leaders, Pilate had instructed the soldiers (see John 19:19a) to put up above His head the charge against Him which read, “THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS .” Matthew recorded an abbreviated version of the full inscription, which read, “JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS ,” and was “written in Hebrew, Latin, and in Greek” (John 19:19b-20). Greek was the most nearly universal language in the empire at that time, Aramaic (closely related to Hebrew) was the language of Palestine, and Latin was the official language of Rome. By those three languages the governor made certain that virtually every person who passed by could read the inscription.

JUSTIFIED BY FAITH = PEACE WITH GOD...by Ichabod Spencer

Sermon # 10
Romans 5:1 "Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."

"There is no peace, saith the Lord, unto the wicked" (Isaiah 48:22). An unpardoned sinner can have no peace with God. While his conscience is unawakened, he may be careless and secure; but as soon as his eyes are opened, and his heart is made to feel, he must be miserable, till God speaks peace to his guilty soul. To be justified, is to be pardoned and accepted of God. Pardon and acceptance are only obtained by faith in Jesus Christ, as having atoned for sin by His precious blood. When it is given me to believe that Jesus Christ hath taken away my sins, there is nothing more to distress my conscience; then I have peace with God. The distress of an awakened soul arises from a guilty conscience, and a sense of his sins. As soon therefore as the poor trembling sinner discovers, that Christ died for such as he is; that Christ, being God, is able to save the chief of sinners; that this was his errand into the world, and that He hath said, "him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out" (John 6:37): as soon as the poor sinner believes this, he hath peace with God; he can call God his Father; he can trust God for everything; he can think of death with comfort, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Sinner, is this your state? Do you know that there is no salvation without an interest in Christ?

That there is no peace with God but through Jesus Christ? That unless your sins be pardoned, your life must be unhappy, and your death the entrance of eternal misery? If I am looking unto Jesus as the only Saviour, and in self-despair have fled to Him for refuge, then God is no longer angry with me; my sins, which are many, are forgiven; my person is accepted; and if I die tonight, I shall go to God. O happy state, to have nothing to fear in life or death! To have God for our Father, Christ for our Redeemer, the Holy Ghost for our Comforter, death our friend, heaven our home, and a happy eternity before us of peace and joy. Sinner, is this thy case?

Did Christ as the Incarnate Mediator, Fulfill the Law and All Righteousness for Himself or for Those He Came to Save?

This is a profound article; it is long, but good! Take some time and feast on Owen in the Word today.

by John Owen

I cannot but judge it sounds ill in the ears of all Christians, "That the obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ, as our mediator and surety, unto the whole law of God, was for himself alone, and not for us;" or, that what he did therein was not that he might be the end of the law for righteousness unto them that do believe, nor a means of the fulfilling of the righteousness of the law in us;--especially considering that the faith of the church is, that he was given to us, born to us; that for us men, and for our salvation, he came down from heaven, and did and suffered what was required of him. But whereas some who deny the imputation of the obedience of Christ unto us for our justification, do insist principally on the second thing mentioned,--namely, the unusefulness of it,--I shall under this part of the charge consider only the arguing of Socinus; which is the whole of what some at present do endeavour to perplex the truth withal.

The substance of his [Socinus de Servat] plea is,--that our Lord Jesus Christ was for himself, or on his own account, obliged unto all that obedience which he performed. And this he endeavours to prove with this reason,-- "Because if it were otherwise, then he might, if he would, have neglected the whole law of God, and have broken it at his pleasure." For he forgot to consider, that if he were not obliged unto it upon his own account, but was so on ours, whose cause he had undertaken obligation on him unto most perfect obedience was equal to what it would have been had he been originally obliged on his own account. However, hence he infers "That what he did could not be for us, because it was so for himself; no more than what any other man is bound to do in a way of duty for himself can be esteemed to have been done also for another." For he will show of none of those considerations of the person of Christ which make what he did and suffered of another nature and efficacy than what can be done or suffered by any other man. All that he adds in the process of his discourse is,--"That whatever Christ did that was not required by the law in general, was upon the especial command of God, and so done for himself; whence it cannot be imputed unto us." And hereby he excludes the church from any benefit by the mediation of Christ, but only what consists in his doctrine, example, and the exercise of his power in heaven for our good; which was the thing that he aimed at. But we shall consider those also which make use of his arguments, though not as yet openly unto all his ends.

