Ligonier Ministries Blog

Ligonier Ministries
Ligonier Ministries
  1. Good Friday, which commemorates the suffering and death of Jesus, has long been celebrated in the Christian church. The historical record is unclear regarding how the church came to call this day “Good Friday” since the term is not mentioned in Scripture. Some have posited that it was originally called “God’s Friday” and later morphed into “Good Friday,” but most linguists find that theory untenable. It’s more likely that the term comes from an antiquated meaning of “good” as “holy”—in other words, “Holy Friday.” Regardless of how this term developed historically, the fact remains that Christians do see Good Friday as good in the way we understand the term today—a fact that some people might find puzzling. Why would Christians call “good” a day that saw their leader experience horrific injustice at the hands of corrupt religious rulers and put to death by the Romans on a shameful torture device? At first glance, there appears to be nothing good about this day at all. Jesus’ followers certainly didn’t see it as good when they mourned His death that Friday and Saturday. The disciples who had given up their livelihoods, believing they would be key players in a messianic kingdom that would overthrow the rule of Rome, had their hopes and dreams dashed. Indeed, if Jesus’ death on that dark day had been the end of the story, people would rightly view Christians as objects of pity (1 Cor. 15:17–19). Why, then, do Christians call Good Friday “good”? The answer is that Resurrection Sunday interprets and transforms Good Friday. We see woven throughout Scripture the pattern of “not good” later being reinterpreted as God sovereignly uses it to bring about what is good. For example, consider the story of Joseph in Genesis. There is nothing inherently good about being betrayed by one’s own brothers, sold into slavery in a foreign country, and—just as things seem to finally be getting better—being falsely accused, thrown into prison, and forgotten by a fellow prisoner turned freeman. It would be natural to stamp “not good” over these parts of Joseph’s story. Yet in God’s mysterious but wonderful providence, He fashions good from these “not good” raw materials, using Joseph and his eventual position of authority in Egypt to save not only Joseph’s family from starvation but the entire region. In retrospect, Joseph can say of his brothers’ evil betrayal of him, “As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today” (Gen. 50:20, emphasis added). So it is with the evil events of the crucifixion and death of Jesus. As the Apostle Peter makes clear in his sermon at Pentecost, Jesus was indeed “crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men” (Acts 2:23) who “killed the Author of life” (Acts 3:15). It was evil for these people to knowingly sentence to death an innocent man who was also God incarnate. But over all these events, God was sovereignly working out a plan that had been prophesied through the ages to bring about the greatest good from the greatest evil. What was the good that God was working in the death of Jesus that Friday? Scripture makes clear that humankind is in a predicament. We have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). The evil and ugliness of sin separates us from the glorious, perfect, and holy God, who in His righteousness and justice must judge sin (Rom. 2:5–6; 5:9–10; 1 Thess. 1:10). What hope do we have as we hurl toward a future of eternal separation from the love of God, and instead face His righteous wrath against our sin? We lack the righteousness that is required to stand in God’s presence and can’t pay the debt we owe for our sin. There would be no hope apart from the triune God’s plan in eternity past to bring us a salvation that we cannot secure for ourselves. The second person of the Trinity, the Son, took on human flesh and lived the perfectly righteous life that we all fail to live. On the cross, according to God’s own plan (Acts 2:23), Jesus faced much more than the wrath of the Jewish leaders and Roman soldiers. He faced and satisfied (or “propitiated”) the wrath of God Himself for the sins of all those who belong to Him (Rom. 5:9–10; Heb. 2:17; 1 John 2:2). The Old Testament sacrificial system pointed forward to Jesus, who is both the perfect High Priest and the perfect sacrifice (Heb. 9:12, 26). His perfect life and substitutionary, sacrificial death satisfied God’s righteous wrath and judgment against the sins of all who trust in Christ alone for salvation. Jesus, the perfectly righteous One, took the punishment for our sins upon Himself, and we who deserve eternal punishment for our unrighteousness receive the perfect righteousness of Christ. Therefore, Good Friday is good because through His death, Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, so that we might receive adoption as sons (Gal. 3:13–14; 4:5). Because Jesus bore our sins in His body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24), we have redemption through His blood and the forgiveness of our trespasses (Eph. 1:7). We are ransomed with the precious blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18–19). We are justified, saved from the wrath of God, and reconciled to God (Rom. 5:9–10). The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead on the third day validates all that He accomplished on Good Friday, revealing that death has no ultimate claim on Him (Acts 2:24). His triumph over death in His resurrection shows that He has the power and ability to secure our justification (Rom. 4:25). The resurrection proves that He really is God (Rom. 1:4) and that God’s wrath was indeed satisfied by Christ’s atoning death. Because Jesus bore God’s wrath for the sins of all who would trust in this provision by faith alone, Christians will never face the wrath of God against their sins or be separated from God, for they are united to Christ in His death and in His life. In short, Good Friday is good because on this day, the greatest exchange took place: “For our sake [God] made [Jesus] to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21). May we then declare with the Apostle Paul, “Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift!” (2 Cor. 9:15).
