God has already begun to fix everything in this world broken by sin. What a privilege to be called to the mission to spread surrender to Christ’s rule over our own heart loyalties, heart attitudes and every sphere life where we have influence. “The kingdom of God is the renewal of the whole world through the entrance of supernatural forces. As things are restored under Christ’s rule and authority, they are restored to health, beauty, and freedom” (Tim, Keller, Ministries of Mercy). Because of Christ’s resurrection and exaltation, to be a Jesus-follower is to have a part in the most significant mission in history—overthrowing the kingdom of darkness.

If you noticed the title of this week’s episode, you may be wondering, “What in the world is a resurrection worldview and why does it matter?” It turns out not only that a resurrection worldview is an essential biblical concept for Christians; it is the foundation for the three specific truths that Paul repeatedly asks for God to help the Ephesian Christians grasp. This episode examines these three life-changing PERSPECTIVES.  
Before digging into the three resurrection truths that Paul yearned for the Ephesians to grasp, let’s consider why a person’s view, his perception of the truth, his mental perspective matter so much. Let’s start way back with happiness. Scripture teaches that happiness and life-satisfaction are not a result of circumstances but of the ATTITUDE you choose. For example, Proverbs 15:5 observes, All the days of the afflicted are evil, but the cheerful of heart has a continual feast. Jesus taught the same truth when he began his portrait of kingdom restoration with eight godly attitudes (known as the beatitudes) introducing each one with the term blessed (MAKARIOS), which is the Greek word for the entirely fulfilled. So, Jesus’ plan to transform our heart attitudes, restoring them to holiness, happens to be the pathway to fullest enjoyment of life.
If at the core of God’s salvation plan is transforming our sinful heart attitudes into Christ-like ones, no wonder Paul wants us to have a resurrection perspective. One of the great secrets of life taught in Scripture is this: Your PERSPECTIVE determines your ATTITUDE. If you doubt that, just consider how your attitude of thankfulness for getting an unexpected 10% raise from your boss would change if you found out everyone else got a 15% raise. Or consider how, after taking a step onto the street to cross it, your angry attitude towards a pedestrian whose arm flies out against your chest shoving you backwards into a mud puddle would be transformed to gratefulness if you then saw a bus fly across the surface of the road on which you were just standing! Our attitude is inseparably bound to our perspective. It should not surprise us that Paul, who knew that God’s goal is to transform our heart attitudes, wrote to the Romans, Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the RIGHT PERSPECTIVE—the renewal of your mind (12:2).
With this background, we can see why Paul’s prayer strategy for the Ephesian Christians began with prayer for them to have a correct RESURECTION PERSPECTIVE, i.e. to mentally grasp the way the resurrection impacts our everyday living in specific ways. As we now come to these three truths, notice in the text we’re studying, how Paul piles up words that have to do with PERSPECTIVE. Ephesians 1:16-23: I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of 1) wisdom and 2) revelation in the 3) knowledge of him, having the 4) eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may 5) know…Five different ways he refers to the PERSPECTIVE he longs for them to have—a perspective about what difference the resurrection makes. That resurrection worldview is to know: 1) What is the hope to which he has called you, 2) what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and 3) what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe. If you are anything like me, these words go right over your head. What is Paul talking about? And why in the world does he single out these three aspects of the reality of the resurrection? I believe that as we dig into these truths, we will come away with a much richer understanding of how the resurrection of Jesus Christ on Easter Day—matters in our everyday lives.
Truth # 1: The Hope to Which He Has Called You
A. Biblical Hope Is Richer than Most of Us Realize
We recognize that the historic miracle of God suspending the natural order to raise Jesus from the dead validates Jesus’ claims. But it points to so much more. Author, Tim Keller observes:
“The resurrection was indeed a marvelous display of God’s power, but we should not see it as a suspension of the natural order. Rather it was the beginning of the restoration of the natural order of the world, the world as God intended it to be. Since humanity turned away from God, both the human and natural worlds have been dominated by sin and evil, disorder and disease, suffering and death. But when Jesus rose from the dead, he inaugurated the first stage of the coming of God’s kingdom power into the world to restore and heal all things. The resurrection means not merely that Christians have hope for the future, but they have hope that comes from the future. The Bible’s startling message is that when Jesus rose, he brought the future kingdom of God into the present. It is not yet here fully but it is here substantially, and Christians live an impoverished life if they do not realize that it is available to them.” (Hope in Times of Fear).
If our view of what the resurrection accomplished is basically that when we die, we get to go to heaven, we’ve severely shrunk the biblical concept of hope, which is RESTORATION of CREATION PARADISE on EARTH—not ESCAPE from it.
“The world was created by God to be a place of perfect harmony under his rule. Everything was cohesively woven together with every other part of creation. There was no disharmony between the body and the soul, or between our feelings and our conscience. There was no conflict between individuals or the genders. The body never became disharmonious within itself—there was nothing like the disintegration of the body through disease, aging, and death. There was also perfect harmony between humanity and the animals and the environment. There was no broken relationship of any kind” (Ibid).
When we look behind the false worldviews we studied in this series, we realize that what is longed for is actually the restoration that Jesus is bringing. Behind broken sexuality is often a hunger for unconditional love. Behind the accusation that biblical patriarchy is toxic is often the feminist yearning for significance, and sense of worth. Beneath the pro-abortion position that embryos have no right to be in the way of women’s pursuit of happiness is the yearning for fulfillment. The day when open borders work is the day when sin and oppression are ultimately vanquished from earth. True resurrection hope is enormously attractive.
B. Biblical Hope Balances the Already and Not Yet Aspects of the Kingdom
The kingdom of God and the Second Adam have already broken into Adam’s kingdom and overthrown the usurpers, Satan, sin, and death. As one theologian observes:
“We must not underestimate how present the kingdom of God is, but we must also must not underestimate how unrealized it is, how much it exists only in the future. Because the kingdom is present partially but not fully, we must expect substantial healing but not total healing in all areas of life…If we overstress the ‘already’ of the kingdom to the exclusion of the ‘not yet’ we will expect quick solutions to problems and we will be dismayed by suffering and tragedy. But we can likewise overstress the ‘not yet’ of the kingdom to the exclusion of the ‘already.’ We can be too pessimistic about personal change. We can withdraw from engaging the world, too afraid of being ‘polluted’ by it.” (Ibid).
C. Biblical Hope Energizes Our Calling
Christ-followers are those who have responded to our Master’s personal CALL to enlist in his cause—not  just throwing a lifeline to people guilty of sinning—but the overthrow of the kingdom of darkness and establishment of his kingdom of righteousness over every square inch of life on planet earth.
Read More
Related Posts:

The hypocrite’s trust is ultimately in himself. He’s looking the part and playing the part, but it’s not real. There’s no communion. There’s no desperation. No brokenness, no humility, no hunger and thirst. Most importantly, there’s no grateful hope pulling him towards Christ. Christians are asked to “examine themselves” at the Lord’s Supper. That examination often (and appropriately) brings up feelings of unworthiness, grief, and self-doubt. But still, there’s that hope that pulls you toward Christ.

Just before Jesus’ institution of the Lord’s Supper, he predicted that one of his disciples would betray him. All the disciples, Judas included, responded with a heart-searching question: “Is it I?” (Matt. 26:22, 25). For most of the disciples, it was a moment of self-doubt; for Judas, it was blatant hypocrisy.[1] The difference becomes a very important lesson for self-examination, especially in the context of the Lord’s Supper.
Have you ever considered why the NT emphasizes Judas’s betrayal as the context of the Lord’s Supper? The Apostle Paul writes, “The Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread…” (1 Cor. 11:23). All three Synoptic Gospels emphasize and juxtapose Jesus’ institution of the Lord’s Supper with the betrayal of Judas. Why?
Two reasons come to mind. This juxtaposition highlights Jesus’ love and faithfulness all the more.[2] But in addition, it highlights the need for self-examination, humility, and repentance when it comes to the Lord’s Supper. Judas’ betrayal reveals the possibility of hypocrisy, eating the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner (see 1 Cor. 11:27).
Consider the difference between the disciples’ question, “Is it I, Lord?”, and Judas’s question, “Is it I, Rabbi?” (see Matt. 26:22,25). There might be a suggestive difference in the titles used, but the questions are almost exactly the same. Yet they obviously came from very different places—and that difference is immensely revealing.
Consider that the disciples’ question came from a place of self-doubt, grief, and concern…for Jesus! They were struck (at least momentarily) by an acute awareness of their own fragility and weakness. Notice that none of them were pointing fingers at any of the others. They had no reason to suspect anyone else. But each doubted himself. They were “extremely distressed” (λυπούμενοι σφόδρα) at the thought of betraying him, and they didn’t trust themselves.
That’s the heart of a real Christian. Judas’ question, by contrast, came from a very different place.
Read More

Archbishop Davies, hit back at his comments, saying the diocese would “stay true to the bible’s teachings on sexuality” and reject the “revisionist theology” propagated by progressive archbishops in Adelaide, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. Bishop Davies has been the dominant force in the conservative wing of the Anglican Church for nearly a decade, leading the Sydney diocese from 2013 to last year, and was a leading campaigner against same-sex marriage during the 2017 postal survey.