To clear the truth herein, the things ensuing must be observed,--

1. The obedience we treat of was the obedience of Christ the mediator: but the obedience of Christ, as "the mediator of the covenant," was the obedience of his person; for "God redeemed his church with his own blood," Acts 20:28. It was performed in the human nature; but the person of Christ was he that performed it. As in the person of a man, some of his acts, as to the immediate principle of operation, are acts of the body, and some are so of the soul; yet, in their performance and accomplishment, are they the acts of the person: so the acts of Christ in his mediation, as to their "energemata", or immediate operation, were the acting of his distinct natures,--some of the divine and some of the human, immediately; but as unto their "apotelesmata", and the perfecting efficacy of them, they were the acts of his whole person,--his acts who was that person, and whose power of operation was a property of his person. Wherefore, the obedience of Christ, which we plead to have been for us, was the obedience of the Son of God; but the Son of God was never absolutely made "hupo nomon",--"under the law,"--nor could be formally obliged thereby. He was, indeed, as the apostle witnesses, made so in his human nature, wherein he performed this obedience: "Made of a woman, made under the law," Gal.4:4. He was so far forth made under the law, as he was made of a woman; for in his person he abode "Lord of the sabbath," Mark 2:28; and therefore of the whole law. But the obedience itself was the obedience of that person who never was, nor ever could absolutely be, made under the law in his whole person; for the divine nature cannot be subjected unto an outward work of its owns such as the law is, nor can it have an authoritative, commanding power over it, as it must have if it were made "hupo nomon",--"under the law." Thus the apostle argues that "Levi paid tithes in Abraham," because he was then in his loins, when Abraham himself paid tithes unto Melchizedek, Heb.7. And thence he proves that he was inferior unto the Lord Christ, of whom Melchizedek was a type. But may it not thereon be replied, that then no less the Lord Christ was in the loins of Abraham than Levi? "For verily," as the same apostle speaks, "he took on him the seed of Abraham." It is true, therefore, that he was so in respect of his human nature; but as he was typed and represented by Melchizedek in his whole person, "without father, without mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life," so he was not absolutely in Abraham's loins, and was exempted from being tithed in him. Wherefore, the obedience whereof we treat, being not the obedience of the human nature abstractedly, however performed in and by the human nature; but the obedience of the person of the Son of God, however the human nature was subject to the law (in what sense, and unto what ends, shall be declared afterwards); it was not for himself, nor could be for himself; because his whole person was not obliged thereunto. It is therefore a fond thing, to compare the obedience of Christ with that of any other man, whose whole person is under the law. For although that may not be for himself and others (which yet we shall show that in some cases it may), yet this may, yea, must be for others, and not for himself. This, then, we must strictly hold unto. If the obedience that Christ yielded unto the law were for himself, whereas it was the act of his person, his whole person, and the divine nature therein, were "made under the law;" which cannot be. For although it is acknowledged that, in the ordination of God, his exinanition was to precede his glorious, majestical exaltation, as the Scripture witnesses, Phil.2:9; Luke 24:26; Rom.14:9; yet absolutely his glory was an immediate consequent of the hypostatical union, Heb.1:6; Matt.2:11.

Socinus, I confess, evades the force of this argument, by denying the divine person of Christ. But in this disputation I take that for granted, as having proved it elsewhere beyond what any of his followers are able to contradict. And if we may not build on truths by him denied, we shall scarce have any one principle of evangelical truth left us to prove any thing from. However, I intend them only at present who concur with him in the matter under debate, but renounce his opinion concerning the person of Christ.

