Berith Road

The Generation of Light, Order, and the Fullness of Life through God’s Word

2012-01-27T12:32:00.005+11:00

The Bible teaches that the universe has been created by an eternally existing, powerful God. According to the biblical account of creation in Gen 1, God created the world, but (surprisingly perhaps) he did so in stages.

The first stage on creation involved the creation of the basic content of the universe: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen 1:1). Resulting from this original act of creation, the earth came into existence, but its original state for a certain period of time was chaotic: “but the earth was formless and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the deep” (Gen 1:2).

The original chaotic state of the earth forces the reader to ask why. Specifically, why would God, when he created the world, initially create the earth to be formless and empty? Surely God with his infinite power could have created a world that was fully formed right from the very beginning. He could have created a world complete in every way in the blink of an eye. He could have, but he chose not to. Why then would a God of order create a world that existed in a state of some kind of disorder for a certain limited period of time? In addition, why would a God of light, the God in whom there is no darkness at all, create the earth only to cover it in darkness at least for an initial period of time?

An important clue to the answer to these questions can be found in the final clause in Gen 1:2 where we are told that “the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the water.” The initial state of the the earth was formless, empty, and dark; but the chaotic mass was pregnant with the expectation of new life, because the Spirit of God was brooding over the water.

In effect, Genesis 1:2 gives the starting point for the subsequent six days of the ordering of creation. Over the six days of creation God would take the formless, empty, dark mass, and lighten, shape, and fill it. Genesis 1 involves, therefore, a movement from negative to positive, a movement from disorder, emptiness, and darkness (in v. 2), to light (v. 3), order (through God’s work of dividing and naming in vv. 4–10), and filling (vv. 11–31).

Therefore, on Day One, God speaks into the midst of the darkness, and creates light. God not only creates light, but he creates order through dividing and naming. He divides the light from the darkness, and calls the light day, and the darkness night.

On Day Two, God divides the water covering the earth into two layers, and the boundary between these two layers he calls heaven or sky. In doing this, God begins to give order to the original chaotic mass.

On Day Three, God makes dry land appear, and calls the water seas, and the dry land earth. God brings order to the original chaotic mass in order to make it habitable. Having created order and various spaces, God then sets about dealing with the problem of the emptiness of the original chaotic mass. And so on Day Three God also makes vegetation to begin to cover the land.

On Day Four, God continues his work of filling by filling the heavens with the sun, moon, and stars. These objects also have a role in giving light, and in ordering or dividing day from night, and in giving order to time. The sun and the moon are the timepieces in the sky that God has given us in order to be aware of, and to keep track of, time.

On Day Five, God continues the work of filling his canvas. He fills the space of sea with all sorts of fish and swimming creatures. And the great space, the expanse of sky, is filled with birds and other sorts of flying creatures.

On Day Six, God turns his attention to filling the space called earth, the land. He begins by creating all sorts of domesticable animals, creepy crawlies, and wild animals. But the pinnacle of the land creatures is humanity, male and female. And with human beings, God’s work of filling is effectively complete. That is not to say, however, that the world was full. In the beginning there were only two human beings. There was room for more filling to take place, but for all intents and purposes (apart from the human race) the world was full with all of the creatures that God had determined in his wisdom to make.

And then on Day Seven, God rested, not because he was tired, but because his work of creating was over. God started things off, creating the universe, and making Planet Earth fit for habitation. He started the work of filling the world, but handed over the rest of the work of filling the planet to the human race to achieve. The significance of God’s rest on the seventh day is that it is a promise to humanity. God has invited the human race to continue his work of building the kingdom of God on earth (Gen 1:28); and as we follow his pattern in taking the order and life-giving power of God’s word out into the whole world, so too when our work is complete, we will enter the liberation of an eternal rest, which involves enjoying the fruits of blessing in God’s kingdom forever more. God’s resting on the seventh day is therefore a promise of eventual perfection and of our enjoyment of that perfection after it has been achieved.

But how is humanity to build the kingdom of God on earth? The key to humanity’s work of building the kingdom of God on earth can be seen in the way in which God went about building the world in the first place. In particular, God brought light, order, and filling with life into the world through his word. The tenfold repetition of the expression ויאמר אלהים and God said (vv. 3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 28, 29) in Gen 1 deliberately emphasizes the important role of the divine word in reversing the “problem” of the formlessness, emptiness, and darkness of the original chaotic mass. Ten times God spoke … in order to bring light, order, and life into the world.

The Generation of the World through the Word of God

A key message of Gen 1, therefore, is simply that it is the word of God that brings light, order, and life into existence. God created the world in stages as a lesson for the human race in order to help us appreciate the way in which God’s word is the unifying structure of the universe and the key to life in the universe. Genesis 1 tells not only that God is the Creator of the cosmos, but that God the Creator is the God who acts through the power of his Spirit and word to transform darkness into light, chaos into order, and the absence of life into life. The rest of the story of the Bible is concerned to record the development of the kingdom of God on earth in tandem with the historical response of humanity to the word of God. Obedience to the word of God builds the kingdom of God, bringing light, order, and the fullness of life to the world; whereas disobedience to the word of God brings about a reversion to the default state of the world, the state of formlessness, emptiness, and darkness of the original chaotic mass.

God the Eternally Self-Generating Ultimate Cause

2012-01-19T01:09:00.003+11:00

The story of the Bible starts with God. The Bible tells us “in the beginning God” (Gen 1:1). God just ... is! God is uncreated reality, eternally self-generating, without beginning and without end. He has always been around, and always will be around.

The existence of God is the fundamental starting point of Christianity. Whatever system of religion or philosophy that one believes in, there has to be starting point. When it comes to the question of the existence of the world there are only four major options: (1) either the world is not real, and all of “reality” is unreal (like some kind of dream); or (2) the world is real and eternal; or (3) the world is real but finite in time, and has come from absolutely nothing; or (4) the world is real but finite in time, and has been caused or created by a previously existing power.

The view that the world is eternal was taught by some ancient Greek philosophers (e.g., Aristotle), and it is also taught in Hinduism and Buddhism. The view that matter has come from nothing, that absolutely everything has come from absolutely nothing, is the view of various forms of modern atheism. Despite the fact that many scientific atheists hold this view, this is logically speaking a difficult position to hold in view of the scientific axiom of cause and effect. Science (with the arguable exception of quantum mechanics) presupposes the idea of cause and effect. To hold that the big bang which led to the formation of the universe came from absolute nothingness—the equivalent of saying that the big bang had no cause—is to posit the existence of an effect without a cause. For the view that the world has come from a previously existing power, the major religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all believe in one eternal God who is Creator of the universe.

Which view is the most logical of these options? The major choice today lies between theism and atheism. Out of these, theism is more logical and much more probable. It requires a lot more faith to believe that all of the universe and the approximately 100 million different species that inhabit our earth came about as a massive fluke, totally by chance, from absolutely nothing, than it does to believe that there was a powerful self-generating designer who generated this world for a reason. Both theism and standard atheism hold that everything came from nothing. In theism, however, there is a cause: God.

A Summary of the Bible: Generator, Generation, Degeneration, Regeneration

2012-01-13T23:41:00.006+11:00

How to summarize the story of the Bible?

A handy way of thinking about the message of the Bible, or what Christianity is on about, is that the Bible tells a story of the history of the universe that revolves around four basic facts. These basic facts are: God, creation, sin, and salvation. Put another way, this gives us the following four basic facts: Generator, generation, degeneration, and regeneration.

God, Creation, Sin, Salvation

God’s Word in Human Hearts

2012-01-03T23:22:00.003+11:00

The more that I read the Old Testament, the more convinced I am that the Old Testament presents two primary case studies (Adam and Israel) of what happens when God’s word is not present in human hearts. As Gen 1 is concerned to teach, it is the word of God that brings light, order, and life to the world. The whole of human society must be founded upon and directed by the word of God the Creator. Not to do this is to revert back to the disorder, emptiness, and darkness of the original chaotic mass (see my post “The Theology of Genesis 1” for more on this idea).

One of the keys, therefore, to a succesful human life is having God’s word in one’s heart. This is why the new covenant centers on God’s word (torah) being written in the heart (Jer 31:33).

This is also why the psalmist says in Ps 119:11: “I have hidden your word in my heart in order that I might not sin against you.” As the whole of Ps 119 attests, the key to human happiness is following in the way of God’s word: “Blessed are those whose way is wholesome, who walk in the law of Yahweh. Blessed are those who keep his testimonies, who seek him with all their heart” (Ps 119:1–2).

God’s word in the heart! Simple yet profound.

The Fulfillment of Micah 5:1–5a in Jesus of Nazareth

2011-12-23T14:13:00.003+11:00

One of the strongest proofs of the truth of Christianity is the fulfillment of prophecy. There are at least fifty specific prophecies about the Messiah in the Old Testament, not to mention the many people or objects that function as prophetic parallels to Christ.

Micah 5:1–5a is a particularly good example. Micah is one of the eighth century prophets. He lived in Moresheth-Gath, a town in the south of Judah, about 35 km south-west of Jerusalem. The second half of the eighth century B.C. was a time when the Assyrian empire was exerting increasing pressure in the region. Israel was forced to pay tribute to the king of Assyria, and over time lost territory to the Assyrians until finally, in the year 722 B.C., the northern kingdom of Israel was conquered, and its citizens deported.

Conducting his ministry in this context, Micah was prophesying at significant time in the history of the people of Israel. His basic message was that the military defeat of Israel was coming as a result of Israel’s rebellion against God. As part of the covenant that God had entered into with Israel at Mount Sinai, God had promised to bless Israel on condition of obedience; but if they didn’t obey, instead of receiving blessing, Israel would experiences the curses of the covenant, bad things like disease, drought, defeat, death, and expulsion from the Holy Land.

Some 700 years after the exodus, God had finally had enough. After 700 years of rebellion and repeated unfaithfulness on the part of Israel, God’s judgment was going to come down against Israel in a serious way. The northern kingdom of Israel would be defeated and deported by the Assyrians, and over a century later the southern kingdom of Judah would be destroyed by the Babylonians.

Micah 5:1 speaks of this judgment. Micah 5:1 goes with the preceding five verses (i.e., Mic 4:9–13). In these verses Micah predicts that Jerusalem, also called the daughter of Zion, will be attacked; Jerusalem’s king will perish; the city will writhe in agony; and her inhabitants will be forced off into exile in Babylon. This is why in Mic 5:1 Micah calls upon Jerusalem to marshal her troops, to get ready for war. Jerusalem would be besieged, and the people would defend the city, but their effort would end in failure.

This defeat is pictured in Mic 5:1 with the ruler of Israel being struck on the cheek with a rod. Israel’s ruler being struck on the cheek with a rod is a picture of the king of Jerusalem being captured and mistreated by his captors. As a result of the sin of God’s people, the king of Israel would suffer. This verse is not primarily a prophecy about Jesus; but it is significant that, when Jesus was arrested, the Roman soldiers mocked Jesus by making him wear a royal robe and a crown of thorns (Matt 27:28–29). They made him hold a rod as his royal scepter; then they knelt down and mockingly hailed him as the king of the Jews before snatching away the rod, and spitting on him, and striking him on the head with the rod many times (Matt 27:29–30). The treatment of the king of the Jews at the hands of the Babylonians would foreshadow the treatment of Jesus at the hands of the Romans some 600 years later.

God’s judgment was coming down upon Israel because of her covenant rebellion. The curses of the covenant (including military defeat and exile) were going to be realized against her. But in the midst of judgment, Micah also proclaimed salvation. In fact the book of Micah itself alternates between sections of judgment and salvation. The book contains three cycles with every cycle beginning with oracles of judgment, followed by an oracle or oracles of salvation:

cycle 1: judgment (1:2–2:11); salvation (2:12–13)

cycle 2: judgment (3:1–12); salvation (4:1–5:15)

cycle 3: judgment (6:1–16); salvation (7:1–20)

Micah preached the reality of judgment, but he also proclaimed that after the time of judgment God’s favor would return to Israel. Death and destruction would not be the end of the story for God’s people. Beyond the time of trouble, there would be a time of restoration. But what would this restoration look like, and how would it happen?

