SON OF MAN (Part one of a three part sermon series.)

“The Son of Man” is a designation of Christ found frequently in the NT. It was Jesus’ favorite designation of himself to imply both his messianic mission and his full humanity.”

Dale Ellenburg and John B. Polhill

 

1. The Son of Man signifies and conceals Christ’s Messiahship.

  1. Jesus avoided the use of the term MESSIAH (lit “Anointed one” Greek “Christ”).

    1. It had militaristic connotations.

    2. It had political connotations.

Why is this important?

  • What we presuppose or imagine God to be has consequences. God is not the sum of all our fallen hopes and dreams. He is the sum total of Himself and he shares Himself with us.

  • “Thy kingdom come” will not be brought about through legislation but through the second coming.

  • Even today the name of Christ (Messiah) is misused or exploited for military or political purposes. (Examples: Mid-Eastern politics: Christian Zionism, Political party platforms: How would Jesus vote? Or building a “nation under God”)

2. The Christian teaching concerning The Incarnation is linked with the title Son of Man.

  1. Incarnation: “This term refers, in the first instance, to the act wherein the eternal Son “became flesh,” but it is extended to signify the whole experience of human life into which he entered, and also embraces within its reference the fact that Christ still bears his humanity and will do so forever.” C. W. Carter

      • And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14, ESV)

  • The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood. We saw the glory with our own eyes, the one-of-a-kind glory, like Father, like Son, Generous inside and out, true from start to finish.” (John 1:14, The Message)

  1. The Christian teaching of incarnation has a divine order or direction to it.

    1. Think of the song Lord I Lift Your Name on High… “You Came from Heaven to Earth..”

    2. No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.” (John 3:13, ESV)

      • Our culture is really becoming more and more… anthropocentric in its world view. Anthropocentric is a ten dollar word that basically means man centered in these three ways:

      1. Human beings are the central fact of the universe.

      1. As a worldview it assumes that human beings are the final aim and end of the universe.

      2. This world view seems to view and interpret everything in terms of human experience and values.


 

 

Man Centered Worldview

Man Centered Worldview

 

God Centered Worldview

God Centered Worldview

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Why is this important?

  1. The Son of Man means God is in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself.  2 Corinthians 5:19

  2. Jesus was not thinking of ME ABOVE ALL he was thinking of the FATHER ABOVE ALL. John 3:16

  3. Because you know that Jesus represents the Father you can be confident that God The Father Almighty has extended his loving hand of Grace to you through the incarnation of Jesus as The Son of Man.

 

John 3:13–18

Will you trust and receive The Son of Man today?

““No one has ever gone up into the presence of God except the One who came down from that Presence, the Son of Man. In the same way that Moses lifted the serpent in the desert so people could have something to see and then believe, it is necessary for the Son of Man to be lifted up—and everyone who looks up to him, trusting and expectant, will gain a real life, eternal life. “This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life. God didn’t go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was. He came to help, to put the world right again. Anyone who trusts in him is acquitted; anyone who refuses to trust him has long since been under the death sentence without knowing it. And why? Because of that person’s failure to believe in the one-of-a-kind Son of God when introduced to him.” (John 3:13–18, The Message)

 

Advertisements

If you enjoy reading The Bible here is something to meditate on from William Webb (pretty much my NEW hero)…

First of all I want to encourage you to purchase this book by William Webb…
Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis

“As one might suspect from its name, a key component of a redemptive-movement hermeneutic is the idea of movement. The Christian seeking to apply Scripture today should examine the movement between the biblical text and its surrounding social context. Once that movement has been discovered, there needs to be an assessment of whether the movement is preliminary or absolute (see criterion 1). If it is preliminary and further movement in the direction set by the text would produce a more fully realized ethic, then that is the course of action one must pursue. The interpreter extrapolates the biblical movement toward a more just, more equitable and more loving form. If a better ethic than the one expressed in the isolated words of the text is possible, and the biblical and canonical spirit is headed that direction, then that is where one ultimately wants to end up. The alternative, of course, is to work with an understanding of Scripture that is static.
A static hermeneutic does not interest itself in discovering movement. It is primarily interested in exegeting the text as an isolated entity and finding comparable or equivalent expressions (alternative forms) of how that text may be lived out in another culture. In the case of slavery, a static hermeneutic would not condemn biblical-type slavery, if that social order were to reappear in society today. Proponents of a static hermeneutic are generally willing to condemn American slavery, which was often worse than the biblical form, but they will not speak in a negative manner about the kind of slavery presented in the Bible. In the meantime, the household codes concerning masters and slaves are transferred to the modern context of employer/employee relationships. Equivalent admonitions of “obey” and “submit” are popped in like sure-fit items. This type of application process amounts to a rather wooden swapping of ancient-world and modern-world equivalents. When a static hermeneutic is pressed with the actual words of the slavery texts, however, it produces grotesque, mutation-like applications. Imagine taking the words of Peter and advising modem employees to accept physical beatings by their employers for the sake of the gospel (1 Pet 2:18-25). Or, think about instructing contemporary employers from the Pentateuch that, should they limit beating employees to within a hairbreadth of their life, they would not be guilty of legal reprisal (Ex 21:20-21). Or, maybe our modem world should consider handing out lesser penalties for sexual violation against an employee (= slave) than in the case of sexual violation against an employer or self-employed person (= free) (Deut 22:25-27; cf. Lev 19:20-22). These examples, of course, show the utterly ridiculous nature of a static hermeneutic. Even a static application utilizes a redemptive-movement hermeneutic of sorts, on a lesser scale, by its selective choice of that which can and cannot be carried over to our context.
One might be able to persuade a modern congregation into believing that employees should “obey” and “submit to” their employers based upon the slavery texts. This happens all the time. But the outcome reflects a tragic misunderstanding of Scripture. The rest of the slavery material, beyond the obey/submit instructions, is often left at arm’s length and simply not applied.  This kind of static approach to the slavery texts is not persuasive. In fact, the wooden nature of a static hermeneutic becomes a liability to any Christian seeking to live out their commitment to God’s will, as revealed through Scripture. Having discovered the movement of the biblical texts on slavery relative to the original social context, an extrapolation of that movement today leads to the abolition of slavery altogether. On this issue our culture is much closer to an ultimate ethic than it is to the unrealized ethic reflected in the isolated words of the Bible.

In addition to the complete removal of slavery, a redemptive-movement hermeneutic proposes quite a different way of applying the household codes in our modern context. A redemptive-movement hermeneutic does not argue that modem Christians apply the household codes through submitting to and obeying their employers. Such an application not only neglects the element of movement to a more fully realized ethic but overlooks fundamental differences between slavery and modem employee-employer relations. The most crucial difference is that of ownership compared to a contractual basis for working relationships. In the modern contractual setting we should not preach obedience and submission, but that Christian employees should fulfill the terms of their contract to the best of their ability in order to bring glory to God and enhance their gospel witness. In addition, a redemptive-movement hermeneutic seeks to reapply the spirit or movement component of the slavery texts relative to the surrounding cultures. Scripture sides heavily with the plight of the slave, the poor and the oppressed. This life-breathing spirit, which bettered the conditions for slaves in the ancient world, should also influence the application process today. Contemporary Christian employers, then, should not abuse their power in pursuit of bottom-line production but advance their businesses in ways that value their employees as people and encourage their productive contribution in humane and just ways. Working conditions, levels of income, and disparity between the rich and poor are all issues that the redemptive spirit, evidenced in scriptural movement, ought to impact as we bring these texts to bear on our modem world.”

William J. Webb. Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis (Kindle Locations 319-339). Kindle Edition.

What are your thoughts?

1. “A static hermeneutic does not interest itself in discovering movement.” What do you think about the idea that scripture is not static?

2. As we read scripture are we able to see the trajectory of a text not just the shooter or the place where the text is being shot from?

This Sunday’s sermon Mark 2:1-12 Title: Jesus is The Source of Forgiveness and Healing.

Text:And when he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home. And many were gathered together, so that there was no more room, not even at the door. And he was preaching the word to them. And they came, bringing to him a paralytic carried by four men. And when they could not get near him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him, and when they had made an opening, they let down the bed on which the paralytic lay. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, “Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, “Why do you question these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’? But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he said to the paralytic— “I say to you, rise, pick up your bed, and go home.” And he rose and immediately picked up his bed and went out before them all, so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”” (Mark 2:1–12, ESV)

Title: Jesus is The Source of Forgiveness and Healing.

  • The Source… Jesus is authority (He has called and they came in his own authority, He casts out demons in His own authority, He heals and forgives in His own authority.)
  • Forgiveness…  Only God can forgive sins. Jesus acts with the will and authority of God to forgive through Grace.
  • Healing… Image restoration.

