* ALL Questions about Jesus Christ *

[Patriot]

What is the doctrine of eternal generation and is it biblical?​

ANSWER

The doctrine of eternal generation harkens back to the early stages of the Christian church. This doctrine, along with the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, form the basis for the complete doctrine of the Trinity. This doctrine was codified in the Nicene Creed, which is universally accepted as an accurate statement of faith in both Roman Catholic and Protestant churches. Furthermore, this doctrine has also been included in such Reformation confessions of faith as the Belgic Confession (Articles X & XI) and the Westminster Confession of Faith (Chapter II.3). These two confessions stand as the doctrinal standard for many Reformed and Presbyterian churches worldwide.

When discussing the Trinity, we are immediately confronted with the fact that it is a doctrine clouded in mystery. As finite, created beings, we will never be able to fully comprehend the doctrine of the Trinity; it is simply beyond our ability to fully comprehend. All human analogies used to explain the Trinity break down at some level. So, we need humility as we try to explain these things. We should not attempt to go further than the Scriptures warrant. Every heresy concerning the Trinity has arisen out of an attempt to explain the inexplicable.

With that said, let’s review what is commonly believed within evangelical circles in regards to the doctrine of the Trinity. The doctrine of the Trinity makes four basic assertions:

1. There is one and only one true and living God.
2. This one God eternally exists in three Persons—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
3. These three Persons are completely equal in attributes, each sharing the same divine nature.
4. While each Person is fully and completely God, the Persons are not identical.

These four claims are universally accepted by all professing Christians whether Roman Catholic or Protestant. Each of these four claims can be defended with Scripture. If we accept these as true, then we should be able to compare the doctrine of eternal generation against these and see if it holds up.

The doctrine of eternal generation essentially teaches that God the Father eternally and by necessity generates or begets God the Son in such a way that the substance (the divine essence) of God is not divided. In other words, there is a communication of the whole, indivisible substance of the Godhead so that God the Son is the exact representation (or express image) of God the Father. There is still one divine essence that eternally exists in two persons through eternal generation. Reformed theologian Louis Berkhof states the doctrine of eternal generation in this way:

It is that eternal and necessary act of the first person in the Trinity, whereby He, within the divine Being, is the ground of a second personal subsistence like His own, and puts this second person in possession of the whole divine essence, without any division, alienation, or change (Systematic Theology, Eerdmans, 1938, p. 94).

So, we see that eternal generation is an act performed by the First Person of the Trinity. Furthermore, this act by the First Person is necessarily and eternally performed. Finally, the result of this act is the generation of the Second Person of the Trinity in such a way that the entire divine essence is communicated from the Father to the Son.

Because of this act of eternal generation, the relational terms Father and Son are used to identify the First and Second Persons of the Trinity. The Father eternally generates the Son, and the Son (having no beginning or end) is eternally generated by the Father. This is similar to human generation (which, we note, is neither eternal nor necessary) in that human fathers also “generate” or “beget” human sons in their own image.

The doctrine of eternal generation is sometimes attacked on the basis that the idea of begetting implies a creation in time or that it suggests an ontological dependence. In response, we note that all human analogies regarding the Trinity eventually break down, so we can’t carry our analogies too far. Also, the qualifiers eternally and necessarily should remove any concerns of a temporal or subordinate relationship between the Father and the Son. The qualifier eternal removes this relationship from the constraints of time and space; there was no beginning, and will be no end to the generation of the Son from the Father. The qualifier necessarily removes any ontological dependence between the Father and the Son; the Son must be generated from the Father, and the Father must generate the Son.

