My sermon on Romans 3:21-26 is here. Audio is here.
I preached on 'Why the Cross?' on Sunday. Thanks to all who gave help to this sermon.
In the end I guess I did a version of an old style law-gospel talk. Basically it ran - sin is very serious, thank Christ for atonement.
Now I'm aware that such a shape to preaching has both a long pedigree and a number of dangers. The dangers of this kind of preaching seem to me to be:
-
Sin tends to be defined merely as transgression and almost never considered christologically
-
It can sound like there's something called 'Justice' which forces God to punish sin
-
It can sound quite impersonal (even if you accept Christ it can be more 'Whoopee I have a pardon' rather than 'Hallelujah I have the Son!')
-
All in all, it can be, ironically, less than christocentric
But bearing in mind these pit-falls, there is much to commend such an approach. And I had a go!
Check it out here if you like.
Do you think my fears of law-gospel preaching are unfounded/insurmountable/irrelevant?
.
just an off the head random suggestion
how about why the cross from within the Trinity?
The Father - I will 'perfect' my Son & He will be revealed to His bride
The Son - I will reveal my Father to my bride and then will praise Him in one flesh with me
The Son to the Father:
The Son as Beloved
The Son as free
The Son as Heir
The Son as Other to the Father
The Son as Image of the Father
The Son as obedient
The Son as Glory of the Father
The Son to His Bride:
The Son as Bridegroom
The Son as Redeemer
The Son as Inheritance
The Son as Mediator
The Son as Revealer
The Son as Lord
The Son as Glory of Israel
Therefore the Son as Mediator is:
Prophet
Prince
Priest
AND SO...
LAMB
(I've got my nose in Revelation at the moment, hence sevenfoldness is eeking out. And nothing makes much sense either!!)
Pingback: A thousand posts in a thousand words « Christ the Truth