Note on the relationship between sin and disease: Humans are in the image of God but we are all broken by the fall. As a result there is dis-ease (sins moral and natural blight on humanity) in every aspect of our very being…
Our Physical nature has been broken by dis-ease.
Our Spiritual nature has been broken by dis-ease.
Our Emotional nature has been broken by dis-ease.
Our Mental nature has been broken by dis-ease.
Our Volitional (our free will, desires, dreams, ability to choose) nature has been broken by dis-ease.
NOTE:Some say this brokenness is complete (people are 100 % percent broken) While others say this brokenness is total (every aspect of our being mental, emotional, physical, spiritual and  volitional, has been cracked by the fall) I personally hold  to a total brokenness (or depravity) position.

We need to understand from this text that
1. Jesus announces that He is The Source of forgiveness and love. ILLUSTRATION: Priest from the middle ages in France would say to the sick who came to them… “You have sinned and God is afflicting you. Thank Him, you will suffer so much less torment in the life to come”

2. Coming to Jesus as the source of forgiveness and love does not result in being turned away in this life or the next.

3. Healing is not only Physical!

4. Christ is God (Exodus 15:26 “I am the Lord who heals you”)

5. Our forgiving and healing relationship with God should carry over into our sphere of influence.

Congregational questions for discussion…
1. Do the Sick like you and I have full access to our Jesus and His church or are we fencing the well somewhere?
2. Do we see Christ as God or Gods separate helper? (example: is the Father angry at you and the Son is kind?)
3. Are we disgusted/angry about sins effect on us or are we angry about the effect of sinners on us? Which attitude is healthy and which one is not? Why?

The text for this Sunday’s sermon. I welcome your thoughts, questions and perspectives.

And rising very early in the morning, while it was still dark, he departed and went out to a desolate place, and there he prayed. And Simon and those who were with him searched for him, and they found him and said to him, “Everyone is looking for you.” And he said to them, “Let us go on to the next towns, that I may preach there also, for that is why I came out.” And he went throughout all Galilee, preaching in their synagogues and casting out demons. And a leper came to him, imploring him, and kneeling said to him, “If you will, you can make me clean.” Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched him and said to him, “I will; be clean.” And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. And Jesus sternly charged him and sent him away at once, and said to him, “See that you say nothing to anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to them.” But he went out and began to talk freely about it, and to spread the news, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town, but was out in desolate places, and people were coming to him from every quarter.” (Mark 1:35–45, ESV)

 

Q 1: Where is this passage located in redemption history and how does it relate to us? (See this post to help to help with this question… HERE)

Q 2: What does this point mean for the non Christian?

Q 3: What does it mean for us as citizens, as employees, and so forth?

Q 4: What does it teach us about Christ?

Q 5: What does it mean for us as individual Christians?

Q 6: What does it mean for our church as a whole?

Luke Geraty on Striking the Balance Between Comfort & False Conversion

Luke Geraty says in an article called Striking the Balance Between Comfort & False Conversion over at the Think Theology blog… Check it out.

“But I’m not a fan of the title “eternal security” because I don’t believe it rightly emphasizes the importance of both God’s sovereign work in carrying us to completion along with the fact that people are responsible to respond to God’s grace. And I absolutely deplore the term “once saved, always saved” because it has been used to undermine the biblical concept of sanctification and has polluted the water around the issue of salvation. Frankly, there have been innumerable people who have walked around believing that they can live however the want while doing whatever they want because they “made a decision” at some point and were “saved.” This is where I find a lot to commend with Scot McKnight’s recent book, The King Jesus GospelYes, you can be a “Calvinist” and still love much of McKnight’s work and even say, “Amen” to his Jesus-centered theological constructs… especially when the kingdom of God is so prevalent in his writings!”

An article I wrote for a blog called Think Theology.

A friend Luke Geraty asked me to write about “why it is important for pastors to spend time with their people because if they don’t they’ll preach sermons that don’t reach people and they’ll miss out on a ton of missional opportunities along the way.”  This is what I came up with. He is a great person, pastor and I really enjoy his blog check it out if you get the chance.

Here is the link to my article… “Pastors, plant Jesus seeds in the garden that God has called you to.”

Here is a great blog response to this Sunday’s message…

My phone is not working so I am not sure if I received any texts this week. Here is a great blog response to this Sunday’s message…

“Maybe God has placed us in this community so we can realize we are not alone. Maybe God has asked us to share with each other and grow as a community in love and discipleship. Maybe we are incapable of standing on the scale of faith as individuals but as a community, through communication and openness, we can stand strong on the scale with two feet and no crutch.”

http://poeticindifference.wordpress.com/2012/08/12/the-scales-of-faith/