Micah 5:2–5a provides a few clues as to what the future restoration of God’s people would look like. It begins with Bethlehem, a small agricultural town, 9 km south of Jerusalem. Micah moves from his concern with Jerusalem to turn to address Bethlehem: “But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, small among the clans of Judah” (Mic 5:2a).

But why this sudden focus on Bethlehem? Micah 5:2b tells us the reason: “from you [i.e., Bethlehem] will come forth for me one who will be a ruler in Israel.” At the time of the restoration of God’s people, there would be a ruler who would come from Bethlehem, the home town of King David. Micah seems to be prophesying about a second King David who would arise in the future to rule God’s people. This interpretation is confirmed by the common Jewish interpretation of this verse, an example of which is found in Matt 2:6. When Herod wanted to know where the Messiah was supposed to be born, the Jewish chief priests and scribes quoted Mic 5:2 as biblical proof that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem.

So there was going to be a future ruler of Israel who would be born in Bethlehem, yet (quite amazingly) Micah prophesies that “his origins are from of old, from ancient times” (Mic 5:2c). How can this be? Who can be yet to come in the future, but at the same time someone who has been around for ages, since ancient times? Micah is talking about a second King David who would be at the very least thousands of years old by the time he became the ruler of Israel. How is this possible?

Christians point to Jesus as the only possible fulfillment of this prophecy. The historical record is clear that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. And after growing up, Jesus went around all of Israel, claiming to be the new Davidic king of Israel, who had existed even before Abraham: “before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58). The early Christians believed that Jesus was the divine Word of God who had existed back in the beginning, back when the world was created, who took on human flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:1, 14). Micah 5:2c implies that the future ruler of Israel would be human (born in Bethlehem) yet divine (being of ancient origin).

Micah 5:3 confirms the idea that sees Jesus as being the fulfillment of Mic 5:2. Micah 5:3a states that (because this king was coming) God would give Israel over to their enemies “until she who is giving birth has given birth.” Israel would be under the power of her enemies until a birth had taken place. Linking Mic 5:2–3 together the implication is that Israel would be under the thumb of her enemies until this future ruler of Israel was born into the world by his mother in Bethlehem.

Once again Jesus makes sense of this prophecy. The Christian gospel proclaims that Jesus came to set God’s people free. Jesus’ birth into the world via Mary in Bethlehem marked the beginning of the end of Israel’s slavery. And Mic 5:3b seems to indicate the time when Israel would be fully free, when “the rest of his brothers return to be beside the sons of Israel.” The language here is intriguing. Who are these brothers of Israel who would join Israel? This could refer to the return of the Israelite exiles, but it could also be a prophecy about the conversion of the Gentiles. A similar ambiguity in the word brothers exists in Isa 66:20, a verse to which Paul seems to allude in Rom 15:16 when writing about his ministry to the Gentiles. If Mic 5:3b is a prophecy about the conversion of the Gentiles, then this is consistent with the teaching of the Apostle Paul in Rom 11 that the salvation of all Israel would not take place until the full number of the Gentiles had “entered in” (Rom 11:25–26).

This salvation of Israel from slavery to her enemies is associated in Mic 5:4 with this ruler of Israel standing to “shepherd his flock in the strength of Yahweh, in the majesty of the name of Yahweh his God.” The language of standing can have overtones of resurrection in the Old Testament (e.g., Dan 12:13), and the image of shepherding a flock is an image in the Old Testament language of exercising (ideally benevolent) rule over a people (see Ezek 34:1–10, 23–24; 37:24). After his standing up, this ruler of Israel would rule God’s people with the strength of God himself to the glory of God, the great I Am. This would result in the flock of God’s people dwelling securely, because “he [would] become great to the ends of the earth” (Mic 5:4b).

The idea of his greatness extending out to the ends of the earth is a picture of the Messiah’s rule being extended out from Israel to all the nations of the earth. Christians believe that this is what is happening as the gospel is preached throughout the world. As the message of the lordship of Jesus Christ is proclaimed to the nations, many people from all of the nations on earth are believing the message, and coming into submission to Jesus as Lord. In this way the rule of Christ is being extended throughout the world, even to the ends of the earth.

According to Mic 5:5a, “this is peace.” According to the Old Testament, the peace that this world needs is the peace that only Christ can bring. This is why Mic 5:5a identifies peace with “this” ruler. The masculine singular Hebrew pronoun זה this in Mic 5:5a [MT 5:4a] most likely refers back to the masculine singular subject in the final clause of the preceding verse, which refers back ultimately to one who will be ruler over Israel in Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]. Hence, the translation: he is peace or he will be peace. This is consistent with the message proclaimed by the angels at the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem: “Glory to God in the highest! And on earth peace to those upon whom his favor rests” (Luke 2:14). The angels understood that this baby lying in a manger was the agent of true peace for God’s world.

Overall, Mic 5:1–5a prophesies that Israel would be under God’s judgment until this ancient ruler born in Bethlehem stood up to rule and bring security for the people of God, as his rule extended to the ends of the earth.

This is a very detailed prophecy that was given over 700 years before the birth of Jesus. If we compare this prophecy with what is known about Jesus in the New Testament, then it is hard to imagine who else could the fulfillment of this prophecy apart from Jesus of Nazareth, the eternal Word of God, born to the virgin Mary in Bethlehem. An objective examination and comparison of the content of this prophecy with what is known about Jesus is rather convincing provided that the New Testament record about Jesus is accepted as being more or less historically accurate.

The Christian perspective holds that Jesus is the fulfillment of this prophecy. Micah prophesied of a ruler born of a woman in Bethlehem, yet whose origins go back into eternity, who would extend his rule throughout the world, to bring all of God’s people back to live securely in the presence of God, to experience peace. This is the truth about Jesus that Christians celebrate at Christmas.

The Meaning of Soothsayers and Observers of Times in the King James Bible

2011-12-17T11:37:00.005+11:00

I have been asked a question about the meaning of the expression soothsayers and observers of times in the KJV.

The word sooth is an Old English word that means truth. In terms of English usage, a soothsayer is therefore a truth teller, i.e., someone who tells the truth about the future. The word soothsayer or soothsayers occurs seven times in the KJV.

There are four references to soothsayers in the Aramaic part of Daniel (Dan 2:27; 4:7; 5:7, 11). The relevant Aramaic word is a Peal participle of the root גזר. This root conveys the idea of cutting, dividing, hence determining. The soothsayers in Daniel were viewed, reflecting the Babylonian perspective, as being determiners or analysts of the future.

The remaining three references to soothsayers in the KJV involve the Poel (and possibly Qal) participle of ענן (Isa 2:6; Mic 5:12 [MT 5:11]) and the Qal participle of קסם (Josh 13:22). The underlying meaning of the root ענן is uncertain. Some have suggested that it originally indicated humming or something to do with appearing. The root קסם appears to convey the idea of dividing or assigning, from which has been derived, in cultic contexts, the meaning of divination, i.e., foretelling the future or what is unknown by means of signs or omens given by the gods.

The expression observer of times occurs in the KJV in Deut 18:10, and the plural equivalent in Deut 18:14. In both instances the Hebrew word is based on the Poel participle of the root ענן. The translation observer of times suggests that the translators took the root ענן here as conveying the idea of someone who sees the future. The LXX translation (based on κληδονίζω) simply indicates someone that tells omens.

The Identity of the Weak and the Strong in Romans 14–15

2011-12-12T12:12:00.007+11:00

In Rom 14:1–15:13 Paul distinguishes between the weak and the strong within the Christian community in Rome (Rom 14:1–2; 15:1). The identity of these two groups of people has long been debated.

Paul gives some clues in Rom 14:2 of the identity of these groups: “One person believes in eating everything, but the weak person eats [only] vegetables.” In Rom 14:5 the strong believe that all days are the same, whereas the weak believe that some days are more important than others. In 14:14 it is apparent that the issue distinguishing the strong and the weak from each other has to do with food and drink that is common and uncommon, or profane versus holy.

The practice of abstaining from certain foods, and keeping various days, in the context of a concern with things that are profane or holy fits in with what we know concerning Jewish religious practice defined by the law of Moses (see Acts 10:9–15). Therefore, the obvious conclusion concerning the issue that is in view in Rom 14:1–15:13 would be to link to the issue of the place of the Jewish food laws, and the Jewish practice of observing certain days as holy, within the Christian community in Rome.

But is this conclusion justified? When the wider context of Paul’s argument in Romans is taken into consideration, I believe that the evidence definitely supports the conclusion that the issue of the weak and the strong in Rom 14:1–15:13 revolves around the problem of Jewish and Gentile relations within the Christian community in Rome.

Historically at the time of the writing of the epistle to the Romans, Jewish exiles returning to Rome were bringing back into the Roman churches their traditional Jewish views of the necessity of keeping the law of Moses. The impact of this was to create division between Jews and non-Jews. The law of Moses was a body of laws and stipulations that were part of the covenant that God made with Israel at Mount Sinai after Israel had been rescued out of Egypt. This covenant was a covenant made exclusively with Israel (see “The Monoethnic Nature of the Mosaic Covenant”). As part of this covenant there were many laws that functioned to keep Israel separate from the other nations.

Certain foods (such as pork) were unclean to the Jews. But the Gentiles had no such restrictions. From the orthodox Jewish point of view, the law of Moses implied that the Gentiles were unclean; and this is why the Jews of Paul’s day traditionally could not eat or socialize together with Gentiles (see Acts 11:2–3). To do so would taint them with Gentile uncleanness. This was problematic for the early church. When a Jew and a Gentile believed Jesus, and came together as believers in church, what kind of fellowship could they have together if they could not eat or socialize with each other?

In order to deal with this problem some Jewish Christians were saying, “Look, force the Gentiles to become Jews. Circumcise them (if male), and make them keep the laws of Moses, to keep the Sabbath and to keep the food laws, etc. If they do that, there can be unity between us” (see Acts 15:1, 5). These Jewish Christians were called Judaizers because they wanted to make Gentiles Jewish.

The problem, however, with this “solution” is that it made salvation, righteousness, and church membership possible only for Jews! According to this view, Gentiles could not be members of God’s people, and share in the benefits of salvation, unless they gave up their Gentile citizenship, and became Jews. But Paul and the orthodox Christians in the early church refused to accept this Judaizing solution as biblical. Paul understood that the new covenant would bring salvation to the Gentiles as well as the Jews, but how could the new covenant bring salvation to the Gentiles if the Gentiles were forced to become Jews?

To argue his case for the inclusion of Gentiles within the people of God on the basis of faith in Jesus Christ, and no longer on the basis of keeping the law of Moses, Paul wrote this letter to the Romans. After explaining God’s plan of salvation in Rom 1–11, Paul turns in Rom 14:1–15:13 to give advice about how Jews and Gentiles could live together in harmony. This is particularly evident from the way that Paul concludes his appeal in this section of his letter. His concern with the weak and the strong living together in harmony is due to the fact that he desires that “with one heart and one mouth you might glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom 15:6). Following straight on from this, Paul appeals to his readers: “Therefore, receive one another, just as Christ has received you to the glory of God” (Rom 15:7), which Paul then explicates in Rom 15:8–9 in terms of what Christ has done for “the circumcision” (i.e., Israelites) and for “the Gentiles.” Mention of “the circumcision” and “the Gentiles” here at the end of his integrated argument in Rom 14:1–15:13 shows that the issue between the weak and the strong was basically an issue involving the relationship of Jews and Gentiles within the Christian community. Paul’s quotations in Rom 15:9–12 from Ps 18:49; Deut 32:43; Ps 117:1; Isa 11:10, proving that the Gentiles would join together with Israel in singing praises to God in the new covenant age, also supports the idea that in Rom 14:1–15:13 Paul is primarily concerned with how Jews and Gentiles can live together harmoniously within the church.