2. As our Lord Jesus Christ owed not in his own person this obedience for himself, by virtue of any authority or power that the law had over him, so he designed and intended it not for himself, but for us. This, added unto the former consideration, gives full evidence unto the truth pleaded for; for if he was not obliged unto it for himself,--his person that yielded it not being under the law,--and if he intended it not for himself; then it must be for us, or be useless. It was in our human nature that he performed all this obedience. Now, the susception of our nature was a voluntary act of his own, with reference unto some end and purpose; and that which was the end of the assumption of our nature was, in like manner, the end of all that he did therein. Now, it was for us, and not for himself, that he assumed our nature; nor was any thing added unto him thereby. Wherefore, in the issue of his work, he proposes this only unto himself, that he may be "glorified with that glory which he had with the Father before the world was," by the removal of that vail which was put upon it in his exinanition. But that it was for us that he assumed our nature, is the foundation of Christian religion, as it is asserted by the apostle, Heb.2:14; Phil.2:5-8.

Some of the ancient schoolmen disputed, that the Son of God should have been incarnate although man had not sinned and fallen; the same opinion was fiercely pursued by Osiander, as I have elsewhere declared: but none of them once imagined that he should have been so made man as to be made under the law, and be obliged thereby unto that obedience which now he has performed; but they judged that immediately he was to have been a glorious head unto the whole creation. For it is a common notion and presumption of all Christians, but only such as will sacrifice such notions unto their own private conceptions, that the obedience which Christ yielded unto the law on the earth, in the state and condition wherein he yielded it, was not for himself, but for the church, which was obliged unto perfect obedience, but was not able to accomplish it. That this was his sole end and design in it is a fundamental article, if I mistake not, of the creed of most Christians in the world; and to deny it does consequentially overthrow all the grace and love both of the Father and [of the] Son in his mediation.

It is said, "That this obedience was necessary as a qualification of his person, that he might be meet to be a mediator for us; and therefore was for himself." It belongs unto the necessary constitution of his person, with respect unto his mediatory work; about this I positively deny. The Lord Christ was every way meet for the whole work of mediation, by the ineffable union of the human nature with the divine, which exalted it in dignity, honour, and worth, above any thing or all things that ensued thereon. For hereby he became in his whole person the object of all divine worship and honour; for "when he bringeth the First-begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him." Again, that which is an effect of the person of the Mediator, as constituted such, is not a qualification necessary unto its constitution; that is, what he did as mediator did not concur to the making of him meet so to be. But of this nature was all the obedience which he yielded unto the law; for as such "it became him to fulfill all righteousness."

Whereas, therefore, he was neither made man nor of the posterity of Abraham for himself, but for the church,--namely, to become thereby the surety of the covenant, and representative of the whole,--his obedience as a man unto the law in general, and as a son of Abraham unto the law of Moses, was for us, and not for himself, so designed, so performed; and, without a respect unto the church, was of no use unto himself. He was born to us, and given to us; lived for us, and died for us; obeyed for us, and suffered for us,--that "by the obedience of one many might be made righteous." This was the "grace of our Lord Jesus Christ;" and this is the faith of the catholic church. And what he did for us is imputed unto us. This is included in the very notion of his doing it for us, which cannot be spoken in any sense, unless that which imputed unto us. And I think men ought to be wary that they do not, by distinctions and studied evasions, for the defense of their own private opinions, shake the foundations of Christian religion. And I am sure it will be easier for them, as it is in the proverb, to wrest the club out of the hand of Hercules, than to dispossess the minds of true believers of this persuasion: "That what the Lord Christ did in obedience unto God, according unto the law, he designed in his love and grace to do it for them." He needed no obedience for himself, he came not into a capacity of yielding obedience for himself, but for us; and therefore for us it was that he fulfilled the law in obedience unto God, according unto the terms of it. The obligation that was on him unto obedience was originally no less for us, no less needful unto us, no more for himself, no more necessary unto him, than the obligation was on him, as the surety of the covenant, to suffer the penalty of the law, was either the one or the other.

