Against the Theology of Glory (Part 2)

by on March 11, 2026

Exposition

Nowhere in the Gospels, perhaps nowhere in the New Testament, is the union between Christ and believers and its implications taught more clearly than in John 15:1–17. Jesus outlines the truth that he is the vine and those who are united to Him by the Holy Spirit in true faith bear fruit. Jesus says he will consummate this union by laying down his own life for his friends, those whom he has chosen.

Beginning with verse 18 he outlines the implications that union with Christ has for believers: “If the kosmos hates you, keep in mind that the kosmos hated me first.” The world does not hate those who are united ethically to it. The servant is not greater than the master. The master suffered, so the servant should not expect to escape a similar fate. Jesus is describing a normal part of the Christian life. That Christians in any era should be free of suffering is, as we will see, an aberration.

In Romans 5:1–11 (especially v. 4), Paul takes it as a given that identification with the death of Christ entails suffering. It is the almost casual way he goes about describing the relationship of suffering to the glories of the gospel that is striking (see Gal 3:4).

In verse 3 Paul says that because of our relation to Jesus, we boast in suffering. Robert Schuller is wrong. Paul is not saying that “when things get tough, the tough get tougher.” Rather, he is saying that our sufferings (thlipsis) demonstrate the eschatological (and consequently) ethical antithesis between the Christian and the world. Suffering is an affirmation of our union with Christ. This is the prelude to the locus classicus for the doctrine of imputation, which is another aspect of our union with Christ (Rom 8:18–39). Paul compares the sufferings (pathemata) of the present age semi-eschatological with the glory to be revealed in us. For this revelation, creation itself is anxious. What is the object of the anxiety? The redemption of our bodies (v. 23). He is looking for the resurrection. Because of our weakness and groanings (because of suffering?) the Spirit intercedes for us. Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Thlipsis or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?” (v. 35).

These are not just random selections of difficult things contrasted with Christ’s love. These are real-life experiences shared by the Roman Christians before and after the reception of the letter. The references are unmistakable. This is part of the reason Paul turns their attention for comfort to the unbreakable golden chain of God’s decrees in verses 28–30.

In 1 Corinthians 13:3, Paul lists things with which perhaps the Corinthians are familiar. Among them is giving one’s body over to be burned. Clearly there is a reference here to martyrdom. It was apparently common enough in the first century that Paul could casually mention it as an example without having to explain that Christians sometimes were martyred for the faith.

In Paul’s doxology to the Father in 2 Corinthians 1, one of the things for which Paul is grateful is deliverance from thlipsis (vv. 4–7). We are familiar with the benefits of suffering from this passage— namely, patience—but this is not the only reason Paul mentions it.

In verses 4–5 he is contrasting the comfort God gives to his saints through the Holy Spirit with the sufferings that are ours of a course. He speaks of Christ’s pathemata abounding, or overflowing, to us. Paul even identifies his (and our) sufferings with Christ’s. What does he mean?

We saw in the Gospels with reference to Christ that pascho has a technical meaning. This is proof of the derivative meaning I posited earlier. Paul is arguing that identification and mystical union with Christ necessarily means that we endure persecution at the hands of those who still hate Jesus. Because of that identification and union, our sufferings become, in one sense, part of a continuum with Christ’s. The discontinuity is that his are perfect and propitiatory and ours derivative.1 The comfort we receive comes from Jesus. A reciprocal relationship is envisioned. In verse 7 Paul says that his hope for the Corinthians is firm because he knows they are experiencing this reciprocal relationship.

Philippians 1:29 establishes unshakably that, in the mind of Paul, there was a necessary correlation between election in Christ and suffering. Let me quote the passage beginning with verse 27:

Only this, conduct yourselves worthily of the gospel of Christ, then whether coming, I see you, or being absent, hear about you, I will know that you stand firm in one spirit [in the One Spirit?] working as one man for the faith of the gospel and not being frightened in any way by the ones opposing you, which opposition is proof of their destruction and of your salvation, and this salvation is from God. Because it has been granted to you not only to believe but to suffer on behalf of Christ, having the same struggle which you saw regarding me and now hear regarding me (emphasis added).