  2. Many Protestants have attended churches that have had focused worship services on Good Friday and Easter Sunday. However, in Protestant churches that do not strictly adhere to the liturgical calendar and do not celebrate Maundy Thursday, some may be unfamiliar with the terminology and practice of Maundy Thursday. Historically, the Christian church celebrated Maundy Thursday at the beginning of the Triduum (i.e., the three days of Christ’s suffering). The Christian church has done so in commemoration of Jesus’ institution of the Supper, His washing the disciples’ feet, and His giving the new commandment in the upper room on the night He was betrayed. The word Maundy comes from the Latin word mandatum, which, in English, simply means “mandate.” In the upper room (John 13–17), Jesus gave His disciples the new commandment (i.e., the new mandate) after washing their feet. This new commandment is found in John 13:31–35. Having set an example by washing their feet, the Lord Jesus told the Twelve: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35). It has not been uncommon for believers to misunderstand the symbolism of the foot washing and Jesus’ subsequent new commandment. Christ was not instituting a practice of foot washing as a sacrament in this act; neither was He teaching us that we fulfill the new commandment by literally washing the feet of other believers. Rather, He was acting out in His service of His disciples a parable regarding what He would do on the cross. Jonathan Edwards helpfully explains: > There were . . . symbolical representations given of that great event this evening; one in the passover, which Christ now partook of with his disciples . . . another in this remarkable action of his washing his disciples’ feet. Washing the feet of guests was the office of servants, and one of their meanest offices: and therefore was fitly chosen by our Savior to represent that great abasement which he was to be the subject of in the form of a servant, in becoming obedient unto death, even that ignominious and accursed death of the cross, that he might cleanse the souls of his disciples from their guilt and spiritual pollution. By rising, stooping, and rising again, Jesus was acting out His incarnate humiliation and subsequent exaltation (cf. John 13:3–14; Phil. 2:1–11). In the new commandment, Jesus is giving His disciples—who would become the foundation stones of the new covenant church—a mandate to serve and care for the spiritual good of His people. As Christ would die on the cross to wash the filthy souls of those He came to redeem, so He commands His disciples to follow His example in caring for the spiritual needs of others. This command is fulfilled in the preaching of the gospel and the calling of sinners to the Savior. By way of application, believers are also to care for the temporal needs of other believers. Since Jesus is the Savior of soul and body, so He calls elders and deacons to care for the spiritual and temporal (i.e., material, physical, etc.) needs of His people. The commandment to love and serve others is not unique to the New Testament. In the old covenant law, God gave His people the command, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18). What is distinct about the “new commandment” is that Jesus is fulfilling it in His sacrificial life and death for the redemption of His people. No one but Christ had ever so kept the command to “love your neighbor as yourself.” Through His sacrificial service, Jesus fulfilled Leviticus 19:18 for the redemption of His people and set the example of what it means to love and serve others. : Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards, vol. 2, “Sermon XVI: Christ the Example of Ministers, John 13:15, 16” (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993). Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on April 3, 2023.