The strong, therefore, were those who (like Paul) believed that in Christ Jesus “nothing is profane in itself” (Rom 14:14). That is to say, these people understood that, as a result of the coming of Jesus, the stipulations in the law of Moses that distinguished profane from holy, clean from unclean, no longer applied in the way that they once did. Those laws were simply illustrations until the time of the coming of the Messiah of the difference between holy and unholy, clean and unclean. They were illustrations that spoke of the need for God’s people to be free from the taint of sin, free from the taint of the “strange” customs of the people of the nations who did not know God. The strong, therefore, were those Christians who understood that the law of Moses no longer regulates the life of God’s people in the way that it during the old covenant age. The weak, on the other hand, were those Jewish Christians and Judaizing Gentiles who still kept the Mosaic food laws and the Mosaic religious calendar with its Sabbaths and regular feast days.

The Participation of Gentiles in the New Covenant

2011-12-05T12:16:00.006+11:00

I have been asked a question about how Gentiles can be viewed as participating in the new covenant given that Jer 31:31–33, the key new covenant prophecy in the Old Testament, only mentions God making this new covenant with Israel.

It is true that the members of the new covenant in Jer 31:31–33 are God and Israel, and that the Gentiles are not mentioned in these verses. But Jer 31:31–33 is not the only place in the Hebrew Bible that talks about the new covenant. Basically any prophecy in the Old Testament that talks about events belonging to the time of the eschatological restoration of God’s people is a prophecy of the new covenant.

Jeremiah 31:31–33 needs to be read in the light of the total picture of all of the other Old Testament prophecies that speak about the new covenant; and when we do that, we can see fairly clearly that the Hebrew prophets taught that Gentiles would participate on ultimately an equal footing with Israelites in what God was going to do as part of the future restoration of God’s people.

Some examples (by no means exhaustive):

In Deut 32:21 Moses prophecies that following the covenantal rebellion of Israel, God will make unfaithful Israel jealous “with those who are no people,” that Israel would be provoked to anger by “a foolish nation.” In other words, the calling of the Gentiles to be God’s people would play a part in making disobedient Israel realize what she had forfeited. The Apostle Paul notes this verse in Rom 11:11, arguing that the conversion of the Gentiles will lead in turn to the conversion of Israel.

In Isa 2:1–4 “all the nations” and “many peoples” will come to the exalted Zion to learn and do torah. The idea of Gentiles doing torah implies a change in torah such that it is doable by Gentiles as Gentiles, and not as proselytes to Judaism.

In Isa 11 “the root of Jesse” will be “a signal for the peoples” which will result in the ingathering of “the banished of Israel” and “the dispersed of Judah.”

In Isa 49:5–7 the Messiah will not only restore Israel but bring salvation to the Gentiles, resulting in the submission of Gentile rulers to the Messiah.

In Isa 49:22 Gentiles will bring Israel back to Yahweh. Thus, Gentiles would participate in the eschatological restoration of Israel.

In Isa 51:4–5 it is prophesied that God’s torah and righteousness will go out the the Gentiles.

In Isa 55:1–5 the Messiah calls upon “everyone who thirsts”—note the similarity with Jesus’ language in John 7:37—to come, in order to enter into an everlasting covenant that will function as a fulfillment of the Davidic covenant. As part of this, the Messiah will be “a witness to the peoples” and “a leader and commander for the peoples,” which involves “a nation that you did not know … run[ning] to you.”

Following on from the new covenant of the Messiah spoken of in Isa 55, Isa 56:3, 6 clearly speaks of foreigners who will “join” themselves to Yahweh. They are assured that they will not be separated from “his people,” and they are described as holding fast to God’s covenant. As Gentiles join Israel, the temple will become “a house of prayer for all peoples” (Isa 56:7). For the temple to be a house of prayer for all peoples, this implies that Gentiles would not lose their status as Gentiles as they became members of Israel.

In Isa 66:18–23 “all nations and tongues” will be gathered to see the glory of Yahweh, and from the Messianic sign people will go out declaring the glory of Yahweh such that “all your brothers from all the nations” will be brought as an offering to Yahweh in Jerusalem. The expression all your brothers from all the nations seems to include Gentiles and not just Israelites within its purview. The preaching of the glory of God in the gospel of the Messiah will bring exiled Israel and the nations back to the Lord. At this time of the new heavens and the new earth, “all flesh” will come to worship Yahweh.

In Zech 8 it is prophesied that at the time of the eschatological restoration of Israel “many peoples and strong nations will come to seek Yahweh of hosts in Jerusalem, and to entreat the favor of Yahweh … In those days ten men from the nations of every tongue shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, ‘Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you’” (vv. 23–24). It is evident from this that Gentiles would join together with Jews in going up to worship God in Jerusalem as part of the new covenant restoration.

Therefore, when Jer 31:31–33 is read in the light of prophecies such as those listed above, it is clear that the Hebrew prophets understood that Gentiles would participate together with Israelites in the blessings of the new covenant.

The Problem of Bad Language among Young Christians

2011-12-03T00:42:00.006+11:00

One of the problems that is currently impacting on younger Christians is the kind of language that these young believers use when talking with their friends. This is particularly evident in the kind of language that appears on social network sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Young believers can sometimes be found imitating the language of their peers, using language such as OMG, WTF, faarken, fkng, f***, and other unsavoury kinds of derivatives and abbreviations.

Language does change with time, and the prevalence and tolerance of swear words in popular culture is much greater than it used to be, but just because this is the kind of language used by their peers is not a good enough reason for Christians to speak the same way.

The Apostle Paul says the following in Eph 5:3–4:

Do not let any kind of sexual immorality and impurity or greed even be spoken of among you, just as is proper for saints, or that which is shameful, or foolish talk, or coarse jokes, which are not fitting, but rather thanksgiving.

By writing as he does in v. 3 that sexual immorality, impurity, and greed are not even to “be spoken of among you,” Paul is probably not just forbidding the practice of these particular sins. Instead of taking v. 3 as an oblique way of saying “these sins should not exist among you,” it seems that Paul is saying in v. 3 that it is not fitting for Christians to be talking about ungodly deeds as if they were an appropriate topic of conversation, let alone something that should ever happen within the Christian community. I would argue that Paul seems to have speech acts particularly in mind in vv. 3–4, because the verb ὀνομαζέσθω let it be named is implied in v. 4, where three out of the four nouns listed are clearly speech acts.

Misusing God’s name (whether in abbreviated form or not), or using coarse words referring to the act of sex (whose historical origin lies in taking the act of sex, which in the context of love is a special gift from God, and turning it into a form of abuse), is simply inappropriate for those who are called to be “saints” (i.e., holy ones) in Christ.

According to the Apostle Paul, the process of sanctification involves us putting to death the earthly things (Col 3:5), and this includes getting rid of “blasphemy” and “foul language from your mouths” (Col 3:8).

Apart from the disrespect to God that is shown in mindlessly abusing his name, along with the disrespect that is shown to God as the one who has given us sex as a special gift whenever we use in an unnecessary way coarse words that refer to sex, there is the problem of the use of such language leading to an impaired witness for Christ. Whilesoever there are people in the community who regard this kind of language as crude or rude, the presence of such language of the lips of Christians brings disrepute to the name of Christ. It can also be a source of discouragement to other Christians, and a barrier to fellowship among Christians who find such language unacceptable.

Christ has saved us to be clean and pure, and he desires that our language be clean and pure as well.

The Monoethnic Nature of the Mosaic Covenant

2011-11-26T11:29:00.014+11:00

One of the “problems” with the covenant that God made with Israel at Sinai (i.e., the old covenant) is its monoethnicity. We need to be clear about this: the Sinaitic and Deuteronomic covenants were made with one nation, the nation of Israel.

The monoethnic nature of the Sinaitic covenant can be seen in the following verses in particular:

“Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine, but you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod 19:5–6);

“You shall be holy to me; for I, Yahweh, am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine” (Lev 20:26).

The Deuteronomic covenant, being an expanded renewal of the Sinaitic covenant, was also exclusively made with Israel:

“For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as Yahweh our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation is there that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today?” (Deut 4:7–8);

“For you are a people holy to Yahweh your God. Yahweh your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession” (Deut 7:6);

“you are a people holy to Yahweh your God. Out of all the peoples on the face of the earth, Yahweh has chosen you to be his treasured possession” (Deut 14:2);

These are the terms of the covenant Yahweh commanded Moses to make with the Israelites in Moab, in addition to the covenant he had made with them at Horeb. Moses summoned all the Israelites and said to them: “... You shall keep the terms of this covenant, and do them, so that you may prosper in everything you do. All of you are standing today before Yahweh your God—your leaders and chief men, your elders and officials, and all the other men of Israel, together with your children and your wives, and the foreigners living in your camps who chop your wood and carry your water—in order to enter into the covenant of Yahweh your God and his oath, to confirm you this day as his people, that he may be your God as he promised you and as he swore to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; and it is not with you alone that I am making this covenant and this oath, but with those who are standing here with us today before Yahweh our God, and also with those who are not here with you today” (Deut 29:1–2, 9–15).

Understanding the ethnic particularity of the Mosaic covenant helps us to understand the need in God’s plan of salvation for a new covenant. The Mosaic covenant is “problematic” from the perspective that God’s plan involved bringing blessing to the nations as part of a covenant relationship (Gen 12:3). This is something that the Apostle Paul came to realize. Comparing the monoethnic nature of the Mosaic covenant to the Abrahamic promise in Gen 12:3 led Paul to understand that there had to be, in the purposes of God, a new covenant which would open up the door of righteousness and salvation to the Gentiles, and which would fulfill, subsume, and thereby supercede, the Sinaitic and Deuteronomic covenants that God had made previously with Israel.

Thus Paul contrasted the Abrahamic promise with the Mosaic covenant:

The law [of Moses], introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise (Gal 3:17–18).

Paul also understood that it was through Jesus Christ, as proclaimed in the Christian gospel, that the Abrahamic promise of blessing to the nations had been realized:

Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you” (Gal 3:8);

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:26–29).

Or as Paul has written in Eph 2:11–16, 19, concerning how the dividing wall of the law of Moses was “destroyed” through the death of Christ on the cross, thereby allowing Gentiles to be members of God’s covenant people:

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision”—which is done in the body by human hands—that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law [of Moses] with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility … Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household.

Being limited to one nation, the Mosaic covenant cannot by definition bring salvation to the nations. Only one covenant can: the multiethnic, new covenant in Christ Jesus.

The Central Concern of the Old Testament

2011-11-21T23:59:00.004+11:00

The central concern of the Old Testament (or the Hebrew Bible) is God’s relationship with Israel. The fact that the most frequent nouns in the Hebrew Bible are יהוה Yahweh (6,828 times), אלהים God (2,601 times), and ישראל Israel (2,514 times), attests to this.

The Pentateuch is primarily concerned with the historical background to, and the establishment of, the Sinaitic and Deuteronomic covenants, which functioned to define and regulate Yahweh’s exclusive relationship with Israel.

Following on the from the Law, the Prophets (i.e., the Former and Latter Prophets) are primarily concerned to trace the historical failure of the covenant relationship between God and Israel, and God’s response to this relational breakdown.

All in all, the Old Testament is a case study in the failure of a nation to keep covenant with God. It is a case study in what happens to human beings and human society when God’s word is ignored, a record of one nation’s reversion to darkness, chaos, and death.

The Rise of the Monarchy in Israel Viewed in the Light of the Concept of Kingship in the Old Testament

2011-11-14T11:34:00.003+11:00

The rise of the monarchy in Israel needs to be viewed in the light of the broader concept of kingship presented in the Old Testament. The primary theological point relating to the issue of monarchy in Israel is the consistent teaching of the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua and Judges that kingship is first and foremost an attribute of God. God is presented in the Pentateuch as being the King of creation. God appears in Gen 1 as the King whose word of command established the boundaries and content of created reality (compare Ps 148:5–6). Even though God’s kingship is not frequently mentioned in an explicit way in the Pentateuch or in Joshua and Judges, God’s rule over creation is the presupposition upon which the content of these books rests. What is presupposed and implicit for the most part in the Pentateuch, Joshua, and Judges becomes more explicit in the biblical books from 1 Samuel onwards. The royal psalms in particular link God’s work of creation and his subsequent work of providence for creation with his “honor and majesty” and “glory” (e.g., Ps 19:1; 95:3–5; 104:1–32). Such psalms make explicit the theology of kingship that is implicit in the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua and Judges. The Old Testament teaches that one of the reasons that God created the world was so that his universal kingship might be acknowledged by all his creatures (Ps 96:1–10; 99:1–3; 145:10–13; 148:1–13; 150:1–6).

