26 As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus. 27 A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. 28 Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ 30 Then “‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!” and to the hills, “Cover us!” ‘ 31 For if men do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?” 32 Two other men, both criminals, were also led out with him to be executed. 33 When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left. 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting lots. 35 The people stood watching, and the rulers even sneered at him. They said, “He saved others; let him save himself if he is the Christ of God, the Chosen One.” 36 The soldiers also came up and mocked him. They offered him wine vinegar 37 and said, “If you are the king of the Jews, save yourself.” 38 There was a written notice above him, which read: This is the King of the Jews. 39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.” 44 It was now about the sixth hour, and darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 for the sun stopped shining. And the curtain of the temple was torn in two. 46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” When he had said this, he breathed his last. 47 The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, “Surely this was a righteous man.” 48 When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away. 49 But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things.

Introduction

Things do not always work out the way we plan them. I remember our first (and last) family camping trip as a boy. My parents took us on a trip to Montana. Glacier National Park was beautiful. The lofty, snow-capped mountains were spectacular, accented with deep ice-blue lakes, sometimes with an island in the center. We reached our camp sight with great optimism and expectation. The day was beautiful. The tent went up nicely. The family stood smiling in front of the tent, with the mountains as the background, all framed in a blue sky, with a few puffs of clouds for contrast. I took the picture. We have come to call that picture, “the lull before the storm.”

It was a glorious conclusion to a wonderful day. In a while, we ate our picnic dinner, and then when it got dark we all climbed into our sleeping bags. Granted, the ground was a little hard, and we had to move about so that a protruding stone was not in the center of our back. No one told us about the mountain storms, however, nor did we think about the direction from which the wind (and the rain) would come, or the slight dip in the ground where we had erected our tent. These factors soon became very important.

It was a little later when the thunder and the lightning began. It was not until the rains began to fall heavily that the real concern began. Somewhere in this time frame, my brother began to sing “Jesus Loves Me” quite loudly. The tent leaked, as I guess all tents do in heavy rains, and this was not helped by the fact that the tent door was facing the wind and the torrent of rain. We still determined to weather the storm, until we discovered that the tent was beginning to fill with water. The little “hollow” that seemed like such a nice spot for a tent filled with the runoff, so that an inch or two of water had filled the tent and swamped our sleeping bags before we determined we had to give it all up.

The storm continued as we tried to break camp. We did not try to do anything in an orderly fashion. We collapsed the tent, wadded up the sleeping bags, and stuffed the entire muddy mess into the trunk of the car. On one of the last trips to the car, which was also parked in a little hollow, my brother slipped in the mud and slid most of the way under the car, and into the puddle beneath it, thoroughly soaking himself. We plucked him from beneath the car, climbed in amidst some of the camping gear, which would not fit in the trunk, and drove on to a very welcomed motel.

Things don’t always work out the way we expect. And so it was with the crucifixion of Jesus. This was not the Jewish way of executing people, but the Romans used it with some degree of regularity. It served to make a public example of those who chose to ignore or to actively resist the laws of Rome. The event had become a social event, at which a crowd would gather to watch. With crucifixions, as with other events, there developed a rather predictable routine. A new-comer to a crucifixion could quickly be “brought up to speed” as to what would happen, in what sequence, and at about what time. Allow me to begin our lesson by attempting to describe the event, somewhat in 20th century Western terms, so that we can identify with the event in a general way. We will then attempt to demonstrate that this execution did not at all go as planned, and the impact which this had on many of those present, and, in particular, on the thief, for whom his execution became the time of his conversion, and the commencement of eternal life.

The Crucifixion,
Twentieth Century Style

Imagine with me that the crucifixion of our Lord were taking place in our day and time. Given the popularity of Jesus, His execution would probably be given national news coverage. I suppose that the crucifixion would be handled something like the launching of the last space shuttle, Discovery. Television coverage of our Lord’s last week in Jerusalem would have been extensive. On the night of Jesus’ arrest, programming would have been interrupted to announce that Jesus had been taken into custody. Reports from the trials of our Lord would have been given as events progressed and as the location of Jesus shifted. Coverage in the early hours of the morning would have included the trial before Pilate and Herod.

Mobile cameras would have captured the agonizing journey from the palace of Pilate to Calvary, the sight of the crucifixion. I can imagine that there would have been an interview with some Roman official, in charge of executions, telling precisely how and when the crucifixion would take place. The execution, he would have said, was scheduled for 9:00 that morning. In light of the religious holiday, the Passover, there would be a special effort to conclude matters by no later than 3:00 P.M. For humanitarian reasons, those scheduled to die would be given a wine, mixed with a pain-dulling drug, making the ordeal less torturous. A medical expert might then be interviewed, who would describe the actual process of death, ending with the necessity of breaking the legs of the felons, so that their deaths might be expedited. By the time the execution was under way, the viewing public would have a mental picture of the sequence of events about to unfold before them. Some details might change, such as the exact time of death, but by and large everyone knows what is going to happen.

During the grueling 6 hour long process, file footage of coverage of Jesus’ life would be played to fill the gaps in time and to keep the audience interested. Interviews with various individuals would be done, some live, and others taped: individuals who had been healed or helped by Jesus, none of the disciples, as they were “unavailable for comment,” one of the arresting officials, the chief priest, a member of the Sanhedrin, members of the family (if available). A few details would be given about the other two criminals, and perhaps brief coverage on Barabbas, maybe even an interview. The whole thing would seem to be routine, under control.

The Sequence of Events at Calvary

The sequence of events is not always clear, and Luke leaves out a number of unusual and significant phenomena,¹²⁷ so that we cannot tell for certain the exact order of events that actually occurred. Generally speaking, however, the events appear to have happened something like this:

• The victims were nailed to their crosses, which were raised and fixed in position
• Either prior to this or shortly after drugged wine was given to deaden the pain
• The clothing of Jesus was divided among the four soldiers, by lot
• Railing accusations and mocking occurred throughout the ordeal—the crowd somehow seems to file or pass by the cross
• Jesus cried out, “Father, forgive them … ”
• The criminals joined in reviling Christ
• The thief on the cross came to faith in Jesus as his Messiah
• Darkness falls over the scene, from 6th hour (noon) till 9th hour (3:00).
• Jesus cried out, “My God, My God, why has thou forsaken Me?” (Matthew, Mark)
• Jesus said, “I thirst” (John), drank a sip of vinegar
• Jesus said, “It is finished” (John)
• Jesus bowed His head and said, “Father, into your hands, … ” and died
• Immediately, the curtain of temple torn in two, top to bottom (Luke)
• Earthquake and the raising of dead saints (Matthew)
• Legs of other two were broken, but Jesus’ legs not broken, seeing He was already dead (John)
• Soldier pierced Jesus’ side with a spear—blood and water gushed out (John)
• Centurion (and the other soldiers) who witnessed it said, “Surely this was son of God”
• The crowds left, beating their breasts, while the Galilean followers stay on, watching from distance

A Departure from the Normal

The unusual events seem to begin with the statement of Jesus (recorded only by Luke), “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (verse 34). This would have taken many by surprise. God’s name was a very frequent word on the lips of the accused, no doubt. For some, it would have been in the form of profanity. For others, there may even have been a petition for mercy or death. But on the lips of the Savior, it was an expression of His own forgiveness, and a petition for the forgiveness of the Father. Now this was something new.

I can see the television commentators picking up on this, in our twentieth century setting. “What do you suppose he meant by that statement?” the commentator would have queried. “Let’s replay the tape, to make sure we got the words right.” This could have led to a fairly extensive discussion on “forgiveness” in the vocabulary and teaching of Jesus, throughout His public ministry.

The television camera now slides down the cross, zooming in on the soldiers, who are dividing up the garments of the Savior. Did they divide the garments of the other two? Why were Jesus’ garments so desirable? Were they nice enough for a soldier to want them for himself? Were they a souvenir? The incident served to show that prophecy was fulfilled (in the other gospels), but for Luke it was an evidence of the callousness of the soldiers, and their indifference the this man from Galilee. That, too, will change, and soon.

The change is evident in the responses of many of those who observed the death of the Son of God. The soldiers, who had little regard for Jesus (certainly for His suffering) at first, and who later joined in mocking him, had a change of heart (as reported by Matthew 27:54). The centurion, according to Luke, declared the innocence and the righteousness of Jesus (23:47), while in Matthew and Mark His deity is also affirmed (Matthew 27:54; Mark 15:39). These hardened soldiers had a very distinct and unusual change of heart toward Jesus.

The crowd, too, went away different from the way that they came, and even from the way they had been midway through the crucifixion. While they stood by passively at first (Luke 23:35), they later seemed to get into the reviling themselves (Matthew 27:39-40; Mark 15:29-30). But when the whole event was over, the crowd left, silent, sobered, and deeply disturbed—beating their breasts (Luke 23:48).

The Conversion of
the Thief on the Cross

No change, however, was more dramatic than that of the thief, who hung beside the Savior, who came to faith in Him while both hung dying on their own crosses. I am convinced that no one left the scene of the cross of Jesus the same that day, but no change was so dramatic or so exciting as that which happened to the thief who hung beside the Savior. I wish to focus, as Luke alone does, on his conversion. It is indeed a remarkable event. Let’s read the account again:

32 Two other men, both criminals, were also led out with him to be executed. 33 When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left … ¹²⁸ 39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!”¹²⁹ 40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”¹³⁰

Luke’s account of the conversion of the thief on the cross is unique, and it is also very significant. It serves as a crucial turning point in the crucifixion of Jesus. There was a period of time, early in the crucifixion, where opposition to Jesus appears to have built up. In verse 34 of Luke’s account, the soldiers are indifferent to Jesus’ suffering. They care only about His clothing. In Matthew 27:36, this writer tells us that the soldiers sat down, keeping watch over Jesus. Jesus’ lack of aggressiveness, of verbal rebuttal, and of forgiveness, may well have struck them as a sign of weakness. The crowd, too, was miffed by Jesus’ inactivity. Some actually expected to see a miracle, or at least thought it possible (cf. Matthew 27:49; Mark 15:36). As time went on, everyone seemed to get more abusive of Jesus. The crowd seemed to get up its courage (cf. Matthew 27:39-40; Mark 15:29-30). The soldiers also joined in (Luke 23:36). The conversion of the thief is a turning point for Luke. From this point on, all railing and mocking stops. The supernatural phenomena immediately commence in Luke’s account, beginning with the 3 hour period of darkness (Luke 23:44), the tearing of the temple veil (23:45), followed later by an earthquake and the raising of the dead (only indirectly referred to by Luke, cf. 23:47-48).

The conversion of the thief cannot be questioned. It was a genuine conversion, indicated by Jesus’ strong words of assurance and hope: “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise” (23:43). It was not, as some might conceive of it, a kind of second-class conversion, allowing for much error or misunderstanding, based upon the shortness of time and the crisis at hand. Notice with me some of the characteristics of this conversion:

Characteristics of the Thief’s Conversion

(1) The thief was thoroughly and genuinely converted. Jesus assured him that on that very day he would be with Him in paradise. The others who witnessed the death of Christ were changed, never the same, but they only came to a point of fear at this point in time, not the faith of this thief.

(2) Initially, the thief joined in with the railing of the others against Jesus.

(3) The thief spoke to Jesus, requesting salvation, before any of the miraculous signs and wonders which were to follow.

(4) The thief believed in Jesus, in the midst of the rejection and railing of others, at a time when no one was showing faith in him. He was moving against the grain of the moment, out of step with the crowd.

(5) It was in response to the scoffing of the other thief that this man’s faith was evidenced. He spoke first to the thief, and then to Jesus.

(6) The second thief rebuked the first for not “fearing God.” This was at least a recognition of Jesus’ innocence, but also appears to be a recognition of the deity of Jesus. He was speaking to God in such an irreverent manner.

(7) To the thief, Jesus was not merely innocent, He was who He claimed to be, the Messiah, and thus the key to entering into the kingdom of God. It is this kingdom into which the thief asked Jesus to enable him to enter into.

(8) The thief recognized, as Jesus had told Pilate, that His kingdom was not of this world. Thus, the thief and Jesus could both die, and yet enter into it.

(9) The thief saw that his own salvation did not require Jesus coming down from the cross, saving Himself, or getting him off of the cross.

(10) This thief recognized his own sin, and that he was deserving of death.

(11) The thief requested Jesus’ mercy on the basis of His grace, offering nothing in return.

(12) This man had some kind of resurrection faith—believed in an afterlife, for he was about to die—a kind of resurrection faith.

The thief seems to have come to a point of seeing what he already believed in a different light, and of acting upon it. I do not think that the thief ever thought of Jesus as a guilty man. Even the reviling of the other thief is expressed in such a way that we are encouraged to think he believed Jesus might be the Messiah. His words, “Aren’t you the Christ?” imply (in the original text) that He was the Messiah. But now, suddenly, the thief looks at what he believed differently.

There are those who have noted and capitalized on the fact that this thief was not baptized, but may I suggest that he fulfilled the essence of even this commandment. The purpose of baptism was to make a public profession of faith, to disassociate with that unbelieving generation (from the standpoint of those Jews living in that generation), and to publicly associate with Jesus Christ in his death and resurrection. What this man said was surely witnessed by more Jews of his day than of those who would later be baptized as a public profession of faith. Even in this matter, the thief is a model (if there can and should be such a thing) of conversion.

Let us not pass by this conversion without noting several essential ingredients. First, there is the recognition of one’s personal sin, and of his deserving of death, of divine wrath. Second, there is the recognition that Jesus is precisely who He claimed to be, the sinless Son of God, Israel’s Messiah, the only way by which men can enter into the kingdom of God. Third, a belief that Christ’s kingdom lies beyond the grave, and that resurrection will enable us to be enter into it. Fourth, a belief in the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which prompted Him to die in our place, to provide a salvation for the worst of sinners, which is not merited or earned, but which is achieved in accordance with grace alone. A simple trust in Jesus for forgiveness and eternal life, by virtue of what He has done.

How Did It Happen?

We have given considerable thought to what happened at the conversion of this thief, but how did it happen? What was the trigger? What was it that changed this man from a scoffer to a saint, from a hell-bent heathen to a heaven-bound believer? I have looked long and hard for an explanation in the text, for a key, but I have not found one. I have since concluded that there is no key, there is no process outlined, which we are encouraged to follow. In answer to the question, “What changed this man’s attitude toward Christ?” the answer must be, “Luke didn’t tell us.”

In John’s gospel, Jesus told Nicodemus that the process of being born again is a mysterious working of the Holy Spirit. While the results of the Holy Spirit’s word are evident, the process is not seen by the eye. The final answer to the question, “What changed the heart of the thief?” is simply this, “God did!” We know not how. We need not know how. Indeed, we cannot even tell how it was that our heats were opened. We can only say, as Luke writes of Lydia, “The Lord opened her heart to believe … ” (Acts 16:14). So it is for all who believe. Salvation is not only the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit, it is His secret work.

The one thing which seems obvious in the conversion of the thief is this: While the thief knew, from the beginning that the Lord Jesus was innocent, and that His death was not deserved, it was at the point of his conversion that he came to understand that Jesus’ death was in order to save such as him. The crowds had not caught the point. All who railed at Jesus had the same basic premise: If Jesus was to save men, He must first save Himself. The thief now understood that in order to save men, Jesus had to sacrifice Himself for their sins. His death was not the destruction of His promises to save men but the means of it. It was this that the Spirit of God somehow made clear to the thief. It was faith in the substitutionary death of Christ which saved him, like it can be for any who believes.

Conclusion

There are a number of lessons to be learned from our text. The first is this: God is sovereign in salvation. It is not men who open their hearts God-ward, it is God who opens the hearts of men. He is the Savior. There is no method, no mechanical system, which can be relied upon to draw men to Christ. All that we can do is to proclaim the gospel and pray that His Spirit will open the hearts of those He has chosen.

Second, while it God who sovereignly opens the hearts of men, to save them, He never turns one who comes to Him in faith away. Some have argued that if it is God who opens men’s hearts, it is futile for any man to seek God. Notice that in our text the Lord Jesus did not “witness” to the thief, and then invite him to come to salvation. The thief turned to Jesus and asked to be saved—and his request was granted. The Scriptures are clear that all who come to Him in faith are received and saved, for He does not turn any away who come in sincere faith (cf. Romans 10:11, 13; John 6:37).

The third lesson is this: God is not selective in the social class of those whom He saves. Of all those gathered around the cross that day, this man would not have been at the top of our list of most likely candidates. But from the very beginning Jesus was drawn to those who were sinners, as they were drawn to Him. Somehow they knew, as this thief knew, that Jesus loved men and that His desire was to save them. No one is too sinful to save. Even this man, who had moments before his conversion, reviled the Son of God, was readily forgiven his sins and assured of eternal life.

May I ask you, very pointedly, my friend. Have you believed in Jesus the way this man did? Have you come to a faith which goes beyond the facts and comes to trust in the Son of God, who died in your place, who was raised from the dead, and who now is in heaven at the side of His Father? May the Holy Spirit of God open your heart, as He did this thief. What a blessed hope! What a Savior! If God can save a sinner, condemned by man, He can and He will save you as well.

There is a final lesson which I would like to underscore from out text. In the paradox of God’s eternal methods and means, life comes to others through the death of those who proclaim it. More than anything else it was the way Christ died that shook those who witnessed this event, and which was instrumental in the conversion of the thief. Christians today often fall into the trap of wanting God to perform according to their expectations, rather than submitting to His sovereign plan and purposes, as clearly laid out in His Word. They want God to convince men of their need to be saved by proving Himself through healings, signs and wonders, and by delivering His saints (and others) from pain and suffering. It was Jesus’ death which men could not grasp. It was Jesus’ death which was God’s means of saving men. One of the most powerful signs of this or any other age is the way in which men and women of faith handle suffering, adversity, and death.

Evangelism is often heavily method-centered, and one of the compromises we have made with the world is to try to sell faith in Christ like Procter and Gamble sells soap, or like Coca Cola sells “coke,” which “adds life.” That is, we want to emphasize the “life” aspect of the gospel, and to avoid the death dimension. This simply does not square with the gospel. As Christ drank His “cup” of death on the cross of Calvary, we have our own “cups” to drink of, and we have our own crosses to take up in order to follow Christ. It is often by the giving up of our lives, figurative or literally, that is instrumental in bringing men and women to faith in Christ, as the Holy Spirit bears witness through us. That is why, I believe, the prisoners in that Philippian jail did not flee, even though their cell doors were all opened (Acts 16). They had witnessed Paul and Silas singing and praising God, just after they had been unjustly and illegally beaten and imprisoned. There is something about watching people die for their faith that carries more weight than prospering as Christians. It is often suffering more than success that God uses as His instrument for bring about His purposes in this world.

As we conclude, let me remind you of some of the texts in which death characterizes Paul’s ministry.

As it is written: “For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered” (Romans 8:36).

9 For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to men. 10 We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored! 11 To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. 12 We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; 13 when we are slandered, we answer kindly. Up to this moment we have become the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world (1 Corinthians 4:9-13).

29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? 31 I die every day—I mean that, brothers—just as surely as I glory over you in Christ Jesus our Lord. 32 If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus for merely human reasons, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” (1 Corinthians 15:29-32).

8 We do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about the hardships we suffered in the province of Asia. We were under great pressure, far beyond our ability to endure, so that we despaired even of life. 9 Indeed, in our hearts we felt the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead. 10 He has delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will continue to deliver us, 11 as you help us by your prayers. Then many will give thanks on our behalf for the gracious favor granted us in answer to the prayers of many (2 Corinthians 1:8-11).

15 For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing. 16 To the one we are the smell of death; to the other, the fragrance of life. And who is equal to such a task? (2 Corinthians 2:15-16).

7 But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us. 8 We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; 9 persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. 10 We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. 11 For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that his life may be revealed in our mortal body. 12 So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you (2 Corinthians 4:7-12).

