The Man Christ Jesus (part 9)

Our Father in heaven as we come to Gather together this morning. We pray for your blessing on our time as we look to your word as we Look at the the doctrine of the humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ his Willingness to submit himself to your will to do Precisely what you wanted him to do and to do these things while he was limited by his humanity.

Father we just pray that you would bless our time as we consider these things that we would gain a greater appreciation for what our Savior did for us and father a greater appreciation for the Really the intricacies of your plan of salvation father bless each one here in Christ's name.

Amen. Well last week we we discussed many things covenants and all kinds of things, but we were focused mostly on the fact that. And it sounds trite to say this but Jesus was a male and why that's important and I mentioned it was an issue only because some liberals over the last Few decades have raised the issue of whether it really matters because Jesus or the the Savior could have been a woman.

They say and they don't really like to offend anyone so they wanted to take all that kind of language out of the Bible. We talked a little bit about the TN IV and if Lewis Brown called the NIV near the nearly inspired version then I guess TN IV is just formalizing that the nearly inspired version.

Because it was much worse than the NIV by the way just a word about Bible translations and the reason I'm not particularly enamored of the NIV the NIV is what is called a thought for thought translation.

What does that mean. That means you take chunks of language and you decide what it means and then that becomes your translation as Opposed to the ESV the the King James the New King James the NAS. Which are more a word for word translation now sometimes the words don't translate precisely and in that case in your Translation you may see words in italics and that kind of thing.

But I just wanted to say you know I I sort of mocked the NIV now if you have the NIV I'm gonna say this not the the TN IV. The TN IV is terrible if you have that. Please come see me, and we'll get you a real Bible if you have the NIV.

It is much better than say the Living Bible or some other really paraphrases, but There are better Translations than the NIV. Okay, so this morning. We're going to be talking about a Chapter in the book, and and I think this will be it'll sound familiar until we get going on it.

And I I've been so impressed and so blessed this book Is available out in the book table I? Don't get any kickbacks on the book dr. Bruce word down a theological seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. The Baptist seminary down there has written this book, and it really is thought-provoking and Causes us to really plumb the depths of Scripture and to be more thankful.

I think for our Savior than ever before dying in our place. Where writes in essence this that Jesus had to be a man in order to die in our place? While it is true that he was more than a man. We say he's fully God and fully man.

He could not be anything less than a man, and what do you mean by less than a man? Well, what it would be something less than a man. How about an animal and we'll discuss that a little bitty he had to be fully human?

Bruce where his daughter asked him a question. And my response when I read this was why couldn't my kids have asked me a question like this. Oh No, I'm kidding my My kids are great, but I just thought this is a profound question listen to this.

Could God not have made a perfect second Adam? Who would bear our sin and die in our place? After all if God had done this we would have a perfect and sinless substitute a Sacrifice one who like us was human yet.

He wouldn't have to send his own son. So why couldn't a perfect second Adam have been our Savior? Okay, and that's right. Okay. Jesus had to be born of a virgin so that he would be sinless. But let me just change her question a little bit.

And maybe this will help us get to the point and I'll get to John in just a second. Okay, if you know the answer go ahead. Okay, and we're gonna take that a step further, but yes only God's life would have infinite or you know the the life of Jesus would have infinite value.

Brad. Well, and that's where I was gonna go to you know Jesus made or Jesus God through Jesus made Adam right formed out of the clay and then breathed life into his nostrils, right? Could he have done that again?

Could have. Okay, but the second Adam. Let's say there was a theoretical second Adam. Here's the here's the problem that where's gonna address first. What could the second Adam have done? Let's say he never sinned.

He could have saved himself because he wouldn't have needed it a Savior per se, but let's look at. Let's open our Bibles for a minute. And I because I want us to just think about hell. Let's look at. It's fun to think about no, it's not fun.

Let's look at Mark chapter 9 verses 47 and 48 familiar passage and. And really I only want to get to one principle, but I want us to read that those two verses. Anyway, Mark 9 verses 47 and 48 and when somebody read that when they get there, please.

And the one point I wanted to bring out of this is what does this tell us about hell? What's the nature of hell? It's ongoing. It's unceasing and what why would somebody wind up in hell it basically tells us here sin.