Even though kingship is supremely an attribute of God, Gen 1–3 indicates that God created human beings in his royal image. The significance of being created in God’s image is linked in Gen 1:26–28 with humanity having “dominion … over all the earth” and over all the creatures of the earth. By giving humanity dominion, God established humanity as having authority as kings over creation. Humanity was given the task of filling and subduing the earth. In other words, God engaged humanity in the work of helping to bring about the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. Once the whole of the earth had been brought inside the boundaries of the garden of Eden, then humanity’s work would be finished, and the kingdom of God complete. To be successful in this task, however, it was necessary for human beings not only to work after the pattern of God himself (hence, the significance of the Sabbath commandment in Exod 20:8–11) but also to submit to God by keeping his commandments. The Pentateuch makes it very clear in a number of ways that humanity’s royal authority was to be exercised under the higher authority of God himself. The fact that Adam was placed under divine command shows that Adam and his descendants were to submit themselves in obedience to God (Gen 2:16–17). The subsequent episodes of God’s judgment of Adam and Eve, the judgment of Cain, the destruction of the flood at the time of Noah, and the judgment of the builders of the tower of Babel all serve to show God’s authority over humanity and/or the whole of creation.

Even though God is the King of the entire world, it is also important from the perspective of the Old Testament to recognize that God chose to realize his kingship over the world through the nation of Israel. Thus, God is seen in the Old Testament to be the King of Israel in particular. The covenant of circumcision established the idea that God would be the God of Abraham’s descendants (Gen 17:7). Abraham’s descendants for their part had the responsibility to “keep [God’s] covenant” (Gen 17:9; 18:19). God promised Abraham that there would be “kings” among his descendants (Gen 17:6). Jacob prophesied that royal authority would be exercised by Judah on a worldwide scale (Gen 49:10). God considered Israel to be “[his] people” (e.g., Exod 3:7; 5:1; 15:16). God’s redemption of Israel out of Egypt further established God’s claim of possession over Israel (Exod 15:13, 16; 20:2). This was also symbolized through the rite of the consecration of the firstborn (Exod 13:1–2, 11–16). After the exodus, the relationship between God and Israel was formalized in a covenant ceremony at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:1–24:11). This was an exclusive relationship which demanded Israel’s faithfulness or loyalty to God. Even though “all the earth is [God’s],” the other nations were excluded from this special relationship with God (Exod 19:5–6). Israel willingly submitted to the covenant that that God offered to them at this time (Exod 19:8; 24:3,7). This covenant, also known as the old covenant (as per 2 Cor 3:14), formally established God’s kingly rule over Israel. The condition for Israel to benefit from this special relationship was covenant obedience, i.e., a commitment to serving God through keeping the law of Moses (e.g., Deut 6:1–3).

It is significant that one of the benefits of Israel keeping covenant with God was that Israel would be constituted as “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Given that the word kingdom in the phrase a kingdom of priests parallels the word nation in the phrase holy nation, the expression a kingdom of priests and a holy nation speaks of Israel as a nation consecrated to the service of God. In other words, Israel would only be a kingdom before God to the extent that the nation submitted itself to the rule of God. What submitting to the rule of God involved for Israel was subsequently spelled out in great detail in the Mosaic law. Even though the context suggests that the kingdom in view in Exod 19:6 is Israel as a divine monarchy rather than Israel as a human monarchy, the books of Samuel and Kings in particular show that the divine and human aspects of the monarchy in Israel were intertwined in God’s plan, with the success of the institution of human monarchy within Israel dependent upon how well the institution of divine monarchy was respected. Israel submitting to the rule of God would mean the restoration of the kingdom ideal that existed in the garden of Eden but which was lost after Adam’s rebellion.

God’s intention for Israel, therefore, involved the development of human rule under the ultimate rule of God. This human rule would also be focused in a particular human being who would also be called the king of Israel. That God’s theocratic rule over Israel would incorporate a human king is indicated in Deut 17:14–20. This passage sets out the divine laws regulating human kingship within Israel. Even though Deut 17:14 is effectively a prophecy that Israel’s motivation for asking for a human king would not be proper (in that it would be motivated out of a desire to imitate the kind of government found in the surrounding nations), the fact that the law of Moses made provision for a human king indicates that human kingship was an integral part of God’s plan for Israel from the beginning. Israel would have a human king, but the one appointed as king had to be the one “whom Yahweh [their] God [would] choose” (Deut 17:15). The king was to be an Israelite, and should not acquire many horses, or wives, or excessive silver and gold (Deut 17:15–17). He was obligated to have his own copy of the Mosaic law to study in order to “keep … all the words of [God’s] law” (Deut 17:18–19). Thus, Mosaic law clearly placed the human king of Israel under the authority of God and his law. Indeed the length of the king’s dynasty is connected in Deut 17:20 with how well the king would follow “the commandment,” i.e., the law viewed as a whole. The idea of human kingship in Israel was, therefore, built into the Mosaic law. The law made provision for a human king but proscribed the authority of this king. The human king was to be subject to the authority of God, the King of kings.

Given what has been observed above, we have to conclude that there was nothing wrong with the concept of human kingship per se operating in Israel. In fact, the evidence strongly favors the conclusion that human kingship was one of the purposes that God had had in mind for humanity and Israel from the very beginning. God has given humanity the privilege of dominion over the earth. For this dominion to be legitimate, however, it must be exercised in submission to the greater authority of God, for God is King over all.

The Old Testament Concept of Wisdom

2011-11-04T15:59:00.011+11:00

The concept of wisdom in Old Testament is torah-centric. Wisdom in the Old Testament has frequently been defined as being “practical knowledge of the laws of life and the world, based on experience” (Gerhard Von Rad, Old Testament Theology [New York: Harper & Row, 1962], 1:418), or else understood in terms of the human endeavor to understand and live in harmony with the divine order that has been built into the cosmos. But when applied to wisdom as it appears in the Old Testament, these definitions are inadequate.

From the biblical perspective, wisdom is supremely the possession of God (Job 12:13; 38:36–37; Ps 104:24; Prov 3:19–20; Isa 28:29; Dan 2:20; Rev 7:12). Wisdom is basically whatever God thinks and says and does. Because God is the source of all wisdom, he is the one who grants wisdom to people, and he does this by means of his Spirit (Exod 31:3; 1 Kgs 4:29; 10:24; Prov 2:6; Eccl 2:26; Dan 2:21–23; Jas 1:5). Because God is wise, God’s word or law is a source of wisdom (Ps 19:7; 119:98, 104, 130; Jer 8:8–9). Jesus’ definition of wisdom in Matt 7:24 is consistent with, and hence a neat summary of, the Old Testament definition of human wisdom: being wise means hearing and doing the word of God. In the context of the Old Testament, this word of God, or law of wisdom, typically equates to the law of Moses, which was viewed as being the source of Israel’s wisdom before the nations (Deut 4:6, 8; see also Rom 2:17–20). According to the Old Testament, wisdom also involves an attitude of fearing Yahweh such that one is concerned to live out every aspect of one’s human existence in accordance with God’s law (Ps 119:100; Prov 28:7; 31:26). Thus, the wise person, i.e., the person with understanding, is supremely viewed in the Old Testament as being the person who obeys the law of Yahweh from the heart (Ps 119:34).

wisdom = hearing + doing torah

An Interpretation of Sin Coming Alive in Romans 7:9

2011-10-28T12:53:00.008+11:00

Romans 7 has often been interpreted by Protestants as if it is talking about our inability as Christians to keep God’s law. I have argued elsewhere (see “The Significance of the Law in Romans 7”) that this is a wrong interpretation for three main reasons:

(1) the law that is being talked about in Rom 7 is the law of Moses, not the law of God in general;

(2) in Paul’s thinking, God’s people in the new covenant age are no longer under the law, but have been set free from the law (Rom 7:4, 6; see also 6:14);

(3) Paul’s concern in Rom 7 is to argue that the historical function of the law of Moses was to bring about the death of carnal Israel (Rom 7:14) as a way of compounding the death of humanity in Adam (Rom 7:8-11, 13; 5:20) in a manner consistent with the Old Testament prophets’ view of the primary historical function of the Mosaic covenant in salvation history.

The idea that the law in Rom 7 is specifically the law of Moses is confirmed by a small but intriguing detail in Rom 7:9. This verse is translated in the NIV as follows: “Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died.” The ESV has the following: “I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.”

There are a couple of interpretive issues to be resolved in relation to this verse. Firstly, what does it mean that Paul was once alive apart from the law? Secondly, what does Paul mean when he says that the commandment came? And thirdly, what does he mean when he says that sin came alive?

Resolving these interpretive issues centers on our understanding of the small and intriguing detail which is the Greek word ἀνέζησεν. This word is a third person, aorist active indicative form of the verb ἀναζάω. The verb ἀναζάω basically means to return to life or to live again. Used in connection with sin, it implies that sin was once alive and then died, before coming to life again when the commandment came.

Sin was alive, then dead, then alive again. How is this pattern to be explained? The common psychological interpretation of Rom 7 as being Paul struggling with sin as a Christian does not fit in neatly with this pattern. Perhaps the best that we can say (following this interpretation) is that Paul was dead in sin as a non-Christian, then liberated from sin at his conversion, but then his struggle with God’s law lead to sin coming to life again in the sense that its power to control him reasserted itself. But this explanation is rather strained.

The explanation that makes better sense of ἀνέζησεν understands the sin alive, dead, alive pattern as fitting in with the flow of salvation history as summarized by Paul previously in Rom 5:12–21, especially vv. 12–14. In Rom 5:12–14 Paul speaks about how sin came into the world through the sin of Adam, and how death reigned over humanity from the time of Adam until the time of Moses even though that was a time during which sin was not reckoned. During this period of time, “sin was in the world; but sin was not reckoned, because the law was not present” (Rom 5:13). In other words, the time from Adam’s sin to the giving of the law at Sinai was a time during which sin was effectively dead. Sin was around; but because the law of Moses had not yet been promulgated, there was no explicit legal structure that regulated God’s standards of morality in a formal way.

Paul’s teaching in Rom 5:12–14 helps us understand, therefore, how it is that sin could come alive again for carnal Israel. Sin, which had formally speaking lain dormant from the time of the expulsion of Adam until Israel’s encounter with God at Sinai, came alive with the giving of the law of Moses. The old covenant mediated by Moses set up a legal structure through which the sin of God’s people would result in death in a formal and legally-binding way as a result of covenant rebellion.

We can now explain the three interpretive issues identified above. Paul, as a representative of carnal Israel, was once alive apart from the law in the sense that Israel experienced life prior to the coming of the commandment, which equates to the giving of the law at Sinai. Prior to the giving of the law at Sinai, Israel’s relationship with God was loosely regulated through the Abrahamic covenant and ad-hoc laws. There was no strict promulgation and regulation of covenant stipulations. There was no formally regulated sense of the possibility of the covenant curse of death coming down upon God’s people. But with the giving of the law at Sinai, this changed. A strict accounting of covenant response in relation to covenant law would now begin, and the prospects of success were not great from the beginning (as the incident of the sin of the golden calf serves to highlight). The giving of the law at Sinai opened up the possibility—or the reality in God’s plan in salvation history—of Israel sinning “according to likeness of the trespass of Adam” (as per Rom 5:14), i.e., of Israel rebelling against God’s formally promulgated law in like manner to Adam.

The point of Rom 7:9 is to help Paul’s Jewish opponents and Christian audience understand that the giving of the Mosaic covenant served in God’s purposes in salvation history to intensify the problem of human sin. Far from liberating Israel from sin and death, the law (in God’s plan) actually made things worse! The primary historical function of the Mosaic covenant was to render Israel guilty before God (Rom 3:19), and to bring the curse of covenant death down against the nation (Rom 7:10), in order to intensify the trespass of humanity in Adam, as a backdrop for the salvation of Jew and Gentile through the super-abounding grace of God in the new covenant of Jesus Christ (Rom 5:20).

