The Holy Spirit’s Ministry and Jesus’ Humanity

 

Jesus If you share a similar Christian tradition to me then I am sure you that have heard comments akin to these about the Holy Spirit, “He is the shy member of the Trinity. He points away from himself and to Jesus. Spirit-filled ministry is Jesus-focused ministry,” and so on. But, developing a point made by Colin Gunton, this narrow, “under-determination of the person of the Holy Spirit,” does not only fail to appreciate Scripture’s presentation of the Spirit but also makes it difficult to give proper dogmatic weighting to Jesus’ humanity. Thus Gunton called the doctrine of the Holy Spirit “the Achilles’ heel of Western theology.” In this post my aim is to convince you that greater significance must be laid on the work of the Spirit if we are to appreciate the life and work of Jesus Christ.

Last year I posted on Christ’s temptation in Matthew 4 and suggested that the Spirit sent Jesus into the wilderness and partnered him as he faced Satan (Matthew 4:1). This close tie between the Spirit and Jesus is apparent throughout Matthew’s narrative: as the earliest creeds state, Jesus was conceived by the Spirit (1:18); John the Baptist foretold that Jesus’ ministry would be inseparable from the Spirit’s (3:11); when Jesus is baptised we are told that the Spirit rests on him (3:16). So when Isaiah 42 is quoted, in Matthew 12:17-18, “Behold my servant, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him,” we ought to understand the Spirit to be, borrowing a phrase from Gordon Fee, “God’s empowering presence.” Immediately following that quotation we read Jesus’ stern rebuke of the Pharisees, who were blaspheming the “Spirit of God” (12:28, 31) by attributing the Spirit’s work through Jesus to Satan (12:26-27). Jesus’ ministry, his miracles and his mission, was inseparable from the Holy Spirit’s ministry.

Dove of the Holy SpiritThere are, in my opinion, at least three reasons we often fail to clearly articulate this biblical truth. Firstly, Driscoll, in Doctrine, writes, “All of the major creeds compiled during the early church…overlook the example of Jesus’ life, in general, and his exemplary relationship with God the Holy Spirit, in particular.” Jesus’ life was not merely ‘God striding across the earth’ (Käsemann), but a window into the remarkable potential for Spirit-empowered humanity. The second reason, linked to the previous point, is most preachers’ penchant to view every miracle Jesus does as evidence of his divinity. When we do this we overlook Jesus’ dependence on the Spirit (as well as the Father) throughout his life. Thirdly, in discussions about Jesus’ temptation our default position is: because Jesus was God he could not possibly have yielded to Satan’s seductive promises. However, that position, in my opinion, makes the temptation no more than a stage drama. Instead, we should recognise that Jesus was truly tempted but also empowered to stay his course by the Holy Spirit.

Returning to our starting point, one can now hopefully see how underappreciating the Holy Spirit’s role throughout Jesus’ life can result in an overemphasis of Jesus’ divinity, at the expense of his humanity. On the other hand, when we fully appreciate God’s empowering presence then, as Gerald Hawthorne writes, in The Presence and the Power, we rightly see Jesus as the archetype of what is possible in a human life, characterised by total dependence on the Spirit of God. In an old post I compared Jesus’ temptation with our own and concluded that when the Christian is tempted they are empowered by the same Spirit who bolstered Jesus’ resolve. By way of conclusion, a proper appraisal of Jesus’ humanity does at least two things: it (1) affirms the biblical emphasis on and importance of the Spirit in all of God’s work, and (2) reassures us in our struggle with sin and temptation of the Spirit’s presence and power.

Can Satan Grow the Church?

If Facebook has taught us anything it is that sensational titles are of paramount importance to being successful online. And I guess if this post were a video the title would run something like this: The Church Grew More Rapidly Than Ever Before, But You Will Not Believe How! “Can Satan grow the church?” The answer is a chilling, “Yes.”

Matthew 13In Matthew 13 we encounter a collection of what have been called Jesus’ ‘kingdom parables’, where our Lord warns his hearers that Satan would actively strive against the church. But notice one of the ways Jesus said he would do this, in the “parable of the weeds of the field” (13:36); Satan’s opposition is not ostentatious but insidious. In the parable, the enemy does not destroy the fields but sows weeds amongst the wheat (13:25). And these grow so closely intertwined with the wheat that the field owner tells his servants they cannot be separated, until harvest time. This parable can be understood to teach us a few things: the church visible is not the church invisible; on judgment day Jesus will vindicate his people whilst judging mere pew-warmers; and God is not deceived by Satan but fully aware of his designs. However, the point I hope to tease out in this short post, one which I do not think is regularly taught, is that Satan grows local churches. One of the ways that Satan deceives us is by growing the local church.