  3. Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.” Gal. 3:13 As we consider the death of Jesus, many things of significance could be taken into account. It is, of course, of the utmost significance that the death of Jesus was the sacrifice that accomplished the salvation of God’s elect. The angel said to Joseph, “You shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). The book of Hebrews very carefully instructs us concerning the sacrificial and substitutionary nature of Jesus’ death (Heb. 9:14, 28). He died in the place of guilty sinners as their substitute. The death that He endured was not His own insofar as the sins were not His own, the guilt was not His own, and the punishment He endured was not His own. While the sacrificial nature of Jesus’ death is of the utmost importance, the manner of His execution is not to be overlooked. The death of Jesus on the cross at the hands of Roman soldiers was not accidental or simply one of many ways by which He could have died. The manner of His death upon a tree is also of weighty symbolic significance for several reasons. Crucifixion, the hanging of the convicted person on a wooden cross (tree), was reserved for the most despicable of criminals. In fact, Roman citizens were rarely executed in this manner. It is fitting that Jesus was executed by crucifixion as He became the most reprehensible sinner in the sight of a holy God, and this by virtue of placing upon Him the sins of all for whom He died. As the Apostle Paul puts it, “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21). Jesus bore our sins, our guilt, and then also bore the awful wrath of God in our place—the punishment we deserved because of our sin. However, it is also significant that Jesus was crucified on a tree as it demonstrates that He bore in His body the covenantal curse that Adam’s rebellion justly brought upon us. Adam broke the covenant of life (Westminster Shorter Catechism 12) and brought death to himself and all mankind. In disobedience to God’s explicit command, Adam ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the covenantal curse of an eternal death fell upon him. This curse is manifestly symbolized in the shame and humiliation of being hung on a tree. Deuteronomy 21:22–23 states, “And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God.” John Calvin comments on this passage, “Moses does not here speak generally, but only of those malefactors who are unworthy of burial, ”and “the man so hanged is called ‘the curse of God,’ because this kind of punishment is detestable in itself.” Of all the possible ways in which Jesus could have been executed, He was hung on a tree to demonstrate the covenantal curse that rested upon Him for our sake. The Apostle Paul makes this very point in Galatians 3:13, where he states that “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.’” Here the gospel is displayed in the starkest of terms. The innocent and blessed Son of God was hung on a tree as though He was a reprehensible criminal, and He suffered the unspeakable experience of the wrath of God—the covenantal curse—in our place, that we might experience unspeakable new covenant blessings. Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on December 15, 2021.
  4. One image, one aspect, of the atonement has receded in our day almost into obscurity. We have been made aware of present-day attempts to preach a more gentle and kind gospel. In our effort to communicate the work of Christ more kindly we flee from any mention of a curse inflicted by God upon His Son. We shrink in horror from the words of the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 53) that describe the ministry of the Suffering Servant of Israel and tells us that it pleased the Lord to bruise Him. Can you take that in? Somehow the Father took pleasure in bruising the Son when He set before Him that awful cup of divine wrath. How could the Father be pleased by bruising His Son were it not for His eternal purpose through that bruising to restore us as His children? But there is the curse motif that seems utterly foreign to us, particularly in this time in history. When we speak today of the idea of curse, what do we think of? We think perhaps of a voodoo witch doctor that places pins in a doll made to replicate his enemy. We think of an occultist who is involved in witchcraft, putting spells and hexes upon people. The very word curse in our culture suggests some kind of superstition, but in biblical categories there is nothing superstitious about it. The Hebrew Benediction If you really want to understand what it meant to a Jew to be cursed, I think the simplest way is to look at the famous Hebrew benediction in the Old Testament, one which clergy often use as the concluding benediction in a church service: > The Lord bless you and keep you; > the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you; > the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace. (Num. 6:24–26) The structure of that famous benediction follows a common Hebrew poetic form known as parallelism. There are various types of parallelism in Hebrew literature. There’s antithetical parallelism in which ideas are set in contrast one to another. There is synthetic parallelism, which contains a building crescendo of ideas. But one of the most common forms of parallelism is synonymous parallelism, and, as the words suggest, this type restates something with different words. There is no clearer example of synonymous parallelism anywhere in Scripture than in the benediction in Numbers 6, where exactly the same thing is said in three different ways. If you don’t understand one line of it, then look to the next one, and maybe it will reveal to you the meaning. We see in the benediction three stanzas with two elements in each one: “bless” and “keep”; “face shine” and “be gracious”; and “lift up the light of his countenance” and “give you peace.” For the Jew, to be blessed by God was to be bathed in the refulgent glory that emanates from His face. “The Lord bless you” means “the Lord make his face to shine upon you.” Is this not what Moses begged for on the mountain when he asked to see God? Yet God told him that no man can see Him and live. So God carved out a niche in the rock and placed Moses in the cleft of it, and God allowed Moses to see a glimpse of His backward parts but not of His face. After Moses had gotten that brief glance of the back side of God, his face shone for an extended period of time. But what the Jew longed for was to see God’s face, just once. The Jews’ ultimate hope was the same hope that is given to us in the New Testament, the final eschatological hope of the beatific vision: > Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. (1 John 3:2) Don’t you want to see Him? The hardest thing about being a Christian is serving a God you have never seen, which is why the Jew asked for that. The Supreme Malediction But my purpose here is not to explain the blessing of God but its polar opposite, its antithesis, which again can be seen in vivid contrast to the benediction. The supreme malediction would read something like this: “May the Lord curse you and abandon you. May the Lord keep you in darkness and give you only judgment without grace. May the Lord turn his back upon you and remove his peace from you forever.” When on the cross, not only was the Father’s justice satisfied by the atoning work of the Son, but in bearing our sins the Lamb of God removed our sins from us as far as the east is from the west. He did it by being cursed. “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree’” (Gal. 3:13). He who is the incarnation of the glory of God became the very incarnation of the divine curse. Editor’s Note: This article was originally published as “The Curse Motif of the Cross” by R.C. Sproul in Proclaiming a Cross Centered Theology. Used by permission of Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers, Wheaton, Il 60187.
