For a worthy victory, Jesus needed a real enemy of daunting might and jurisdiction as suitable foil for displaying God’s crowning virtues so as to win our steadfast love and loyalty.

“…[B]ut this is your hour and the jurisdiction of darkness.” (Luke 22:53b)

The Lord Jesus does not minimize in the least the actual jurisdiction (exousia—authority, rights) of darkness or of Satan. Indeed, God’s mightiest work is that he “rescues us out of the jurisdiction of darkness and transports us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we are having liberation, the release of sins.” (Col. 1:13-14)

To be sure, it was Satan’s jurisdiction that surreptitiously apprehended, falsely accused, roundly condemned, and unlawfully crucified the Lord, yet God’s superior jurisdiction that reversed the wicked sentence by resurrection to glory with “all jurisdiction in heaven and on the earth.” (Matt. 28:18) For Jesus had declared, “Now is the judging of this world, Now shall the Chief of this world be cast out. And I, if I should be exalted out of the earth, shall be drawing all to myself.” (John 12:31-32) For he, too, conquered because he “love[d] not [his] soul until death” (Rev. 12:11), but “surrendered to Him Who is judging justly” (1Pet. 2:23), knowing full well the glorious outcome would be life forevermore.

For a real victory, Jesus needed a real enemy of daunting might and jurisdiction as suitable foil for displaying God’s crowning virtues so as to win our love and loyalty. [10/5/11]

Any talk of the “sinful” or “sinless” nature of Christ is needlessly misdirected since neither ascription can be found in Scripture. However, it is certain that the Son of God did take on mortal flesh. Such flesh—the flesh derived from Adam, without access to the Tree of Life—was by no means inherently immortal even during Adam’s original innocence. It was, accordingly, death that “passed on” (dielthen) by human generation, not sin (Romans 5:12). “Original sin” is a ruse and a hoax. Nevertheless, residual mortality is attended by its own evils, most notably, temptation. It was precisely Jesus’ mission to take the common human legacy of mortal flesh and to return it to its pristine state—nay, to surpass that state and bring all his believing seed along with him in his own transcendent salvation. He took the common lot and “improved” it by ever resisting temptation until, via the gross injustice of the cross, he won God’s just restitution of extraordinary exaltation and immortality. Had he not assumed mortal flesh just like ours—exclusive of sin!—he could assuredly not have “achieved” or “won” anything worthwhile for the salvation of other humans. His was a mighty auspicious context of faithfulness through every contingency allowed, indeed designedly intended by God, to attain the most glorious outcome possible for all concerned.

The basic issue, therefore, is not that concerning a ‘sinless versus sinful nature‘ at all; that’s a false dilemma. Much rather, it’s whether Christ remained unswervingly sinless despite his mortal condition shared with sinners who most certainly could not stay sinless or regain sinlessness by their own feckless, fretful, feverish devices, sound, and fury. [10/7/11]

In manifest irony, the very event that proved beyond doubt that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed Israel’s long-awaited Messiah, with divine authority to avenge all injustices against them, is the identical event that rescued him from their aggravated injustice against him—his resurrection from the dead! On the strength of such a stunning reversal, God declares mercy to all and graciousness to all who believe! [10/12/11]]

To assert that 2 Cor. 5:21 has any bearing on the doctrine of the Atonement but yet deny that the host of passages in Leviticus that translate “sin” as “sin offering” (clearly a matter of atonement!) have any bearing on this passage of Paul’s is transparently to indulge in special pleading. An impartial exegetical examination will confirm a direct and most illuminating relevance. [10/27/11]