What got me thinking along this line was our recent series of posts on Jesus’ temptation, in Matthew 4. Reflecting on the temptations I had to conclude that they were not simply mock or pretend temptations. What we see in the verbal wrestling in the wilderness is Satan genuinely tempting Jesus with the spectacular rather than sacrificial service. While the episode legitimises Jesus’ steadfast obedience to his Father and self-giving love for those he came to rescue, it also presents us with a peculiar puzzle: how could worshiping being he created truly tempt Jesus? David Seccombe argues that Satan’s offer of dominion – through means other than the cross, resurrection, and ascension – was real, “[Jesus] saw just how easy it would be to win the kingdoms if he were to employ the armoury of evil tactics which have been used from time immemorial to achieve political power” (The King of God’s Kingdom, p132). Satan could give the Son what was deservedly his: all glory and honour and power. But due to the deceptive nature of that fallen creature, Jesus saw the relative hollowness of the offer in comparison to what the Father promised.

William BlakeTying the above together I want to address pastors, from all traditions, denominations and walks. Our adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour (1 Peter 5:8). And one of the ways that he can do this is through giving pastors what they rightfully desire: vibrant, impressive churches. If Satan can grow the local church then we should be wary of loading our confidence into the size of our congregations. Sam Storms, in To the One Who Conquers, warns against pointing to sizeable offerings and overflowing crowds as an indicative of divine approval, for the field may simply be full of weeds. Writing on Jesus’ letter to the Philadelphians (Revelation 3:9), Storms adds: “The greatness of a church is not measured by its membership roll or budgetary prowess, but by the size of its Savior, whom it faithfully honors and passionately praises and confidently trusts.” It sounds trite, but it is true. Satan is the surreptitious prince of this world, sowing weeds and causing us to look in awe at the size of churches. But we must remember, from Jesus’ encounter, that he can give what we know to be good and desirable, only through devious means or by deception. Pastors need to be aware of the temptation to adopt alternate means, as Jesus was, in achieving growth in the local church. As Paul reminds us in 1 Corinthians 3, our work will one day be measured, only that which is built on the foundation of Jesus Christ will last.

Let me conclude. From Matthew 13 we see that Satan can grow the church; indeed, it is one of the ways that he deceives believers. Therefore we must be cautious about seeing the size of our congregation as an undeniable mark of God’s blessing or presence. I know of very large churches where Satan’s promises, not God’s as he has revealed them in Scripture, are preached; I have also visited many seemingly insignificant but faithful local churches that I am sure God is pleased with. In Matthew 4 Satan tempted Jesus with a right and desirous end, but the means were idolatrous. For us today, especially those in ministry, the difficult line to walk is between desiring growth in the local church while keeping that desire from becoming an idol. Our enemy revels in a church where attendance is the mark of faith and its leaders worship growth.

Christ’s Temptation and Our Own

Jesus IconI recently posted on Jesus’ temptation in Matthew’s Gospel and argued that the event showed Satan offering Jesus means other than the cross of becoming the Messiah; signified Jesus’ overthrow of Satan; and I suggested that each temptation is developed in the rest of Gospel. I concluded that post by reminding the reader that it was both Jesus’ loving submission to the Father and self-sacrificial love for us that braced him for his messianic role. In this short post I will unpack what the temptation teaches us about Christ and the challenge it issues to us.

When I preached Matthew 4:1-11 I said that Jesus’ temptation reveals Jesus’ struggle with his mission, which was a tremendous burden. However you read Hebrews 5:7-9 one thing is certain: Jesus’ obedience to God the Father was difficult. However when Jesus was tempted by Satan, experiencing in himself our human weakness, he was without sin (Hebrews 4:15). Jesus was unswervingly committed to his task, thus he trusted his Father and gave himself up for us. To borrow an analogy from John Owen’s On Temptation: temptation pierces a vessel revealing what is within. When Jesus is tempted we are given a window into his character and what we see there is steadfast love, for his Father and those he came to save.