Australia’s Anglican Church has split, with a group of conservative bishops and lay people forming a new diocese.  The breakaway group, led by the former Archbishop of Sydney, Most Rev Glenn Davies, has encouraged those Anglicans who are unhappy with progressive bishops to join the new diocese. It follows the Australian Anglican Church’s decision to leave it up to each diocese to decide whether to bless same-sex unions. So far, three dioceses have decided to allow same-sex weddings. Since then, conservative voices have threatened to leave the Church as they felt it had drifted away from Bible teachings on same-sex marriage. The group started drafting plans to create the new diocese early in 2021 and registered with the charities commission in October 2021. Archbishop Davies announced the newly formed Diocese of the Southern Cross during the Global Anglican Future Conference in Canberra.
It will operate under the umbrella of GAFCON, a conservative Anglican movement, and will not be “in communion” with Archbishop of Canterbury, Most Rev Justin Welby and will cover all of Australia. “I think you’ll see the Diocese of the Southern Cross will have a significant impact,” Archbishop Davies said during the event. “It will send shivers down the spines of some bishops in the Anglican Church of Australia.” According to the charity register, Archbishop Davies, Tasmanian minister Susan Willis, and lawyer David Baker from St Jude’s Anglican Church in Melbourne are the three board members. “For those who cannot live under the liberal regime of a bishop, they can come and be thoroughly Anglican under a bishop,” Archbishop Davies continued. Archbishop Davies will be commissioned as head of the breakaway church. At least seven provinces within the Anglican Communion allow same-sex marriage.
Geoffrey Smith, the Primate of the Anglican Church in Australia, issued a stinging rebuke of the “Diocese of the Southern Cross”. Archbishop Smith described the move as “unfortunate”, and one that would make it difficult to hold the church together. “It is always easier to gather with those we agree with. But in a tragically divided world, God’s call, and therefore the church’s role, includes showing how to live together with difference. Not merely showing tolerance, but receiving the other as a gift from God,” he said. The schism comes after discussions between church progressives and conservatives broke down at the General Synod in May, when the country’s bishops voted down a motion to oppose same-sex marriage blessings. It created an atmosphere of revolt among conservative churchgoers, who accused the bishops of departing from the church’s theological roots.
Archbishop Smith said other voices at the Synod were sympathetic to the conservative’s motion. “It is perplexing that the leaders of this breakaway movement cite the reason for this new denomination as the failure of General Synod to explicitly express an opinion against the blessing of same-sex marriages,” he said. Archbishop Davies, hit back at his comments, saying the diocese would “stay true to the bible’s teachings on sexuality” and reject the “revisionist theology” propagated by progressive archbishops in Adelaide, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. Bishop Davies has been the dominant force in the conservative wing of the Anglican Church for nearly a decade, leading the Sydney diocese from 2013 to last year, and was a leading campaigner against same-sex marriage during the 2017 postal survey.
He insisted the diocese would provide a “more authentic home” for congregants at odds with the views of “the revisionist bishops” after years of bitter infighting between senior clergy. “We signalled these issues roughly two years ago and the revisionist bishops did nothing to back-pedal on their views. “They kept saying, ‘Oh, no the evangelicals will capitulate’. “And we have decided not to capitulate,” Archbishop Davies said. “We believe in the authority of scripture. I realise we won’t have the glorious Gothic buildings that other Anglican Church dioceses have, but that doesn’t worry me.” Its approach to same-sex marriage has led to comparable splits in Canada, the US, Brazil and New Zealand, often involving protracted legal disputes over property rights. Sydney Archbishop Kanishka Raffel, the leader of the country’s most powerful conservative dioceses, shocked moderate church leaders when he offered support for the new diocese.
“The Diocese of the Southern Cross is for the sake of those elsewhere who have been forced to leave their church because they cannot in good conscience accept the authority of those who have departed from the teaching of Christ on marriage and human sexuality,” Archbishop Raffel said in a statement. A trenchant opponent of same-sex marriage blessings, he has otherwise remained silent during the diocese’s launch and refused requests for press interviews. Several sources with knowledge of the church’s split said Archbishop Raffel was avoiding comment on the breakaway to ensure he could vote on future motions relating to same-sex marriage in the General Synod, a national congress comprising ordained and lay Anglicans.
Perth Archbishop Kay Goldsworthy, who is forbidden from officiating services in Sydney’s conservative dioceses because she is a woman, said she was concerned about the diocese’s approach to women and gay people, adding that the breakaway was an “unnecessary move” that could be detrimental for the church. Archbishop Goldsworthy also took issue with the use of the word “revisionist” to describe so-called progressive bishops, noting that the “word could be used at any moment of reform in history”. Brisbane’s Acting Archbishop Jeremy Greaves, a vocal supporter of same-sex marriage blessings, said the breakaway diocese was a “deeply saddening moment” in the Anglican Church’s history.
Source
Related Posts: