×

“He has torn us, that he may heal us; he has struck us down, and he will bind us up.” —Hosea 6:1

Are Christians to be broken or triumphant?

Both. But—let’s be clear what we mean.

Are Christians to be broken? If by broken we mean downcast, long-faced, perpetually discouraged, hand-wringing, abject, ever grieving over sins—no. If by broken we mean contrite, low before the Lord, poignantly aware of personal weakness, self-divesting, able to laugh at ourselves, of sober judgment, sensitive to the depths of sin within us—yes.

Are Christians to be triumphant? If by triumphant we mean self-assured, superficial, obtuse to personal weakness, beyond correction, self-confident, quick to diagnose others’ weaknesses and our strengths, showy, triumphalistic—no. If by triumphant we mean confident of God’s unconquerable purposes in the world through faltering disciples, bold with a boldness that accords with the outrageous promises of the Bible, quietly abandoning ourselves to God in light of Christ’s irrepressible victory, relentless in reminding the enemy of Christ’s emptying of the power of Satan’s accusations, risk-taking fueled not by reputation-seeking but God-fixated faith—yes.

Brokenness without triumph is Eeyore-ish gloom that emphasizes the fall to the neglect of redemption, crucifixion to the neglect of resurrection. It is personally under-realized eschatology.

Triumph without brokenness is Buzz Lightyear-ish naïveté that emphasizes redemption to the neglect of the fall, resurrection to the neglect of crucifixion. It is personally over-realized eschatology.

The gospel gives us the only resource to look our brokenness squarely in the face, downplaying nothing, overlaid with—not in competition with—unspeakable victory. Both together.

Jonathan Edwards understood this deeply. “All gracious affections, that are a sweet odor to Christ,” he wrote in Religious Affections, “are brokenhearted affections.” Yet Edwards had earlier written in the same book of the supreme value of “delight and joy in God, a sweet and melting gratitude to God for his great goodness, a holy exultation and triumph of soul in the favor, sufficiency and faithfulness of God.”

In the gospel are we liberated to experience simultaneously fall and redemption, crucifixion and resurrection, brokenness and triumph. Jesus tells us to take up our cross daily (Matt. 16:24) while Paul tells us we have been raised and are seated in heaven (Eph. 2:6; Col. 3:1). How can both be true? Because the only person who was ever in himself triumphant-without-brokenness switched places with those who are only in themselves broken-without-triumph so that now the greatest triumph—restored sonship to God—is freely ours, even as brokenness remains. As any seasoned saint will attest, the strange way God brings us to treasure this triumph is through, not by circumventing, present brokenness. But brokenness is never an end, only a means. There is no brokenness in the first two chapters of the Bible and none in the final two chapters.

Is there enough evidence for us to believe the Gospels?

In an age of faith deconstruction and skepticism about the Bible’s authority, it’s common to hear claims that the Gospels are unreliable propaganda. And if the Gospels are shown to be historically unreliable, the whole foundation of Christianity begins to crumble.
But the Gospels are historically reliable. And the evidence for this is vast.
To learn about the evidence for the historical reliability of the four Gospels, click below to access a FREE eBook of Can We Trust the Gospels? written by New Testament scholar Peter J. Williams.

Podcasts

LOAD MORE
Loading