  5. The celebrated church father, Augustine of Hippo, wrote, “What then is time? Provided that no one asks me, I know. If I want to explain to an inquirer, I do not know.” He made this observation after a lengthy discussion on the nature of time and eternity. While his discussion was more abstract than the question at hand, Augustine’s statement reminds us that the concept of time is complex. Still, we all operate with a pretty straightforward understanding of minutes, hours, days, weeks, and years. But our way of counting time is not the only way. The Bible was written by authors from a variety of backgrounds, in a period and culture far different from ours. To be sure, none of these factors undermine the overall divine authorship of the Scriptures. On the other hand, recognizing these differences helps us understand what the authors meant—and did not mean—when they used everyday language to record when an event happened. In fact, the New Testament is eager for the reader to understand that it is documenting events that occurred in space-time history, as we understand it in an everyday sense. Time markers abound in its pages, from when Jesus met the terrified disciples on the turbulent sea (Mark 6:48), to the time He was crucified (Matt. 27:45), to how long He was in the grave (Luke 9:22; 24:7; 1 Cor. 15:4). As the texts above indicate, the biblical authors taught that Jesus was in the grave for three days. The Gospels tell us He was crucified on Friday and rose from the grave on Sunday (Mark 15:42–47; 16:1; Matt. 27:57–61; 28:1; Luke 23:50–56; 24:1; John 19:38–42; 20:1). But there seems to be a difficulty which surfaces when we compare these accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection and our Lord’s words in Matthew 12:40: “For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Critics allege that we cannot reconcile Jesus’ words with the Gospel accounts of His death, which place it at the “ninth hour” (Mark 15:34), or 3 p.m. in modern terms. If Jesus died at 3 p.m. on Friday and was raised early Sunday morning, how can we square those facts with Jesus’ statement in Matthew 12:40? The Scriptures seem inconsistent here. Skeptics have long seized on this seeming contradiction to discredit the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. The difficulty is apparent, not real. Returning to our earlier discussion on the nature of time, we need to step back and recognize that the Jews of the first century counted days differently than we do today. According to their understanding of days, part of any day counted as a full day. Again, most of us do not mark time like this. If, for example, a newspaper report describes a certain person doing something for three days, we immediately think of three, twenty-four-hour days. But once we understand how Jesus and the majority of Jewish people around Him understood days, the seeming contradiction vanishes. Jesus’ death at 3 p.m. on Good Friday counted as one day, His entombment all day Saturday counted as the second day, and His resurrection on Sunday morning counted as the third day. Therefore, Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 12:40 and the facts of His crucifixion, burial, and resurrection are not at odds, but simply reflect the common way of understanding days in the first century. As with many other so-called Bible contradictions, a bit of reflection and some understanding of cultural differences help us see that there is no inconsistency at all. We are once again reminded that the Bible is truth (John 17:17). We can trust it. The facts it records really happened, even if they were detailed in a way foreign to our modern sensibilities. The more pressing question is, “Do we believe the Bible?” The futile search by critics to find Bible discrepancies like the one discussed here reveals an unbelieving heart. We must make sure such skepticism does not characterize our own hearts. Instead, “Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful” (Heb. 10:23). : Saint Augustine, Confessions: A New Translation by Henry Chadwick (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 230. : This article was originally published June 27, 2022. This article is part of the Responding to Apparent Contradictions collection and was originally published on June 30, 2022.