The use of the imperfect tense in verse 39 implies that this malefactor persisted in his railings.

In the words, “Let Him save Himself (and us)” do we not see a parallel to the mentality of men in all ages? Is this not the same view which the world, and too many Christians take toward suffering? They assume that God would not tolerate or allow suffering, and especially not in the life of His beloved Son. They assume that if God is God, He will prove Himself by delivering the sufferer from his suffering, when the suffering itself is the means God has appointed to achieve His purposes. Here is where the “name it and claim it” version of faith healing flies in the face of Scripture.

The similarity between the taunting of the people and the temptation of Satan does not demonstrate that this is a temptation, but rather that the thinking of the people is reflective of Satan’s values and mindset (cf. Luke chapter 4 and Job 1), rather than of God’s, as described in the prophecies of the Old Testament.

127 What Luke Omits in His Crucifixion Account: He omits the beatings of Matthew 27:27-31 and Mark 15:16-20, in preparation for His execution, and also the mocking, scarlet robe, the crown of thorns, the mocking homage paid to him, and the references to His words about destroying the temple (as Stephen was also later to be accused, cf. Acts 6:13-14). The first offering of wine mixed with gall (Matthew 27:34) or myrrh (Mark 15:23), which Jesus refused. Luke records only the offer of “wine vinegar” (23:37), with no indication of whether or not He took it. The chief priests and teachers said if Christ came down from the cross they would see and believe (Matthew 27:42; Mark 15:32). “He saved others … ” (Matthew 27:42; Mark 15:31). The people (passers by) reviled Jesus (Matthew 27:39-40; Mark 15:29-30). Both thieves reviled Jesus (Matthew 27:44; Mark 15:32). “Here is your son … Here is your mother”—John 19:26, 27). “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani” (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34). “Let’s see if Elijah comes to save him/take him down” (Matthew 27:49; Mark 15:36)—they really wondered if something miraculous might happen. The earthquake and splitting of rocks and the tombs opened—Matthew 27:51-54). Matthew indicates that while the raising of these dead saints occurred at the time of the earthquake, and thus at the time of our Lord’s death, the appearance of these saints in the city was not until three days later (27:54). John says Jesus said, “I am thirsty” after He saw that all prophesy had been fulfilled (John 19:28-29), after which He drank and then gave up the spirit (Matthew 27:50; John 19:30) and died. Jesus’ legs not broken, but His side was pierced, which fulfilled prophecy (John 19:31-37)

128 All four gospels mention that Jesus was in the middle, between the two thieves. Is this to indicate that He was placed in the position of prominence, that He was the center of attention? It seems so. Surely the crowds came because of Jesus, and not the other two.

129 The use of the imperfect tense in verse 39 implies that this malefactor persisted in his railings.

In the words, “Let Him save Himself (and us)” do we not see a parallel to the mentality of men in all ages? Is this not the same view which the world, and too many Christians take toward suffering? They assume that God would not tolerate or allow suffering, and especially not in the life of His beloved Son. They assume that if God is God, He will prove Himself by delivering the sufferer from his suffering, when the suffering itself is the means God has appointed to achieve His purposes. Here is where the “name it and claim it” version of faith healing flies in the face of Scripture.

The similarity between the taunting of the people and the temptation of Satan does not demonstrate that this is a temptation, but rather that the thinking of the people is reflective of Satan’s values and mindset (cf. Luke chapter 4 and Job 1), rather than of God’s, as described in the prophecies of the Old Testament.

130 The term “paradise” is found twice elsewhere in the New Testament, in 2 Corinthians 12:4; and Revelation 2:7. In both cases, the reference is to heaven.

This message is available below in PDF in thorough outline style.

Good Friday Message 2021: The Extrusion of Christ (John 19:25-27)

This message was originally preached in 2021 on Good Friday, 4/2/2021 at Aloha church in Kaua’i Hawaii. The video version of this message may also be viewed HERE.

A ministry of…

Author: Dr. Roger Pascoe, President,
Email: [email protected]

I. Strengthening Expository Preaching
“Preaching Hebrew Narratives” (Part 2)

In this edition of The NET Pastors Journal I am continuing (from Issue 38, Winter 2021) the subject of preaching Old Testament (Hebrew) narratives. I will attempt to outline an approach to preaching narratives by answering the questions: How do we preach a story? Do we simply re-tell the story and make application at the end? Do we break the story into parts with principles for each? Do we approach it essentially like a N.T. epistle, deriving from it general principles and applications?

In preaching narratives, I would argue that…

1) We must respect and be sensitive to the genre of the text both in our exegesis and preaching while, at the same time, recognizing that preaching a narrative is not simply re-telling the story with some application. Rather, the primary purpose of a biblical story is to communicate theology. Biblical stories are not merely description; they are also prescription.

2) We must derive universal principles from biblical narratives, just as we do from N.T. epistles. The difference is that, in our preaching style, we must follow, reflect, and respect the story form of the text. We do this (a) by changing our preaching style to reflect the narrative genre; (b) by following the sequence and substance of the story line; and (c) by modifying the structure of our sermon outline to correspond with the narrative genre.

We can learn a lot about preaching O.T. narratives from the book of Acts. For example in Acts 7, Stephen re-told the O.T. redemptive story about (1) God’s deliverance and redemption of his covenant people; (2) Their sinfulness and rebellion; followed by (3) The application of the story to the present audience – namely, that they too were rebellious, resisting the Holy Spirit, killing the Just One etc. In fact, the application to them of the redemptive story was so powerful and direct that they murdered Stephen (cf. also Paul, Acts 13:16-41).

God has told the story. Our task is to explain its universal, theological, abiding principles and apply them to our audience. Just as we analyze a passage from an epistle for its central, theological principle along with its related truths and applications, so we should analyze a narrative for its central, theological truth and its related applications. Finding the central truth is the same process whether you are preaching narratives or epistles. If re-telling the story were all that was necessary, you wouldn’t have to be a theologian to preach. You could simply have a dramatic narrator or an actor recreate the story in contemporary language and terms. I maintain that while we must re-tell the story, we must also enlighten our audiences as to…

1) What it meant back then and what it means now (bridging the historical gap).

2) What its theological truths are.

3) What its implications and applications are to our Christian lives.

This necessitates both re-telling the story (so that it comes alive to today’s audience) and exposing and applying its central, propositional truth. This process is, therefore, didactic and propositional, just as it is when we preach epistles. One difference between preaching epistles and narratives is that with epistles you analyze and preach paragraphs, whereas with narratives you preach “scenes.” Scenes reflect the movement of the story and each scene must be interpreted in the light of the total story, because the total story reveals its central, overarching truth.

A. A Procedure For Studying A Narrative

As with any other sermon texts, the goal is to determine what the narrative reveals about God (his nature, his will, his ways etc.). The first step is…

1. Investigation.

a) Determine where the story begins and ends. If it is a sub-story, determine where it fits into the bigger story. Gather data from the context (i.e. the surrounding narratives and descriptions). Discover the plot. What are the sequence of events that unfold in the story? Is there a reversal in the course of the story? If so, where and why?

b) Identify the textual structure by dividing the story into scenes. Examine the scenes and images within each scene. Make a chart for each paragraph or scene, noting exegetical observations, questions etc. related to each scene.

c) Note how the story unfolds scene by scene. Often the context is given first, followed by scene by scene action. The action typically exposes a dilemma (conflict, tension) which leads to a climax (how is this dilemma going to be resolved?). Then comes the resolution to the dilemma and the conclusion. All stories involve a certain point of tension that leads to a climax. So, as events unfold, be sure to identify the climax and answer the questions: How is the tension resolved? What is the conclusion? This is the dynamic aspect of stories.

d) Examine the characters. Note how the characters respond and act as the story progresses. Identify their strengths and weaknesses and their role in the drama (e.g. the star of the story, the antagonist, the protagonist, a bystander etc.).

e) Analyze any speech or thoughts. Is the central truth expressed through speech or thoughts? Particularly, identify the statements made by the narrator. Often without these statements the story would not make sense because motives, hidden actions, and the like would not be known. Remember, the narrator is omniscient - he knows thoughts, intimate and private conversations, hidden events, even the mind of God. These statements are really God’s entrance into the story as the ultimate storyteller - e.g. “The thing that David had done displeased the LORD” (2 Sam. 11:27b).

f) Identify the various literary structures and devices used. For example, is it written in third person or first person? Is the emphasis on plot or on character development? Is there chiasm, repetition, contrasts, parallelism etc.? If so, how do these literary devices add to the story?

2. Determine The Central, Theological Truth

After analyzing and summarizing the story as I have described above, you should be in a position to determine (a) the subject of the overall story; and (b) what the author says about that subject. The subject of the story is the central, theological truth that the story is communicating. What the author says about the subject constitutes the main points (or, scene by scene sections) of your sermon.

The next task is to write out the central, theological truth (sometimes called the “big idea” or “exegetical idea”). One way to approach this is to start with a single word that captures the subject of the passage and formulate the question about that subject that the writer seems to be answering. Then, write out the all-encompassing answer to that question.

Once you have done that, simply summarize the story in a single descriptive sentence that succinctly states the answer you came up with above. This assertion becomes the central truth of the sermon – i.e. the summary of your sermon stated in a sentence.

B. A Model For Constructing A Narrative Sermon

This is generally the procedure that I follow. I try to interweave my theologically focussed sermon outline with the retelling of the story, making application during and / or at the end of each scene. This is really the identical model that I use for preaching epistles, except that instead of explaining the doctrine in the epistle I am explaining the theological story line in the narrative.

1. The Introduction Of The Sermon

In the introduction, include any background and other material needed to set the story in context and to explain ancient terms or cultural practices.

As I have noted above, it’s important to state your sermon in a sentence in the introduction so that your audience knows the primary theological point of the narrative, a point that you are going to demonstrate in your sermon. Try to state this truth in such a way that it reflects the historical accurateness and literary intent of the story, while using terms that create a timeless theological proposition.