Two Ways to Live in Romans 6

2011-10-21T00:56:00.005+11:00

The objection of Paul’s Jewish opponents, that Christianity was lawless or anomian (Rom 6:1, 15), failed to understand that Christianity maintained the two way ethical system of the Old Testament.

The Hebrew Bible (i.e, the Old Testament) clearly teaches that there are two possible ways of living.

Two Ways to Live

One is the way of life; the other is the way of death. The righteous walk on the road of life, whereas the wicked walk on the road of death. This two way theology is particularly prominent in Psalms and Proverbs. Psalm 1 describes the righteous as abstaining from walking in “the way of sinners” (Ps 1:1). It concludes by saying that “Yahweh knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish” (Ps 1:6). The way of life is pursued by the righteous, who walk in “the paths of justice” and “the way of [Yahweh's] saints” (Prov 2:8), who “walk in the way of the good, and keep to the paths of the righteous” (Prov 2:20). The way of life is “the way of wisdom” (Prov 4:11). Contrasting with the way of life is the way of death, which is the pathway that the wicked follow, to their detriment: “the way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know over what they stumble” (Prov 4:19).

Paul’s Jewish opponents, common to the orthodox Jews of the day, understood (following the teaching of the Hebrew Bible) that the way of life was the way of obedience to torah. As Prov 6:23 says: “the commandment (מצוה) is a lamp, and the teaching (תורה) a light; and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life.” The author of Ps 119 also describes the way of life in terms of following torah. Thus, the way is described as being “the way of [Yahweh’s] testimonies” (Ps 119:14), “the way of [Yahweh’s] precepts” (Ps 119:27), “the way of [Yahweh’s] commandments” (Ps 119:32), “the way of [Yahweh’s] statutes” (Ps 119:33), or more simply “the way of faith (אמונה)” (Ps 119:30). The Old Testament way of faith was the way of obedience to Mosaic torah.

But in teaching that people could be righteous before God through faith in Christ rather than the torah faith of Moses, Paul’s Jewish opponents believed that orthodox Christianity had effectively destroyed the “two way” theology taught in the Hebrew Bible. Hence their insinuation that Christianity was a license to sin (Rom 6:1, 15).

But the Christianity of Paul and the early Christians did not abandon the “two way” ethical structure of the Old Testament. In asserting a greater lawgiver who proclaimed a greater law than the law of Moses, the early Christians redefined the “two way” theology of the Old Testament. They still believed that there was only one way of life and one contrary way of death, but the way of life in the new covenant age was no longer considered to be the way of Mosaic torah but the way of Messianic torah. Hence Jesus’ statement—controversial in a Jewish context—that he himself is “the way and the truth and the life” (John 14:6); and Paul’s teaching (as per Rom 6) that one can either be a slave of God, through obedience to the gospel (Rom 6:17), which results in life (Rom 6:22); or a slave of sin, which leads to death (Rom 6:21). Paul’s gospel retained the “two way” theology of the Old Testament, but redefined “the way” in terms of Jesus Christ.

The Two States of Servitude in Rom 6

Thus, in the crossover from the old to the new, the way of Moses has become the way of Christ.

Christ Came to Enable Obedience

2011-10-13T23:27:00.000+11:00

Paul’s Jewish opponents did not really understand the nature of the Christian gospel. They heard Paul preaching grace instead of the law, but they concluded on the basis of this that Christianity was lawless or anomian, that it was anti-torah (Rom 6:1, 15). But this was to fail to understand the way in which the early Christians firmly saw the gospel as being the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies of the new covenant, at the heart of which was the idea that God would enable the covenant obedience of his people as part of the new covenant.

By way of example:

“And Yahweh your God will circumcise your heart, and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you might live” (Deut 30:6);

“But the word will be very near you. It will be in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it” (Deut 30:14);

“For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares Yahweh: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jer 31:33);

“And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh, and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and be careful to obey my rules” (Ezek 36:26–27).

Hence, Paul’s teaching in Rom 6 that union with Christ involves the believer becoming a slave to righteousness. In other words, Christ enables the obedience of God’s people. Paul understood that the law of Moses was given historically in order to bind Israel under sin, intensifying the consequences of the trespass of Adam; “but where sin increased, grace increased all the more” (Rom 5:20). And with this increase of grace, Christians “have been set free from sin, and have become slaves to God”; and the end result of the sanctification that comes with such obedience is eternal life (Rom 6:22).

Christ came not only to make full atonement for sin, but also to enable the covenant obedience of God’s people. Far from being a license to sin, grace in Christ includes the Spirit-enabled obedience of God’s people.

The Baptism of Jesus in Water and the Spirit in Luke 3:21–22

2011-10-07T22:55:00.002+11:00

The story of Jesus being baptised by John the Baptist frequently raises questions for some Christians. Many have asked the question: if the baptism that John the Baptist performed was a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (as per Luke 3:3), then why would Jesus be baptised by John if he was, as Christians believe, totally without sin?

It is true that the baptism that John the Baptist performed was a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, but it is also true that Jesus didn’t have any sins that he needed to repent of. What then is going on here?

The baptism that John the Baptist performed was a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, but the deeper significance of John’s baptism was that it marked a formal commitment to obedience. In other words, John’s baptism was also a sign of offering oneself in proper service to God, a sign of one’s commitment to walk in obedience to God’s commands.

And this was the significance of Jesus’ baptism in water by John. Jesus was baptised as a sign of his commitment to walk in the way of obedience to his Father’s commands. Jesus was baptised as a sign that he had come not to do his own will but the will of his Father in heaven. And this will required that Jesus would suffer and serve as the promised Messiah. This is indicated by fact that after Jesus was baptised, a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Luke 3:22b). Jesus was the beloved Son of God. In Jewish thinking, the title the Son of God (following Ps 2) designated the Messiah. This heavenly voice was God the Father identifying Jesus as the promised Savior King. And according to God’s words here, Jesus was fully obedient to his Father. Jesus fully pleased his Father.

The presence of the heavenly voice at Jesus’ baptism helps us to see that Jesus’ baptism marked the point in his life when his Messianic ministry officially began. We are told in Luke 3:23 that Jesus was “about 30 years of age” when he began his ministry. It is clear from this statement that Luke viewed Jesus’ baptism as marking the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in his official capacity as the Christ, the Son of God.

But Jesus’ baptism not only marked the official commencement of his ministry. It is also evident that his baptism in water by John corresponded to the point in time when when God baptised Jesus with the Holy Spirit: “when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove” (Luke 3:21–22a).

But what does it mean that the Holy Spirit came down upon Jesus like this? Christians sometimes wonder about the idea of Jesus being baptised in the Holy Spirit. Does that imply that Jesus didn’t have the Spirit prior to his baptism? The answer is “no and yes.” Prior to his baptism Jesus was filled with the Spirit. He had God’s word written on his heart, and he lived an obedient life. Jesus had the Spirit present in his heart, but he hadn’t yet received the new covenant outpouring of the Spirit. He hadn’t yet received the outpouring of the Spirit that was associated with the Messianic age, which was the outpouring of the Spirit that would also equip him in his offical role as the Messiah. So the outpouring of the Spirit at the time of Jesus’ baptism was in reality the beginning of the end-time outpouring of the Spirit that the Old Testament prophets had prophesied about.

In order to understand the significance of Jesus being baptised with the Holy Spirit, we need to understand what the role of the Holy Spirit is according to the Bible. The Holy Spirit has many functions. One of the key functions of the Holy Spirit is his function as being the invisible presence of God throughout the universe. Being the invisible presence of God, the Holy Spirit is God. Christians traditionally talk about him as being the third person of the Trinity. But being the invisible presence of God, the Holy Spirit is also described in the Scriptures as being an agent of God’s power. Indeed, one of the key functions of the Holy Spirit is his function of providing power.

The Holy Spirit can be thought of as being like an electric current that empowers everything in the universe. On a general level, God’s Spirit empowers all living things. This is clear, for example, from Ps 104:27–30. The psalmist praying to God says: “all [the animals] look to you, to give them their food in due season. When you give it to them, they gather it up; when you open your hand, they are filled with good things. When you hide your face, they are dismayed; when you take away their breath, they die and return to their dust. When you send forth your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of the ground.”

Psalm 104:30 teaches that it is God’s Spirit who gives life to the animals, and who renews the surface of the earth by making plants and trees grow upon the ground. The flowers that grow in a person’s garden only do so because of the energy of God’s Spirit that gives them the power to live and grow.

Back in 2005 I remember being amazed to see pictures of the surface of Planet Mars that had been taken by the Mars Rover. Those pictures helped draw attention to the stark difference between Earth and Mars. Earth is green and blue, so full of life; but Mars is red and dry, beautiful in its way, but barren and devoid of life.

But why are these two planets so different? The scientists have their theories, and some want to think that maybe once upon a time there was life on Mars; but the Bible’s more theological answer is a little different yet quite simple. Why are Mars and Earth different? Because God has focused the life-giving power of his Spirit on Planet Earth. Out of all of the planets in the solar system, God’s focus is Planet Earth, and this planet is where his Spirit is most active. Life currently exists on Planet Earth, but not on Mars, because ultimately God’s Spirit is focused on Planet Earth, providing the power necessary for life on the planet that we inhabit.

This life is the life-force evident in every human being. Each of us commenced life as a tiny embryo in our mother’s womb. We began as a little speck, growing bigger and bigger until the day when we were born into the world; and after that, we’ve gradually grown up and matured. We—indeed all people, all living things, the cats and dogs and goldfish—we all have life thanks to God’s Spirit who gives us the necessary life-force. All living things experience the physical life that God’s Spirit gives to all living things generally.

But the Holy Spirit not only gives physical life; he also gives spiritual life. What theologians call the special operations of the Holy Spirit (in distinction from the common operations of the Holy Spirit) involves God’s Spirit empowering specific individuals whom God will use in some way in his plan of salvation, either in a specific way or else in a general way. The Old Testament, for example, identifies particular individuals who were empowered by the Holy Spirit for particular tasks. The Spirit came upon Moses, Joshua, Samson, David, and the prophets, empowering them to lead God’s people, to teach them, even to deliver them. And more generally, the Holy Spirit was also active in a special way during the Old Testament age, writing God’s word on the hearts of a faithful remnant, leading them in the way of righteousness.

Whether specific or general, the special operations of the Holy Spirit have in common the providence of power, a special power which can be called new life power. The climax of this new life power is seen in Jesus’ resurrection. The power that was evident on Easter Sunday, the power that raised Jesus from the dead, this is the life-giving power of the Holy Spirit: resurrection power.

This power can be distinguished from the general life-force experienced by all living things. The general life-force that we currently experience in this world fades over time as we get older and weaker, and it eventually disappears when we die. The power of death is actually greater than the power of life in this world, but the power of death is no match for the power of God’s Spirit. Jesus’ resurrection is proof of this. New life power or resurrection power is the power of the kingdom of God. The special power of God’s Spirit is not the power of this world, but the power of the world to come. It’s a power that doesn’t grow weaker with time, but which continues at great strength forever. In fact, the full extent of that power has not yet been revealed, although we have seen a small glimpse of it in the resurrection of Jesus.

When Jesus was baptised, he was energised with this special power. Having been baptised with the Spirit, God’s Spirit would now direct Jesus’ every step in his ministry. The Spirit would strengthen Jesus, and enable him to teach and prophesy, and to perform miracles.

But did you notice how the Holy Spirit came down upon Jesus? Was it with blinking neon lights or with a blaring horn? No, the Spirit descended “in bodily form, like a dove” (Luke 3:22)! This seems a little strange perhaps. Why the form of a dove? The form of an elephant would have been a little easier to notice, if potentially a little dangerous; but why the dove?

Normally when people today think of a dove, they think of peace. The dove is particularly common as a symbol in anti-war demonstrations. It’s common at such demonstrations to see banners with a white dove holding a small olive branch in its beak. Some may not realise, but this image is taken from the Bible, from Genesis in the story of Noah and the flood. After Noah had been in the ark for ten months, he released a dove which eventually flew back to the ark with an olive branch in its beak (Gen 8:11).