ScalpelWe are no different, for temptation peels back our pious masks and pretensions. Owen wrote, “Temptation is like a knife, that may either cut the meat or the throat of a man; it may be his food or his poison, his exercise or his destruction.” He understood that the nature of temptation is to expose our hearts and added, “[Temptation shows] man what is in him–that is, the man himself.” When Jesus was tempted he rose above it for he was devoted to God the Father. However, what temptation more often than not reveals in the Christian is a lack of commitment to God. We know from Scripture that God sometimes tempts in order to test our faith and that “temptation may proceed either singly from Satan, or the world, or other men in the world, or from ourselves, or jointly from all or some of them”. But regardless of its source – and I would encourage investigating Owen’s different categories, also see James’ differentiation between internal and external temptation – when we are enticed by evil our hearts are exposed. Jesus’ temptation reveals his deliberate and devoted commitment to God. When we are tempted, what is revealed?

I will conclude with two practical points for when we are tempted. Firstly, we must rely on God’s grace to forgive and strengthen us. Owen writes, “Until we are tempted, we think we live on our own strength,” but when we feel like giving in to temptation we are reminded of our need for Christ’s blood and the Spirit’s empowerment. As N. T. Wright says, in The Lord and His Prayer, alluding to Matthew 12, “Invoke the name of the Stronger than the Strong.” The cross has removed our guilt and the Spirit works in us to break the power of sin, when we are tempted, as for when we sin, we need look no further than our gracious God. Secondly, resist temptation, hate sin, submit yourself to God and resist the devil. John Owen has written extensively on the battle with sin, which we make meagre progress in only because we do not actively set about doing it. So when you are tempted, resist what you know will displease your heavenly Father. And let us strive after Jesus’ example, who resisted temptation until the point of death.

Was Jesus Really Tempted?

TemptationIn the last post Graham began a series on Jesus’ temptation in Matthew. In it, he claimed that “Jesus was truly tempted, because the task set before him was overwhelmingly daunting.” But the fact that Jesus was tempted is a point worth further investigation. We quickly affirm Jesus’ perfection and his holiness but if those things are true was the temptation Jesus was faced with anything like our own temptation? If not was he really tempted? Or more, was he really human?

Jesus Didn’t sin

Let’s begin by reasserting Jesus’ perfection. In 2009 the American research company Barna ran a poll that concluded that 22% of Americans strongly agree that “Jesus probably sinned” and another 17% “agree somewhat”. In other words, 40% of those who would describe themselves as Christians (2 out of every group of 5!) would be okay with the idea that Jesus sinned. Or even, they think it’s unlikely that he didn’t.

Jesus’ moral perfection is something that is often questioned and doubted. It is also, however, something that is absoultely critical. We see this 1 Peter 2:22. Peter quotes Isaiah 53 with reference to Jesus and the punchline is that “He committed no sin”. The thing is, Peter is encouraging Christians to endure through suffering. How are they supposed to do that? Look to Jesus as their example. That logic doesn’t really work if Jesus sinned. Peter also doesn’t stop there; in verse 24 we see that the point of Jesus’ sinless death is that we could die to sin. Peter wouldn’t care about dying to sin though unless Jesus were our sinless example.

Jesus Couldn’t Sin

Okay so we all believe Jesus didn’t sin but we may wonder, “Could Jesus have sinned? Was Jesus actually able to sin?” After all, if Jesus was not able to sin, was he really human – isn’t it human nature to sin?

Think back to the Garden of Eden though and we will quickly remember that God made everything good. Adam and Eve were perfectly human and perfectly sinless the way God made them. Sin, ironically, is precisely not human nature. So Jesus could be human without ever sinning (and for that matter, he didn’t even need to be tempted to sin in order to qualify as a real human).

I think we can go one step further though and say that Jesus could not have sinned because not only was he 100% flesh and blood human, he was also 100% real McCoy God. Now something we often forget is that morality is not this arbitrary set of rules out there that God is just really good at keeping. If that were true, there would be something in authority over God. Instead, morality is rooted in God himself, in his nature and character. Quite simply, Jesus couldn’t have sinned because by definition he is the source of morality. To suggest Jesus could have sinned is kind of like suggesting that tree could plant itself.

Morality comes from Jesus and so what he does defines it. That doesn’t mean morality twists and turns and changes all the time, by the way, because something else we need to remember about God is that he is consistent and doesn’t change like shadows as the day wears on. Instead, we see God outlining a moral code and then we see him acting consistently with it through all of Scripture.

Jesus Wouldn’t Sin

If Jesus couldn’t sin though, then it stands to reason that he also couldn’t be tempted – at least in any real or significant way. I mean what’s the worry of temptation if I am don’t even have to worry about resisting it, because of who I am I’ll never be able to be immoral.