When stated properly, you will end up with an abiding theological concept that is true for God’s people at any time or place. This becomes your preaching idea that governs how you present the rest of the material. The preaching idea is the answer to a specific need, problem, or difficulty in life.

The preaching task is to describe for your audience (1) how people in the narrative related, interacted, and struggled with spiritual needs, problems, diseases etc.; (2) that their struggles were the same as ours; and (3) that their solution is our solution.

2. The Body Of The Sermon

Retell the story scene-by-scene. This is where you show how the theological point comes out of the story.

a) Create a theologically oriented sermon outline that reflects the flow of the story.

Every narrative has a clearly defined structure. Because it is narrative does not imply that there is no structure. There is movement in every story scene-by-scene. That is its structure. One of your first tasks is to find the textual structure, just as you would in any other genre of the Bible.

Therefore, construct an outline that follows the scenes of the story (their movement, flow of thought). Narrative outlines are like music symphonies - one piece with several movements. Scene changes are your key to moving to the next section in your sermon outline. Each scene of the narrative that you uncover in your investigation needs to have a theological point (i.e. a statement of a universal truth or principle). To uncover these statements, ask yourself…

1) What does this scene tell us about God (his ways, purposes, judgements etc.)?

2) What does this scene tell us about ourselves (our relationship to God, our spiritual condition etc.)?

The answers to these questions, when stated as a complete sentence, will form your scene-by-scene statements of theological principle. Just make sure that each theologically focussed, universally true statement for each scene relates to and develops the overall theological truth of the entire story - i.e. your “sermon-in-a-sentence” which is usually stated in your introduction.

Do not create an artificial outline in which the points reflect the scene-by-scene description but do not reflect the flow and development of the theological point of the story. Rather, create a theologically oriented outline, which consists of statements of principle that not only follow the flow of the story but also reflect the message of the story. By stating your scene-by-scene titles as theologically focussed principles, you develop the points for your sermon outline in a way that is consistent with and respectful of the overall theological point and intent of the narrative.

Sometimes it is helpful to blend scene-by-scene descriptions with theologically focussed, universal truth statements for those scenes. This approach not only breaks the story down for your audience, making it easier for them to grasp, but also integrates the story with the principles. To illustrate what I mean, here is an example I developed from Genesis 21:9-21…

Universal truth of the passage: “In God’s providence, trouble often precedes triumph.”

Gen. 21:9-10. Sarah’s resentment (scene description): Trouble often finds its source in our bad attitudes (universal truth).

Gen. 21: 11-14a. Abraham’s predicament (scene description): Trouble often finds its source in our bad decisions (universal truth).

Gen. 21:14b-16. Hagar’s banishment (scene description): Trouble often finds its source in our bad circumstances (universal truth).

Gen. 21:17-21. God’s intervention (scene description): Trouble always finds its solution in God’s goodness (universal truth).

Sometimes (as in this example) I might use the scene description as my paragraph (scene) heading and state the universal truth (principle) as my application heading. In other words, I have two headings within each scene, one that describes the action of the scene and the other that describes the principle derived from the action in the scene. What this does is give the audience clear direction through the story by way of descriptive scene headings as well as clear principles that apply to us today by way of application headings. The one then flows from the other naturally as you preach through each scene.

Thus, in Genesis 21:11-14a for example, my action (scene) heading is: “Abraham’s predicament” (i.e. what to do with Hagar and Ishmael in response to Sarah’s complaint). And my theologically-focussed universal principle that I state in my application is: “Trouble often finds its source in our bad decisions” (or, “short term decisions sometimes produce long term predicaments”) – that’s the lesson for us.

You can guard against artificial structures in narrative sermon outlines…

1) By not imposing “points” on the sermon, thus making a narrative sound like a science text book.

2) By making sure that your principles come naturally out of the narrative.

3) By wording your principles as theological statements for each scene, just as you would any other literary genre.

Make sure your sermon outline is faithful to the narrative by…

1) Following the flow of the narrative;

2) Exposing the conflict, complication / tension, climax, resolution, and conclusion of the narrative; and

3) Proving the theological point of the narrative.

b) Make your applications during or at the end of each scene.

This way each scene of the story is directly connected to the life of your audience. But you need to be careful, when preaching O.T. narrative, not to automatically make a direct transfer of the story line to your contemporary audience. Just because they did something back then does not mean that we should do that now. It is very easy, when preaching O.T. narrative, to fall into the trap of either moralizing the story (so that you end up telling your audience that because so-and-so did it, so should they), or allegorizing the story (so that the physical realities take on spiritual, hidden meanings). To guard against this, you have to be sure to apply the theological point of the text rather than the direct story line itself.

3. The Final Remarks Of The Sermon

Be sure that the remedy to the problem has been clearly stated. Summarize the implications of accepting or rejecting this remedy - show how acceptance brings spiritual blessing, while rejection brings further spiritual disease, decline, and distance. Appeal to the audience to choose blessing (health, life) over judgement (disease, death) – i.e. call for a response.

C. Some Comments About Preaching Narratives This Way

1. Preaching narratives this way enables your people…

a) To feel the story as drama.

b) To grasp the theological idea (which their cursory reading would not expose).

c) To understand the implications for their lives.

d) To respond to your applications of the story to their contemporary life.

2. Preaching narrative this way ensures that…

a) You have been faithful to the narrative form.

b) You have brought out the enduring theological idea of the story.

c) You have shown the people how the ancient story relates to contemporary life.

d) You have forced the people to wrestle with the tension and complication of the story.

e) You have forced them to consider the resolution (remedy) for their own lives.

II. Strengthening Biblical Leadership

“The Motivation For Ministry, Part 3: Christ’s Love” (2 Cor. 5:14-17)

In 2 Corinthians Paul develops the topic of ministry and biblical leadership, which, a few years ago, I began to explore in this journal as follows…

1. Confidence in Ministry - God’s direction and provision (2 Cor. 2:14-3:6, Spring 2013)

2. The Nature of Authentic Ministry:

Part 1, The nature of the message – it’s not about us; it’s about Him (2 Cor. 4:1-6, Summer 2012).

Part 2, The nature of the Christian life– power in weakness (2 Cor. 4:7-16, Summer 2013).

3. The Motivation for Ministry:

Part 1, Our future transformation (2 Cor. 4:16-5:9, Fall 2013).

Part 2, Our accountability to God (2 Cor. 5:10-13, Winter 2014).

In this issue, I would like to continue my exploration of Paul’s exposition on “The Motivation for Ministry” - Part 3, Christ’s sacrificial love (2 Cor. 5:14-17).

Christ’s sacrificial love, which was most fully revealed in his substitutionary atonement, compels us to serve Him. Essentially, Paul’s point here is that Christ died for us, therefore we serve him (not ourselves), specifically in preaching a message of reconciliation.

Having established a prospective motivation for ministry (accountability to God) in 2 Cor. 5:10-13, Paul now establishes a retrospective motivation for ministry, the love of Christ (2 Cor. 5:14-17). Indeed, he insists, “the love of Christ controls us” (5:14a). The overriding motivation in the life of the authentic minister is the love of Christ. For Paul, it didn’t matter that some thought he was mad (2 Cor. 5:13). Whatever he did and endured was motivated by Christ’s love. And that same love “controls us” in that it sets the parameters of our ministry. This is the practical effect of Christ’s love for us and in us - it causes us to do what we do for him in our ministry.

What, then, is the nature of Christ’s love that so controls us? “¹⁴ The love of Christ controls us because we have concluded this: that One has died for all, therefore all have died. ¹⁵ And he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised” (5:14-15).

The context of this paragraph is this: Because we understand the “fear of the Lord” in coming judgement, “we persuade others” (5:11) to believe the reconciling truth of the gospel (5:19-20). And the motivation for such a message and ministry is the compelling and controlling love of Christ (5:14-15).

The principle is this: The death of one person (who did not deserve to die because He was sinless) on behalf of others (who did deserve to die because they are sinners) renders the whole group (the “all” for whom he died) to have died also, because the sinless One died in their place, paying the penalty for their sins.

The application is this: The nature and extent of the love of Christ (as demonstrated in his atoning death) motivates us to do what we do in Christian ministry. It’s easy to get distracted with the theological debate about the nature and extent of the atonement in these verses and miss the application in Paul’s argument. Certainly these verses do tell us a lot about the nature and extent of the atonement - I will discuss this below - but primarily Paul is applying the sacrificial love of Christ, which motivated him to die for us, to our motivation for serving Him.

Paul then states two universal conclusions (2 Cor. 5:14-15)…

The first universal conclusion of Christ’s death is that all have died. “We have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore, all have died.” (5:14). Because Christ died for all humanity, then all humanity in principal has died. We can readily understand that Christ died for all, since that concept is supported in Scripture elsewhere. But what does he mean that “therefore, all have died” (5:14b)? Clearly, in some way Christ’s death involved the death of everyone. As R.V.G. Tasker says, “Christ’s death was the death of all, in the sense that He died the death they should have died; the penalty of their sins was borne by him (1 Cor. 15:3; 2 Cor. 5:20); He died in their place” (Tasker, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, TNTC, Eerdmans, 1958, 86). He died for everyone - whether they ultimately receive him or reject him is a different matter. The penalty for their sins was paid by his death. He died the death they deserved. Therefore, in principal, “all have died.” That’s the conclusion that Paul is making here – the death of one on behalf of a group infers that the group (through that one who died) also died. This is a simple statement of the status of every human being in the sacrificial death of Christ on the cross - He died for them, therefore they all died. The penalty was paid for all.

By saying this, Paul is not advocating universal salvation (since clearly not all have spiritual life), but he is advocating the universal provision and availability of salvation through the death of Christ. Because he died their death, they, in principal died, and through faith in him they can turn to Him if they so chose – i.e. the death of Christ on their behalf made it possible for all humanity to be saved, but only those who believe are actually saved. Christ died on behalf of and for the benefit of all humanity - this is indeed the central truth of the gospel (cf. Col. 1:20; Rom. 8:32).

So, the first universal conclusion of Christ’s death is that “all have died.”