3. Setting aside the consideration of the grace and love of Christ, and the compact between the Father and the Son as unto his undertaking for us, which undeniably proves all that he did in the pursuit of them to be done for us, and not for himself; I say, setting aside the consideration of these things, and the human nature of Christ, by virtue of its union with the person of the Son of God, had a right unto, and might have immediately been admitted into, the highest glory whereof it was capable, without any antecedent obedience unto the law. And this is apparent from hence, in that, from the first instant of that union, the whole person of Christ, with our nature existing therein, was the object of all divine worship from angels and men; wherein consists the highest exaltation of that nature.

It is true, there was a peculiar glory that he was actually to be made partaker of, with respect unto his antecedent obedience and suffering, Phil.2:8,9. The actual possession of this glory was, in the ordination of God, to be consequential unto his obeying and suffering, not for himself, but for us. But as unto the right and capacity of the human nature in itself, all the glory whereof it was capable was due unto it from the instant of its union; for it was therein exalted above the condition that any creature is capable of by mere creation. And it is but a Socinian fiction, that the first foundation of the divine glory of Christ was laid in his obedience, which was only the way of his actual possession of that part of his glory which consists in his mediatory power and authority over all. The real foundation of the whole was laid in the union of his person; whence he prays that the Father would glorify him (as unto manifestation) with that glory which he had with him before the world was.

I will grant that the Lord Christ was "viator" whilst he was in this world, and not absolutely "possessor;" yet I say withal, he was so, not that any such condition was necessary unto him for himself, but he took it upon him by especial dispensation for us. And, therefore, the obedience he performed in that condition was for us, and not for himself

4. It is granted, therefore, that the human nature of Christ was made "hupo nomon", as the apostle affirms, "That which was made of a woman, was made under the law." Hereby obedience became necessary unto him, as he was and whilst he was "viator." But this being by especial dispensation,--intimated in the expression of it, he was "made under the law," namely, as he was "made of a woman," by especial dispensation and condescension, expressed, Phil.2:6-8,--the obedience he yielded thereon was for us, and not for himself And this is evident from hence, for he was so made under the law as that not only he owed obedience unto the precepts of it, but he was made obnoxious unto its curse. But I suppose it will not be said that he was so for himself, and therefore not for us. We owed obedience unto the law, and were obnoxious unto the curse of it, or "hupodikoi tooi Theooi". Obedience was required of us, and was as necessary unto us if we would enter into life, as the answering of the curse for us was if we would escape death eternal. Christ, as our surety, is "made under the law" for us, whereby he becomes liable and obliged unto the obedience which the law required, and unto the penalty that it threatened. Who shall now dare to say that he underwent the penalty of the law for us indeed, but he yielded obedience unto it for himself only? The whole harmony of the work of his mediation would be disordered by such a supposition.

Judah, the son of Jacob, undertook to be a bondsman instead of Benjamin his brother, that he might go free, Gen.44:33. There is no doubt but Joseph might have accepted of the stipulation. Had he done so, the service and bondage he undertook had been necessary unto Judah, and righteous for him to bear: howbeit he had undergone it, and performed his duty in it, not for himself, but for his brother Benjamin; and unto Benjamin it would have been imputed in his liberty. So when the apostle Paul wrote these words unto Philemon concerning Onesimus, "Ei de ti edikese se, e ofeilen, touto emoi ellogei, egoo apotisoo", verse 18,-- "'If he has wronged thee,' dealt unrighteously or injuriously with thee, 'or oweth thee ought,' wherein thou hast suffered loss by him, 'put that on mine account,' or impute it all unto me, 'I will repay it,' or answer for it all,"--he supposes that Philemon might have a double action against Onesimus, the one "injuriarum," and the other "damni" or "debiti," of wrong and injury, and of loss or debt, which are distinct actions in the law: "If he has wronged thee, or oweth thee ought." Hereon he proposes himself, and obliges himself by his express obligation: "Ego Paulos egrapsa tei emei cheiri",--"I Paul have written it with mine own hand," that he would answer for both, and pay back a valuable consideration if required. Hereby was he obliged in his own person to make satisfaction unto Philemon; but yet he was to do it for Onesimus, and not for himself. Whatever obedience, therefore, was due from the Lord Christ, as to his human nature, whilst in the form of a servant, either as a man or as an Israelite, seeing he was so not necessarily, by the necessity of nature for himself, but by voluntary condescension and stipulation for us; for us it was, and not for himself.