If your sins are not paid for you're going to hell and it says where the worm does not die in the fire is not quenched. In other words, the wrath of God is never satisfied. It is consistent constant ongoing permanent Punishments.

Well, what does that tell us about sin itself if we sin? Well, let's put it this way. You know, I once I've had a couple of traffic tickets in my life. My favorite one though. This is a true story. I And I was taking the bus at a quite a commutes home every day and I was this won't mean anything to you.

I was at MacArthur's Park in LA waiting for my bus and there's a bunch of traffic. I mean, it's LA. There's just a bunch of traffic and there are a couple buses in the that at the bus stop, you know. Because there are a zillion buses there.

And so I see my bus 493 here it comes right down the street. And I'm waiting and it just goes right by me. I've seen this movie before I Missed that bus and it's 40 minutes to the next one. I don't want to wait 40 minutes.

So Back in those days I could run and I go running out to you know, and you think well who could catch a bus? This guy can catch a bus. Besides that again, it's LA traffic. So it's a couple blocks to the next bus stop.

And I'm running and I've got my books and everything and I'm running and you know. The light right before I'm gonna get to the bus stop. Yellow red and I'm right at the sidewalk and I'm it's just it's a little side street and I go.

I Look to the left. I look to the right. There's nobody there. I am NOT gonna miss this bus. I run across the street I'm like halfway onto the bus and here comes this LAPD motor officer on his motorcycle up on the sidewalk.

Writes me a ticket. Now I was exceeding the speed limit on this on the sidewalk. Son, I got you clocked at 27, you know. He wrote me a ticket for crossing that red light and You know, it wasn't the $10 Fine that appalled me.

Of course. It was the fact that I missed my bus. And I went to court and Explained to the judge what happened and he threw the ticket out. Thank you very much. That's the point of the story. Okay, let's close in prayer.

When we violate the law, there's going to be a punishment. When we violate God's law his holy standard the punishment is forever and so someone said Well, let's put it. Let me put it another way. When we sin against a holy God we create a debt that we cannot pay we write a check that we can't cash.

There there's no there's not enough money. We can't earn enough. There's no way to pay that off but justice. God's justice demands full payments so how can we as finite creatures pay an infinite debt and here's where our first problem with our hypothetical second Adam would Fail where he would fail He would still be finite.

He would still be a creature so even if he lived a perfect life and He agreed to die in our place. Who could he pay for? I mean, I would argue ultimately he can only pay for one person because he's just living that one life that one person is supposed to Pay, but here's the problem.

We said the debt is Infinite a finite being cannot pay an infinite debt. So what does that mean? That means his punishment the second Adam's punishment is going to go on For ever. He's going to face the wrath forever that we ought to have faced.

He would never be able to say what Jesus said on the cross. What did he say? It is finished and when he said it is finished He didn't just mean the work that the father gave him to do he meant the payment for sin was completed.

Everything that was owed on behalf of sinners who believe had been paid. Listen to what pink says he says all things Had been done which the law of God required all things established. Which prophecy predicted all things brought to pass which the types foreshadowed all things accomplished.

Which the father had given them to do all things perform, which were needful for our redemption. Nothing was left wanting. The costly ransom was given the great conflict had been endured. Sins wages had been paid.

Divine justice satisfied. Where says this he says the infinite value of Christ's payment for our sin attaches to his being fully God because he's fully God his Sacrifice has infinite value the substitutionary nature of Christ's death.

That is him dying for us. Attaches most squarely where says to his being fully human. He had to be fully God to. Let's say afford the cost. But he had to be human to die in our place now we have to talk about.

Kind of a fancy word or a fancy phrase that maybe pastor Mike some other Theologians who get into our pulpit would like to talk about penal substitution. Penal substitution. When we talk about the penal system, we know that that is a system that punishes wrongdoers.

When we see when some of you Less godly folks later on this evening because I noticed the Patriots are playing later tonight much later I think they're on the west coast tonight. Not that I've really been tracking that or anything.

But when the referee reaches into his pocket and he throws a flag out, what do they call that? It's a penalty. The team that commits a penalty gets penalized so we understand what penal is. Penal substitution means that Jesus paid the price the penalty Believers ought to have paid.