The second universal conclusion of Christ’s death is that some live, not all. “He died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who died for their sake and was raised” (5:15). “Those who live” are clearly a different category of people from the “all” for whom Christ died (5:14b). As Robert L. Dabney puts it: “If we make the all for whom Christ died mean only the all who live unto Him – i.e. the elect – it would seem to be implied that of those elect for whom Christ died, only a part will live to Christ” (Dabney, Lectures, 525). Good observation!

The effect of Christ’s death in “those who live” (i.e. believers, the elect) is their moral transformation and renewal. All people have not undergone such a moral transformation, only Christians because of their new life in Christ. The death of Christ becomes effective for them alone (not for all) because of their faith in Christ, as a result of which they have a new motivation in life, a new way of life. The purpose of Christ’s death was that those who believe (those who have died to the flesh because of his actual death for them) should have morally renewed lives; lives with a new moral purpose and motivation. Thus, “those who live” are believers only, who, as a consequence of Christ’s death on their behalf and their belief in him, now “no longer live for themselves but for him” (which cannot be said of unbelievers) “who for their sake died and was raised.” As a result, they are new creations in Christ (5:17).

In sum, what Paul is saying is that on the basis Christ’s substitutionary death for us (5:14b), and our acceptance of his death as payment for our sins, Christians have a completely different motivation in life than we previously had – namely, not to live for ourselves but to live for him who died for us and was raised again for us (5:15). Thus, Paul’s application of this truth is plain and simple - since Christ died for everyone without exception and since He loved everyone with selfless love, then our motivation in Christian ministry is to preach the gospel of Christ to everyone without exception out of selfless love. Not everyone, however, will accept His offer of salvation, but those who do (“those who live,” 5:15a) receive new life in Christ and from then on live for Him. Consequently, Christ’s love is the compelling basis for how we should now live our lives for him and, thus, conduct our ministry. Just as Christ gave his life for us, so we now give our lives for Him. His love for us should be reflected in our love for others, most particularly by sharing the “ministry of reconciliation (5:18-21), the gospel. Because we live in Him, we are “ambassadors for Christ” (5:20).

So, the nature and extent of the atonement is certainly the basis of Paul’s argument here, but we should not become so engrossed with that debate that we lose sight of Paul’s overall and primary point. We do not serve in ministry for selfish motives but solely for Him, to be his ambassadors on earth.

As a result of Christ’s death for me, I now live in and for him and, thus, my life is changed in its behaviour, purpose, and activity. This teaching is consistent with the entire Scriptural teaching on the Christian life - it is an exchanged life (Gal. 2:20), the old self is put to death and the new self lives for Christ (Gal. 5:24; Eph. 4:17ff.). Ours is a radically different life than before. Instead of living a self-centred life (Eph. 2:1-3; 4:17-19) we live a Christ-centred life (Eph. 2:4-10; 4:20ff.). Thus, we who have died and risen with Christ are not only able but, more particularly, are called to preach the message of reconciliation (5:18-21), which is evident and powerful in our own lives. We are called to live a renewed life through our authentic ministry, motivated by (1) the power of the message in contrast to the weakness of the messenger (4:7); (2) the scrutiny of God on our ministry (5:10-13); and (3) the love of Christ (5:14-17).

From Paul’s argument (5:14-15) he states two consequences (5:16-17).

Consequence #1: “From now on (from the time he began to live for Christ and not for self), therefore, (the first consequence) “we regard no one according to the flesh” (5:16a). Paul no longer assesses and values people based on external appearances, or on subjective, superficial, human standards and relationships (e.g. riches, race, position etc.; cf. Gal. 3:28). Rather, his estimate of and relationship with other people is based on the spiritual values of one with a renewed mind, such that one’s brothers and sisters are not those of the natural family but of the spiritual family (cf. Matt. 12:46ff.). He no longer relates to people at a fleshly level but views others differently now, not according to the flesh but as “new creations in Christ” (5:17).

“Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer” (5:16b). Paul’s knowledge of Christ prior to his conversion was “according to the flesh” - based on a misinformed, misconceived, carnal mind, and merely human assessment. But subsequently his relationship with Christ was totally different. He no longer esteemed Him from an outward, human perspective, but for who Christ really is, which he knows through the indwelling Spirit. Christ cannot be truly known “according to the flesh” (i.e. with the carnal mind, based on human values). That’s why unregenerate people come to false conclusions about him. It takes a conversion experience through the Spirit to know him, and thus to apprehend him as God and Redeemer. Many who knew Christ “according to the flesh” didn’t know him through the Spirit, who alone enlightens our understanding of who He is. “Paul, like Peter and like Thomas, had to learn that it is not having seen Christ, nor knowing about Him that matters, but loving Him and believing on Him (1 Pet. 1:8; Jn. 20:29)” (Philip E. Hughes, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 201).

Consequence #2. “Therefore” (a further consequence of 5:14-15) not only does he no longer regard anyone according to the flesh (including Christ himself), but “if anyone is in Christ” he regards them as “a new creation” (5:17a) for that is what they truly are. Anyone who is born from above is “in Christ” and thus has a new identity, new relationships, new family, new values, new objectives. He or she is viewed as “in Christ” not “according to the flesh” – when we see them, we see Christ, not the outward, sinful flesh.

To be “in Christ” implies security (now and in the future), identity, relationship, divine nature, a completely “new creation” (cf. Eph. 2:10; 4:24). “The old (the person in the flesh, the old nature with all its predisposition to sin etc.) has passed away (perished; disappeared into history); behold (suddenness, surprise, and great joy) the new has come” (5:17b). We are new creations with eternal life, all because of who we are “in Christ.” And what has been done in us (which will be finalized when we are glorified) is a precursor and guarantee of the re-creation of all things.

III. Sermon Outlines

Title: Letters to the Seven Churches – Faithfulness to Christ (Rev. 3:7-13)

Theme: If you are faithful to Christ, He will transform your feebleness into a pillar of strength.

Point 1: Christ encourages us with His sovereign power (3:8-11)

1a) He sovereignly controls our access to him (3:8)

1b) He sovereignly constrains any opposition to him (3:9)

1c) He sovereignly keeps us from judgement by him (3:10-11)

Point 2: Christ encourages is with His sovereign promise (3:12-13)

2a) To those who are feeble, he promises divine strength (3:12a)

2b) To those who are faithful, He promises a divine name (3:12b)

Conclusion: “He has an ear let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches” (3:13)

A ministry of…

Author: Dr. Roger Pascoe, President,
Email: [email protected]

I. Consolidarea Predicării Expozitive
„Predicarea din narațiunile istorice ebraice” (Partea a 2-a)

În prezenta ediție a acestui jurnal, voi continua (din nr. 38, ediția de iarnă 2021) subiectul predicării din narațiunile istorice (ebraice) din Vechiul Testament. Voi încerca să schițez un mod de abordare a predicării din narațiunile istorice, răspunzând la următoarele întrebări: Cum predicăm dintr-o narațiune? Repovestim textul pur și simplu și facem o aplicație la final? Împărțim narațiunea în secțiuni și extragem principii din fiecare secțiune în parte? Sau abordăm textul narativ ca pe o epistolă nou-testamentară și extragem din el principii și aplicații?

Când predicăm dintr-o narațiune, aș sugera că…

1) Trebuie să respectăm și să fim atenți la genul literar al textului atât când facem exegeza, cât și în predicare însă, în același timp, trebuie să înțelegem că predicarea unei narațiuni nu este o simplă repovestire a textului, la care mai adăugăm niște aplicații. Mai degrabă, scopul principal al unei istorisiri biblice este să comunice teologie. Istorisirile biblice nu sunt simple descrieri; ele sunt și prescrieri.

2) Trebuie să deducem principii universal valabile din textele narative biblice, așa cum facem și din epistolele Noului Testament. Diferența este că, în predicarea noastră, trebuie să urmăm, să reflectăm și să respectăm forma de povestire a textului. Pentru asta, trebuie (a) să ne schimbăm stilul de predicare în așa fel încât să reflecte genul narativ; (b) să urmăm succesiunea evenimentelor și esența povestirii; și (c) să modificăm structura schiței de predică pentru a corespunde cu genul narativ.

Putem învăța multe lucruri despre predicarea din narațiunile Vechiului Testament din cartea Faptele Apostolilor. De exemplu, în Fapte 7, Ștefan repovestește istorisirea răscumpărătoare (1) a eliberării și răscumpărării poporului legământului de către Dumnezeu; (2) a păcătoșeniei și răzvrătirii poporului; urmată de (3) aplicarea povestirii la ascultători – adică Ștefan le spune că și ei erau răzvrătiți, că se împotriveau Duhului Sfânt, că L-au omorât pe Cel neprihănit etc. De fapt, aplicarea la ascultători a istorisirii răscumpărătoare a fost atât de puternică și de directă, încât aceștia l-au ucis pe Ștefan (cf. lui Pavel, Fapte 13:16-41).

Dumnezeu a spus povestea. Sarcina noastră este să explicăm principiile sale universale, teologice și eterne și să le aplicăm la ascultătorii noștri. Așa cum analizăm un pasaj dintr-o epistolă pentru a afla principiul său teologic central și adevărurile înrudite cu el, precum și aplicațiile sale actuale, în același fel trebuie să analizăm o narațiune pentru a afla adevărul său teologic central și aplicațiile ce decurg din el. Pentru aflarea adevărului central folosim același procedeu atât în cazul narațiunilor, cât și în cazul epistolelor. N-ar fi fost nevoie să fii teolog dacă trebuia doar să repovestești narațiunea. Era suficient un povestitor sau un actor pentru a pune în scenă povestirea în termeni și limbaj contemporan. Sunt de părere că, în timp ce repovestim narațiunea, trebuie să îi ajutăm pe ascultători să înțeleagă…

1) Ce a însemnat atunci și ce înseamnă acum (făcând legătura între narațiune și noi, cei de astăzi).

2) Care sunt adevărurile sale teologice.

3) Care sunt implicațiile și aplicațiile pentru noi, creștinii.

Pentru aceasta este necesară atât repovestirea narațiunii (pentru ca aceasta să prindă viață pentru ascultătorii de astăzi), cât și explicarea și aplicarea principiului său central. Acest proces este, așadar, didactic și teoretic, este același proces ca și cel folosit în predicarea epistolelor. O diferență care apare între predicarea din epistole și predicarea dintr-un text narativ este că, în cazul epistolelor, analizăm și predicăm paragrafe, pe când în cazul narațiunilor predicăm „scene.” Scenele reflectă mișcarea ce are loc în cadrul povestirii și fiecare scenă trebuie interpretată în lumina întregii povestiri, pentru că povestirea în ansamblul ei revelează adevărul central, preponderent.

A. O Metodă Pentru Studierea Unui Text Narativ

Ca și în cazul altor texte de predică, scopul este să aflăm ce ne descoperă textul narativ despre Dumnezeu (despre natura Sa, voința Sa, căile Sale etc.). Primul pas este…

1. Explorarea textului.

a) Stabilește unde începe și unde se termină povestirea. Dacă este o povestire mai mică ce face parte dintr-una mai mare, stabilește unde se încadrează în povestirea mai mare. Adună date din context (i.e. descrierile și narațiunile din contextul mai larg). Descoperă intriga. Care este succesiunea evenimentelor ce se desfășoară în povestire? Are loc o schimbare majoră în cursul povestirii? Dacă da, unde și de ce?

b) Identifică structura textului, împărțind povestirea în scene/episoade. Analizează scenele și imaginile din fiecare scenă. Fă o hartă pentru fiecare paragraf sau scenă, notând observațiile exegetice, întrebările etc. legate de fiecare scenă.

c) Observă cum se desfășoară povestirea scenă cu scenă. Adesea ne este prezentat contextul prima dată, iar apoi se desfășoară acțiunea scenă cu scenă. Acțiunea expune, de obicei, o dilemă (un conflict, o tensiune) care duce la un punct culminant (cum va fi rezolvată dilema aceasta?). Apoi vine deznodământul dilemei și concluzia. Toate povestirile au un punct culminant care duce la un deznodământ. Așadar, în cursul desfășurării evenimentelor, identifică punctul culminant și răspunde la întrebările: Cum se rezolvă conflictul? Care este concluzia? Acesta este aspectul dinamic al povestirilor.

d) Analizează personajele. Observă cum acționează și reacționează personajele de-a lungul povestirii. Identifică punctele lor tari și pe cele slabe, precum și rolul lor în povestire (ex. personajul principal, adversarul personajului principal, protagonistul povestirii, un spectator etc.).

e) Analizează cuvintele și gândurile. Adevărul central al povestirii este exprimat prin cuvinte sau prin gânduri? Identifică, în special, afirmațiile făcute de narator. Fără aceste afirmații, povestirea adesea nu ar avea sens, pentru că nu am cunoaște motivele, acțiunile ascunse și altele asemenea. Nu uita că naratorul este omniscient – el cunoaște gândurile, conversațiile intime și private, evenimentele ascunse, și cunoaște până și gândurile lui Dumnezeu. Aceste afirmații reprezintă pătrunderea lui Dumnezeu în povestire, pentru că El este adevăratul povestitor – ex. „Fapta lui David n-a plăcut Domnului” (2 Sam. 11:27b).

f) Identifică diferitele structuri literare și figuri de stil folosire în narațiune. De exemplu, povestirea este scrisă la persoana a treia sau la persoana întâi? Accentul cade pe acțiune sau pe dezvoltarea caracterului? Există chiasme, repetiții, contraste, paralelisme etc.? Dacă da, care este rolul acestor figuri de stil în povestire?

2. Stabilește care este adevărul teologic central

După analizarea și rezumarea povestirii așa cum am arătat mai sus, ar trebui să poți stabili (a) subiectul povestirii; și (b) ce spune autorul despre acel subiect. Subiectul povestirii este adevărul teologic central pe care povestirea îl transmite. Ceea ce autorul spune despre subiect constituie punctele principale (sau secțiunile povestirii) ale predicii.

Următorul pas este să scrii adevărul teologic central (numit uneori și „ideea principală” sau „ideea exegetică”). O modalitate în care poți să faci lucrul acesta este să începi cu un singur cuvânt care surprinde subiectul pasajului și să formulezi întrebarea la care autorul pare să răspundă cu privire la acel subiect. Apoi, scrie un răspuns cuprinzător la acea întrebare.

După ce ai făcut lucrul acesta, rezumă povestirea într-o singură frază descriptivă ce prezintă succint răspunsul la care ai ajuns mai sus. Această afirmație devine adevărul central al predicii – i.e. rezumatul predicii într-o singură frază.

B. Un Model Pentru Alcătuirea Unei Predici Narative

Eu procedez cam așa, de obicei. Încerc să împletesc schița mea teologică cu repovestirea textului, făcând aplicații în timpul și / sau la sfârșitul fiecărei scene. Același model îl folosesc și pentru predicarea din epistole, doar că aici, în loc să explic doctrina epistolei, explic ideea teologică din narațiune.

1. Introducerea predicii

În introducere, se includ informațiile legate de context și orice informații necesare plasării povestirii în context și, de asemenea, se explică practicile culturale și alte lucruri ce țin de cultura antică.

După cum am menționat mai sus, este important să rezumi predica într-o singură frază în introducere, pentru ca ascultătorii să știe care este ideea teologică principală a povestirii, o idee pe care urmează să o demonstrezi în cursul predicii. Încearcă să formulezi acest adevăr în așa fel încât să reflecte acuratețea istorică și scopul literar al povestirii, folosind termeni care creează o idee teologică atemporală.

Dacă o vei formula corect, vei obține un concept teologic atemporal, care se aplică oamenilor lui Dumnezeu din orice vreme și orice loc. Aceasta devine ideea homiletică ce va determina modul în care prezinți restul materialului. Ideea homiletică este răspunsul la o nevoie specifică, la o problemă sau la una din greutățile vieții.

Sarcina predicatorului este să arate ascultătorilor (1) modul în care oamenii din narațiune s-au raportat la anumite nevoi spirituale, probleme, boli etc., cum au reacționat și cum s-au luptat cu ele; (2) că luptele lor erau aceleași cu ale noastre; și (3) că soluția lor este și soluția noastră.

2. Cuprinsul predicii

Repovestește istorisirea scenă cu scenă. Aici arăți cum reiese ideea teologică din povestire.

a) Creează o schiță teologică ce reflectă șirul povestirii

Fiecare narațiune are o structură bine determinată. Faptul că este o narațiune nu înseamnă că nu are structură. Fiecare povestire are un curs al său și acesta reprezintă structura narațiunii. Una din primele tale sarcini este să găsești structura textului, la fel ca în cazul oricărui alt gen literar biblic.

Așadar, fă o schiță urmând scenele povestirii (mișcarea lor, fluxul de idei). Schițele narative sunt precum simfoniile muzicale – o singură piesă cu mai multe mișcări. Schimbarea scenei este cheia trecerii către secțiunea următoare a schiței de predică. Fiecare scenă pe care o descoperi în explorarea textului trebuie să aibă o idee teologică (i.e. enunțarea unui adevăr sau principiu universal valabil). Pentru a descoperi aceste enunțări, întreabă-te…

1) Ce ne spune scena aceasta despre Dumnezeu (despre căile, scopurile, judecățile Sale etc.)?

2) Ce ne spune scena aceasta despre (despre relația noastră cu Dumnezeu, despre starea noastră spirituală etc.)?

Răspunsurile la aceste întrebări, formulate în fraze, vor forma enunțurile din fiecare scenă cu privire la principiul teologic. Ai grijă ca ideea teologică generală dedusă din fiecare scenă să aibă legătură cu principiul teologic principal al întregii povestiri – adică „predica într-o singură frază” care apare, de obicei, în introducere – și să îl dezvolte.

Nu crea o schiță artificială în care punctele principale să reflecte descrierea scenelor, însă care să nu reflecte cursul și dezvoltarea ideii teologice a povestirii. Mai degrabă, fă o schiță teologică formată din afirmații despre principiul teologic general care urmează cursul povestirii și, în același timp, reflectă mesajul acesteia. Când formulezi titlurile scenelor povestirii ca principii teologice, îți formulezi de fapt punctele principale ale schiței de predică ținând cont de ideea teologică generală și de scopul narațiunii și în concordanță cu acestea.

Uneori este de ajutor să combini descrierile scenă cu scenă cu afirmații teologice general valabile pentru scenele respective. Această abordare nu doar împarte povestirea în mai multe părți pentru a fi mai ușor de înțeles pentru ascultători, ci o și unește cu principiile teologice. Pentru a ilustra ceea ce vreau să spun, voi da un exemplu pe baza textului din Geneza 21:9-21…

Adevărul universal ce reiese din pasaj: „În providența lui Dumnezeu, triumful este adesea precedat de necazuri.”

Gen. 21:9-10. Ranchiuna Sarei (descrierea scenei): Necazurile vin adesea din atitudinile noastre greșite (adevăr universal).

Gen. 21: 11-14a. Situația dificilă în care se află Avraam (descrierea scenei): Necazurile vin adesea din deciziile noastre greșite (adevăr universal).

Gen. 21:14b-16. Izgonirea lui Agar (descrierea scenei): Necazurile vin adesea din împrejurările rele în care ne aflăm (adevăr universal).

Gen. 21:17-21. Intervenția lui Dumnezeu (descrierea scenei): Necazurile își găsesc întotdeauna rezolvarea în bunătatea lui Dumnezeu (adevăr universal).

Uneori (ca în exemplul acesta), folosesc descrierea scenei ca titlu pentru paragraf (scenă) și formulez adevărul (principiul) universal ca titlu al aplicației. Cu alte cuvinte, am două titluri la fiecare scenă, unul care descrie acțiunea scenei și altul care descrie principiul derivat din acțiunea scenei. Lucrul acesta oferă ascultătorilor o direcție clară pe parcursul povestirii prin intermediul titlurilor scenelor, cât și principii clare ce ni se aplică nouă astăzi, prin titlurile aplicațiilor. În felul acesta, una decurge natural din cealaltă, pe măsură ce predici pasajul scenă cu scenă.

Astfel, în Geneza 21:11-14a de exemplu, titlul pe care l-am dat scenei respective este: „Situația dificilă în care se află Avraam” (i.e. ce să facă cu Agar și Ismael în urma plângerilor Sarei). Iar principiul teologic universal valabil pe care îl formulez în aplicație este: „Necazurile vin adesea din deciziile noastre greșite” (sau „deciziile pe termen scurt produc uneori necazuri pe termen lung”) – aceasta este lecția pe care o avem de învățat.

Te poți feri de structuri artificiale în schițele de predici din texte narative…

1) Dacă nu impui „puncte” predicii, făcând astfel o narațiune să sune ca un text dintr-un manual de științe.

2) Dacă ai grijă ca principiile expuse să reiasă în mod natural din narațiune.

3) Dacă formulezi principiile ca afirmații teologice desprinse din fiecare scenă, la fel cum ai proceda cu un text din orice alt gen literar.

Ai grijă ca schița predicii să respecte textul narativ…

1) Urmând firul narațiunii;

2) Expunând intriga, desfășurarea acțiunii, punctul culminant, deznodământul și încheierea narațiunii; și

3) Demonstrând ideea teologică a narațiunii.

b) Fă aplicațiile în timpul sau la sfârșitul fiecărei scene. În felul acesta, fiecare scenă a povestirii se leagă în mod direct de viața ascultătorilor. Însă trebuie să ai grijă atunci când predici din narațiunile vechi-testamentare, să nu muți firul povestirii în mod automat în viața ascultătorilor tăi. Faptul că ei au făcut ceva atunci nu înseamnă că și noi trebuie să facem la fel astăzi. Este foarte ușor, când predici din narațiunile V.T., să cazi în capcana de a moraliza povestirea (ajungând să spui ascultătorilor că ar trebui să facă un lucru, pentru că și cutare l-a făcut) sau de a alegoriza povestirea (astfel că realitățile fizice încep să aibă semnificații spirituale ascunse). Pentru a te feri de lucrul acesta, trebuie să ai grijă să faci aplicații la ideea teologică a textului, și nu la firul povestirii.

3. Observațiile de final ale predicii

Ai grijă ca remediul problemei să fie formulat în mod clar. Prezintă pe scurt implicațiile acceptării sau respingerii acestui remediu – arată cum acceptarea remediului aduce binecuvântare spirituală, pe când respingerea acestuia aduce și mai multă boală spirituală, declin și răceală spirituală. Cheamă ascultătorii să aleagă binecuvântarea (sănătatea, viața), și nu judecata (boala, moartea) – cu alte cuvinte, cere un răspuns!

C. Câteva Observații Despre Predicarea Narațiunilor În Felul Acesta

1. Predicarea narațiunilor în felul acesta le permite ascultătorilor…

a) Să simtă că povestirea prinde viață.

b) Să prindă ideea teologică (pe care nu ar observa-o în cursul citirii obișnuite).

c) Să înțeleagă implicațiile ce li se aplică lor.

d) Să răspundă la aplicațiile pe care le faci la viața lor contemporană.

2. Predicarea narațiunilor în felul acesta te asigură că…

a) Respecți genul narativ.

b) Ai scos la lumină ideea teologică a povestirii.

c) Ai arătat oamenilor cum se leagă povestirea aceea veche de viața lor contemporană.

d) I-ai făcut pe oameni să se lupte cu tensiunea creată de intriga povestirii.

e) I-ai determinat să se gândească la soluția (remediul) de care au ei nevoie.

II. Consolidarea conducerii biblice

„Motivația pentru slujire, Punctul 3: Dragostea lui Hristos” (2 Cor. 5:14-17)

În 2 Corinteni, Pavel dezbate subiectul slujirii și al conducerii biblice, pe care, în urmă cu câțiva ani, am început să îl explorez în acest jurnal, după cum urmează…

1. Încredere în slujire - Călăuzirea și purtarea de grijă a lui Dumnezeu (2 Cor. 2:14-3:6, Ediția de primăvară 2013)

2. Natura slujirii autentice:

Punctul 1, Natura mesajului – nu este despre noi; este despre El (2 Cor. 4:1-6, Ediția de vară 2012).

Punctul 2, Natura vieții creștine – putere în slăbiciune (2 Cor. 4:7-16, Ediția de vară 2013).

3. Motivația pentru slujire:

Punctul 1, Transformarea noastră viitoare (2 Cor. 4:16-5:9, Ediția de toamnă 2013).

Punctul 2, Responsabilitatea noastră înaintea lui Dumnezeu (2 Cor. 5:10-13, Ediția de iarnă 2014).

În ediția aceasta, aș vrea să continui explorarea expunerii lui Pavel despre „Motivația pentru slujire” - Punctul 3, Dragostea sacrificială a lui Hristos (2 Cor. 5:14-17).

Dragostea sacrificială a lui Hristos, care a fost revelată pe deplin prin ispășirea substitutivă, ne constrânge să-L slujim. În esență, ce vrea să spună Pavel aici este că Hristos a murit pentru noi, de aceea noi Îl slujim pe El (nu pe noi înșine), în mod specific prin predicarea unui mesaj de reconciliere.

După ce am văzut o motivație prospectivă pentru slujire (faptul că vom da socoteală înaintea lui Dumnezeu) în 2 Cor. 5:10-13, Pavel ne oferă acum și o motivație retrospectivă pentru slujire, și anume dragostea lui Hristos (2 Cor. 5:14-17). Într-adevăr, el insistă asupra faptului că „dragostea lui Hristos ne strânge” (5:14a). Motivația primordială din viața unui slujitor autentic este dragostea lui Hristos. Pentru Pavel nu conta faptul că unii îl considerau nebun (2 Cor. 5:13). În tot ceea ce făcea și îndura era mânat de dragostea lui Hristos. Și aceeași dragoste „ne strânge” prin faptul că ea stabilește parametrii slujirii noastre. Acesta este efectul practic al dragostei lui Hristos față de noi și în noi - ea ne determină să facem ceea ce facem pentru El în slujirea noastră.

Care este, așadar, natura dragostei lui Hristos care ne constrânge atât de mult? „¹⁴ Căci dragostea lui Hristos ne strânge; fiindcă socotim că, dacă Unul singur a murit pentru toți, toți deci au murit. ¹⁵Şi El a murit pentru toți, pentru ca cei ce trăiesc să nu mai trăiască pentru ei înșiși, ci pentru Cel ce a murit și a înviat pentru ei” (5:14-15).

Contextul acestui paragraf este următorul: Pentru că înțelegem „frica de Domnul” în ce privește judecata viitoare, „pe oameni căutăm să-i încredințăm” (5:11) că trebuie să creadă adevărul aducător de pace al evangheliei (5:19-20). Iar motivația pentru un astfel de mesaj și o astfel de lucrare este dragostea irezistibilă a lui Hristos care ne constrânge (5:14-15).

Principiul este acesta: Moartea unei singure persoane (care nu a meritat să moară, deoarece era fără păcat) pentru alții (care au meritat să moară, pentru că sunt păcătoși) face ca întregul grup (acei „toți” pentru care El a murit) să fie părtași în moartea Sa, pentru că Cel fără păcat a murit în locul lor, plătind pedeapsa pentru păcatele lor.

Aplicația este aceasta: Natura și măsura dragostei lui Hristos (demonstrată prin moartea Sa ispășitoare) ne motivează să facem ceea ce facem în slujirea creștină. Putem să ne lăsăm ușor distrași de dezbaterea teologică cu privire la natura și măsura ispășirii din aceste versete și să trecem cu vederea aplicația din discursul lui Pavel. Cu siguranță, versetele acestea ne spun multe despre natura și măsura ispășirii – voi vorbi despre asta mai jos – însă Pavel aplică, înainte de toate, dragostea sacrificială a lui Hristos, care l-a determinat pe El să moară pentru noi, la motivația noastră de a-L sluji pe El.

Pavel formulează apoi două concluzii general valabile (2 Cor. 5:14-15)…

Prima concluzie general valabilă cu privire la moartea lui Hristos este că toți au murit. „Fiindcă socotim că, dacă Unul singur a murit pentru toți, toți deci au murit.” (5:14). Deoarece Hristos a murit pentru întreaga omenire, în principiu întreaga omenire a murit. Este ușor de înțeles că Hristos a murit pentru toți, deoarece ideea aceasta este susținută și în alte părți din Scriptură. Însă ce înseamnă că „toți deci au murit” (5:14b)? În mod clar, moartea lui Hristos implică moartea tuturor. După cum spune R.V.G. Tasker, „Moartea lui Hristos a fost moartea tuturor oamenilor, în sensul că El a murit moartea de care ei ar fi trebuit să aibă parte; pedeapsa pentru păcatele lor a fost purtată de El (1 Cor. 15:3; 2 Cor. 5:20); El a murit în locul lor” (Tasker, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians [A doua epistolă către Corinteni], TNTC, Eerdmans, 1958, 86). El a murit pentru toți - iar dacă ei, în cele din urmă, Îl vor primi sau Îl vor respinge este cu totul altă problemă. Pedeapsa pentru păcatele lor a fost plătită prin moartea Sa. El a îndurat moartea pe care ei o meritau. Așadar, în principiu, „toți au murit.” Aceasta este concluzia pe care o trage Pavel aici – moartea unuia singur pentru mai mulți înseamnă că toți au murit (prin cel care a murit). Aceasta este o afirmație simplă cu privire la statutul fiecărei ființe umane în moartea sacrificială a lui Hristos pe cruce – El a murit pentru ei, prin urmare toți au murit. Pedeapsa a fost plătită pentru toți.