Several things become abundantly clear in this passage. First, Paul correlates opposition to the gospel and adherence to the gospel. Both are proofs. Opposition is proof that one is reprobate. Adherence and “struggling together,” sunathleo, is proof of salvation. This destruction is proleptic. The opponents are still opposing. So also, the salvation is proleptic since we are still struggling (agona, v. 30). In verse 29 he argues that the cause of this antagonistic relationship is being in union with Christ necessarily entails suffering.2

We cannot fail to notice the second correlation, that of the grant to believe and also to suffer. Just as there exists a corollary between belief and unbelief, so also there is a corollary between election and suffering. We can no more escape suffering than election. For Paul, both are sovereign donations of God. Neither can suffering be limited to the first century by some artificial construction since in that case we would have to restrict election to the first century.

The force of 2 Thessalonians 1:5 is equally clear. Paul praises God for the faith of the Thessalonians, and he boasts in their perseverance. Notice that he does not boast about their dominion but about their perseverance. The notion of “eschatological necessity” explains why Paul uses the phrase “counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering.” The kingdom here is both present and future. The present suffering indicates membership in the present kingdom and inheritance of the future kingdom. If there are three marks of the true church, then perhaps this is a mark of the true Christian, suffering.

Paul is not the only writer in the New Testament to make use of this notion. In 1 Peter 2:19–23 Peter contrasts two kinds of suffering, that which is incurred justly and that which is incurred unjustly. The former is commendable, the latter is not. What is important to notice here is, first, suffering is commendable; and, second (v. 21), he says “you were called to this”—that is, suffering. Why? Because Christ is our eschatological-ethical example, and because of our union with him, we are to follow in his footsteps. Peter places suffering in the category of Christian duty (see 1 Pet 3:14–18.) It is clearest in 1 Peter 4:12–19 that suffering is the normal lot of the Christian because of our spiritual connection to the ascended Christ.

With all this common New Testament background, it should not surprise us to see it reappear in the book of Revelation. If, for the sake of argument, the recapitulation reading of chapter 12 is allowed, then the relationship of the dragon to the woman is a colorful allegory of the didactic truth that we have clearly seen elsewhere. Indeed, the entire book of Revelation is a series of progressive parallels intended to explain to suffering Christians in the cities of Asia Minor why it was, Jesus having ascended to his royal glory, they continued to suffer at the hands of opponents and authorities. Jesus’s explanation, through the visions given to John, is that suffering is, in effect, a mark of this age. This is the age of the tribulation, the slaying of the prophets, the wasting of God’s people, so that only a remnant will remain at the coming of the Lamb in wrath.

Conclusion

The doctrine that I have tried briefly to establish is the eschatological necessity of suffering. Because of our union with Christ, suffering is consistently represented in the New Testament as a fruit and proof that we are united with him. Because we are Christ’s body and the antithesis between Christ and the world continues, the world pours out its hatred for Christ on us. We, in turn, receive assurance of faith and the comfort of the Holy Spirit as we fill up and share in Christ’s sufferings.

Christian suffering, which the apostle Peter distinguishes sharply from suffering for the sake of wrongdoing, is part and parcel of being a Christian. It is to be expected. Inasmuch as it is a mark of this age, it is necessary for the Christian. Therefore, we ought to expect it. We ought not be surprised when fiery trials come upon us.

This view is in stark contrast with both premillennialists, who find that Christ’s teachings in Matthew 5–7 do not apply today (for whatever bizarre reason), and those postmillennialists (e.g., Gary North) who regard Jesus’s sermon as applicable only for those who are oppressed so that they will not apply in the coming golden age. The view I have advocated rejects both these approaches as at once too otherworldly and not heavenly-minded enough. Just as Christ our Savior suffered in his flesh, so will we. Just as he was raised, if he tarries, so will we be raised. Just as he has been glorified, so will we be glorified where glory belongs: in heaven with the Savior.

Notes

  1. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 5, under “pascho.”
  2. For more on this passage in Philippians, see R. Scott Clark, host, The Heidelcast, “Have This Mind: Philippians (10),” January 18, 2026.

©R. Scott Clark. All Rights Reserved.

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on the Heidelblog in 2012.

RESOURCES

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

    Post authored by:

  • R. Scott Clark
    Author Image

    R.Scott Clark is the President of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, the author and editor of, and contributor to several books and the author of many articles. He has taught church history and historical theology since 1997 at Westminster Seminary California. He has also taught at Wheaton College, Reformed Theological Seminary, and Concordia University. He has hosted the Heidelblog since 2007.

    More by R. Scott Clark ›

Subscribe to the Heidelblog today!