The Greatest Love of all....

I was a big Whitney Houston fan in the 80's and her now classic hit was 'The Greatest Love of All', the song ends with the lyrics 'the greatest love of all is learning to love yourself'. That is not the greatest love of all, in fact loving ourselves is easy for us. The greatest love of all is this: while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. 

It's the holiday season when amidst all the frenzy of shopping and Santa there is a manger scene where cattle, shepherds and Magi surround a helpless baby who is placed in a manger. (but not a Santa)
John's gospel tells us nothing of this, that is left to Matthew and Luke, for John, Christmas starts earlier not in Mid September like it does in the West these days, but in Eternity past. John tells us that this helpless looking baby is none other than the Word who created all things in the beginning. The Word who was with God and is Himself God. The Son who is very God of very God, whom the myriads of Angels adored, and the Father delighted in,  the darling of Heaven humbled Himself and became a helpless baby. As one song writer put it, 'The hands that created the world, made the hands that was now holding Him'. Or as John put it 'The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth'.

Christmas confronts us with the fact that while we do love ourselves we by our nature are unlovely and we stand in need of saving and in need of forgiveness. Yet we are utterly helpless to change and transform ourselves and utterly helpless to change our standing before a holy God. Christmas confronts us with a baby who was born to reconcile sinners to Himself to offer us forgiveness by coming to trust in the one who laid down His life for guilty sinners. Christmas points inevitably to Easter and the manger points inevitably to the cross!

As you celebrate Christmas may you come to delight in not only the greatest love of all but the greatest gift of all that is forgiveness from God.

Merry Christmas!

Stephen <><

How deep the Father's love for us

I am working my way through John Stott's classic book 'The Cross of Christ', Stott reminds us that The cross is not the Son working against the Father's will to redeem us as the cross is just as much the Father's initiative. 

Stuart Townend's song 'How deep the Father's love for us' also reminds us of this:

How deep the Father's love for us
how vast beyond all measure
that He should give His only Son
To make a wretch His treasure.

How great the pain of searing loss,
The Father turns His face away
As wounds which mar the Chosen One,
Bring many sons to glory

John 3:16  tell's us that God so loved the world that He gave His only Son so whoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life. The cross therefore isn't the means to God loving us but is the result, the effect of that love.

Stott puts it like this, 'We must never make Christ the object of God's punishment or God the object of Christ's persuasion, for both God and Christ were subjects not objects, taking the initiative together to save sinners. Whatever happened on the cross in terms of 'Godforsakeness' was voluntarily accepted by both in the same holy which made atonement necessary. It was God in our nature forsaken of God. If the Father gave the Son, The Son gave Himself. If the Father "sent the Son, the Son 'came' Himself. The Father did not lay on the Son an ordeal he was reluctant to bear, nor did the Son extract from the Father a salvation he was reluctant to bestow.' Stott, The Cross of Christ p151

We find at the cross God's wrath poured out upon His beloved Son, the place where wrath and mercy met. Divine justice, mercy and love are fulfilled as God in love both punishes and receives punishment to bring many sons to glory. How great is God!

God Bless

Stephen <><

John Stott- A Portrait by his friends

I've recently finished reading  this book which was published for John Stott's 90th birthday by several friends from different walks of life. They are short accounts of what 'Uncle John' meant to them, some of them are better than others, but what comes out is that John Stott lived what he believed. Each chapter is short and reveals something that left an impression upon them about John Stott.  It seems John was consistent in praying for people, remembering details about them, encouraging them even years after a brief encounter and helping many people out in practical ways. John Stott was single minded about ministry, he was driven starting the day early and lived to know Christ and make Him known. This effected the way he dealt with people. He had time for people seeing them as being created in the image of God. He was humble about his own talents and calling, seeking to encourage those he encountered on his walk through life. According to several of his friends this was because he knew he was saved, knew what he was saved from and never, ever, ever got over it. Like John Newton he realised it was all of grace  and that this grace is amazing. The challenge that John Stott's life offers to us is to be so in love with Jesus and his saving grace at work in our life that it makes an impact on those around us  for eternity  to the glory of God.

God Bless

 Stephen <><

Old Testament Theology- A Thematic Approach by Robin Routledge

I was given this book by a good friend which was really nice as it is probably not something I would have been drawn to but I have enjoyed it immensely. It does what it says on the tin, it is a thematic approach to the Old Testament, no surprises there. The surprise was how readable it was which for a book that is about the theology of the Old Testament really is a surprise. It's probably aimed at first year Theology undergraduates but is very readable so it could benefit anyone. I haven't purposefully avoided any Old Testament scholarly works but I think this is the first O.T. text I've read since I was a 3rd year theology student. For this reason I found the large introduction useful as it covered all the major players in Old Testament studies and their perspectives as well as their different schools of thought.