5. The Lord Christ, in his obedience, was not a private but a public person. He obeyed as he was the surety of the covenant,--as the mediator between God and man. This, I suppose, will not be denied. He can by no imagination be considered out of that capacity. But what a public person does as a public person,--that is, as a representative of others, and an undertaker for them,--whatever may be his own concernment therein, he does it not for himself, but for others. And if others were not concerned therein, if it were not for them, what he does would be of no use or signification; yea, it implies a contradiction that any one should do any thing as a public person, and do it for himself only. He who is a public person may do that wherein he alone is concerned, but he cannot do so as he is a public person. Wherefore, as Socinus, and those that follow him, would have Christ to have offered for himself, which is to make him a mediator for himself, his offering being a mediatory act, which is both foolish and impious; so to affirm his mediatory obedience, his obedience as a public person, to have been for himself, and not for others, has but little less of impiety in it.

6. It is granted, that the Lord Christ having a human nature, which was a creature, it was impossible but that it should be subject unto the law of creation; for there is a relation that does necessarily arise from, and depend upon, the beings of a creator and a creature. Every rational creature is eternally obliged, from the nature of God, and its relation thereunto, to love him, obey him, depend upon him, submit unto him, and to make him its end, blessedness, and reward. But the law of creation, thus considered, does not respect the world and this life only, but the future state of heaven and eternity also; and this law the human nature of Christ is subject unto in heaven and glory, and cannot but be so whilst it is a creature, and not God,--that is, whilst it has its own being. Nor do any men fancy such a transfusion of divine properties into the human nature of Christ, as that it should be self-subsisting, and in itself absolutely immense; for this would openly destroy it. Yet none will say that he is now "hupo nomon",--"under the law,"--in the sense intended by the apostle. But the law, in the sense described, the human nature of Christ was subject unto, on its own account, whilst he was in this world. And this is sufficient to answer the objection of Socinus, mentioned at the entrance of this discourse,--namely, that if the Lord Christ were not obliged unto obedience for himself, then might he, if he would, neglect the whole law, or infringe it; for besides that it is a foolish imagination concerning that "holy thing" which was hypostatically united unto the Son of God, and thereby rendered incapable of any deviation from the divine will, the eternal, indispensable law of love, adherence, and dependence on God, under which the human nature of Christ was, and is, as a creature, gives sufficient security against such suppositions.

But there is another consideration of the law of God,--namely, as it is imposed on creatures by especial dispensation, for some time and for some certain end, with some considerations, rules, and orders that belong not essentially as before described. This is the nature of the written law of God, which the Lord Christ was made under, not necessarily, as a creature, but by especial dispensation. For the law, under this consideration, is presented unto us as such, not absolutely and eternally, but whilst we are in this world, and that with this especial end, that by obedience thereunto we may obtain the reward of eternal life. And it is evident that the obligation of the law, under this consideration, ceases when we come to the enjoyment of that reward. It obliges us no more formally by its command, "Do this, and live," when the life promised is enjoyed. In this sense the Lord Christ was not made subject unto the law for himself, nor did yield obedience unto it for himself; for he was not obliged unto it by virtue of his created condition. Upon the first instant of the union of his natures, being "holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners," he might, notwithstanding the law that he was made subject unto, have been stated in glory; for he that was the object of all divine worship needed not any new obedience to procure for him a state of blessedness. And had he naturally, merely by virtue of his being a creature, been subject unto the law in this sense, he must have been so eternally, which he is not; for those things which depend solely on the natures of God and the creature are eternal and immutable. Wherefore, as the law in this sense was given unto us, not absolutely, but with respect unto a future state and reward, so the Lord Christ did voluntarily subject himself unto it for us; and his obedience thereunto was for us, and not for himself. These things, added unto what I have formerly written on this subject, whereunto nothing has been opposed but a few impertinent cavils, are sufficient to discharge the first part of that charge laid down before, concerning the impossibility of the imputation of the obedience of Christ unto us; which, indeed, is equal unto the impossibility of the imputation of the disobedience of Adam unto us, whereby the apostle tells us that "we were all made sinners."

