I John 5

By Pastor Christian in Thinking About Sunday on 4/5/09

This Sunday Brandon wrapped-up our series in I John titled “First John, Then Me.” Like the original author, Brandon took the opportunity to reaffirm the general thoughts of the book – namely, that Christians are known (ought to be known) by Faith, Love, Obedience, and having Overcome the World.

The part of that message that really stuck in my head was his suggestion that “some intellectuals” might recoil at the idea of a Substitutionary Atonement (that is: Jesus was a sacrifice on our behalf). While I certainly agree that they will baulk, I am still not sure why. Ostensibly, it is because “it seems barbaric” and they are on the other hand driven by reason. That alone is mock-worthy, but I will leave it. I do ask however – WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE REASONABLE? What other way could have God reconciled his creation to Himself?

Let’s do this with logic, since that is the “intellectuals” tool.

First we begin with a proposition. God is Holy. Now admittedly, our first proposition is a brain-full. But if there is no agreement here, then really, the rest of the conversation is moot. I would suggest that all conversation is moot, but I will leave that one too. I will stick to, “Why discuss a God that it not Holy?” Could we Worship it? It’s not just that He describes himself that way. It’s just as well that I can not imagine Real Divinity without Real Perfection. Otherwise we are just talking bout a greater being. I am talking about God.

If God is Holy and Good, then he must reject sin. Again, apply logic to this second proposition. To be truly Holy, anything less than perfection must be rejected. Furthermore, to be all Holy and All powerful, must mean that he must reject all evil everywhere.

What else could he do? Can you imagine an all Holy all powerful being that does not crush evil wherever it appears? It MUST be that God will personally answer every act of evil in his creation. Otherwise, he is neither Holy, Good, nor all powerful. It must be understood that no evil – none, no tragedy will not be called to account. It may not be in our timing, but ALL evil must be accounted for.

So, now a question? What ought to be the punishment for evil in objection to perfection? What response should this issue from perfection? How about ELIMINATION? Holiness should seek to eliminate evil. It can have NOTHING to do with.

That leads to another question then: How then is all of this made right? I am not even entertaining the question of the broken world here. If you need to be convinced that all the creation is touched by brokenness and that no perfect human walks the earth, then we need another conversation.

So, if God by the very virtue of his nature must eliminate/destroy/kill all evil in this world. That is, all penalties must be paid. How does he do that without killing everybody? Well, he can’t, everybody must die. Yikes. And even after everybody dies, even after all evil is eliminated, still there would be NO JUSTICE. The penalty would have been paid, but no restitution made. The infractions would not have been paid!

How then can God’s Holiness be maintained and his position as the all powerful, good God of the universe without killing every less than perfect Human being?

SUBSTITUTIONARY ATONEMENT

Somebody/thing else must pay. But who/what could pay this price? Who /what could die for another without wiping out all humanity again?

I would suggest that only a real person, who themselves was not guilty (i.e. perfect) with the strength to bear the weight of ALL EVIL FOR ALL TIME could stand in this role. Keep in mind that every cruel human act across of human history must made right. Who could bear this weight? Seriously.

Does the answer ONLY Jesus, who was both God and Man (John 1:1-18, Col. 1:15-20, Phil 2:6-11) speak to your logic? Only he could stand in as a substitution for humans and survive the justice of God. Only he could take that punishment and rise again to victory. Who else could? Who else in all time? What GREAT HUMAN BEING? None. There IS NONE OTHER.

So at issue for the “intellectual” is what, the penalty? Of course there is a penalty! Otherwise there is no TRUE GOOD. Perhaps it is the price? But really, are they not moved that though God must exact the penalty, he (the three Father, Son, and Spirit) choose that THEY WOULD PAY THE PRICE. And that specifically, the eternal and perfect Word of God would become the human being Jesus Christ to make the way? He from the very beginning chose to bear the penalty within himself!

Where is the barbarism? Where is the broken logic? All that proceeds is beauty and love and sacrifice! Did you hear? God so loved the world that he gave his one and only begotten son, that whoever believes in him will not die, but have eternal life! John 3:16

And so I ask. I open the question. WHAT ELSE COULD HE HAVE DONE?

What would be better? Before you tear down this plan, suggest another one? How else would an all Holy God reconcile his creation to himself? How else real justice. How else is the pain and terror of evil answered. HOW ELSE other than Jesus?

Back to Top