So does the dove with the olive branch symbolise peace in this story? Yes, but it’s more than simply the idea of peace thought of as being the absence of war. This dove and the olive branch actually symbolise peace in the sense of new life returning to the world after a period of God’s judgment. The dove and the olive branch symbolise more than anything else … new life. The green olive branch in the dove’s beak meant that life had returned to Planet Earth after the devastation of the flood. The dove, therefore, is a symbol of new life after death.

In the light of this, the significance of the Holy Spirit coming down upon Jesus in the form of a dove is clear. The Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus in this way in order for us to understand the significance of that event by understanding the significance of the symbolism of the dove. There on the day of Jesus’ baptism the Holy Spirit was himself proclaiming: This man is the new ark of salvation; this is the man who will bring new life to God’s world through the power of God’s Spirit. This is completely consistent with the Old Testament teaching that the Holy Spirit is the Giver of life in general, but especially the Giver of new life in the context of death.

It was this Holy Spirit who would empower Jesus in a ministry whose purpose was to bring new life into a world dominated by death. With the Holy Spirit coming down upon him in the form of a dove, Jesus was in effect being presented as being a new Noah’s ark. Just like the ark, Jesus would pass through the stormy seas of God’s judgment against sin. And just like the ark, Jesus would be the vehicle through whom life would be preserved in the world.

Being filled with the Spirit, Jesus was able to do the work of his ministry of bringing new life to the world. Luke records in ch. 4:1 that it was the Spirit that led Jesus from the Jordan River into the wilderness to be tempted for forty days. Afterwards we read that Jesus “returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee” (Luke 4:14). These two details show that Jesus’ whole ministry was conducted under the guidance and power of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, it is thanks to the Holy Spirit that Jesus was able to complete his mission of bringing new life to the world. Christians celebrate this victory of Jesus over sin and death, the victory of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit co-operating to bring peace to our world.

Luke’s account of the baptism of Jesus provides a wonderful picture of the Trinity co-operating. Here is the Trinity working together so that Jesus might fulfill his ministry of salvation. God the Father sends God the Spirit to empower God the Son. And because the Trinity was a unity in the ministry of Jesus, Christians can experience the power of new life even in the midst of the decadence of the world around us by participating in the power of the Holy Spirit.

But to participate in the power of the Holy Spirit, we, like Jesus, need to be baptised in the Holy Spirit. In fact, one of the questions that everyone living on this planet needs to ask is: How can I be baptised with such power? How can I have the power of eternal life running through my veins?

In answer to this question, Christianity proclaims that Jesus is the one who baptises with the Holy Spirit, and that he freely baptises those who come to him acknowledging that he is the Christ, the promised Savior King. Because Jesus has been filled to overflowing with the Holy Spirit, he is able to baptise us with the Spirit. As John the Baptist proclaimed: “I baptise you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming … he will baptise you with the Holy Spirit” (Luke 3:16).

This baptism in the Holy Spirit is the baptism that Christians receive at conversion. Christians have various opinions on this issue, but I take it that the normative situation for Christians generally is the same as that which was taught by the Apostle Peter in his famous Pentecost sermon. Peter called upon the people moved by his preaching, saying: “Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). The normative situation in the early church regarding baptism in the Spirit saw the official reception of the Spirit by a believer as being closely tied in with water baptism. In fact, the very reason why water is used in baptism is because water (the free-flowing source of life) is a wonderful symbol of the Holy Spirit.

In this way, Jesus’ baptism follows the standard model. Jesus’ baptism is recorded in Scripture, not only because it helps us to understand more about Jesus’ identity as the Spirit-filled Son of God, but also because it functions as a model for what typically happens at the baptism of a Christian. Jesus’ baptism was a baptism of water and the Spirit. There was a conjunction of water and Spirit for Jesus, and it is similar for Christians today. The water which surrounds the body of the baptisand is a symbol of how God’s Spirit is poured upon believers in an official and formal way as we submit to Jesus as Lord.

This is why Christian baptism is significant. It marks our formal union with Christ, and the official beginning of our participation in the life-giving power of the Spirit. It links us to Jesus, and to the new covenant outpouring of the Spirit that commenced with the baptism of Jesus, the obedient Son of God.

John the Baptist’s Teaching concerning Baptism and Fruitfulness in Luke 3:7–17

2011-10-01T00:26:00.004+10:00

I don’t know what you normally think of when you think about baptism; but baptism is a rather strange custom. When we think of baptism, we think of contact with water. Depending on the mode of baptism employed, this contact can either be like jumping into a swimming pool, or jumping in and out of the shower after a couple of seconds. But why does Christianity have this rite?

Baptism is a part of Christianity because Jesus taught it that way. In the Great Commission, Jesus spoke about how disciples are made, and he linked that with baptism: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt 28:19). Baptism is the first step to becoming in an official sense a disciple of the Lord Jesus. Through baptism, we officially become disciples of the Lord Jesus. Through baptism, as we confess our faith in Jesus as Lord, we officially become united to Christ, and officially begin to share in the eternal life which has been his since the time of his resurrection.

Baptism is a sign that we officially belong to Jesus, that we are officially one of his disciples. This means that baptism is a privilege. It is a wonderful privilege to be baptized, and to belong to Christ; but, like anything in life, with wonderful privilege also comes important responsibilities. And this is where John the Baptist’s teaching in Luke 3 comes in. John’s warnings function to remind us of some of the responsibilities that go together with baptism.

John the Baptist was called by God to go and preach “a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sons.” John did his job well. Crowds flocked to hear his preaching, and they responded by submitting themselves to baptism in the Jordan River. This is something which is recorded not only in the Bible, but the famous Jewish historian called Josephus, who wrote a history of the Jewish people in the first century A.D., wrote about John, saying: “many people came like a crowd surrounding John, because when they heard his preaching, they were greatly moved.” Being moved by his preaching, the people responded by being baptized.

This is a pattern that we see in the early church. The apostles went out telling people about Jesus, and those who responded were baptized. For example, the Apostle Peter at the time of the Feast of Pentecost preached to a large crowd of Jews in Jerusalem. We read in Acts 2 how his message also cut people to the heart, and Peter called on them to “repent and be baptized, every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). Baptism is a sign of repentance leading to the forgiveness of sins.

Here we need to be clear what repentance is. What does it mean to repent? In the Bible to repent basically means to change direction. It means to turn away from our sinful way of life in order to follow God. It means to turn away from following the way of the world to start follow God’s way, to start living the way he would have us live. Baptism is important as a sign of repentance, but it’s only the beginning of a life which is to be lived out in the spirit of repentance.

This is something about which John the Baptist strongly warned the crowds who were coming to him to be baptized. John was not one of your touchy-feely types. Seeing the crowds who were coming to him to baptized, he could have praised God for the wonderful response to his ministry. I’m sure that he was praising God for the effectiveness of his ministry, but at the same time he was aware that baptism was only the beginning. Seeing the crowds coming out to be baptized, John warned them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Bear fruits in keeping with repentance!” (Luke 3:7–8). Baptism is a wonderful privilege, but it is only a beginning. When we are baptized, it is like being planted as a fruit tree in God’s orchard. It is great being a fruit tree in God’s orchard, but our job as fruit trees is to bear fruit for God.

John understood that some of the people coming out to him to be baptized had probably not fully understood the significance of baptism as being a sign of repentance. Those being baptized were primarily, if not exclusively, Jewish. So John warned them, saying: “Do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham” (Luke 3:8). Being a physical descendant of Abraham was not enough for a person to be right with God. Belonging to Israel was not enough to a person to be right with God. Being right with God demands true repentance.

John was warning his audience that baptism in and of itself was not enough to make a person right with God. To put it in another way, if baptism is a sign of repentance, then we all have need of a constant attitude of repentance throughout our lives. Martin Luther, the famous Reformer of the church, once said: “Baptism signifies that the old Adam in us is to be drowned by daily sorrow and repentance, and perish with all sins and evil lusts; and that the new man should daily come forth again and rise, who shall live before God in righteousness and purity forever.”

To what extent have we been seeking to do that lately? Have you been seeking to put to death the old self with its selfish desires, and to please God instead, in everything that you do? Having been baptized, our whole life is meant to be characterized by repentance.

In fact, if our lives are not characterized by repentance, if we’re not seeking to live lives that please God, then there are serious consequences. In v. 9, John warned his audience by giving an illustration of fruit trees about to be cut down and destroyed: “Even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down, and thrown into the fire” (Luke 3:9).

A fruitless fruit tree is basically a waste of space, and will eventually be removed and destroyed. In a similar way, an unrepentant baptized person, an unrepentant Christian, someone who is not bearing fruit for God’s kingdom will eventually be removed from God’s kingdom and destroyed. Such is the great responsibility of those who have been baptized: to honor the meaning of their baptism in their daily lives.

Baptism is somewhat like a marriage. During the wedding ceremony the man and the woman become husband and wife. The wedding ceremony is a special occasion, but it is only a beginning. What significance would the wedding have if after the wedding the husband or the wife went on living as if they weren’t married. Being married, you’re married! You can’t go on acting as if you’re not! If fact, the significance of the wedding and the marriage vows would effectively be lost if the husband or the wife did not commit themselves to the exclusive faithfulness that the marriage relationship demands.

Baptism is similar to a marriage. When a person is baptized, it is a special occasion, somewhat like a wedding. In the rite of baptism, we formally come under the lordship of Christ, and promise our exclusive faithfulness to Christ. It is a wonderful occasion, but like with a wedding it only marks the beginning of a life that is meant to be lived in an exclusive relationship of love with someone else. Baptism marks the beginning of the Christian life, not its end. Not to take the responsibilities associated with baptism seriously is to seriously devalue the meaning of our baptism.

Sadly the responsibilities of baptism are something that many people in the West have lost sight of. How many Westerners have been baptized? The figure seems to be dropping over time, but in some countries it is still quite high. In Australia, for example, the figure might be around 60% of the population. But how many of that 60% are genuinely seeking to live lives that honor God by being actively involved in Christ’s church? Probably not many. 20%? Even 20% seems a bit too generous. This means that there is a large proportion of Westerners who, having been baptized, need to be reminded of their responsibility before God to bear fruit for him. They need to understand the significance of baptism. Baptism is a wonderful picture of the gospel. It speaks to us about how our sins can be washed away through the cleansing power of the blood of Jesus. But the divine promise of cleansing needs to be met with us taking the promise of faithful submission to the lordship of Jesus seriously.

As John the Baptist warns us, if our lives are not characterized by repentance, then the baptism that we submitted to will not save us from the wrath of God which is going to come. This is something that all baptized people need to be told about. If baptism is a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, then have we been living out the meaning of our baptism? Have we been producing the fruit of repentance in our lives?

But what is this fruit that we are meant to produce? Basically, we can say that a repentant person will seek to trust in God’s strength to live a life that pleases God more and more as time goes on. We will seek to be more active in doing good. We will love our neighbor as ourself more, and we’ll have a different attitude to possessions and money that what we see around us today.

When John was warning the people whom he was baptizing, the people in the crowd asked: “What should we do?” (Luke 3:10). John replied: “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise” (Luke 3:11). Producing the fruits of repentance means sharing what with have with those who are in need. Producing the fruits of repentance means loving our neighbor.

Tax collectors were also baptized by John, and they asked him the same question: “What shall we do?” (Luke 3:12). And John answered: “Collect no more than you are authorized to do” (Luke 3:13). Tax collectors back in those days had to tender to get the job, and collecting more tax than was due meant greater profits for the tax collector.

Soldiers also came to John, asking the same question: “And we, what shall we do?” “Don’t extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages” (Luke 3:14).

Overall, then, to summarize John’s teaching on this issue, the fruits of repentance involve us having a new attitude to our possessions, money, and power. Repentance means sharing with the needy, and being honest in all our dealings. It means making money honestly instead of dishonestly. It means not abusing the authority of our position.