He suffered that we might not suffer. First this morning. I want us to see that he died for our sins. Let's look at Colossians 2 verses 13 and 14. Colossians 2 verses 13 and 14. And with somebody who's really quick on the draw read that one for me.

Colossians 2 verses 13 and 14. Okay, listen to what O 'Brien says about that. He says God has not only removed the debt. He has also destroyed the document on which it was recorded. The Greek word there denotes a document especially a note of indebtedness.

Written in one's own hand as a proof of obligation. This meaning is well attested in both the Jewish and Greco-Roman world. A Common thought in Judaism was that of God keeping accounts of man's debt.

Calling in the debt through angels and imposing a just judgment based on the records kept in the ledger. And what does the scripture here say by canceling the record of debts? Our sins are paid for and even the list of them.

Destroyed. No record. God has no record of our sins anymore. And notice that he paid for our sins that would be believers, let's look at it Isaiah 53. Very specific language. I remember I won't go into this story all over again, but you know the Jewish believer.

Well, he wasn't a believer at this point the Jewish man who came to me with an Old Testament in the jail and said, you know I'd like to give this Old Testament to A another Jew in one of the dorms and I said to him I said does your Old Testament there have Isaiah 53 and he says sure it does.

I said what can I see and so I open it up and I turned and there was Isaiah 52 and there was Isaiah 54 and Isaiah 53 was missing and he said well, why is that. And I told him and you know, it was months later.

He stopped me. I didn't even remember him and he told me about how he'd come to faith in Christ. You know on account of that this is a very powerful passage that speaks to Jesus and his work. Listen, Isaiah 53 verses 4 to 6.

Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows yet. We esteemed him stricken. Smitten by God and afflicted but he was pierced for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. Upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace and with his wounds we are healed.

Oh, we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned everyone to his own way and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all we hear all that personal language and I've heard Or read Jewish people who say you know that this has to do with the nation of Israel.

But it's such a convoluted Explanation that it's easier to actually remove Isaiah 53 than it is to try to explain it because it doesn't make any sense. Listen what Alec Mott your Old Testament scholar says about this passage.

He says we all at we we all at the beginning of this passage here is matched by us all at the end the perfect equivalence of remedy is Here all each common culpability individual responsibility like sheep astray the folly and thoughtlessness of sin leading to the danger inherent in being sheep without a shepherd.

Turned we turned art to our own way the deliberateness of sin and the Lord with this emphatic subject. Isaiah Corrects any misunderstanding involved of stricken by God. It wasn't that he was he was considered stricken by God, but he was indeed Stricken by God, but with the astonishing purpose of laying our sin on him.

It's descriptive of the divine act of gathering into one place on to one substitutionary victim the sins of all the sinners whom the Lord purposed to save the servants is The solution of the Lord to the needs of sinners.

This is our payment in full. Now there's a common thread among some evangelicals today. They want to minimize or deny altogether the doctrine of penal substitution. Why would anybody want to deny this that Jesus was condemned in our place that he took the punishment for?

Sin, why would somebody want to deny that? Gary Okay been taught to that. They pay for their own sins. I mean, I Well, let's put it another way or maybe I could just explain it this way the atonement what was the purpose of the atonement if we say that Jesus went to the cross to pay for our sins that he suffered that it was the pleasure of God to crush him the father to crush him we say though that use that kind of language that we're really saying is he took our punishment, but Why would he do that if God is?

Love that's not loving to do that to Jesus and besides that if Jesus was taking our place. Well, everybody knows That God loves us and intends nothing but good for us. Listen to what Steve and I Apologize in advance.

I may mess up his name here. I don't know if it's Chalky or chalk because it ends with an e but he's a British Baptist minister and a friend of Someone you may have heard of Tony Campolo and he says here the fact is that the cross isn't a form of cosmic child abuse a Vengeful father punishing his son for an offense that he has not even committed.

Understandably both people inside and outside of the church have found this twisted version of events morally dubious and a huge barrier to faith. Deeper than that. However, is that such a construct? Construct stands in total contradiction to the statement.

God is love. We'd read that in first John if the cross is a personal act of violence perpetrated by God towards humankind. But born by his son. Then it makes a mockery of Jesus own teaching to love your enemies and refuse to pay evil with evil.

In other words if Jesus said that how can God the Father then do this to the Son even if it's to save sinners. He goes on to say it is a demonstration of just how far God this is his view of the cross.

It's a demonstration of just how far God as Father and Jesus as his son are prepared to go to prove that love in other words penal substitution does not fit into The hermeneutic of love. God is love and that's all God is.

So they put the emphasis on love and they interpret scripture in light of that. Bruce yeah, that's exactly right is it's all depends on how you view love if You know as the Savior said as Bruce was saying love is sacrificing oneself for another.

Jesus sacrificed himself for all the redeemed. That's a greater act of love than Any act in the history of the world. One man wrote this he said I cannot find anywhere in Scripture. That makes the father the primary agent behind the crucifixion of his son.

Can you think of any place that said that? Isaiah 53 we just read it. Here's another one acts 2 22 and 23. Men of Israel hear these words. Jesus of Nazareth a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and Signs that God did through him in your midst as you yourselves know this Jesus Delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God.

You crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. In That passage men were responsible. God was sovereign. God planned it. Doesn't Jesus himself say that he came to do what? The father's will. And.

Then he only says and does whatever the father wants him to say and do now this Theory of the atonement. That they hold to that these men hold to is something called Christus Victor, that's the Latin, but it means just Christ is the victor.

Which is to say the primary purpose and result of Jesus death and resurrection is the defeat. Well to show God's love, but also to show the defeat of Satan and the forces of darkness. Now again the primary purpose of Jesus death and resurrection is the defeat of Satan and the forces of darkness.

That's what they teach. So what's wrong with that? Didn't Jesus defeat Satan and the forces of darkness, yes, yes. Listen what where says he says it is nonetheless a mistake. To displace the centrality of penal substitution in the Bible's teaching on Christ's atoning work.

While Christ's triumph over sin and Satan is gloriously true. In other words Christus Victor is true. It is only because his sacrifice was by nature a penal Substitutionary offering that the accomplishment of the cross brought about the victory over the powers of darkness.

And we're gonna develop that a little bit more. Let's look at Colossians 2 15. I think we were there for verses 13 to 14. Well, we're gonna go ahead and read verse 15 now to Colossians 2 verse 15 and would somebody read that please?

Yeah, go ahead Cory. Okay, now that sounds like Christus Victor, right. Seems to prioritize the victory of Christ over the forces of darkness. But not so fast as Lee Corso likes to say not so fast. Remember the context Colossians 2 13 and 14.

I'll read it again and you who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh God made alive with together with him having forgiven us all our Trespasses by canceling the record of death that stood out stood against us with its legal demands this he set aside.

Nailing it to the cross. So what came before the victory over the demonic powers or what demonstrated that victory penal substitution? Where says the substitutionary death that Christ died in which he canceled out the debt of sinners is the backdrop.

For the next glorious truth found in verse 15 where he disarmed the rulers and authorities. Getting or putting them to shame and triumphing over over them. The death by which Satan is disarmed and put to shame then is a debt death that cancels our sin.

These are not accidentally linked concepts, but theologically and necessarily linked in other words. There can be no Christ Victory over the forces of darkness without the cancellation of sin. Let me put it another way.

How is it that Satan holds the entire world in his way? How is it that sinners are said to be? Followers of of his children of his. And I just sort of gave it away because it is because of the power of sin.

In fact when I was thinking about this pondering and I thought you know, John 8 Jesus talking to the Jews and what does he say in John 8 verses? 34 to 36 Jesus answered them truly truly I say to you everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin.

The slave does not remain in the house forever. The Sun remains forever, so if the Sun sets you free you will be free indeed free from what? Da Carson says those whom Jesus liberates from the tyranny of sin are really free.

True freedom is not the liberty to do anything We please but the liberty to do what we ought to do and it is genuine liberty because doing what we ought Now pleases us when he sets us free. We have a new master.

That's Romans 6, right? You present your members when you're Unredeemed you present your your body to sin. You make yourself a slave to sin when you've been set free you present yourselves to Christ you become a slave of his of righteousness.

Here's another passage That seems to demonstrate Christus Victor. That's the point that where's trying to debunk here. Let's look at Hebrews 2 Versus 14 to 17 and if someone would read that when they get there Hebrews 2 verses 14 to 17.

