Nick Bogardus

Richard Dahlstrom recently wrote a thoughtful and articulate piece here on Conversant that I enjoyed reading. After reading Rick Warren’s prayer, I had thought about writing about the same thing - his use of the Hebrews passage - and I’m partially glad I didn’t yet because Richard’s is so well written.

I say partially because I think he stopped short of the true power of that passage. Richard ends his scripture quotation here: “fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith.” The problem is that there isn’t a period at that point in the passage…but it’s that last part of the passage that makes all the difference! If we stop there, isn’t Jesus just a moral example (and not our Savior or author and perfecter of our faith), leaving us with a set of moral imperatives: do this, don’t do this? So, if I may, I offer an addendum of questions.

The passage has a comma and continues into the meat of that passage.

“Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.”

If we’re going to use Jesus as our example, shouldn’t we go all the way to the cross? More so, shouldn’t we go all the way to the Jesus who is sitting at the right hand of the throne of God?

Richard mentioned breaking down of the dividing wall, the ending of slavery, the ushering in of reconciliation, the challenge to the abuse of power, and the call to justice; but do those make sense apart from the cross?

At the cross Jesus the broke down of the true dividing wall between man and God (Heb. 6:19,20)
At the cross Jesus put an end to our true slavery (Heb. 2:15, Rom. 6:6-7).
At the cross He brought us true reconciliation (Rom. 5:1,2).
At the cross Jesus laid down His rights to power as the Son of God and instead became a curse for us (Gal. 3:13), became sin for us (2 Cor. 5:21).
And, at the cross is where we find the only true and righteous justice that is the foundation for any call to social justice.

Without a cross, do we have the understanding of how He achieved any of those things, are we able to understand their eternal weight and how they apply to our lives, and without a cross are we able to explain to people why we advocate and seek reconciliation, justice, and humility?

Mr. Dahlstrom is right, behind it all there is Jesus, but is a Christ without a cross one who is able to command us to be faithful as He was faithful or a blessing as He was a blessing? It doesn’t seem that He could so in the eternal sense and, even if He did so in the temporal sense, wouldn’t it be impotent? More so, in a conversation peppered with the word ‘hope’ and that uses Scripture mentioning true joy, does a Christ without a cross offers either?

As Christians, our witnesses endured suffering and trial, threw off sin that so easily entangled, and ran with perseverance the races set before them because of the cross, because we have a God and Savior who didn’t consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made Himself nothing, taking on the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death - even death on a cross!

So, while Warren put a man on first with a descent inaugural prayer, and Richard’s thoughtful and well-written piece put two men on, I would like to wave them home by removing that period and adding a comma and a cross. Shouldn’t we? Isn’t Christianity primarily about what He has done and secondarily (and consequently) about what we must do?

-