YOUR WEEKLY DOSE OF GOSPEL...how God saved us from Himself

On the cross, God through Christ saved us from Himself. The true Christian never has to face the fear of eternal judgment; why? Because Jesus faced it for us already on the cross. God treated Christ on the cross as if He lived our life, so that we by grace through faith in Him, can be treated as if we lived His life (2 Cor. 5:21). Our sin imputed to Him; His perfect righteousness imputed to us. This is called "the doctrine of imputation."

The culmination of the Lord being punished in our place and the satisfaction of God being accomplished was when Jesus cried out, "My God, My God, why has thou forsaken Me?" Christ was forsaken in that He bore our sin, its guilt and penalty. But also He bore the wrath of God against us. The Father faced the Son and the Son faced the Father on the cross and He “took it—all of it” for His own. When Jesus cried, "IT IS FINISHED" He had:

• fulfilled the Law;
• went beyond the veil;
• satisfied God's wrath;
• fulfilled all righteousness;
• exalted grace;
• took away the guilt and penalty of our sin;
• destroyed Satan's hold of death;
• abolished death and its sting;
• secured for us eternal life;
• brought us into intimacy with God;
• instituted a new covenant;
• and made for us peace with God forever!

The death of Christ was both a propitiation and an expiation of sin.

Propitiation refers to the turning away of wrath by an offering. God's wrath is satisfied, His justice is met by the sacrifice.

Expiation refers to covering sins. By the atonement the penalty of our sins are removed from us. The atonement satisfies both the demands of the Father and the needs of Christ's people (1 Pet. 1:2). That such a double transaction can be achieved by one Person, in one event is a matter of eternal glory reserved for Christ alone.

This great work of redemption which began in eternity past, was realized in time through the Virgin Birth, His sinless life lived in fulfilling the Law, the once for all complete atoning sacrifice on the cross by our Lord fulfilling all righteousness, triumphantly culminated in His bodily resurrection from the grave. He was, as Paul said, "raised for our justification."

May the Lord strengthen your hearts and minds today in the propitiatory work of the Jesus Christ on the cross and cause you to glorify and love Him with the full affections of your lives.

Because He lives...
Steve
1 John 4:10

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON THE CROSS?...Christ died for God - this is called propitiation

and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance

he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time,

so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

-Romans 3:24-26

In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us

and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

-1 John 4:10

The real suffering that Christ endured was not at the hand of Pilate's cat-of-nine-tails with the scorpion hook he brutally inflicted upon our Lord's body. No. But the greatest affliction occurred when on the cross our Lord became our divine substitute for us (2 Cor. 5:21) and took our sin, the penalty and guilt of our sin, and all of the Father's wrath that burns against us and our sin that we deserved. He took it for us! As Isaiah 53 says, "It pleased God to crush Him for our iniquities."

O what majesty in the midst of such suffering; what glory in the midst of such agony; and what grace,love and mercy in the midst of such sinful man's rebellion. Hallelujah to the King of Righteousness this blessed day of our salvation.

And wherever you are today, remember this beloved: that at precisely 3:00pm our Lord cried out from Calvary's tree these eternal words: "IT IS FINISHED!" Never forgot what a wonderful, merciful Savior we have in the Lord Jesus Christ. And He is worthy of our reverence, respect, worship and adoration.