Just want to underscore something there in verse 15. You know when when we talk to people that are in Unrepentant sin, I mean I think about you know some rock and roll legends. And where they say about hell, you know, I'm you know something like I'm going to hell and when I get there It's gonna be a great party.

Well, it's not and we know that from the other passages, but just listen to it. You know, they think they're free. But again, listen to verse 15 part of what it says there. We're subject to lifelong slavery.

That's what sin is it's not freedom it's lifelong slavery. Where says this about this passage in Hebrews 2 he says likewise it links Christ destruction of Satan Who had the power of death verse 14 with Christ's faithful priestly role in which he offers a propitiatory that means satisfactory sacrifice one that actually satisfies God's wrath a propitiatory Sacrifice for the sins of the people verse 17 at the very least.

It is clear that Christus Victor the Christus Victor theme Does not stand alone rather it is deliberately linked to the theme of penal and propitiatory sacrifice. In other words There is Christ is not victorious unless he over the forces of darkness unless he has Actually paid the price of sin for his people.

Where says this? Clearly the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ inaugurating the new covenant is Presented in Hebrews as providing the payment for sin that was foreshadowed But was never actually accomplished through the animal sacrifices of the old covenant.

Old covenant. Bob. Yeah, who else could right? Bob said, you know a second theoretical Adam would be fully human and not Divine would not have the power to raise himself from the dead. So that's a great point excellent point to It.

Well, it's a it's a sure road. The rejection of penal substitution opens up the avenue to Deny personal responsibility for my sin because maybe God's not so serious about it. It's it. Well, I'll just put it this way summarize it Denying penal substitution calling it cosmic child abuse.

What have you it is liberalism and is the fast track for unbelief. You're you're on the road. If you're not already there you are on your road to full-blown paganism. What we see in churches that teach this is an openness to a variety of truths.

Universalism. I mean if if Jesus isn't paying for our sin, well, what does that mean? It means God's not so holy. He's not so wrathful and basically you're good enough. This is Stuart Smalley kind of theology you're good enough God likes you enough go into heaven.

And that's just wrong. Nobody knows who Stuart Smalley is except for he's in the United States Congress now, so. There there is that. Okay, so we're talking about. I'll just read it again. Clearly the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ inaugurated in the New Covenant is Presented in Hebrews as providing the payment for sin that was foreshadowed that is it was predicted in the Old Testament.

But never actually accomplished through the animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant. Let's look at Hebrews 10. Hebrews 10 and verses 1 to 4. For since the law has but Has but a shadow of the good things to come.

Instead of the true form of these realities it can never that is the law can never by the same Sacrifices that are continually offered every year make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered since the worshipers having once been cleansed would no longer have any consciousness of sins.

But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin. When we talk about take away sins We talk about the sacrifice of Jesus the necessity of penal substitution of him.

Taking the wrath of God for us. We have to keep in mind that in the Old Testament. What do they do they sacrifice these animals every year. Why? It was a sign it was a symbol it was a foreshadowing as he calls it there it was the the fancy word the antitype, right it it was a Predictor of what was to come but it did it have any actual? Efficacious effect.

Did it actually remove sins? Well Hebrews just told us no. It certainly didn't remove the consciousness of their sins didn't make them feel less guilty because It didn't have that power. Listen what Simon Kistemacher says he says believers in the Old Testament times Knew that an animal sacrifice would not be able to cleanse them from sin every day on the Day of Atonement.

The high priest would enter the most holy place with the blood of a slain animal. But the high priest could never say to the worshipers quote This blood has removed your sins once for all and therefore this sacrifice has been the last.

They were never done know the annual return of the high priest from the inner sanctuary of The Day of Atonement proves that the sacrifices were inadequate and effective and ineffective. The worshipers continued to feel guilty for their sins.

The covenant that God has made with the people of Israel had one Serious deficiency it was unable to take away the consciousness of sin. The main deficiency and the Old Covenant was that it could not accomplish forgiveness.

The blood of sacrifice of Sacrificial animals cannot take it away. Only the blood of Christ shed once for all remove sin and cleanses man's Consciousness of guilt. Okay one more and then we'll close out here.

Well the People who want to put this Christus Victor idea forward will say well didn't Jesus come to destroy the works of Satan. Isn't that true? Well, it's absolutely true. First John tells us that First John chapter 3 verse 5, you know that he appeared in order to take away sins and in him there is no sin.

One who abides in him keeps on sin or No one who keeps on Who abides in him keeps on sinning? No one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. Little children let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous as he is righteous.

Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to Destroy the works of the devil. No one born of God makes a practice of sinning for God's seed abides in him and he cannot keep on sinning because he has Been born of God.

By this it is evident. Who are the children of God and who are the children of the devil? Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God nor is the one who does not love his brother. In this passage Jesus both took away sins in verse 5 and Destroyed the works of the devil, but which one has the priority?

Where says this he says Christus Victor occurs Only as the very works that Satan carries out are themselves destroyed. Well, what are the works of the devil sin? So as Christ comes to take away sin He destroys the sins that are the works of the devil.

Penal substitution then forms the basis by which Christus Victor is accomplished and secured as He dies in the place of sinners. He secures victory over Satan and darkness. Where points out? Why criminals end up in jail because they're guilty of a crime?

He says if their guilty status is removed in other words if you can undo the jury's verdict. Then the state has no basis to incarcerate them and that same way Jesus removes the guilty status of us. We're we're guilty not before a jury of our peers.

But before God of being sinners of violating his law and when Jesus takes away that guilty tag when he takes away that guilty sentence. Then what also is true? Well, what also is true? Is that there is no?

Basis to punish us for being guilty good. We're no longer guilty. We've been declared not guilty. Where says Satan's power over sinners is tied specifically and exclusively to their guilt through sin.

Not their guilt. Let me be clear here because he wasn't in his writing. He doesn't mean guilt in the sense of I feel guilty. This is not a sense of guilt. This is actual factual Guilty verdict you're guilty of a crime.

You're guilty of sin. Saints power over sinners is tied specifically and exclusively to their guilt their guilty standing through sin his hold on them is owing to their rebellion against God and sin and his subsequent jurisdiction over their lives as Result of that sin remove the guilt and you remove the bondage.

Accomplish penal substitution and you accomplish Christus victor. So the purpose of the atonement is not the victory over Satan and the forces of darkness. That is a byproduct of the actual purpose, which is penal substitution.

That is to say that Jesus suffered bled died Gave himself up for his people and then was raised on the third day. Penal substitution is the key. Let's talk about and we talked just a bit about his deity and the importance of that because he had to be he had to be God in order to As someone said have sufficient value his life to have sufficient value to pay for us all but also To be perfect to be holy and everything.

But let's talk about why he had to be fully man, too. So we read in Hebrews 2 14 earlier. That the the blood of bulls and goats and all that stuff could not take away sin. Where says nothing less than human flesh and blood could atone for our sin and bring victory over Satan.

Old Testament sacrifices were not human. I mean that would be terrible wouldn't it. The Jews were known for that. They were not human but animals. So where says this if God was able to use animal sacrifices in the Old Covenant to substitute for the sins of his people.

Why not continue that practice and avoid having to sacrifice a human being namely his son. Why not just continue Killing animals rams and all those kind of things and never have to send his son to die.

He goes on to say none of those Old Testament animal sacrifices actually just like kiss marker said actually paid for any sins of believing Israelites and Hence, none of those Old Testament sacrifices were in themselves efficacious.

You say well, why did they do it? Well, first of all God commanded them to. But secondly because it was a sign of what was to come. It was a reminder of the penalty that was owed. Where says this these were types of the greater sacrifice that was to come.

They pointed to the planned and purposed and certain coming of the Lamb of God. The animal sacrifices had no ability in themselves actually to pay for any sin whatsoever. But they were efficacious precisely because they were connected in the divine mind and plan To the future once-for-all Sacrifice that would be rendered when Jesus came and died on the cross.

And I'm gonna close with this and we'll discuss this more next week. You say I don't get that he says well, let me give you an illustration where does. Since you go to a store. This is one of the things I used to do with my kids, by the way.

When they were really young I'd give the person at the store a credit card. And I'd take the stuff out of the store and walk out of it. I go. Did you see that? I don't have to pay any money. I just gave him that card.