Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Originally posted by Saiph
I do not think Christ did anything passively did He ? ?
Originally posted by Saiph
Passivity is stagnation.
Christ delivered himself up to God . . know one takes my life I offer it freely .. . . into thy hands . . etc .. .
Originally posted by Saiph
Christ was the object of His own action (middle)
Originally posted by Saiph
I believe it to be like the infra/supra debate. He actively saved us by actively obeying and actively dying. If someone wants to use the word "passive" to explain His relationship to the father then have fun. I simply do not like the word passive in reference to God.
It is really silly of me to even mention it.
I'm so thankful for the active obedience of Christ. No hope without it.
Originally posted by SolaScriptura
Guys - I'd really like comments about my article. I'm not really interested in Mark's opinions about the legitimacy of the vocabularly we've been handed by our fathers.
Please, comment on my article.
Originally posted by Saiph
Christ was the object of His own action (middle)
That all the time He lived on earth, but especially at the end of His life, He bore, in body and soul, the wrath of God against the sin of the whole human race; in order that by His suffering, as the only atoning sacrifice, He might redeem our body and soul from everlasting damnation, and obtain for us the grace of God, righteousness and eternal life.
Originally posted by puritansailor
Ben, I thought it was good in light of the audience you had in mind. I personally start with the covenant of redemption (without using that term) in order to explain how the work of Christ fits in, especially in reference to limited atonement and justification. They all would agree that Jesus came to do the will of the Father. Did He succeed? Will the Father honor the work of His Son and keep His promise to Him? It may help to explain the work of Christ in light of His relationship to the Father, and in light of God's immutability, justice, and faithfulness. It may be helpful when your freinds are ready.
Originally posted by Saiph
Etymologically I thought it was from passivus, meaning subject to emotion, or capable of feelings ?
Where in scripture is anything Christ did said to be passive ?
How can one passively obey the law ? Is not all obedience active ?
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
Originally posted by Saiph
Christ was the object of His own action (middle)
In Reformed theology, all of Jesus' obedience is said to have been active and passive at the same time.
All his active obedience was suffering and all his suffering was active obedience. See HC 37:
That all the time He lived on earth, but especially at the end of His life, He bore, in body and soul, the wrath of God against the sin of the whole human race; in order that by His suffering, as the only atoning sacrifice, He might redeem our body and soul from everlasting damnation, and obtain for us the grace of God, righteousness and eternal life.
rsc
The term “passive obedience” does not mean that in anything Christ did was he passive, the involuntary victim of obedience imposed upon him. It is obvious that any such conception would contradict the very notion of obedience. ... Neither are we to suppose that we can allocate certain phases or acts of our Lord’'s life on earth to the active obedience and certain other phases and acts to the passive obedience. The distinction between the active and passive obedience is not a distinction of periods. It is our Lord’'s whole work of obedience in every phase and period that is described as active and passive, and we must avoid the mistake of thinking that the active obedience applies to the obedience of his life and the passive to the obedience of his final sufferings and death.
[Murray, John Redemption Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1955) 20-21.]
The two accompany each other at every point in the SaviorÂ’'s life.
[L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology, p. 379.]
It is true that Christ’'s willingly undergoing those sufferings which he endured, is a great part of that obedience or righteousness by which we are justified. The sufferings of Christ are respected in Scripture under a twofold consideration, either merely as his being substituted for us, or put into our stead, in suffering the penalty of the law. And so his sufferings are considered as a satisfaction and propitiation for sin, or as he, in obedience to a law or a command of the Father, voluntarily submitted himself to those sufferings, and actively yielded himself up to bear them. So they are considered as his righteousness, and a part of his active obedience. Christ underwent death in obedience to the command of the Father, Psa. 40:6-8, “Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire, mine ears hast thou opened: burnt-offering and sin-offering hast thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart.” John 10:17-18, “I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.” John 18:11, “The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” And this is part, and indeed the principal part, of that active obedience by which we are justified.
[Edwards, Jonathan The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 1 (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1987) 638-639.]
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
Originally posted by Saiph
Christ was the object of His own action (middle)
In Reformed theology, all of Jesus' obedience is said to have been active and passive at the same time.
Passive does not refer to actions done to Jesus, but rather is derived from the Latin verb passio, ire to suffer.
All his active obedience was suffering and all his suffering was active obedience. See HC 37:
That all the time He lived on earth, but especially at the end of His life, He bore, in body and soul, the wrath of God against the sin of the whole human race; in order that by His suffering, as the only atoning sacrifice, He might redeem our body and soul from everlasting damnation, and obtain for us the grace of God, righteousness and eternal life.
rsc
{enter Latin police}
But it actually comes from patior, pati, passus sum a verb meaning primarily "to suffer" or "to undergo;" but it can also mean "to permit" or "to allow" (viz. Cicero, Vergil, Horace), which is where we get out word "passive" (e.g. passive voice) today.
{exit Latin police}
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
{enter Latin police}
But it actually comes from patior, pati, passus sum a verb meaning primarily "to suffer" or "to undergo;" but it can also mean "to permit" or "to allow" (viz. Cicero, Vergil, Horace), which is where we get out word "passive" (e.g. passive voice) today.
{exit Latin police}
Fred,
Many thanks for this. Typing too quickly and thinking too slowly.
ps. there is an entire chapter devoted to this topic in the forthcoming volume, The Foolishness of the Gospel to be published (they say) in May by P&R.
rsc
[Edited on 1-18-2006 by R. Scott Clark]