The book covered major themes in the Old Testament occasionally demonstrating how they relate to a New Testament understanding. For me the most informative section was in the chapter 'God and the future' especially 'Messianic expectation'. Routledge is an evangelical who believes the whole Bible so he interacts with the New Testament. He argues that many of the terms that we rightly associate with Jesus found within the Old Testament are not necessarily considered Messianic. I'd never thought of that before and have automatically presumed that any passage that speaks of Jesus, such as the prophet, the Son of Man, the Servant are all Messianic. He also traces some of these themes into the inter-testament period and saw how they developed. In the same chapter I was a little disappointed with his treatment of the after life but I did a large essay in the 3rd year at HTC so I had explored it in more depth than it is treated in this book. I appreciate the way he interacts with more liberal scholarship but sometimes it is unclear if he believes in some of their ideas, especially predictive prophecy and the number of authors for the book of Isaiah.

This book is not an Old Testament introduction because it doesn't cover book by book or explore all the themes in the Old Testament, how could it when it's only 350 pages? It would be  good to read alongside a more traditional Old Testament introduction and worth a read as a stand alone volume!

God Bless

Stephen <><

A man called John

It's been a week where Britain mourns the death of a pop star whose talent was considered legendary, but who battled various addicts. However it has  been silent about the death of one of the leading figures in British Evangelicalism. A man whose influence is felt across the UK, The US and in large parts of the global south. In John's gospel we are told there was a man sent from God his name was John. He himself was not the light but he came as a witness to the light, in it's original context it was talking about John the baptiser. It could also be said of John Stott whose influence in Evangelicalism extends beyond his own Anglican denomination. He was responsible for the formation of the London Institute for contemporary Christianity, the Langham Partnership which supplies theological material and other resources for the church in Africa, he edited the New Testament BST series, one of the best conservative evangelical small volume commentaries . He was also a leader of the New evangelicals and was involved in setting up the Lausanne conference as well as being the pastor of a large church in the centre of London. His influence will be felt for generations. Praise the Lord for a life well lived for the glory of God!

God Bless

Stephen <><

The vulnerability of God

I am 100% convinced of the Sovereignty of God, I affirm completely that God is all-powerful, knows all things and indeed ordains all things. Some reformed guys believe in the impassibilty of God, I don't. I see it, it fits well in the Systematic books but it doesn't make sense of how God relates in Scripture. At creation God creates Adam and Eve, knowing by this evil will enter into His newly created world. God will for the first time exercise His mercy as He commits Himself to bringing rebelious sinners back to Himself. In Genesis for example God makes a covenant with Abraham, well actually He makes a covenant with Abraham present but He takes upon Himself all the obligation whilst Abraham sleeps. In essence God makes Himself vulnerable to Abraham and His descendants, if they don't keep the covenant, God will pay the price. He does this knowing all things, knowing that they will not keep the covenant. In the minor prophets He is bound to Israel as a husband, not to a faithful wife but to an adulterous wife. Yet like Hosea he loves at a cost, bringing His unfaithful wife back time and time again. Is he impassive, I think not! No He is a loving husband who is made vulnerable by His wife's infidility. Wounded by His great love.The most vulnerable we see Him is when as the Logos He takes on flesh, knowing that His own will reject Him. He is vulnerable in a human body, subject to joy and tears, hunger and tiredness. He is vulnerable in His love as He weeps over Jerusalem, He stretches out His arms to embrace them and they put nails through His hands and hang Him on a cross. God is love!

The Jesus Inquest by Charles Foster

I received this book free from Thomas Nelson Publishers as part of their BookSneeze.com <http://booksneeze.com/> book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review.

This book is an apologetic debate with a difference as both sides are argued by the same guy! Charles Foster says he read ,The Case for Faith by Lee Strobel and didn't like  the approach Strobel uses, interviewing lots of smart guys who are Christians without letting smart non-believers make their case. He believes both cases should be made, that the evidence should be presented for both sides. Charles Foster claims that he has argued both sides so the book could be more comprehensive as he has read widely on the area of Jesus' resurrection.  He believes as  a lawyer he can argue both sides without letting his bias get in the way. It's quite a claim, does he pull it off? Well no, as his bias comes out, in terms of comprehensiveness the answer is yes and no! Yes, if by comprehensive he means that he has read every book on the shelf of his local secular bookstall on this issue. No, if he means he has gone to a good theological college and read all the books on the issue in their library. The book itself takes on some of the arguments made popular by Dan Brown, the Jesus family Tomb etc. These arguments themselves are weak and are not taken seriously by those who have taken the time to investigate. However since I started reading this book the conversations I have had with non-believers relate to these issues. If they have heard anything it is via Dan Brown or Simcha Jacobovici's Jesus family tomb and the arguments that they go for are precisely the ones made popular by them in their books and TV programmes. It's a shame that he took these arguments seriously and yet  takes a superior tone over arguments that are equally ridiculous. That said, Foster's book  could be a useful book and for the most part it is very readable.  However I struggled with the book precisely because Foster is one man. He calls himself x when he takes the non-Christian argument, and Y when arguing as a Christian. I found it silly that there was a joint statement between X and Y and frustrating when X and Y attacked "each others" intellectual honesty or abilities. If you can get over that then it might be worth reading, but I couldn't.

God Bless
Stephen <><