To what extent have our lives been producing these kinds of fruits lately? In what ways have you been helping those less fortunate than yourself? Have you been honoring God in how you make your money? One of the areas where we can be tempted today is in relation to taxation. Perhaps not many of us work for the government taxation office. We may not be employed as tax collectors, but most of us are taxpayers in some form or other. Even here honesty is needed. No one really likes paying taxes; but as Christians, we need to see paying tax as an opportunity to serve God. By paying our taxes, we serve God by contributing to the betterment of our society, and by helping our governments help those who are most needy in our community and in communities overseas; or at least that is the ideal.

Honesty and generosity are some of the fruits of repentance that God wants us to produce in our lives. If we haven’t been seeking to live this way, then we need to confess this to God, and ask for his strength and guidance to do better in the future, to be more productive as fruit trees in his orchard.

In pointing people to the coming Messiah, John the Baptist also warned them that the Christ would bring judgment as he came. According to John the Baptist, the Christ would come with the Holy Spirit and fire (Luke 3:16). Fire here is a symbol of judgment. “His winnowing fork is in his hand to clear his threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire” (Luke 3:17).

The useless chaff and the useless tree will be dealt with in the day of wrath, in the coming day of judgment. This day is even closer now than when John warned his audience previously. There will be a day of judgment when every person who has ever lived on this earth will have to give an account before God of how they have lived. We need to be very clear about this. When we take our turn in God’s court on judgment day, will God see good works in your life as proof that you have taken your covenant responsibilities towards God seriously? On the day of judgment, will God find evidence in your life of the work of his Spirit?

In calling for the fruit of repentance to be evident in our lives, we need to understand that John is not speaking here of perfection. The perfect righteousness that all of us need in order to live in the presence of God can only come through Christ, but at the same time there needs to be a genuine positive response to God’s grace to us in Christ. John is talking on the level of covenantal responsibilities. Everyone who has been baptized needs to be true disciple of the Lord Jesus, following in his footsteps, walking in his way of life. This genuine positive response is what John calls repentance. Repentance is an ongoing commitment to walking in the way of the Lord, and the Bible speaks of it as being a condition for salvation.

In the fourth century there was a famous Christian called John Chrysostom. Chrysostom became the Archbishop of Constantinople, which was the second most important city in the Roman Empire after Rome at the time. His surname Chrysostom means golden-mouth, because he was famous as an eloquent and powerful speaker. Chrysostom once said: “even supposing you receive baptism, yet if you are not minded to be led by the Spirit afterwards, you lose the dignity bestowed upon you and the pre-eminence of your adoption.”

In sum: having started the journey, we need to finish the journey. And we finish the journey by persevering in the way of repentance, one step after the other, following in the footsteps of Jesus. Whatever you do, don’t throw away the benefits of your baptism! To paraphrase the words of John the Baptist: without the fruits of repentance you will have no part in the kingdom of God.

Justin Martyr: Old Covenant versus New Covenant

2011-09-22T23:26:00.008+10:00

Justin Martyr (103–165) is a famous early Christian apologist. His understanding of the relationship between the law of Moses and the new law of Christ is very instructive. Justin argues that Jesus is the new law, eternal and final, who has replaced the old law of Moses. Approaching God in the new covenant age requires, therefore, that a person repent from idolatry and other sins, persevere in one’s confession of faith in Jesus Christ, and maintain piety.

The excerpt below is taken from ch. 11 of Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho (adapted from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iv.xi.html). Trypho was a Jew who was interested in philosophy.

“There will be no other God, O Trypho, nor was there from eternity any other existing … but He who made and disposed all this universe. Nor do we think that there is one God for us, another for you, but that He alone is God who led your fathers out from Egypt with a strong hand and a high arm. Nor have we trusted in any other (for there is no other), but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. But we do not trust through Moses or through the law; for then we would do the same as yourselves. But now (for I have read that there shall be a final law, and a covenant, the chiefest of all, which it is now incumbent on all men to observe, as many as are seeking after the inheritance of God. For the law promulgated on Horeb is now old, and belongs to yourselves alone; but this is for all universally). Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law—namely, Christ—has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law, no commandment, no ordinance. Have you not read this which Isaiah says: ‘Hearken unto Me, hearken unto Me, my people; and, ye kings, give ear unto Me: for a law shall go forth from Me, and My judgment shall be for a light to the nations. My righteousness approaches swiftly, and My salvation shall go forth, and nations shall trust in Mine arm?’ [Isa 51:4–5]. And by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt’ [Jer 31:31–32]. If, therefore, God proclaimed a new covenant which was to be instituted, and this for a light of the nations, we see and are persuaded that men approach God, leaving their idols and other unrighteousness, through the name of Him who was crucified, Jesus Christ, and abide by their confession even unto death, and maintain piety. Moreover, by the works and by the attendant miracles, it is possible for all to understand that He is the new law, and the new covenant, and the expectation of those who out of every people wait for the good things of God. For the true spiritual Israel, and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations), are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ.”

Not under Law But under Grace: An Exposition of Romans 6:15–23

2011-09-16T12:24:00.013+10:00

“Christians are under grace, not law!” This is a slogan that Christians, following the Apostle Paul, have frequently parroted. The problem is: have we understood what Paul meant by this slogan? Protestants typically interpret law in the phrase for you are not under the law but under grace to mean law in general, but this is to take Paul’s teaching out of its historical context, and to apply it in an illegitimate way.

The law that Paul was talking about in Rom 6:14 was specifically the law of Moses, not law in general whether divine or human. On the surface, the noun νόμος (law) in the phrase ὑπὸ νόμον under law looks indefinite, but it needs to be kept in mind that in New Testament Greek the definite article is frequently not used after prepositions. In the end, context needs to determine whether ὑπὸ νόμον means under law (in general) or under the law (of Moses). The big issue in the early church was whether or not Gentiles could be saved by faith in Jesus Christ apart from following the law of Moses (see Acts 15:1, 5). The orthodox Christians said “yes,” whereas the Judaizers said “no.” This is the particular historical context that argues for ὑπὸ νόμον to mean specifically under the law (of Moses). This is consistent with the rest of Paul’s argument in the epistle to the Romans, which is concerned with Jews versus Gentiles in God’s plan of salvation as foretold in the Hebrew Bible (i.e., the Old Testament). This Judaizing issue was being replayed in Rome after Nero’s accession to the imperial throne led to increasing numbers of Jews returning to Rome following the cessation of Claudius’s edict of expulsion.

In Paul’s day, there were people who objected to Christianity on the basis that it was anomian or law-less. In the historical context of Paul’s day, this was a specifically Jewish objection. Paul’s Jewish opponents viewed that Christian teaching which proclaimed that being right with God was a matter of belief in (i.e., submission to) Jesus Christ rather than a matter of obedience to the law of Moses as constituting a rejection of Moses and Mosaic law, rebellion against the covenant, and disobedience to God.

In Rom 6:15 Paul picks up the objection of his Judaizing opponents to the Christian teaching that God’s people are under grace rather than law in the new covenant age. His opponents’ objection was: “Following your teaching, Paul, we should all sin, because we are not under the law but under grace.” This objection appears as a direct response to Paul’s final statement in Rom 6:14. From Paul’s opponents’ perspective, being under grace rather than law was to reject God’s standards of righteousness as defined in the law of Moses. They thought that Christianity was a license to sin, but Paul strongly strongly rejected this implication (Rom 6:15).

Consistent with Old Testament teaching, Paul understood that there are only two ways of living in the world. On the one hand, there is the way of life that leads to God; and on the other, the way of death that leads away from God. Paul captures this in Rom 6:16 by talking about two states of slavery: “Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves as slaves for obedience, you are slaves to whom you obey, either of sin which leads to death, or of obedience which leads to righteousness?” According to Paul, there are only two masters whom we can serve: sin or obedience. Serving sin is the way of death, whereas pursuing obedience is the way of righteousness and life. These two possibilities applied in the old covenant age, and Paul understood that they apply just as equally in the new covenant age. The coming of grace in Jesus does not render invalid the basic framework of the dual halakhic (i.e., the two ways of living) ethical system of the Old Testament. Paul’s opponents were wrong to think that this is what Christianity advocated.

Paul understood that Christian conversion involved a heart transformation that brought converts into slavery to righteousness (Rom 6:17–18). Paul was thankful to God that the Christians in Rome had undergone this transformation. Before conversion they had been “slaves of sin,” but since their conversion “you have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching that you received” (Rom 6:17). The phrase from the heart is a deliberate echo of the new covenant prophecies of Deut 30:6: “And Yahweh your God will circumcise your heart, and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live”; and Jer 31:33: “ For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares Yahweh: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” Paul understood that the Old Testament prophecies about the restored (i.e., new covenant) obedience of the people of God are fulfilled through conversion to Christianity. It is also significant that the law written in the heart is equated by Paul with the standard of teaching that you received. The model of teaching received by the Roman Christians was Christian teaching. It was the Christian gospel. The gospel is the received tradition of the Christian community, passed down from Christ to his apostles, and from them to subsequent Christian teachers. Receiving this teaching into the heart is the key to freedom. The Christian gospel, the new covenant word of God, has the power to set people free from slavery to sin; but this is freedom for the sake of obedience to righteousness (Rom 6:18). There is no morally neutral territory. From the beginning of time, there has only ever been two ways of living: one a way of life, and the other a way of death.

Paul’s imagery of slavery to one of two masters was an accommodation to the weakness of the understanding of his readers (Rom 6:19). He used this illustration for the purpose of encouraging his Christian readers to pursue Christian sanctification: “just as you have presented your members [i.e., the parts of your body] as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness for lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness for sanctification” (Rom 6:19). Divine grace is not a license to sin. The Jewish accusation that Christianity was ἀνομία lawlessness was far from the truth. Being part of the new covenant is about walking in righteousness with the law of God written in our hearts. Being a Christian is about being holy, as the gospel of Christ brings holistic transformation. It is true that Christians are under grace, not law; but this is not the same as saying that Christianity is law-less, that Christians are not bound to any law, that they are free to live without any sense of morality. If law in the phrase under law is taken as denoting all possible forms of law, then Christianity is truly anomian. But if Paul, in the light of the historical context of his day, is specifically talking about the law of Moses as the law which we are not under, then a place is left for understanding that the gospel is new covenant law, and the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies (such as Deut 30:11–14; Isa 2:1–4; Jer 31:33; Ezek 36:26–27) that speak of the vivifying function of eschatological torah in the heart of God’s new covenant people. Paul was objecting to old covenant law. He was not denying that Christians are under new covenant law, which is the gospel, “the standard of teaching that [we] have received.”

As Jesus said, “You cannot serve two masters” (Matt 6:24). When Paul’s readers were “slaves of sin,” they were “free of righteousness” (Rom 6:20). Slavery to sin is incompatible with slavery to righteousness. Paul also reminds his readers of the consequences of their former way of living. “What fruit did you get then from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death” (Rom 6:21). Serving sin leads to shame and death. It is a dead end and totally fruitless. This fruitlessness of slavery to sin contrasts markedly with the consequences of slavery to righteousness. “But now, having been set free from sin, and having become enslaved to God”—that is, after Christian conversion—“you have the fruit of sanctification, and its end eternal life” (Rom 6:22). Slavery to righteousness is equated by Paul in Rom 6:22 as being slavery to God. The two masters that we must serve in life are either sin or God. Serving sin is useless. It leads to death. But serving God, as the Old Testament consistently teaches, has great benefit. Serving God means bearing and enjoying the fruits of holiness. Furthermore, the end destination of this way of living is eternal life. It is significant here that Paul views eternal life as residing at the end of a lifelong process of sanctification. Eternal life in the presence of God is the goal of Christian halakhah.

Paul concludes his teaching concerning righteousness in Rom 6 by summing up the consequences of the two possible ways of living in the world. He shifts from the image of fruit to that of wages: “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23). The concept of wages is used as a metaphor for what God “pays back” to people. There are consequences for how we live our life in the world. If we indulge in following sin, then the end result of that is God’s payback of death. “But the gracious gift of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” is not like the consequences of sin: “the gracious gift of God … is eternal life” (Rom 6:23). This verse is often quoted by Christians out of context, as if to say that God’s gracious gift of eternal life in Christ has no connection with the need for personal righteousness on the part of the believer. God’s gracious gift in Christ Jesus is eternal life, but this cannot be divorced from the process of sanctification that leads to eternal life. In effect, the phrase eternal life in Rom 6:23 is basically a synecdoche, a figure of speech in which a part is used to refer to the whole. Eternal life lies at the end of a process of sanctification. The whole of this process is the gracious gift of God.

