The Personality and Deity of the Holy Spirit

“May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2Cor 13:14).

Is the Holy Spirit a he, she, or it? It’s all too common today for people to think of the Holy Spirit as an impersonal force rather than as a person of the Godhead. The scriptures, however, insist that the Holy Spirit is a he, not an it. Even though the Greek term for “spirit” has a neuter gender, the NT authors always use masculine pronouns when speaking of the Spirit. For example, “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me” (John 15:26).

The personality of the Spirit is also demonstrated by the things he does. He advocates (as above). He speaks (eg, Acts 10:19-20, 13:2). He intercedes (Rom 8:26-27). We have fellowship with the Spirit (2Cor 13:14).

Also, he is described in Romans 8:27 as having a mind: “And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.”

Rick Cornish points out Acts 10:38 (“God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power”) saying, “If the Holy Spirit is only God’s impersonal power, Peter is speaking nonsense by repeating himself: ‘God anointed Jesus with power and with power.’”¹

Most who think of the Spirit in impersonal terms do so out of ignorance, perhaps because of the pervasive influence of New Age thought in our culture. There are modern day Arians who deny the deity of Christ and the personality of the Spirit, though, and they must maintain a willful misunderstanding of the scriptures.

But saying the Holy Spirit is a person doesn’t make him God. Is he?

When the Nicene and post-Nicene era Christians debated the deity of the Holy Spirit, the go-to passage for the pro side seems to have been the baptismal formula given by Christ: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit...” (Matt 28:19). Just as it boggles the mind to think that Jesus would tell us to baptize in the name (again, singular) of God, his created Son, and a force, it’s incredibly unlikely (once we’re convinced of the deity of Christ) that he told us to baptize in the name (singular!) of God, the divine Son, and some other non-divine being or impersonal force. This formula strongly implies, if not requires, a trinitarian view of God.

There are other trinitarian formulas in scripture. For example, in 2Cor 13:14 (“May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all”), the Spirit is treated the same way as the Father and the Son. (See also, 1Pet 1:1-2, Heb 9:14, Acts 20:28, Jude 1:20-21). These passages link the Father, Jesus, and the Spirit in a way that only makes sense if the Spirit is also divine.

The scriptures also speak of the Spirit as God. Lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God (Acts 5:3-4). The Holy Spirit can be “blasphemed” (Mark 3:28-29), a term that is only applicable to God. The Spirit is called “eternal” in Heb 9:14, and only God is eternal. The Holy Spirit has a “temple” in the Church (1Cor 6:19), something only God may have. The inspiration of scriptures is said to be both the work of God (2Tim 3:16) and the work of the Spirit (Mark 12:36, 2Pet 1:21). The Holy Spirit is said to be omniscient (1Cor 2:11) and omnipresent (Psalm 139:7-10). He was part of the work of creation (Gen 1:2). It should be clear that the prophets and apostles believed in the deity of the Holy Spirit.

Why does this matter? Boice tells us:

If we think of the Holy Spirit as a mysterious power, our thoughts will be, “How can I get more of the Holy Spirit?” If we think of the Holy Spirit as a person, we will ask, “How can the Holy Spirit have more of me?” The first is nonbiblical, pagan. The second is New Testament Christinianity.²

“The Holy Spirit is the point at which the Trinity becomes personal to the believer.”³ The Spirit is not a force to be employed. He is the God who lives in us and among us (more on that later). He loves you and wants to see you be all you can be. And he looks forward to the day when you will finally be fully conformed to the image of Christ. Love him and worship him as part of our triune God.


The classic defense of this doctrine is On the Holy Spirit by Basil the Great.

1 Rick Cornish, 5 Minute Theologian
2 James Montgomery Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith
3 Millard Erickson, Introducing Christian Doctrine

The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit: Introduction to Pneumatology

“Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters” (Gen 1:2).

The Holy Spirit appears on the first and last pages of the Bible and very frequently in between, yet he has been called the forgotten God because non-charismatic evangelicals tend to overlook him. This is inappropriate not only because he is part of our triune God but also because he is a fundamental part of the Christian life.

When God acts, he acts through the working of the Holy Spirit. When he wants people to do something for him, he sends his Spirit. The Spirit is the power for the Christian life and the work of the Church. “Without Him, people operate in their own strength and only accomplish human-size results. ... But when believers live in the power of the Spirit, the evidence in their lives is supernatural. The church cannot help but be different, and the world cannot help but notice.”¹

When we think about the Spirit, we need to keep in mind that everything we know about YHWH, the triune God, applies to him just as it applies to the Father and the Son. But he has roles that he alone plays, just like the Father and the Son. So we will look at those roles and see why the Nicene Creed calls the Spirit “the Lord, the giver of life.”


1 Francis Chan, Forgotten God: Reversing Our Tragic Neglect of the Holy Spirit

Image credit: M W via Pixabay

The Work of Christ in the Present

“The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven” (Heb 1:3).

After Jesus’ resurrection, he visited with his disciples off and on for 40 days. Then “he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight” (Acts 1:9). He ascended into heaven and sat down at the right hand of his Father (Heb 1:3).

So what is he doing now? Is he retired? Is he just killing time until the Father sends him back? No, Christ has a very active role. Let’s look at three things he is doing right now.

First and foremost, Christ is reigning with his Father.

God has “raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come” (Eph 1:20-21). Being seated at the right hand is a position of authority.¹ The Son now shares in the Father’s rule. “All authority in heaven and on earth” has been given to him (Matt 28:18). That little word “all” is very interesting. It means ... all. Everything in the universe is under his control just as it was before his incarnation. There is no part of his creation that is out of his control -- not hurricanes, nor viruses, nor demons. And everything is dependent on him; he sustains all things by his powerful word (Heb 1:3, Col 1:17). Everything continues to exist only because Christ wills it. My Savior, the one who loved me and gave himself for me is running the universe. What have I to fear?

And one day, we will reign with him. The scriptures say that we have been “seated ... with him in the heavenly places” (Eph 2:6). God’s plan is that we should rule with our elder brother to the praise of his glorious grace (Eph 2:7).

Second, Christ is representing us to his Father. Christ is our mediator with God (1Tim 2:5). He intercedes for us to his Father (Heb 7:25, Rom 8:34). He is our advocate with the Father (1John 2:1). The one who became a man, who was tempted as we are, who then covered our sins with his blood stands between God and man as our great High Priest.

“Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin. Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need” (Heb 4:14-16).

Third, Christ is preparing a place for us. The night that he was betrayed, the Lord told his disciples, “My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am” (John 14:2-3).

Tony Evans says, “The ascension is vitally important to our hope for tomorrow and for eternity. ... Because Jesus went somewhere, we have somewhere to go. And just as Christ ascended to heaven, you and I will leave this earth someday and ascend to heaven because Jesus is coming back for us. If the ascension is true, then heaven is true.”² Heaven is real, and Jesus wants us to be with him. And Jesus is going to come set everything right. But that’s a topic for another time.

James Montgomery Boice says, “It is always difficult to measure one’s own spiritual maturity. But there is a sense in which one can assess it generally by the dominant image one has of Jesus Christ.”³ He is no longer the baby in the manger; he’s not still hanging on the cross. Christ is now the ruling and reigning Lord. Live like he’s the King of the universe. Pray like he’s interceding for you. Hope like you have been promised an eternal home. “Our destiny has been secured by our conquering hero, the ascended Christ, seated at God’s right hand.”⁴


There’s so much more that could be said. I recommend “The Uniqueness of Christ in His Ascension and Present Ministry” in Tony Evans’ Theology You Can Count On.

1 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology
2 Tony Evans, Theology You Can Count On
3 James Montgomery Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith
4 Rick Cornish, 5 Minute Theologian

Image credit: Ronny Overhate from Pixabay

Aside: The Odds of Jesus

“Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, ‘We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled’” (Luke 18:31).

Everyone is the product of a unique combination of improbable events. But Jesus is special: Those improbable events were foretold hundreds of years before his birth.

The New Testament writers had a broader view of the term “prophecy” than we tend to. They included what theologians called types, similar to foreshadowing in literature. So the apostles saw hints of Christ throughout the scriptures. Sometimes they are things that happened to other people in the scriptures but that still point to Christ. Theologians identify about 200 prophecies about Jesus using this broader sense of the word.

But some prophecies are clear and specific and fulfilled only in Christ. There are prophecies that he chose to fulfill, such as riding into Jerusalem on the foal of a donkey, that demonstrate how Jesus saw himself and his mission. But there are others that no man could have chosen to fulfill.

Pick any eight such prophecies:

• Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2)
• Rejected by his people (Is 53:3, Psalm 22:6-8)
• Abandoned by his followers (Zech 13:7)
• Badly beaten (Is 52:14)
• Death by crucifixion (Psalm 22:16-17)
• Killed with criminals (Is 53:9)
• Lots cast for his clothes (Psalm 22:18)
• Buried with the rich (Is 53:9)

The odds of Christ’s fulfilling these eight prophecies are 1 in 10¹⁷ or 1 in one hundred million billion; that is a huge number, so an illustration can help make it a little clearer. This is one by Peter Stoner that Josh McDowell uses¹:

Suppose you cover the entire state of Texas with silver dollars two feet deep – that takes about 10¹⁷ silver dollars. Paint one of them red and mix it in good. Now send a blindfolded friend to go anywhere in the state he wishes and randomly pick up one dollar. The odds that he’d get the red one are 1 in 10¹⁷. That is how likely it is for one person to fulfill eight prophecies.

And that doesn’t even consider how his ministry (Is 9:1-2, 61:1-2), miracles (Is 35:5-6), and resurrection (Is 53:10, Ps 16:8-10) were predicted.

The life, death, and life of Jesus were uniquely foretold in detail hundreds of years before he was born, demonstrating that he was no mere man and that the death he died was according to the plan of God.


To get the full effect, read what is sometimes called the gospel according to Isaiah, Is 52:13-53:12, and reflect on how closely this passage written 700 years before Christ describes the death of the savior.

1 Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict

image credit: M&R Glasgow, via Creative Commons 

Evidence for the Resurrection

“For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared ...” (1Cor 15:3-5).

Christianity alone, out of all the religions in the world, tells you how to prove that it’s false: produce the body. OK, two thousand years later, that would be impossible. But to the modern world we can offer a similar challenge: give us a better explanation for the facts.

What facts? Gary Habermas offers a list of 12 facts that, with one exception, are “accepted as historical by virtually all [90%+] scholars who research this area”,¹ be they evangelicals, liberals, or even non-Christians. He also says that you don’t even need all 12 to prove the resurrection happened. I would use these five:

1. Jesus died by Roman crucifixion.
2. The disciples had experiences they thought were appearances of the risen Jesus.
3. The apostles began teaching the resurrection of Christ very soon afterwards in Jerusalem, the city where Jesus was executed and buried.
4. James, the brother of Jesus and a former skeptic, and Saul (Paul), the church persecutor, became Christians due to experiences they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus.
5. Christ’s tomb was empty. (This is the exception. Habermas says only about 75% accept this as fact.)

Because liberals and skeptics accept these facts, it is not necessary to argue from an inerrant or even inspired Bible. They don’t even think the gospels are all that historically reliable. This is why we can say that even if the gospels are simply ancient religious literature, Christ was raised from the dead and Christianity is true.

Anyone wishing to disprove Christianity simply needs to come up with a better explanation for the above facts than the resurrection. And people have tried. We will look at several alternative theories.

Legendary development: Skeptics often claim that the resurrection only became part of Christian teachings decades after the crucifixion, after the “witnesses” were dead and long after Christ’s body would have decayed beyond recognition. But today there are several noteworthy skeptical NT scholars who agree that the teaching of the resurrection happened within a few months to a few years of the crucifixion. For instance, Bart Ehrman² believes that the creed reproduced in 1Cor 15:3-7 would have been established within 3-5 years of Christ’s death, meaning that the teaching would have begun even earlier. Scholars generally agree that the resurrection was preached at most a few months after the crucifixion. This means those who claimed to see him after his death were the ones teaching the resurrection. So legendary development is not a plausible alternative.

Swoon theory: The idea that Jesus didn’t actually die on the cross comes into fashion every once in a while. It’s interesting that no one suggested this until long after crucifixions were no longer carried out. Experts believe Jesus actually died on the cross because Roman soldiers were very good at killing people. If Jesus had somehow fooled everyone into merely thinking he was dead, the spear in his side would have ended the charade. If by some odd chance he survived the crucifixion and the time in the tomb without medical care, he would then have to get himself out of the tomb (the stone would have weighed tons) and avoid the guards. And after all he had endured (the flogging, the crucifixion, the spear, the time in the tomb), it’s unlikely he would convince his followers he had “conquered death.”

Stolen body: The idea that the disciples stole Christ’s body is the first alternative theory we know about. But the idea that the same men who fled and hid during his arrest would then find the nerve to steal his body from a guarded, sealed tomb and then insist on proclaiming his resurrection even after the deaths of Stephen and James is too ridiculous to imagine. This theory also fails to explain the conversion of skeptics.

Hallucination: What if the disciples only thought Jesus appeared to them? What if they wanted him to live so badly they convinced themselves that he had returned from the dead? As much trouble as they caused with their preaching, the Jewish leaders or the Romans would have simply trotted out the body. But the tomb was empty; how did that happen? And even though people can have such hallucinations, people cannot share hallucinations. One disciple might think he saw the risen Christ, but not a dozen, much less 500 of them. Additionally, skeptics like James and Paul would not be susceptible to those hallucinations.

Copy of pagan myths: Some claim that the Christian resurrection story was copied from pagan myths of dying and rising gods. When the similarities are closely examined, though, they quickly fall apart, and the more similar the mythic element is, the more likely it is to have appeared after Christianity. And, ultimately, no amount of similarities to these myths explains the historical data.

History has shown that skeptics are endlessly creative when it comes to alternative theories to explain away the resurrection, but in the end they all fail to adequately explain the historical facts. “But no theory is as implausible as the idea that someone rose from the dead.” In a naturalistic world, that would be true. But if God can create a universe out of nothing, he can certainly reanimate a corpse. And as long as miracles are possible, a resurrection is a much better explanation for the historical facts.

We need to be confident that Christ was raised from the dead. “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

“But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1Cor 15:17-20).


For more on this topic, including more skeptical alternative theories, I recommend The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona.

1 Gary Habermas, The Risen Jesus & Future Hope
2 Bart Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist?

image credit: JeffJacobs1990 via pixabay

Facets of the Atonement

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).

What happened at the cross? Over the centuries theologians have proposed numerous ways of understanding what Christ accomplished on the cross. People have argued vehemently in support of various “theories of the atonement.” In recent years, though, most theologians are realizing that there is an element of truth in many of these theories and that we should consider them together to get a complete understanding of the atonement.

“Not all theories of the atonement can be justified biblically. Some are incompatible with others, and many, while having an element of truth, are not adequate explanations of how salvation is accomplished. All of them, however, are illuminating and in some way widen our knowledge of this profound subject.”¹

The atonement is like a fine diamond; it has many sides, many facets that gleam differently as we turn to look at it first from this angle, then from another. So we’ll look at a few of the prominent theories and see how the different facets reflect God’s glory and grace to us.

The death of Christ as an example. “To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps” (1Pet 2:21). Jesus taught that we should turn the other cheek and go the extra mile. He said, “Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness” (Matt 5:10). He showed us just how far we should be willing to take that by going to the cross where “when he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly” (1Pet 2:23).

The cross as demonstration of God’s love. “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom 5:8). The cross shows us just how far God’s love for us goes. Once we understand the depths of our sin, the love shown at the cross should leave us speechless. And it should fill us with confidence. “What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” (Rom 8:31-32).

The cross as Christ’s victory over evil. When the forces of evil coaxed Man to sin, they gained a foothold on the earth and authority over humanity. “Our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Eph 6:12). At the cross, Christ took all of that back. “And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross” (Col 2:15). Then God “raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come” (Eph 1:20-21). Though for now sin and death and the dark powers that are loose in the world can still harm us in their death throes, the war is over, and we have victory in Christ Jesus.

The cross as payment of our debt to God. Substitutionary atonement, the idea that Christ died to satisfy the wrath of God, to pay the penalty for our sin, is frequently attacked today as not only bloody and petty but also as new. Though the modern formulation has its roots in Anselm’s satisfaction theory, it really only became what we know today in the time of the Reformation. But that doesn’t mean the idea of Christ paying for our sin hasn’t been part of Christian teaching since the beginning.

Jesus was introduced as “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). In Hebrews, the death of Christ is likened to the Day of Atonement (9:1-15). Peter said of Jesus, “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness” (1Pet 2:24). And one of the earliest statements of faith of the fledgling church was “Christ died for our sins” (1Cor 15:3). Christ and the apostles pointed to Isaiah’s prophecy of the suffering servant in relation to Christ’s death: 

But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed (Is 53:5).

“... [S]ubstitution is not a ‘theory of the atonement.’ Nor is it even an additional image to take its place as an option alongside the others. It is rather the message of each image and the heart of the atonement itself.”²

Together, these facets give us a fuller understanding of the atonement than any one theory can. Erickson sums up the picture created:

In his death Christ (1) gave us a perfect example of the type of dedication God desires of us, (2) demonstrated the great extent of God’s love, (3) underscored the seriousness of sin and the severity of God’s righteousness, (4) triumphed over the forces of sin and death, liberating us from their power, and (5) rendered satisfaction to the Father for our sins. All of these things we as humans needed done for us, and Christ did them all.³

This brief article can barely scratch the surface. I recommend John Stott’s The Cross of Christ to everyone.

1 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology
2 John Stott, The Cross of Christ
3 Millard Erickson, Introducing Christian Doctrine

image credit: OpenClipart-Vectors

The Work of Christ in His Death and Resurrection

“He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification” (Romans 4:25).

The death and resurrection of Christ was the central act of human history. It’s also the foundation of Christian theology, so we’ll be spending some time digging into this topic.

Why did Christ have to die? Human rebellion had to be paid for, and “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23). “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Heb 9:22). Rebellion against God is a capital offense, but God, in Christ, was willing to take that punishment upon himself.

So Christ went to the cross. Many today want to dismiss the notion that God sent Jesus to die. They say that he came here to teach and inspire, but we killed him. The apostles disagree: “This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross” (Acts 2:23).

Some today object that this constitutes “divine child abuse.” They have a weak understanding of the Trinity. The Father and the Son are separate persons, but there is one God and there was one plan whereby God would take the penalty on himself. The Son was not forced into a role by the Father; this was their plan. “We must not, then, speak of God punishing Jesus or of Jesus persuading God, for to do so is to set them over against each other as if they acted independently of each other or were even in conflict with each other. We must never make Christ the object of God’s punishment or God the object of Christ’s persuasion, for both God and Christ were subjects not objects, taking the initiative together to save sinners.”¹ Jesus said, “No one takes [my life] from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again” (John 10:18).

Which brings us to the resurrection. In the epistles, the authors will often speak of Christ’s death or of his resurrection, but in most cases they have both in mind. His death and resurrection are two parts of the same event. “He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification” (Rom 4:25).

It’s common for skeptics to claim that this belief developed later, long after everyone who knew Jesus was dead. Today, though, even non-Christian NT scholars (yes, that’s a thing) find themselves agreeing that this belief is very early. 1Cor 15:3-7 is held by many scholars to be an early creedal statement that Paul quotes in his letter. It says, “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, ... he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures....” According to Jesus Seminar founder Robert Funk, this creed was probably set within three years after Christ’s death.² Note that both his death “for our sins” and his resurrection are included in this formula.

Today “progressive Christians”* often teach that the resurrection of Jesus was a “spiritual resurrection,” that is, that he “rose” in his followers’ hearts or perhaps that he continued in a spiritual existence after his death. In his massive The Resurrection of the Son of God, NT Wright has shown in exhaustive detail that a non-physical resurrection would never have even entered into the minds of either Jews or Greeks of that time period. Resurrection meant the body getting back up and walking off. That is part of what made the Christian message so hard for the Jews and Greeks to believe. “The resurrection is particularly significant, for inflicting death was the worst thing that sin and the powers of sin could do to Christ. In the inability of death to hold him is symbolized the totality of his victory. What more can the forces of evil do if someone whom they have killed does not stay dead?”³

The teaching of the apostles was that Christ physically rose from the dead and so will we. Christ was “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1Cor 15:20). Because he had victory over death, we will have victory over death. Not only will we live again, we will live better than we ever have — we will have a resurrection body (eg, 1Cor 15:51-54) like his.

But the victory of the resurrection isn’t just for after we die. Through Christ’s resurrection, we have victory over sin’s power right now. “When you accepted Christ you were identified completely with Him, both in His death and in His resurrection. So when Christ was raised from the dead, you also were raised to a new way of life.”⁴ Through Christ’s death, the chains of sin were broken. Through his life, we have the power to not sin. It’s a power we don’t use well or often enough, but we can get better with practice.

The death and resurrection of Christ are not just an event to commemorate. It’s supposed to transform us. We should live differently because of the price paid for our sins and because of Christ’s victory over death. Let us commit to living, through the power of the Holy Spirit, lives worthy of the risen Savior.


For more on this topic, I recommend “The Uniqueness of Christ in His Resurrection” in Theology You Can Count On by Tony Evans.

1 John RW Stott, The Cross of Christ
2 Robert Funk and The Jesus Seminar, The Acts of Jesus
3 Millard Erickson, Introducing Christian Doctrine
4 Tony Evans, Theology You Can Count On

* The term here refers to a religious perspective rather than a political movement. I put the term in quotes because the extent to which these people teach Christianity is in serious question.

image credit: passion by congerdesign via Pixabay