It’s helpful to realise that there are two types of temptation. Internal, like the kind James 1:14 refers to when James says we are tempted “when [we are] lured and enticed by [our] own evil desires.” and External, like the kind that Adam and Eve faced from the serpent in the Garden of Eden.

Jesus was not tempted internally because, unlike you are I, Jesus was not part of fallen humanity. However, it’s also clear that Jesus was tempted externally. The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) all report Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness. Satan tries three times to have Jesus follow the rest of humanity in sin and three times Jesus resists, consistently turning to Scripture (a poingant lesson to 21st century Christians who are known for our “snuggle” with sin).

The gospel accounts use Jesus’ victory against temptation to set him up as the true Israel and the second Adam through whom the Fall will be overturned. There is, however, one other particularly significant passage we should take note of; Hebrews 4:15

we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.

Here we see the importance of Jesus’ temptation to us as frail sinners. Jesus is not someone who cannot sympathise with our weaknesses. He was tempted in all things! In fact, if I were Satan I would have maxed out my efforts on getting Jesus to sin. “Yet,” Hebrews tells us, Jesus was without sin. This is an encouragement to us when we fall into sin to turn once more to Jesus. More than that, the author of Hebrews knows that Jesus sinlessness means that even when we sin, there is forgiveness because Jesus was not only our great high priest but our perfect atoning sacrifice.

Matthew: The Temptation of Christ

The temptation of ChristAt his baptism, Jesus is called God’s “beloved Son” (Matthew 3:17), he is then partnered by the Holy Spirit and sent into the wilderness to be tempted (4:1). Having been identified with Adam (clearer in Luke’s account) and Israel by the designation ‘son of God’, Jesus’ sonship is tested before his kingdom preaching commences (4:12-17). That means the temptation narrative is pivotal in reading Matthew’s Gospel. Unfortunately this important passage is often sketchily treated and underappreciated. So in this short post I hope to impress on the reader the gravity of Jesus’ meeting with Satan in the wilderness.

An important place to start is by asking if there exists a thread through the temptations. New Testament scholar David Seccombe argues, in The King of God’s Kingdom, that Jesus is being lured by false methods to achieve his messianic role. Jesus is not merely having his commitment to God tested; his commitment to the messianic office is being tried. So in each temptation Satan offers Jesus an alternative means of becoming promised king. Firstly, Satan tells Jesus to turn stones into bread. ‘Provide the people with their physical needs. Fill their stomachs and they will follow you.’ But Jesus’ reply suggests the people have a greater need, to hear the preached word of God. Secondly, Satan suggests that Jesus throw himself from the temple, the centre of Jewish life, requiring that God send hosts of angels to deliver him. Such a miracle would compel belief, win allegiance and clearly demonstrate that this is God’s promised king. But Jesus’ answer indicates that it would at the same time express unbelief in God, testing his faithfulness and dictating how he should act in his world. Lastly, if Jesus will only worship Satan then he will receive the kingdoms of the earth. Being ‘the prince of this world’ I would argue there is some weight to Satan’s offer, but Jesus’ response is uncompromising devotion to the only Lord God. Jesus knew that his messianic task could not be carried out in any way other than worshipful obedience to God the Father. As Shane Claiborne writes in Jesus for President, ‘In each of the three temptations Jesus resisted the spectacular, legitimising himself as the Servant-King’. Jesus was truly tempted, because the task set before him was overwhelmingly daunting.

The next question to ask might be: What does Jesus’ resistance to Satan’s temptation signify? In Matthew’s Gospel the simple answer is victory. Looking ahead, at 12:29 where Jesus says the strong man must first be bound, C. H. Dodd comments in The Founder of Christianity that implicit to Jesus’ teaching is that, “he had cleared scores with the devil before his work began, and he could carry on his campaign into the enemy’s country unhampered”. N. T. Wright makes the same point in Simply Jesus about Jesus’ temptation: Satan tried to bring Jesus over to his side, grasping the right goal but through the wrong means. Jesus’ temptation spelt the beginning of Satan’s defeat. Yet Jesus’ kingdom parables reveal that Satan’s opposition to God will be on going, as the kingdom advances (13:19, 38). According to Jesus’ words in 25:41, the final victory over Satan will only come at the end of the age. The victory over Satan in Matthew, and larger scope of Jesus’ ministry, poses a real challenge to the ‘classic or ransom theory’ of atonement, which understands Christ’s death as a payment to Satan for the ownership of humanity. In his ministry, kingdom proclamation, and the cross, Jesus was bringing about the defeat of Satan, binding him and loosing his reign over the kingdoms of earth.

