Gaffin on the efficacy of the cross

Richard Gaffin on the efficacy of the cross as elucidtaed by Paul:

Only now are we in a position, finally, to address more specifically how Paul unfolds the efficacy of Christ's death. He does so using a number of themes or motifs that reinforce each other, and at points overlap. Prominent among these are sacrifice, or expiation; propitiation; reconciliation; redemption; and justification. As we have already seen, Christ's death, together with his resurrection,  is God's eschatalogical answer to sin as rebellion against God, specifically his revealed will. In the cross and resurrection, God addresses sin in its essential and irreducible twofold aspect. He removes the sinner's sin both as recurring guilt and as corrupting and enslaving power, and in so doing, he effects the removal of his just wrath, terminating in eternal destruction, which that guilt and corruption deserve. (Nicole, Roger R., Charles E. Hill, and Frank A. James. The Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Historical & Practical Perspectives : Essays in Honor of Roger Nicole. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004. Print. 156-7)

This is monumentous! God, through Christ, defeats sin at the level of our experience removing its guilt-inducing, corruption-producing, and slave-recruiting efficacy. But, more importantly or at least more foundationally, in doing so God removes his own just wrath which had destined us for eternal damnation. Amazing grace!

Substitution and Sacrifices explained by Dr. Jim Hamilton

As I blog through Dr. Jim Hamilton’s momentous and memorable biblical theology called God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment, I come to an important explanation focused on the sacrifices of the Old Testament Levitical system. The OT sacrifices, and how they relate to us as New Testament believers, is something I have often wrestled with and, in some respects, continue to wrestle with. This excerpt from Hamilton’s book is very helpful:

The substitution seen in both the sacrifice of the ram in place of Isaac and the Passover lamb in place of the firstborn of Israel is also reiterated in the Levitical system. Wenham writes, “In some degree substitution seems to form part of the theology of all the sacrifices.” The worshiper places his hand on the head of the sacrificial animal (e.g., Lev. 1:4). The description of the Day of Atonement ritual in Leviticus 16 adds that when the high priest places his hands on the head of the animal, he is to confess the sins of the people over the animal (16:21), and this seems to make explicit what is implicit elsewhere. As Wenham writes, “In sacrifice it appears that the worshiper identifies himself with the animal he offers. What he does to the animal, he does symbolically to himself. The death of the animal portrays the death of himself.” The substitute is judged on behalf of the worshiper. The transfer of guilt from the worshiper to the sacrificial beast, and then the death of the beast, cleanses the worshiper of sin. The blood of the beast atones for the soul of the worshiper (Lev. 17:11). Kiuchi writes, “The offerer is viewed as the object of the Lord’s wrath to varying the degrees, and the offerings symbolize the offer appeasing the Lord’s wrath.” The worshipers are saved by faith through the judgment that falls on the sacrifice. God is glorified in salvation through judgment. (110-1)

This passage not only helps support Hamilton’s premise that the central and unifying theme of the Bible is God’s glory in salvation through judgment, but it is also crucial for understanding the sacrifice that Christ made on Calvary. The Levitical sacrifices are a shadow of Christ’s sacrifices and they point to the Son of God becoming our substitute and propitiating God’s wrath and cleansing us from sin. As God’s elect, he identifies us with himself in his sacrifice; he, as our substitute, is judged on our behalf.

These types of discussions are imperative if we are to understand the concept of penal substitution and Hamilton’s elucidating of the OT sacrifices is a welcome voice.

Christ in Comparison

And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. (Hebrews 10:11-14 ESV)

To compare is to consider at least two different things in light of their similarities and differences. In these verses the author of Hebrews uses comparison to highlight the following:

Similarities

1. sin - is is the ever present enemy of both God and man and as such is something that must be dealt with
2. sacrifice - sacrifice is the method of dealing with sin as prescribed by God
3. mediator - the sacrifice for sin requires a mediator to mediate between God and man

Differences

1. frequency - the OT priests offered sacrifices repeatedly pointing to futility whereas Christ made one sacrifice pointing towards efficacy
2. posture - the OT priests remained standing indicating their work was never finished and therefore was fruitless whereas Christ sat down indicating His work was finished and therefore effectual
3. sufficiency - the OT priests' sacrificing could never take away sins and therefore ultimately failed whereas Christ's sacrifice has perfected His people and is deemed efficacious

Our sin required a sacrifice administered by a mediator. The OT cultic system and its priests ultimately failed as their endeavours where fruitless and futile. Christ's NT covenant and sacrifice was effectual, and efficacious.

This points to Jesus Christ as the matchless and unchallengeable priest and sacrifice of a superior covenant. That's our Saviour.