The Cross Displays the Satisfaction of God

-Solus Christus (Christ alone)

One of the key words the N.T. writers use to speak of vicarious penal substitutionary atonement is propitiation (Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2, 4:10, Heb. 2:17).

This word carries with it two ideas:

1. to satisfy;
2. to quench, to assuage.

Taken in context, Jesus Christ on the cross took not only the guilt and penalty of our sin, but the full wrath of God for His elect. That is what the Apostles Creed means when it says, "…He [Jesus] descended into hell." Jesus literally didn’t go to hell after He died (the false teachings of the Word/Faith movement), but He endured the full weight of God’s eternal wrath for us as our Federal Head on the cross. And in that manner He “descended into hell…” for all those He came to save.

God's Wrathful Presence
Hell is not simply the absence of God beloved as some would suggest; hell is His wrathful presence being poured out upon all the ungodly, Satan and his demons forever. Listen, hell would be “Club Med” if it were not for the presence of God’s wrath.

This wrath of God that you and I deserve to be poured out upon us in unmitigated gall and ferocity without reprieve was fully poured out upon Jesus on the cross. This is truly miraculous. The sinless Son of Man; the perfect Son of God; the spotless Lamb; and the holy High Priest drank the cup of wrath on our behalf so that we may have peace with God forever. That was the punishment that Christ endured for us; that is penal substitution. This is not “cosmic child abuse” as one (who shall remain unnamed) author refers to it. This is a profound truth and mystery. Whatever eternal wrath comprises, the miracle was that it was compressed into time and poured out on the Son for us as the Father faced the Son and the Son faced the Father and the fullness of His anger was consumed, quenched, and satisfied by the Lord Jesus Christ.

This is what propitiation is:
wrath assuaged and God satisfied.

The sins of the elect (every sin, that would ever be committed, by everyone, who would ever believe) was thrust on Jesus.

The prophet Isaiah in his fourth song of the Suffering Servant, gives us the most graphic picture of this once for all propitiatory sacrifice for our sins:

“Surely our griefs He Himself bore, And our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him” (Isaiah 53:4-6).

The fullness of the guilt and penalty of ours sins were thrust on Him. And the greatness of my wretched sin and yours would have beeen enough to bear... But it was the burden of the cross, the eternal wrath of a holy God that was poured out upon Jesus Christ. THAT was the cup that only Jesus could drink; that was the cup that He wrestled with in the garden. It was not the cup of death or dying. He wasn’t fearful to walk the way of the cross. Wicked men had gone Golgotha’s way before and were rightly punished for their crimes. Many went laughing, mocking, unafraid, scornful of their insurrections and offenses. They were the worst of criminals deserving to die and punished justly for their crimes.

But not so with the Lord Jesus Christ. He was sinless, holy God incarnate; guilty of no crime that humanly deserved this kind of death sentence. As the Apostle Paul has said, “He who knew no sin, became the sin offering for us; that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21). Only God incarnate, Jesus Christ the Lord, could drink the cup of God's wrath. And He drained it beloved; He drained it to the very dregs and fully redeemed us at Calvary. Christ suffered in our place so that we may have peace with God forever (Rom. 5:1-2). He became, what Paul says in Galatians 3, “a curse for us.”

Christ Died for God
What were we saved from? Our sins? Yes. Hell? Yes. The sting of death? Yes. But those pale in comparison with this profound reality: on the cross, God through Christ saved us from Himself. That’s right – God through Christ saved us from Himself. From His wrath, His holiness, His justice. And Because Jesus Christ fully satisfied God (propitiation) on the cross as our Divine Substitute, we need to never fear of eternal judgment, condemnation, wrath or punishment for our sins. The penalty of our sins have been fully quenched in the once for all vicarious penal substitutionary sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. That is the Good News of the gospel beloved.

God treated Christ on the cross as if He lived our life, so that we by grace through faith in Him, can be treated as if we lived His life (2 Cor. 5:21). He was clothed with our sin (thought sinless and holy); so that we might be clothed with His righteousness (though are sinners and sinful). That is the great doctrine of imputation.

