Receiving the Benefits of Easter and Anzac Day

The close proximity of Easter (April 22-24) and ANZAC Day (April 25th) this year led many to reflect on the relationship between the two commemorations.

Anzac day commemorates the sacrifice of those soldiers, sailors and airmen (and women) who fought and served during all conflicts to protect and preserve the freedom we enjoy in Australia. We especially remember those who paid the ultimate price and laid down their lives in service of our country.

At Easter we remember the sacrifice of the one man - Jesus Christ, the Son of God, whom John called "the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Jesus gave his innocent life when he died on a Roman cross and suffered the agony of God's wrath for us. He took upon himself the punishment we deserved and died on a cross so that we might be forgiven and set free from our slavery to sin and death.

You can see how the comparison between the deaths of our military personnel and the death of Jesus can be made. When speaking of our war dead, Jesus words are often spoken: "Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13)  While Jesus was undoubtedly looking forward prophetically to his own death 'for his friends', no doubt the general principle still applies.

There is however, a significant difference in how we receive the benefits of these deaths.

If we are enjoying the prosperity and freedom of living in 21st century Australia then we are beneficiaries of the sacrifices of all those who gaves their lives in military conflicts to defend us. We are beneficiaries of this freedom whether or not we appreciate what they gave for us. We are beneficiaries whether or not we honour their sacrifice and commemorate their memory. We are beneficiaries of their sacrifices if we curse their memory and desecrate the war memorials.

However, we cannot be beneficiaries of Jesus' sacrifice for us simply by virtue of our nationality or family heritage. The benefits of Jesus' death are received by God's grace when we turn from our rebellion against God and turn to him in faith. We receive the benefits of his death when we accept them as OURS by faith.

In some ways it is easier that recognising the sacrifice of our military heroes. We don't have to march in a parade or even go to a dawn service. But just as someone who recognises the sacrifices made to keep our nation free lives in a way that honours those sacrifices, so the person who has received the benefits of Jesus' sacrifice will live in a way that honours him.

So while we remember the similarities between Easter and Anzac day, let's also remember that there is a very signifiacnt difference in how wer receive the benefits of these different sacrifices.

Satisfying God’s Honour?

My Apologies for not posting in more than a month!

Stott has shown that in explaining the cross, theologians went through periods where different theories took priority. The early Greek church Fathers explained the cross in terms of Christ's satisfaction of the rights and claims of the devil. The early Latin church Fathers explained the cross in terms of satisfying God's law. A third theory of the atonement was first proposed by Anselm of Canterbury in the eleventh century. (Anselm was an Italian, but became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1093 AD.)

Anselm's great work was Cur Deus Homo? (Why Did God become Man? Completed 1098.) His work is seen as a leading example of medieval 'scholasticism', which was an attempt to reconcile philosophy and theology, Aristotelian logic and Biblical revelation. While Anselm does include some Biblical quotes and considers the Bible a 'firm foundation', his prior commitment is to be 'agreeable to reason'.

Stott summarises Anselm's argument:

SATISFYING THE LAW??

In Chapter 5 of The Cross of Christ, Stott continues in the discussion of who is satisfied by the cross by asking the question 'Is it the law that is satisfied'?
He summarises this argument succinctly:

Sin is lawlessness (1 Jn 3:4), a disregard for God's law and disobedience to it. But the law cannot be broken with impunity. Sinners therefore incur the penalty of their law-breaking. They cannot simply be let off. The law must be upheld, its dignity defended and its just penalties paid. The law is thereby 'satisfied'.

The strength of this argument is that it recognises the justice or righteousness of God – in that His law is right and true demands an appropriate punishment.

SATISFYING THE DEVIL??

In Chapter 5 of The Cross of Christ, Stott examines a number of traditional views of what 'satisfaction' is achieved on the Cross. Was Jesus satisfying the devil?

The idea that on the cross Jesus satisfied the devil was apparently widespread in the early church. Stott suggests that the early church fathers were sometimes 'extremely injudicious' in the way they presented the devil's power and how the cross deprived him of it.

It is true that the Bible tells us that since the fall, mankind has been in captivity not only to sin and death, but also to the devil. Some of the (post-apostolic) early church fathers therefore thought of him as the major tyrant from whom Jesus came to liberate us.

Stott suggests that, with hindsight, we may detect three errors made by the early church fathers:

The Cross – Who is Satisfied??

Chapter 5 of John Stott's The Cross of Christ is on 'Satisfaction for Sin'. As Stott says, there are no words more likely to cause offence in discussions of the atonement than 'satisfaction' and the related term 'substitution'. He quotes Sir Alister Hardy, former professor of Zoology at Oxford and researcher into religious experience who describes his inability to come to terms with the 'crude' beliefs of many 'orthodox churchmen. Quoting from The Divine Flame (c. 1965) he says:

I feel certain that he [Jesus] would not have preached to us of a God who would be appeased by the cruel sacrifice of a tortured body. . . I cannot accept either the hypothesis that the appalling death of Jesus was a sacrifice in the eyes of God for the sins of the world , or that God, in the shape of his son, tortured himself for our redemption. I can only confess that, in my heart of hearts, I find such religious ideas to be among the least attractive in the whole of anthropology. To me they belong to quite a different philosophy – a different psychology – from that of the religion Jesus taught.'

Stott reminds us that opponents will often caricature the Christian understanding of the Cross in order to more readily condemn it. "The real question", he says, "is whether we can hold fast to the saving efficacy of the death of Jesus, and to its traditional vocabulary (including satisfaction and substitution) without denigrating God". His answer is "I believe we can and must."

The Problem of Forgiveness - Reflecting on Stott's The Cross of Christ #2

In part two of The Cross of Christ, Stott begins talking about ‘The Heart of the Cross’ by thinking first about ‘The Problem of Forgiveness’. As he says near the beginning of the chapter:

In particular, our insistence that according to the gospel the cross of Christ is the only ground on which God forgives sins bewilders many people. ‘Why should forgiveness depend on Christ’s death?’ they ask. ‘Why does God not simply forgive us, without the necessity of the cross?’

He then goes on to quote the cynical French phrase which translates (roughly): ‘The good God will forgive me; that’s his job.’ This is not far different from the Muslims who wonder why there should be any difficulty in God deciding to forgive sins.

John Stott on the Cross of Christ

In preparation for Mid Year Conference I have been re-reading John Stott's classic book The Cross of Christ. It's not just a classic because it was published in the 80's! (It was first published by IVP in 1986). It is a classic because it is a clear yet profound study of the central doctrine of the Christian faith - Jesus' work on the cross (also called the atonement).



You can read some reviews written for the Twentieth Anniversary edition here. The book is also a classic because it has been constantly in print for over twenty years - being reprinted almost every year! If you aren't sure about buying your own copy then just ask an older Christian -they are likely to have a copy on their shelves. But I warn you, this is a book you will want to own yourself and re-read a number of times. In re-reading the book I have found it still fresh and very relevant.

The book is divided into four main parts: