For those of you who may be unaware, this upcoming Lord's Day is Ascension Day, and even though I do not follow the church liturgical calendar in my preaching, my senior pastor asked me to preach on the Ascension. I agreed to do so for at least two reasons: (1) I have always wanted to preach on the Ascension and planned to do so, and (2) the Ascension is a neglected doctrine in the church today, and I must honestly admit that I am unable to answer some questions about the Ascension in my own thinking. In any event, church calendars aside, I was eager to comply with my pastor's request.
As I have studied the Ascension in depth over the past week or so, I have been amazed at the variety of texts that touch upon this important aspect of the work of Christ. Before my study, I knew that Luke 24:50-53 and Acts 1:9-11 were the major texts. If I really thought things through, and you caught me on a good day, then I might also add Mark 16:19, though a disputed text, and John 20:17. Indeed, Paul assumes the ascension when he speaks of Christ at the right hand of God, as head of the church, as Lord above all, etc. He also explicitly refers to the ascension in Ephesians 4:8-10, which is often avoided because of the controversy over the meaning of his "descent" (earth, hell, etc.) and the alleged misquotation of Psalm 68:18.
Interestingly enough, Calvin seems to make Ephesians 4:8-10 a central verse in his thinking about the Ascension, especially verse 10b, which says, "...that he might fill all things." We also find discussions of the ascension in Calvin's treatment on the Lord's Supper in order to contest the assertion of Luther and others that Christ can be physically present in the bread and wine while remaining at the right hand of God in his physical body. In any event, when you think about the Ascension of Christ, there are many texts to consider (probably more than you ever imagined): Matthew 26:64 and parallels, John 3:13, John 6:62, John 13:3, many references in John 14-17 (going back to the Father, etc.), Acts 2:33-36, Ephesians 1:20-23, Hebrews 1:3, 9:24 and about a dozen other places in Hebrews, 1 Peter 3:22, and others.
With respect to the OT, the Ascension is almost always connected with Psalm 110:1, and in Matthew 26:64 (cf. Gospel parallels, too) Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13-14 are merged into one picture.
The author of Hebrews uses Psalm 110 to establish the fact that the Christ is not only an ascended King (110:1), but he is also an exalted Priest (110:4).
In the book of Acts, I would say that the emphasis is upon Jesus as ascended king, and in the book of Hebrews the emphasis is upon Jesus as ascended high priest. So when considering the Ascension, it is also important to think about the three offices of Christ: prophet, priest, and king.
As you can see, the more you study of the Ascension of Christ, the more you realize that your mind is inadequate to understand the glory of this aspect of his exaltation (Reformed Theology distinguishes four stages of the exaltation of Christ: Resurrection, Ascension, Session, and Second Coming).
Now what does this have to do with preaching? Well, it means that when we preach, we should always be selective. No matter what I preach this upcoming Lord's Day, I will not be able to preach everything there is to preach on the Ascension, which is good news and bad news.
It is good news because it means that this truth is that rich, but it is bad news because it means that I can only preach about 15% of what I have studied and learned over the past week.
Second, this also means that when preaching the key events of Jesus' saving work, it is difficult to preach a strictly expository sermon. In other words, it is much easier to preach a textual, thematic, theological sermon. This is not a sin, but it may bother some who are committed to strict verse by verse exposition. However, and this is especially true if you are preaching on a narrative text like Luke 24 or Acts 1, the narrative demands to be explained and applied, and since this is the work of the epistles and other NT documents, we should not be afraid to use them to illumine the Scripture when necessary.
Let me provide an example. When I preach from Acts 1:6-11, I will talk under one point about the fact that Jesus ascended into heaven in order to prepare a place for us in heaven. However, when you read through those verses you will look long and hard to find that truth, except for one fact. That fact is the observation that Luke tells us that Jesus went into heaven, which causes us to think, "Why did Jesus go into heaven? Did he tell us?" So in order to understand why, we need to look to Jesus' words in John 14:2. Now here is the key. We would not do this in an exegesis in a critical commentary, but we would and should do this in an exposition in a sermon. We do this to elucidate the meaning and significance of the Scripture. Here I am elucidating the significance, not the meaning, but it is a good thing to do in an exposition. So, when preaching on the saving work of Jesus, we will need to be thematic in order to provide a complete picture.
These are just some thoughts that I have entertained this past week in sermon prep...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Logan,
Hey brother. Have you read Martin Chemniz's "The Two Natures of Christ"? I'll admit that I've only read a few small portions, but I hear he's extremely concise in explaining the Lutheran view.
I have not read Martin Chemniz's work, though I have heard of it. My problem with ubiquity is that it is hard for me to imagine a human nature that is omnipresent (the right hand of the Father being "everywhere," etc.) and still human. It seems like a tertium quid, which would lead down a path toward Eutycheanism. I know that Lutherans resist this charge, but I do not see the defense against it. Yes, Calvinists believe in the communication of attributes, but we believe that the natures remain different and distinct. Also, I find it difficult to avoid thinking of the Ascension locally as Calvin did.
Why is it, do you think, that we so often neglect preaching on the Ascension of Christ? More than that, when preaching on the believer's union with Christ in his exaltation, we usually focus on his resurrection only (and not his Ascension, Session, and Second Coming). However, the believer's ascension and session WITH Christ is just as Biblical a concept as the believer's resurrection WITH Christ as you pointed out in Ephesians 2:6-8. Paul also says that the creation awaits the revealing of the sons of God (cf. Rom. 8:19-21) implying our union with Christ in his Second Coming as members of his mystical body. Yet these three aspects of Christ's exaltation are oft neglected in our mention of the believer's union. Are there works out there that treat this subject or am I right in saying it is an underdeveloped area of Reformed study?
Post a Comment