The terms Father and Son do more than analogize the relationship between the First and Second Person of the Trinity; they also help explain a theological truth. There is a hierarchical and functional order being described here—one that defines the activity of Father and Son in the economy of creation and salvation. The Father speaks the universe into existence, and the Son is the agent of that creation. The Father elects the chosen unto salvation, and the Son provides the necessary atonement. The Father sends the Son, and not the other way around. This hierarchy of role and function in no way diminishes the ontological equality between the Father and the Son; they are both essentially God, sharing equally in the full divine essence. So, the terms Father and Son, far from being a mere anthropomorphism, go to the heart of defining this necessary and eternal relationship. As such, the doctrine of eternal generation is clearly in line with our four assertions concerning the Trinity, above.

Is this doctrine supported in Scripture? Consider the following verses:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)

“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)

“No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.” (John 1:18)

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

“For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself.” (John 5:26)

“Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.” (John 14:11)

“That they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.” (John 17:21)

“He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.” (Hebrews 1:3)

The thrust of these verses, as they apply to the Trinity, is to suggest that the relationship between Father and Son has existed for all eternity and is grounded in ontological equality. Also worth consideration are the words of the Nicene Creed and the Westminster Confession of Faith as they pertain to eternal generation:

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. (Nicene Creed)

In the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son. (WCF, II.3)

Based on Scripture and the witness of the creeds and confessions, we can be sure that the doctrine of eternal generation is biblical.

We should not expect every believer to have a fully mature grasp of this doctrine. The doctrine of the Trinity—including the doctrine of eternal generation—is the centerpiece of orthodox theology and should be affirmed by every true believer, but it is not a requirement for a true confession of faith. In other words, salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8). As one studies the Christian faith, one will come to a more mature understanding of this doctrine.

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

The Moody Handbook of Theology by Paul Enns

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

If Jesus was God, why did He say "No one is good but God alone"?​

ANSWER

It is often claimed by those who reject the deity of Christ that in Mark 10:17-22 Jesus denies His divinity by rejecting the notion that He is good. It reads as follows:

“As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. ‘Good teacher,’ he asked, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ ‘Why do you call me good?’ Jesus answered. ‘No one is good – except God alone. You know the commandments: Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.’ ‘Teacher,’ he declared, ‘all these I have kept since I was a boy.’ Jesus looked at him and loved him. ‘One thing you lack,’ he said. ‘Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.’ At this, the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.”

Is Jesus here rebuking the man for calling Him good and thereby denying His deity? No. Rather, He is using a penetrating question to push the man to think through the implications of his own words, to understand the concept of Jesus’ goodness and, most especially, the man’s lack of goodness. The young ruler "went away sad" (Mark 10:22) because he realized that although he had devoted himself to keeping the commandments, he had failed to keep the first and greatest of the commandments—love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength (Matthew 22:37-38). The man’s riches were of more worth to him than God, and thus he was not "good" in the eyes of God.

Jesus’ fundamental lesson here is that goodness flows not from a man’s deeds, but rather from God Himself. Jesus invites the man to follow Him, the only means of doing good by God’s ultimate standard. Jesus describes to the young ruler what it means to follow Him—to be willing to give up everything, thus putting God first. When one considers that Jesus is drawing a distinction between man’s standard of goodness and God’s standard, it becomes clear that following Jesus is good. The command to follow Christ is the definitive proclamation of Christ’s goodness. Thus, by the very standard Jesus is exhorting the young ruler to adopt, Jesus is good. And it necessarily follows that if Jesus is indeed good by this standard, Jesus is implicitly declaring His deity.

Thus, Jesus’ question to the man is designed not to deny His deity, but rather to draw the man to recognize Christ’s divine identity. Such an interpretation is substantiated by passages such as John 10:11 wherein Jesus declares Himself to be “the good shepherd.” Similarly in John 8:46, Jesus asks, “Can any of you prove me guilty of sin?” Of course the answer is "no." Jesus was “without sin” (Hebrews 4:15), holy and undefiled (Hebrews 7:26), the only One who “knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

The logic can thus be summarized as follows:
1: Jesus claims only God is good.
2: Jesus claims to be good.
3: Therefore, Jesus claims to be God.

Such a claim makes perfect sense in light of the flow of Mark’s narrative with regards to the unfolding revelation of Jesus’ real identity. It is only before the high priest in Mark 14:62 that the question of Jesus’ identity is explicitly clarified. The story of the rich young ruler is one in a sequence of stories designed to point readers toward Jesus as the eternal, divine, incarnate Son of God.

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

God the Son Incarnate: The Doctrine of Christ by Stephen Wellum

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

Was Jesus a Jew?​

ANSWER

It would seem that the question of Jesus’ ethnicity would be beyond controversy. Of course Jesus was a Jew—right? The biblical record says, yes, Jesus was a Jew. But that doesn’t stop the disagreements and objections that some have. We will take a look at what the Bible has to say.

In Jesus’ day, a person was considered Jewish if he or she 1) was born to a Jewish mother or 2) had formally converted to the religion of Judaism. Jews by descent traced their lineage to the ancient Hebrews; Jews by conversion were proselytes from any ethnic background. Jesus was a Jew by descent, and He lived a Jewish life in the first century.

Jesus was born in Judah to a Jewish mother, raised in Galilee in a Jewish home, and taught in Jerusalem, the Jewish capital. He ministered throughout Israel: “He came to His own [the Jewish people], and His own [the Jews] did not receive Him” (John 1:11, NKJV). Speaking to a Samaritan, Jesus said, “You [Gentiles] worship what you do not know; we [Jews] know what we [Jews] worship, for salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). In His use of first- and second-person pronouns, Jesus identified Himself as being among the Jewish population.

The biblical record sets out the facts: Jesus Christ is “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (Matthew 1:1). When the angel Gabriel announced Jesus’ birth, he spoke of Jesus’ having “the throne of his father David” and of His “reign over Jacob’s descendants forever” (Luke 1:32–33). In writing of Jesus’ unique priesthood, the author of Hebrews says, “It is clear that our Lord descended from Judah” (Hebrews 7:14). Judah was a son of Jacob, and it’s from his name that we get the word Jew. Mary’s genealogy, in Luke chapter 3, shows that the mother of Jesus was a direct descendant of King David, giving Jesus the legal right to the Jewish throne and establishing without a doubt that Jesus was a Jew by descent.

The biblical record also presents Jesus as living a Jewish lifestyle and keeping the Jewish law. He was reared in a Jewish home, and Jesus’ parents were careful to do all that the law required of them (Luke 2:39). In His ministry, Jesus often taught in synagogues (Matthew 13:54; Luke 6:6; John 18:20), and even in the temple (Luke 21:37). In His teaching, Jesus pointed to the Law and the Prophets as authoritative (Matthew 5:17; 12:5; Mark 10:19), He taught others to keep the law (Matthew 23:1–3), and He Himself observed the commandments. Jesus identified with the religion of the Jews and was considered a rabbi (John 1:38; 6:25), although He strongly rejected the pharisaical reinterpretation of that religion.

As a Jew, Jesus observed Passover (John 2:13), the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:2, 10), and Hanukkah, (John 10:22). Jesus was called the King of the Jews (Mark 15:2).

The Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament was a Jewish savior, one chosen by God for a special purpose. The Messiah was to serve God by redeeming Israel and then ruling from Zion, bringing peace, righteousness, and security to Israel (see Isaiah 9:6—7; 32:1; Jeremiah 23:5; Zechariah 9:9). Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, the Son of David sent to the Jews, and in His earthly ministry He focused on “the lost sheep of Israel” (Matthew 15:24). But in His death and resurrection, Jesus secured salvation for all who would trust in Him, regardless of their nationality or background. The Jewish Messiah became the worldwide Savior (Ephesians 2:11–22).

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Updated Edition by Alfred Edersheim

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

Was Jesus a Jew? | GotQuestions.org​

Got Questions Ministries




While many don’t even question Jesus was a Jew, is there enough evidence to prove it? How can we be sure that Jesus the Jewish Messiah? In this video, Pastor Nelson with Bible Munch answers the question, “Was Jesus a Jew?”

*** Source Article: https://www.gotquestions.org/was-Jesu...

*** Check out, Bible Munch! @BibleMunch / biblemunch

 

[Patriot]

If Jesus was a Jew, why aren’t Christians Jewish?​

ANSWER

If Jesus was a Jew, why is it that Christians don’t follow Judaism? The Laws of Judaism were given to Moses for the children of Israel in a very sacred and special covenant at Mount Sinai and recorded for us in the book of Exodus. In this covenant, God wrote His laws on tablets of stone, and Israel was commanded to be obedient to all that was revealed to them. But this wonderful covenant was only a picture of a new and better covenant that God would one day give to His people, both Jew and Gentile.

This new covenant is recorded for us in Jeremiah 31:31-34, “‘The time is coming,’ declares the LORD, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,’ declares the LORD. ‘This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,’ declares the LORD. ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, “Know the LORD,” because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,’ declares the LORD. ‘For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.’”

Christians don’t follow Judaism today because the Mosaic covenant has been fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17). And the writer to the Hebrews wrote, “By calling this covenant ‘new,’ he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear” (Hebrews 8:13).

As Christians we don’t need to follow the old covenant any longer because that old covenant has been replaced. We now have a better covenant, with a better sacrifice, administered by a better High Priest! “Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful” (Hebrews 10:19-23).

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Updated Edition by Alfred Edersheim

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

​

 

[Patriot]

Was Jesus a Christian?​

ANSWER

It may sound strange to say, but no, Jesus was not a Christian.

A Christian is a person who has faith in Jesus Christ as his or her Lord and Savior (Romans 10:9–10). Jesus is the foundation for the Christian faith, but, based on the definition of the word, He could not Himself be called a Christian. Christianity is built upon His identity as the Son of God (John 19:7), His perfect life (Hebrews 4:15), and His substitutionary death and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Jesus did not come into the world to start another religion. The world has more than enough religions. He came to complete the work of God in redeeming sinful mankind (Galatians 4:4). He came to defeat our enemy, Satan (Genesis 3:15; John 12:31). He came to seek and to save the lost (Luke 19:10). He came to fulfill the righteous requirements of the law (Matthew 5:17). He came to establish a new covenant between God and mankind (Mark 14:24). He came “to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good” (Titus 2:14). Christianity is the result of Christ’s finished work of salvation, and He now builds His church (Matthew 16:18). Christianity is not a religion in this sense: religion is man’s attempt to reach up to God, but Christianity teaches that God has reached down to man. The Son of God, the second Person of the Trinity, took on human flesh and, during His time on earth, was literally God reaching out to us (John 1:14; 3:16–18).

Jesus was not a Christian; He was a Jewish rabbi. Jesus followed the Jewish law God had given to Moses (Matthew 5:17–18). He lived perfectly under the law in order to present Himself as a sacrifice without blemish, acceptable under that law (Leviticus 9:3; 1 Peter 1:18–19; Hebrews 9:13–14). Christianity is the culmination of God’s plan, the completion of what God instigated when He set apart the Hebrew people for Himself (Deuteronomy 7:6–8). For centuries God had promised that He would send His Messiah to rescue His people and reign over them forever. The coming of Jesus was the fulfillment of that promise.

Another reason that Jesus cannot be called a Christian is that the term Christian was not coined until after His resurrection and ascension into heaven. Believers were first called Christians in the city of Antioch in Syria (Acts 11:22). The term means “little Christs.” It was originally used in a derogatory way, but believers came to embrace it as a badge of honor. Christians today should obey the voice of their Master and still consider themselves “little Christs” in the sense that they imitate the Lord Jesus. Jesus cannot properly be described as a Christian, but He is the Christ from whom Christians get their name.

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Updated Edition by Alfred Edersheim

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

Did Jesus ever travel to India?​

ANSWER

There is no biblical support for the idea that Jesus meditated in India before beginning His ministry in Israel. Other than when Joseph and Mary took Jesus to Egypt when He was a child in Matthew 2:13–21, there is no evidence that He ever left the land of Israel. Of the four Gospel accounts, only two mention the birth of Jesus (Matthew and Luke), and only one (Luke) mentions anything about Jesus’ life prior to His beginning His three-year ministry in Israel. So, from His birth until 12 years of age, the Bible tells us very little about what happened in Jesus’ life. And from ages 12 to 30, we know nothing. This has led many to speculate as to what Jesus did during those intervening years.

The orthodox position is that Jesus grew up in Nazareth with His family until it was time to begin His ministry. While the Bible doesn’t explicitly say this, it is implied from the following passage in the Gospel of Luke: “He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was His custom. And he stood up to read.... All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from His lips. ‘isn’t this Joseph’s son?’ they asked. Jesus said to them, ‘Surely you will quote this proverb to me: “Physician, heal yourself! Do here in your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum." I tell you the truth,’ he continued, ‘no prophet is accepted in his hometown’” (Luke 4:16, 22-24). Notice that Luke says that Jesus was "brought up" in Nazareth, and he also mentions twice that Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown. Furthermore, the people in the synagogue knew Jesus and knew that he was Joseph’s son. All of this leads to the conclusion that Jesus lived in relative obscurity in Nazareth until His baptism.

Despite this fairly clear account, there are those who want to fill in the gaps in Jesus’ life with extraordinary tales of adventure and mystery. From apocryphal tales of Jesus’ infancy in which He acts more like a malevolent trickster than the very Son of God, to the supposed tales of Jesus’ journey to India to learn the secrets of Hinduism and Buddhism from Eastern gurus, there is no shortage of sources that claim to have “definitive proof” of Jesus’ lost years. Depending on the source, Jesus either spent 17 years in India before His ministry in Israel, or He spent the remainder of His life after surviving the crucifixion in India and died at the age of 120. These theories all seem to come from the identification of Jesus with the Kashmiri saint, Issa Yuz Asaf ("Jesus Son of Joseph").

The most recent author to promote this view is Holger Kersten, whose book Jesus Lived in India: His Unknown Life Before and After the Crucifixion (1994) supposedly presents "irrefutable evidence that Jesus did indeed live in India." Mr. Kersten is also the author of another “conspiracy” book called The Jesus Conspiracy, in which he asserts that the Roman Catholic Church fudged the carbon dating on the shroud of Turin to show a medieval date. Mr. Kersten argues that the shroud was the authentic burial cloth of Jesus, but that Jesus was alive following the crucifixion. The problem with most conspiracy theorists is that their books are long on conspiracy and short on evidence. Authors such as Mr. Kersten aren’t taken seriously in biblical scholarship.

A precursor to Holger Kersten is Nicolas Notovitch, a Russian war correspondent, who visited India and Tibet in the late 19th century. While there, Mr. Notovitch learned of the life of Saint Issa, the "best of the Sons of men." Mr. Notovitch chronicles the life of Saint Issa, whom he identifies as Jesus, and tells how Saint Issa grew in wisdom and knowledge while attending the ancient Indian university at Nalanda. However, Mr. Notovitch’s work was discredited by one J. Archibald Douglas, who claims that Mr. Notovitch never visited the monastery of Hemis (where he purportedly learned of Saint Issa).

We can argue and speculate on why these theories regarding Jesus abound, but the main thing to take away is that despite the origin of these theories, their ultimate source is the father of lies, Satan (John 8:44). As he did in the beginning, so he is doing now. At the baptism of Jesus, a voice from heaven proclaimed, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17). Jesus of Nazareth was declared by God the Father to be His one and only Son. All of these conspiracy theories attempt to divert us from God’s declaration that Jesus was His Son. They do so by downplaying or denying outright the deity of Jesus Christ. By denying His divinity, they reduce Jesus to just another rabbi, prophet, sage or wise man. In the case of Mr. Kersten, he not only denies the deity and resurrection of Christ, but he claims that Jesus didn’t even die on the cross. By denying the death and resurrection of Christ, he strikes at the very heart of the Christian faith; which, of course, is his intent.

The thing to keep in mind is despite the claims of a few conspiracy theorists, the four Gospels still provide the most accurate and compelling account of the life of Jesus in print. If Jesus went to India prior to His three-year ministry, then one would expect there to be a distinct Indian flavor to His teaching. However, how does one explain Jesus’ vast knowledge of the Torah? Jesus quotes the Hebrew Scriptures all throughout His earthly ministry to the point of correcting even the learned scholars of His day. Not only that, but His teaching style was consistent with the Jewish itinerant teachers of His day. Scholars would study most of their lives to have the encyclopedic knowledge of Hebrew law and customs that Jesus had. Are we to believe that Jesus took the Old Testament with Him to India and studied the Scriptures between lessons on transcendental meditation?

Of course there are those who simply deny the authenticity of the four Gospels. How are we to respond? With the exception of John, all 12 apostles (including Paul and Matthias in the place of Judas) died martyr’s deaths. Why would they do that for a lie? More importantly, why would they do that for something they knew to be a lie? The four Gospels have been under attack for nearly 2,000 years; in fact, no book has undergone as much scrutiny or endured so many attempts to extinguish it than the Bible, yet it is still here, still changing lives and still attesting to the truth of the good news of Jesus Christ. "The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever" (Isaiah 40:8).

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

God the Son Incarnate: The Doctrine of Christ by Stephen Wellum

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What does it mean that Jesus is our High Priest?​

ANSWER

High Priest is only one of the many titles applied to Jesus: Messiah, Savior, Son of God, Son of Man, Friend of Sinners, etc. Each one focuses on a particular aspect of who He is and what that means for us. In the book of Hebrews, Jesus is called a High Priest (Hebrews 2:17; 4:14). The word “priest” carries a couple of primary meanings. First, it means one who mediates in religious services. It also means one who is holy or set apart to perform those services.

The first place we find the word used in the Bible is in Genesis 14. Abraham, the friend of God, entered into battle to rescue his nephew Lot, who had been captured by the army of Elam. On his return, Abraham was met by Melchizedek, King of Salem and priest of the Most High God. This man, whose name means the “king of righteousness,” blessed Abraham and the Most High God who gave victory to Abraham. In return for this blessing, Abraham gave a tithe (10 percent) of all the spoils of war to Melchizedek. By this act, Abraham acknowledged Melchizedek’s high position as the priest of God.

Years later, Abraham’s great-grandson Levi was singled out by God to be the father of the priestly tribe. When the Law was given on Mount Sinai, the Levites were identified as the servants of the Tabernacle, with the family of Aaron becoming the priests. The priests were responsible for making intercession to God for the people by offering the many sacrifices that the law required. Among the priests, one was selected as the High Priest, and he entered into the Most Holy Place once a year on the Day of Atonement to place the blood of the sacrifice on the Ark of the Covenant (Hebrews 9:7). By these daily and yearly sacrifices, the sins of the people were temporarily covered until the Messiah came to take away their sins.

When Jesus is called our High Priest, it is with reference to both of these previous priesthoods. Like Melchizedek, He is ordained as a priest apart from the Law given on Mount Sinai (Hebrews 5:6). Like the Levitical priests, Jesus offered a sacrifice to satisfy the Law of God when He offered Himself for our sins (Hebrews 7:26-27). Unlike the Levitical priests, who had to continually offer sacrifices, Jesus only had to offer His sacrifice once, gaining eternal redemption for all who come to God through Him (Hebrews 9:12).

One other important point about Jesus’ priesthood—every priest is appointed from among men. Jesus, though God from eternity, became a man in order to suffer death and serve as our High Priest (Hebrews 2:9). As a man, He was subject to all the weaknesses and temptations that we are, so that He could personally relate to us in our struggles (Hebrews 4:15). Jesus is greater than any other priest, so He is called our “Great High Priest” in Hebrews 4:14, and that gives us the boldness to come “unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:16 KJV).

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

God the Son Incarnate: The Doctrine of Christ by Stephen Wellum

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is the significance of the triumphal entry?​

ANSWER

The triumphal entry is that of Jesus coming into Jerusalem on what we know as Palm Sunday, the Sunday before the crucifixion (John 12:1, 12). The story of the triumphal entry is one of the few incidents in the life of Jesus which appears in all four Gospel accounts (Matthew 21:1-17; Mark 11:1-11; Luke 19:29-40; John 12:12-19). Putting the four accounts together, it becomes clear that the triumphal entry was a significant event, not only to the people of Jesus’ day, but to Christians throughout history. We celebrate Palm Sunday to remember that momentous occasion.

On that day, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the back of a borrowed donkey’s colt, one that had never been ridden before. The disciples spread their cloaks on the donkey for Jesus to sit on, and the multitudes came out to welcome Him, laying before Him their cloaks and the branches of palm trees. The people hailed and praised Him as the “King who comes in the name of the Lord” as He rode to the temple, where He taught the people, healed them, and drove out the money-changers and merchants who had made His Father’s house a “den of robbers” (Mark 11:17).

Jesus’ purpose in riding into Jerusalem was to make public His claim to be their Messiah and King of Israel in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. Matthew says that the King coming on the foal of a donkey was an exact fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9, “Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.” Jesus rides into His capital city as a conquering King and is hailed by the people as such, in the manner of the day. The streets of Jerusalem, the royal city, are open to Him, and like a king He ascends to His palace, not a temporal palace but the spiritual palace that is the temple, because His is a spiritual kingdom. He receives the worship and praise of the people because only He deserves it. No longer does He tell His disciples to be quiet about Him (Matthew 12:16, 16:20) but to shout His praises and worship Him openly. The spreading of cloaks was an act of homage for royalty (see 2 Kings 9:13). Jesus was openly declaring to the people that He was their King and the Messiah they had been waiting for.

Unfortunately, the praise the people lavished on Jesus was not because they recognized Him as their Savior from sin. They welcomed Him out of their desire for a messianic deliverer, someone who would lead them in a revolt against Rome. There were many who, though they did not believe in Christ as Savior, nevertheless hoped that perhaps He would be to them a great temporal deliverer. These are the ones who hailed Him as King with their many hosannas, recognizing Him as the Son of David who came in the name of the Lord. But when He failed in their expectations, when He refused to lead them in a massive revolt against the Roman occupiers, the crowds quickly turned on Him. Within just a few days, their hosannas would change to cries of “Crucify Him!” (Luke 23:20-21). Those who hailed Him as a hero would soon reject and abandon Him.

The story of the triumphal entry is one of contrasts, and those contrasts contain applications to believers. It is the story of the King who came as a lowly servant on a donkey, not a prancing steed, not in royal robes, but on the clothes of the poor and humble. Jesus Christ comes not to conquer by force as earthly kings but by love, grace, mercy, and His own sacrifice for His people. His is not a kingdom of armies and splendor but of lowliness and servanthood. He conquers not nations but hearts and minds. His message is one of peace with God, not of temporal peace. If Jesus has made a triumphal entry into our hearts, He reigns there in peace and love. As His followers, we exhibit those same qualities, and the world sees the true King living and reigning in triumph in us.

FOR FURTHER STUDY​

One Perfect Life: The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus by John MacArthur

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is the significance of the triumphal entry?​

Got Questions Ministries




What is the significance of the triumphal/triumphant entry? Why did the people put palm branches before Jesus during the triumphal entry?

​