The temptation of ChristFinally, something which entire post could be written of, is the theme of temptation further developed in Matthew’s Gospel? I would argue that it definitely is, not only in general but specific to the three temptations Jesus endured in the wilderness. Jesus showed twice that he could miraculously provide bread in abundance (14:13-21; 15:32-39). When he was arrested in Gethsemane he asked, “Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?” (26:53). Lastly, prior to his arrest, Jesus lies prostrate before the Father in desperate prayer yet submits himself to the Father’s will (26:39). He refused to establish a ‘bread circus’, he renounced his right to the angelic hosts, and he resisted the temptation to worship anything and anyone but his Father in heaven. Jesus carried out his messianic role without erring; though agonisingly tempted to use other means, his loving submission to the Father and his self-sacrificial love for us drove him ever closer to the cross.

The Futility of Fighting Sin with Sin

Ring PendantI think I may have started to find narrative more persuasive and more compelling than propositions (that’s quite a step for me). Again I have been thinking about Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, this time I have been thinking about sin through Tolkien’s spectacular metaphor of the ring. After Shelob’s lair – potentially the most exhilarating episode in the book – Sam believes Frodo to be dead and, after some deliberation, comes to the realisation that the responsibility of bearing the ring has fallen to him. This means that Sam carried it briefly and, for a short time, even wore it. My interest is the battle of wills that ensues as Sam puts on the ring.

The objective of the fellowship has always been the defeat of Sauron. The objective is a good one. It is the means of that objective being fulfilled that shifts and it is in the shift that Sauron would triumph. Sam barely wears the ring but simply having it hanging around his neck gives him courage and makes him fearsome in the eyes of orc enemies.

Already the Ring tempted him, gnawing at his will and reason. Wild fantasies arose in his mind; and he saw Samwise the Strong, Hero of the Age, striding with a flaming sword across the darkened land, and armies flocking to his call as he marched to the overthrow of Barad-dûr. And then all the clouds rolled away, and the white sun shone, and at his command the vale of Gorgoroth became a garden of flowers and trees and brought forth fruit. He had only to put on the Ring and claim it for his own, and all this could be.

Were he to wear it and try to wield it, it would certainly destroy him. His will would be engulfed in the will of Sauron and his good desire to defeat Sauron would turn into the evil desire for the power; the power for which Sauron himself longed (this is the vice of the ring; into it was poured all of Sauron’s evil will such that it will corrupt the will of whoever wears it).

While Sam’s desire to defeat Sauron remains and is still good, conflicting desires flare up that are evil and as Tolkien allows us briefly to peak into Sam’s ring-induced imaginings, we are exposed to the subtle yet perilous shift in means. Sauron’s defeat need not come at the expense of the ring; Sam is tempted by the idea that in his own power (with the help of the ring), he could overthrow Sauron. The seductive but errant notion that the defeat of evil need not come at the expense of evil.

Figurine: Gollum with The RingThe concept is illuminating. How often I now find myself using a sinful means to try to defeat sin. Allow me to illustrate, a man beats his wife. He knows it’s wrong but he constantly finds he succumbs to the temptation. He realises, however, that should this be discovered he would lose his reputation – a reputation that has become an idol to him. He therefore puts a stop to beating his wife in order to maintain his reputation. Of course, he would still beat his wife if no one could discover him. What’s more, the sinful passion that was fed as he found satisfaction in his sin will only find another outlet. Worst of all, in my opinion, he willfully feeds a sinful desire.

On the contrary, Sauron will not be defeated by the use of the ring, only by its destruction. Sin will not be defeated by the use of sin. This is why we are urged time and again to “put to death” “the deeds of the body” (Romans 8:13) and “what is earthly in you” (Colossians 3:5). Sin cannot be wielded for good, it can only corrupt. It began in Eden with a desire to be like God – a good desire (which will be accomplished by Christ in us) – but a sinful means in the serpent’s whisperings to Eve, “You need only eat the fruit and claim it for your own, and all this could be.” How often I take the bait.

Evil can only be overthrown by direct assault, only the pursuit of righteousness will defeat evil. So my exhortation is, “put to death whatever is earthly in you” and “clothe yourselves with compassionate hearts.”