When the fullness of that wrath was embraced by Jesus on the cross He cried out, "My God, My God, why has thou forsaken Me?" Many commentators think that at this point on the cross that God simply turned His back on His Son in shame for He could not look on sin.

Though sentimental, this view is not biblical.

This belief stems from inaccurate rendering of a verse in Habakkuk 1:13 where the prophet says,

“Thine eyes are too pure to approve evil, And Thou canst not look on wickedness with favor. Why dost Thou look with favor On those who deal treacherously? Why art Thou silent when the wicked swallow up Those more righteous than they?” (NASB) (Emphasis mine).

Notice, it isn’t that God cannot look on sin; but He cannot look on sin with favor. Consider these verses:

Jer. 16:17 "For My eyes are on all their ways; they are not hidden from My face, nor is their iniquity concealed from My eyes."

Prov. 15:3 "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, Watching the evil and the good."

The Lord “sees” all things continually – including our sin. So the forsaking of Jesus on the cross by the Father couldn’t be something as emotional as God turning His back to His Son because He cannot look on sin.

Again, the key here is that God cannot look on sin with favor, with approval. His holiness demanded a sacrifice; His justice demanded satisfaction; His righteousness required perfection. God had to be satisfied before we as sinners could be justified!

Therefore, Jesus was, as Hebrews 2:17 says,

"that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people" (emphasis mine).

That phrase "in things pertaining to God" in the Greek is: pros ton theon. It means "face to face with God"; and this occured on the cross. Don't miss this amazing picture of redemption: the Son faced the Father from the cross; and the Father faced His Son on the cross; and He poured out upon Him the eternal wrath that we deserve in hell forever.

"Amazing love how can it be..." Amen?

Christ was absolutely forsaken; He bore our sin, its guilt, penalty, and shame. And He bore the wrath of God that burns against us. He drank the cup of wrath; He became the curse for us; he endured the shame of the cross for the joy set before Him; He was bruised, crushed, chastined for our iniquities. Once again beloved... hear this today: the Father faced the Son on the cross; and the Son faced the Father from the cross; and He “bore God’s wrath—all of it” as our divine Substitute in His once for all propitiatory sacrifice on the cross for His own.

When Jesus finally cried, "IT IS FINISHED" what had happened?

• He had fulfilled the Law;
• went beyond the veil;
• satisfied God's wrath;
• fulfilled all righteousness;
• exalted grace;
• took away the guilt and penalty of our sin;
• destroyed Satan's hold of death;
• abolished death and its sting;
• secured for us eternal life;
• brought us into intimacy with God;
• instituted a new covenant;
• and made for us peace with God forever!

Now THAT is a cross we can glory in!

The death of Christ was both a propitiation AND an expiation of sin. Propitiation refers to the turning away of wrath by an offering. God's wrath was satisfied and His justice meted out by Jesus’ once for all sacrifice on the cross. Expiation refers to covering sins and in specific, the guilt of sin. By the vicarious penal substitutionary atonement of Christ Jesus on the cross, our sins and their penalty are removed from us. The atonement satisfies both the demands of the Father and the needs of Christ's people (1 Pet. 1:2).

As brother Spurgeon can only say:

"When Jesus gave himself for us, he gave us all the rights and privileges which went with himself; so that now, although as eternal God, he has essential rights to which no creature may venture to pretend, yet as Jesus, the Mediator, the federal head of the covenant of grace, he has no heritage apart from us. All the glorious consequences of his obedience unto death are the joint riches of all who are in him, and on whose behalf he accomplished the divine will. See, he enters into glory, but not for himself alone, for it is written, "Whither the Forerunner is for us entered." Heb. 6:20. Does he stand in the presence of God?-"He appears in the presence of God for us." Heb. 9:24.

Can we now say with confidence this day with Paul himself: "If God be for us... who can be against us?"