Christian Message Boards: WHAT WAS ACCOMPLISHED AT CALVARY?

This is topic WHAT WAS ACCOMPLISHED AT CALVARY? in forum Bible Topics & Study at Christian Message Boards.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://thechristianbbs.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=006119

Posted by WildB (Member # 2917) on :

by Cornelius R. Stam

If the Bible makes anything clear, it is the fact that the secret of all God's good news to men is centered in Calvary. It was because Christ was to die for sin that God could proclaim good news to sinners down through the ages.

It was not until some time after the crucifixion, however, that "the preaching of the cross" was widely proclaimed as a message by Paul in "the gospel [good news] of the grace of God" (ICor.1:18; Acts 20:24).

The proclamation of "the gospel of the grace of God" was the natural accompaniment to the revelation of the cross as the secret of God's good news to man. In this proclamation of His over-abounding grace to sinners, everything centers in the cross.

According to Paul's epistles "we have redemption through His [Christ's] blood" (Eph.1:7), we are "justified by His blood" (Rom.5:9), "reconciled to God by the death of His Son" (Rom.5:10), "made nigh by the blood of Christ" (Eph.2:13), and "made the righteousness of God in Him" because "God hath made Him to be sin for us" (IICor.5:21).

The "covenant" of the Law was abolished by the cross (Col.2:14), the curse of the Law was removed by the cross (Gal.3:13), the "middle wall of partition" was broken down by the cross (Eph.2:14,15), and believers in Christ are "reconciled to God in one body by the cross" (Eph. 2:16). Little wonder Paul calls this message "the preaching of the cross"!

To the believers it is thrilling indeed, and how thankful we should be, to see the cross as God's reply to Satan when, at first glance, it had appeared that the cross was Satan's greatest triumph.

Posted by Eden (Member # 5728) on :

WildB posted an article by Cornelius R. Stam who said

quote:
If the Bible makes anything clear, it is the fact that the secret of all God's good news to men is centered in Calvary. It was because Christ was to die for sin that God could proclaim good news to sinners down through the ages.

But it is curious that Paul resolved to "know nothing but the resurrection" instead of the "secret that was centered on Calvary".

Acts 4:33
And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.

Acts 17:18
Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? Other some, He seems to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached to them Jesus, and the resurrection.

Cornelius Stam said

quote:
If the Bible makes anything clear, it is the fact that the secret of all God's good news to men is centered in Calvary. It was because Christ was to die for sin that God could proclaim good news to sinners down through the ages.

The resurrection was preached more than Calvary, though the two were sequentially connected.

love, Eden

Posted by Aaron (Member # 3761) on :

Amen Eve,

Paul said this about the Corinthians

quote:
1Cr 3:1-3 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?

So that is why, when he was among them, he limited his teaching:

quote:
1Cr 2:2 For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

But, at the same time, Paul declared that there were other things to teach "among the mature":

quote:
1Cr 2:6,7 However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory...

So, the teaching of Christ's crucifixion is a thing of "milk" given to the young in Christ. There are other, more "meaty", teachings that are suitable for the mature in Christ.

Therefore, it is "childish" to say that Christ's crucifixion is the summation of God's wisdom. Is it vital? Yes. Foundational? Yes. But not the most important central message of God's gospel.

Aaron

Posted by TB125 (Member # 2450) on :

Aaron,
The reason that Paul concentrated his attention on the cross of Jesus in his preaching and teaching to the Corinthians was because of his failure to establish a group of believers in Athens where he tried to blend the "wisdom" of their citizens and philosophers, including their poetry and sculpture, into his message (see 1 Cor 1:17-3:2). The cross may be considered the "milk" of the gospel, but that is not because it isn't "meaty" enough for the believer's "diet" (his or her spiritual nouishment), but because it is so basic to the life of the believer. Please reconsider your perspective on this.

Posted by Aaron (Member # 3761) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TB125:
Aaron,
The reason that Paul concentrated his attention on the cross of Jesus in his preaching and teaching to the Corinthians was because of his failure to establish a group of believers in Athens where he tried to blend the "wisdom" of their citizens, including their poetry and sculpture, into his message.

So, when Paul wrote:

quote:
1Cr 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

and

quote:
1Cr 2:4 And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.

You're saying he really meant to say "I mixed my message with your carnal wisdom"?

Paul does not have a habit of writing one thing and doing the opposite. Correct?

Aaron

Posted by TB125 (Member # 2450) on :

Aaron,
In response to these questions:

quote:
You're saying he really meant to say "I mixed my message with your carnal wisdom"?

Paul does not have a habit of writing one thing and doing the opposite. Correct?

I'm saying that he changed the theme and content of his message to the Corinthians from that which he had tried to deliver to the Athenians. He had tried to mixed the message of the cross and resurrection of Jesus with the "carnal wisdom" of the Athenian philosophers, and it wasn't accepted. It didn't produce many believers, so he was determined not to make the same mistake with the Corinthians.

Paul is usually very consistent in his writing and what he does in his life of preaching and teaching. He usually preaches and teaches what he basically believes, but in Athens he tried to blend the basics of his gospel message with some "carnal" poetry and sculpture, which he later realized was a big mistake. His preaching and teaching were much more solid when he built them on the basics of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection and the prophecies of the Old Testament writings than when he tried to combine them with other messages or sources.

My point is that in his preaching and teaching ministry to the Corinthians he returned to the unblended "basics" of the gospel. This does not mean that the message of the cross is somehow reduced in its nourishing value or "toughness". I trust that my point is clear.

Posted by Aaron (Member # 3761) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TB125:
Aaron,
In response to these questions:
quote:
You're saying he really meant to say "I mixed my message with your carnal wisdom"?

Paul does not have a habit of writing one thing and doing the opposite. Correct?

I'm saying that he changed the theme and content of his message to the Corinthians from that which he had tried to deliver to the Athenians. He had tried to mixed the message of the cross and resurrection of Jesus with the "carnal wisdom" of the Athenian philosophers, and it wasn't accepted. It didn't produce many believers, so he was determined not to make the same mistake with the Corinthians.

Paul is usually very consistent in his writing and what he does in his life of preaching and teaching. He usually preaches and teaches what he basically believes, but in Athens he tried to blend the basics of his gospel message with some "carnal" poetry and sculpture, which he later realized was a big mistake. His preaching and teaching were much more solid when he built them on the basics of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection and the prophecies of the Old Testament writings than when he tried to combine them with other messages or sources.

My point is that in his preaching and teaching ministry to the Corinthians he returned to the unblended "basics" of the gospel. This does not mean that the message of the cross is somehow reduced in its nourishing value or "toughness". I trust that my point is clear.

I understand what you are saying but it remains speculation at best.

Paul said that the message he preached to the Corinthians was "milk" and not the message of wisdom that he preaches among the mature. He defined the "milk" as "Christ and Him crucified".

Why is this so hard to receive? And why the attempt to make "Christ and Him crucified" more than milk to babes when Paul, himself, called it that?

Don't all babes need milk? Wouldn't we wall perish if we didn't have milk at one point in our lives? Calling "Christ and Him crucified" "milk" does not reduce the importance of the message.

My children, at one time, ate only milk because that is all they could handle. Now, because they have matured, they can ate many other things...things intended for more mature children.

Now, because they no longer HAVE to eat milk do I rile at the milk and say "Oh, that milk is worthless" or "What a foolish thing the milk was."?

No.

Because of the milk they could become mature. It was milk first then meat.

Now, if I only had milk to feed them, well, I then may attempt to ascribe qualities to the milk that aren't true. I may say things like
"Milk is all you need."
or
"There is nothing more than milk."
or
"All food is really milk."
or
"If you are smart enough you can see that the milk is really meat."

Rubbish.

Milk is milk. It doesn't have to be meat because the Father provides the meat as well.

Aaron

Posted by becauseHElives (Member # 87) on :

If the Bible makes anything clear, it is the fact that...

The term Calvary , The term the Cross. The term Death, Burial and Resurrection are exactly the same thing that can not be separated ....

WHAT WAS ACCOMPLISHED AT CALVARY?

simple the death, burial, and resurrection ....

one without the other is of no effect to those of faith! [Bible]

Posted by bluefrog (Member # 7448) on :

MILK...is a measure used for discussion on this here board, don't ya know ? It has been said maany times, "Here take this milk..dummy".

I have a question. Why is milk being discussed on the "What was accomplished at Calvary" board?

Posted by Eden (Member # 5728) on :

bluefrog wrote

quote:
I have a question. Why is milk being discussed on the "What was accomplished at Calvary" board?

Because the "milk of the Word" is one of the things that Jesus acquired/created for us through the cross of Calvary. And the "meat of the Word" is the second thing that Jesus acquired/created for us on Calvary. That's why "milk" is being discussed on this board under the Topic "What was accomplished at Calvary"?

love, Eden

Posted by bluefrog (Member # 7448) on :

EDEN....Happy New Year