Spunând aceasta, Pavel nu susține mântuirea universală (este destul de limpede că nu toți au viață spirituală), ci susține faptul că mântuirea este asigurată și oferită tuturor prin moartea lui Hristos. Pentru că El a murit pentru ei, în principiu au murit și ei și, prin credința în El, ei se pot întoarce la El dacă doresc – cu alte cuvinte, moartea lui Hristos în locul lor a făcut posibil ca toți oamenii să fie salvați, însă doar cei care cred sunt, de fapt, salvați. Hristos a murit în locul întregii omeniri și pentru întreaga omenire – acesta este, într-adevăr, adevărul central al evangheliei. (cf. Col. 1:20; Rom. 8:32).

Așadar, prima concluzie universal valabilă cu privire la moartea lui Hristos este că „toți au murit.”

Cea de-a doua concluzie universal valabilă cu privire la moartea lui Hristos este că unii trăiesc, și nu toți. „Şi El a murit pentru toţi, pentru ca cei ce trăiesc să nu mai trăiască pentru ei înşişi, ci pentru Cel ce a murit şi a înviat pentru ei” (5:15). „Cei ce trăiesc” reprezintă în mod clar o altă categorie de oameni decât acei „toți” pentru care a murit Hristos (5:14b). Robert L. Dabney spune astfel: „Dacă acei toți pentru care a murit Hristos înseamnă doar toți cei care trăiesc prin El – adică cei aleși – atunci ar părea că textul spune aici că dintre cei aleși pentru care a murit Hristos, doar o parte vor trăi pentru Hristos” (Dabney, Lectures [Prelegeri], 525). Bună observație!

Efectul morții lui Hristos în „cei ce trăiesc” (i.e. credincioșii, cei aleși) este reînnoirea și transformarea lor morală. Nu toți oamenii au parte de această transformare morală, ci doar creștinii, datorită vieții noi pe care o au în Hristos. Moartea lui Hristos are efect doar pentru ei (nu pentru toți), datorită credinței lor în Hristos, iar ca rezultat ei au o motivație nouă în viață, un nou mod de viață. Scopul morții lui Hristos a fost ca cei care cred (cei care au murit față de firea pământească prin moartea Lui pentru ei) să aibă o viață nouă din punct de vedere moral; o viață cu un nou scop moral și o nouă motivație. Astfel, „cei care trăiesc” sunt doar cei credincioși, care, ca urmare a morții lui Hristos în locul lor și a credinței lor în El, acum pot „să nu mai trăiască pentru ei înşişi” (ceea ce nu putem spune despre necredincioși), „ci pentru Cel ce a murit şi a înviat pentru ei”. Ca urmare, ei sunt făpturi noi în Hristos (5:17).

Pe scurt, Pavel spune că, pe baza morții substitutive a lui Hristos pentru noi (5:14b) și a acceptării din partea noastră a morții Sale ca plată pentru păcatele noastre, creștinii au o motivație cu totul nouă – și anume aceea că nu mai trăim pentru noi înșine, ci trăim pentru Cel care a murit și a înviat pentru noi (5:15). Astfel, Pavel face o aplicație simplă a acestui adevăr – pentru că Hristos a murit pentru toți, fără excepție, și pentru că El ne-a iubit pe toți cu o dragoste dezinteresată, motivația noastră în slujirea creștină este să predicăm evanghelia lui Hristos tuturor, fără excepție, din dragoste dezinteresată. Totuși, nu toți vor accepta oferta salvării Sale, însă cei care o vor accepta („cei ce trăiesc” 5:15a), vor primi o viață nouă în Hristos și vor trăi pentru El. Prin urmare, dragostea lui Hristos este ceea ce ne constrânge acum să trăim pentru El și determină modul în care Îl slujim pe El. La fel cum Hristos și-a dat viața pentru noi, tot așa ne dăm și noi viața Lui. Dragostea Lui pentru noi ar trebui să se reflecte în dragostea noastră pentru alții, și mai ales în faptul că luăm parte la „slujba împăcării” (5:18-21), adică la evanghelie. Pentru că trăim în El, suntem „trimiși împuterniciți ai lui Hristos” (5:20).

Așadar, natura și măsura ispășirii este, fără îndoială, baza argumentului lui Pavel din textul acesta, însă nu ar trebui să devenim atât de absorbiți de această dezbatere încât să pierdem din vedere ideea principală a lui Pavel. Noi nu slujim în lucrare din motive egoiste, ci doar pentru El, ca să fim ambasadorii Lui pe pământ.

Ca urmare a morții lui Hristos pentru mine, eu trăiesc acum în El și pentru El și, astfel, viața mea este schimbată la nivel de comportament, scop și activitate. Învățătura aceasta este consecventă cu toată învățătura Scripturii despre viața creștină – viața creștină este o viață schimbată (Gal. 2:20), firea pământească este răstignită și omul cel nou trăiește pentru Hristos (Gal. 5:24; Ef. 4:17 și urm.). Viața noastră este radical diferită de cea de dinainte. În loc să trăim o viață egoistă (Ef. 2:1-3; 4:17-19), trăim o viață ce Îl are pe Hristos în centru (Ef. 2:4-10; 4:20 și urm.). Astfel, noi, cei care am murit și am înviat împreună cu Hristos nu doar că putem, ci mai exact, suntem chemați să predicăm mesajul împăcării (5:18-21), care este vizibil și puternic în viața noastră. Suntem chemați să trăim o viață nouă prin slujirea noastră autentică, motivați de (1) puterea mesajului în contrast cu slăbiciunea mesagerului (4:7); (2) privirea lui Dumnezeu asupra slujirii noastre (5:10-13); și (3) dragostea lui Hristos (5:14-17).

Din argumentul său (5:14-15), Pavel deduce două consecințe (5:16-17).

Consecința #1: „Aşa că, de acum încolo (adică din momentul în care a început să trăiască pentru Hristos și nu pentru sine), (prima consecință) „nu mai cunoaștem pe nimeni în felul lumii” (5:16a). Pavel nu îi mai evaluează și prețuiește pe oameni pe baza înfățișării lor exterioare sau pe baza relațiilor și standardelor umane, subiective și superficiale (ex. bogății, rasă, poziție socială etc.; cf. Gal. 3:28). Mai degrabă, relația lui cu alți oameni și aprecierea lui față de ei se bazează pe valorile spirituale ale omului cu mintea înnoită, pentru care surorile și frații lui nu sunt cei din familia naturală, ci cei din familia spirituală (cf. Mat. 12:46 și urm.). El nu se mai raportează la oameni la un nivel firesc, ci îi vede altfel acum pe ceilalți, nu potrivit firii, ci îi vede ca fiind „o făptură nouă” (5:17) în Hristos.

„Și, chiar dacă am cunoscut pe Hristos în felul lumii, totuși acum nu-L mai cunoaștem în felul acesta” (5:16b). Înainte de convertirea sa, Pavel Îl cunoștea pe Hristos „în felul lumii” – cu mintea sa firească, dezinformată și greșită, și avea o părere omenească despre El. Însă ulterior, relația sa cu Hristos a fost cu totul alta. Acum, el nu Îl mai privește dintr-o perspectivă umană, exterioară, ci Îl prețuiește pentru cine este El cu adevărat, pentru că Îl cunoaște prin Duhul Sfânt care locuiește în el. Hristos nu poate fi cunoscut cu adevărat „în felul lumii” (i.e. cu mintea firească, pe baza valorilor umane). De aceea oamenii nenăscuți din nou ajung la concluzii false cu privire la El. Este nevoie de experiența convertirii prin Duhul Sfânt ca să Îl poți cunoaște și să Îl înțelegi astfel ca Dumnezeu și Răscumpărător. Mulți care L-au cunoscut pe Hristos „în felul lumii” nu L-au cunoscut prin Duhul, singurul care ne iluminează înțelegerea cu privire la Persoana Domnului Isus. „Pavel, ca Petru și Toma, a trebuit să învețe că ceea ce contează nu este să Îl fi văzut pe Hristos sau să știi despre El, ci să Îl iubești pe El și să crezi în El (1 Pet. 1:8; In. 20:29)” (Philip E. Hughes, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians [Cea de-a doua epistolă către Corinteni], 201).

Consecința #2. „Căci” (o altă consecință ce decurge din 5:14-15) nu doar că nu mai cunoaște pe nimeni în felul lumii (inclusiv pe Hristos), ci „dacă este cineva în Hristos”, el consideră că acea persoană „este o făptură nouă” (5:17a), pentru că așa este, într-adevăr. Toți cei ce au fost născuți de sus sunt „în Hristos” și au astfel o nouă identitate, relații noi, o familie nouă, valori noi, obiective noi. Ei sunt văzuți ca fiind „în Hristos” nu „în felul lumii” – când ne uităm la ei, Îl vedem pe Hristos, și nu firea păcătoasă.

A fi „în Hristos” implică siguranță (acum și în viitor), identitate, relație, natură divină, „o făptură nouă” (cf. Ef. 2:10; 4:24). „Cele vechi (omul vechi, firea păcătoasă predispusă la păcat etc.) s-au dus (au pierit; au dispărut în istorie); iată (deodată, prin surprindere, o mare bucurie) că toate lucrurile s-au făcut noi” (5:17b). Suntem făpturi noi și avem viață veșnică, datorită statutului pe care îl avem „în Hristos.” Și ceea ce a avut loc în noi (și care se va încheia atunci când vom fi glorificați) este un precursor și o garanție a noii creații.

III. Schițe de predici

Titlu: Scrisori către cele șapte biserici – Credincioșie față de Hristos (Apoc. 3:7-13)

Tema: Dacă Îi ești credincios lui Hristos, El va transforma slăbiciunea ta într-un stâlp de putere.

Punctul 1: Hristos ne încurajează prin puterea Lui suverană (3:8-11)

1a) El controlează în mod suveran accesul nostru la El (3:8)

1b) El constrânge în mod suveran pe oricine opune rezistență (3:9)

1c) El ne păzește în mod suveran de judecata Sa (3:10-11)

Punctul 2: Hristos ne încurajează prin promisiunea Lui suverană (3:12-13)

2a) Celor slabi le promite putere divină (3:12a)

2b) Celor credincioși le promite un nume divin (3:12b)

Concluzie: „Cine are urechi să asculte ce zice bisericilor Duhul.” (3:13)