To continue in sin, therefore, because we are not under law but grace is to fail to understand the meaning of God’s new covenant grace. God’s new covenant grace not only involves God graciously sending Jesus to make full atonement for our sins, but also God graciously writing his law in our hearts, so that we might be able to obey him, and to live as a consequence of walking in the way of personal righteousness in the context of atoning grace. To say (as some have said to me in the past) that the idea that personal righteousness is necessary for salvation is inconsistent with grace is ironically to fail to understand the nature of God’s grace. People who say that have, in effect, narrowed God’s grace down to simply the imputation of Christ’s righteousness received. It is definitely true that Christ’s righteousness stands at the heart of God’s grace, but God’s grace to us Christians is more than simply the reception of an alien righteousness. God’s grace involves both the reception of an alien righteousness and its personalization in a holistic way within the believer. The extrinsic righteousness of Christ truly applied will see itself reflected in the Spirit-induced intrinsic righteousness of the believer. The extrinsic without the intrinsic is inefficacious. Being under grace instead of law, therefore, does not make us lawless.

Grace Is Not a License to Sin: An Exposition of Romans 6:1–14

2011-09-10T01:11:00.002+10:00

Christianity is a religion of grace. The concept of grace as God’s undeserved favor to sinners is, generally speaking, strongly promulgated in evangelical Protestant theology today. But is grace a license to sin? A small minority of Christians down the years have come to that conclusion, but the Apostle Paul argues in Rom 6:1–14 that being under grace involves being set free from sin to serve and obey God. Christianity is a religion of grace, but grace actually involves God moving his people to obedience.

In Paul’s day, there were people who objected to Christianity on the basis that it was anomian or law-less. This was a specifically Jewish objection. Christianity proclaimed that being right with God was a matter of belief in (i.e., submission to) Jesus Christ rather than a matter of obedience to the law of Moses. Christianity, therefore, “devalued” the law of Moses in the sense that the law of Moses was viewed as being subordinate to the revelation of God’s will that had come through Jesus and his apostles. In effect, orthodox Christianity viewed the law of Moses as being divine revelation of second-order magnitude. But this “devaluation” of the law of Moses was viewed by orthodox Jews as being heretical. It was viewed by them as constituting a rejection of Moses and as being disobedience to God.

One of the objections of such people against Christianity was that it was anti-torah. They heard Paul speaking of being under grace instead of law, so they assumed that he and Christianity must be law-less. They also knew Paul’s teaching regarding the primary function of the Mosaic covenant in salvation history: that the purpose of Israel receiving the law from God in the first place was so that Israel would sin against it, thereby creating the opportunity for grace to abound. As Paul argues in Rom 5:20: “The law came in, in order that the transgression might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more.”

Paul reflects the objection of such people in Rom 6:1. Romans 6:1 is basically a quotation of one of the objections offered against Paul and his view of the purposes of God in giving the law to Israel. The word translated as increase in Rom 6:1 is a deliberate reference to the language that Paul was using to explain God’s purpose in giving Israel the law (see Rom 5:20). Paul’s opponents were basically saying: “Well, Paul, if God gave the law to Israel, so that Israel would sin, in order that grace might increase, then following your logic, the more we sin, the more grace will increase. Let’s continue then to sin, in order that grace might increase! Your teaching here, Paul, is absurd. Your religion promotes sin, and that is obviously wrong!”

But this portrayal of Paul’s teaching was incorrect. It is true to say that Paul understood that God gave the old covenant to Israel primarily as an instrument to bring about the covenant rebellion of Israel as a backdrop for God’s gracious dealings with Israel and the nations through Jesus. It is true that the giving of the law of Moses led in the purposes of God to an increase in sin in order that grace might increase all the more. But this is not to say that God wanted Israel to sin, nor is it to say that God wants such sin to continue as part of the new covenant that Christ has come to establish.

Paul argues against this Jewish misinterpretation of his teaching by appealing to the significance of Christian baptism. Arguing his case from Christian baptism is a weak argument to use in a debate with non-Christian Jews, but the epistle to the Romans was written to Christians. The main problem for Paul was that the traditional orthodox Jewish view of the law was accepted by many (primarily Jewish) Christians. These Christian Judaizers were in turn promulgating their views in Rome. With the return of Jews to Rome after Nero’s accession to the throne had brought an end to Claudius’s edict of expulsion, the Judaizing position was growing in influence in Rome, and causing disunity within the church. Arguing from Christian baptism is a powerful argument in a Christian context.

The basic principle put forward by Paul was that we (Christians) have died to sin. Having died to sin, it is not theoretically possible to continuing living in sin (Rom 6:2). This death to sin was formally sealed and symbolized in Christian baptism. Christian baptism is a baptism “into Christ Jesus” (Rom 6:3). Through baptism, Christians formally become one with Christ, a member of his body, the church. Baptism unites us to Christ. This means that baptism also unites us to Christ’s death. Baptism also unites us to his burial. Christian baptism means that the Christian is dead and buried with regard to sin! But being dead and buried is not the end. Through baptism (whose efficacy continues as long as faith continues), the Christian also shares in Christ’s resurrection from the dead. Christ’s resurrection from the dead is new life. “Just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so also we [Christians] … walk in the newness of life” (Rom 6:4).

Being a Christian is about having new life; and having new life, also means having a new lifestyle. This life and lifestyle necessarily go together. Paul proves the truth of Christians having a new way of life, by pointing out that sharing in Christ’s death means that we Christians will (in the future) also share in Christ’s resurrection in an experiential way (Rom 6:5). This unity in Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection means that our former self (i.e., the person that we were before our formal conversion at the point of baptism) has been crucified together with Christ. This has happened in order that the body of sin (i.e., our sinful nature) might be rendered inoperative, i.e., that it might be destroyed, so that we might “no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom 6:6). Union with Christ means, therefore, being “set free” from slavery to sin (Rom 6:7).

“If we have died with Christ, we believe that we we will also live together with him” (Rom 6:8). Union in his death goes together with union in his life. It is a total package. And just as Christ has been raised from the dead never to die again, “death no longer rules over him” (Rom 6:9). When Christ died, he died because of the power of sin; but he did so “once and for all” (Rom 6:10). The fact that Christ was raised from the dead to live forever means that his death has dealt fully with the problem of sin. Sin, having been dealt with, Christ’s resurrection life is fully lived under the positive purposes of God. With his resurrection, Christ’s suffering ended. In effect, his resurrection means that he is free from the overbearing power of sin. The implication of all of this is that just as death no longer rules over Christ, likewise sin and death should not be allowed to rule over us Christians. Paul spells this out in Rom 6:11: “So also consider yourselves as being dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.” Our baptismal union with Christ means that, in a way analogous to Christ himself, Christians have been set free from the power of sin to live new lives in the service of God. To say that Christianity is law-less because it does not follow the law of Moses in every detail according to Jewish tradition is to fail to see the purpose behind the coming of the new covenant and the significance of the believer’s union with Christ.

Paul concludes his argument against this anomian objection in Rom 6:12–14. In Rom 6:12–13 he notes the ethical consequence of our baptismal union with Christ, and calls upon his Christian readers to serve God in righteousness: “Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, to obey its desires” (Rom 6:12). The bodies that we currently live in are destined to die. This is the consequence of sin in the world , yet Christians have already been set free from the power of sin. We are not, therefore, to allow sin’s former reign to continue to control us. The pronoun its in the phrase its body is textually uncertain with regard to its gender, although the evidence seems to favor its referent being your mortal body. The desires of the mortal body are sinful desires, but these are not to be obeyed. Neither are Christians to “offer your members as tools of unrighteousness to sin” (Rom 6:13). The word translated as members denotes limbs or parts of the body. Christians are not to use their bodies in the service of sin to do what is not right. Rather, says Paul, “offer yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as tools of righteousness to God” (Rom 6:13). Christians have been set free in Christ to serve God rather than sin, and it is to God that we are to offer ourselves in obedient service. God is the King that we serve, not sin. Christians are to serve God, because “sin will not rule over you” (Rom 6:14). The sense of the future tense of the verb translated as will rule seems to be incorporating the time from the present into the future. This is at least the sense that emerges in the light of the present tense used in the second clause of v. 14: “for you are not under the law but under grace.” The law of Moses in the old covenant age was a historical epoch in which sin and death reigned over Israel (see Rom 5:21). In this, the covenant rebellion of Israel served to replicate and intensify the original rebellion of Adam, which brought death into the world in the first place (Rom 5:14). But Christians through their union with Christ now participate in the new covenant. We belong to the historical epoch in which grace and righteousness rules (Rom 5:21), and continuing to serve sin is incompatible with this new reality.

Being under grace does not mean, therefore, that Christians live in a moral free zone. Paul’s Jewish opponents were wrong to suggest this. Christians have been saved to serve God in righteousness. Christianity may appear to be anomian and anti-torah from the traditional Jewish perspective, but obedience and righteousness are still important. Christ came to enable the obedience of faith among all nations. Grace, therefore, is not incompatible with personal righteousness. Indeed, grace guarantees the proper service of God.

The Key to a Father’s Happiness according to the Book of Proverbs

2011-09-01T23:40:00.006+10:00

Every Father’s Day children wish their father “Happy Father’s Day.” But what really makes a father happy? The book of Proverbs has a fair bit to say about the role of fathers, and what makes for a happy father.

The book of Proverbs presupposes that fathers should love and take delight in their children (Prov 3:12). Parents obviously have a responsibility to provide for their children’s physical and emotional needs, but the primary role of fathers according to the book of Proverbs lies in education. Proverbs presupposes that fathers will be instructing (Prov 1:8; 4:1), commanding (Prov 6:20), and disciplining their children (Prov 3:12). Discipline actually stems from a father’s delight in his child (Prov 3:12). Just as God seeks to instruct his people by speaking his word to them, human fathers are to pass God’s instruction (i.e., torah) and wisdom on to their children, and particularly to their sons.

Proverbs 1:8–9:18 functions as a model for how fathers should instruct their children. Fathers can instruct their children about many things, but moral instruction is most important. Fathers should encourage their children to pursue wisdom, motivating them to do so by helping them to consider the supreme value of wisdom, and the desirability of the benefits that flow from it.

“Hear, my son, your father’s instruction; and forsake not your mother’s teaching; for they are a graceful garland for your head and pendants for your neck” (Prov 1:8–9).

“Hear, O sons, a father's instruction; and be attentive, that you may gain insight; for I give you good precepts. Do not forsake my teaching. When I was a son with my father, tender, the only one in the sight of my mother, he ktaught me, and said to me, ‘Let your heart hold fast my words; keep my commandments, and live. Get wisdom; get insight. Do not forget, and do not turn away from the words of my mouth. Do not forsake her, and she will keep you; love her, and she will guard you. The beginning of wisdom is this: get wisdom; and whatever you get, get insight. Prize her highly, and she will exalt you; she will honor you if you embrace her. She will place on your head a graceful garland; she will bestow on you a beautiful crown’” (Prov 4:1–9).

If the father’s primary role is educating his children, then it makes sense that a father will experience happiness to the extent that his children receive and follow his instruction. It is significant that the main section of the proverbs of Solomon in the book commences with the following proverb: “A wise son makes a glad father, but a foolish son is a sorrow to his mother” (Prov 10:1). The idea that a wise son makes a glad father is repeated in Prov 15:20. Wisdom in the Old Testament is defined as hearing and doing torah. Children who follow God’s instruction bring joy to godly fathers. As Prov 23:24–25 states: “The father of the righteous will greatly rejoice; he who fathers a wise son will be glad in him. Let your father and mother be glad; let her who bore you rejoice.”

The opposite of wisdom is foolishness. Accordingly, the foolish child brings the opposite of joy to his or her parents: “He who sires a fool gets himself sorrow, and the father of a fool has no joy” (Prov 17:21); “A foolish son is a grief to his father, and bitterness to her who bore him” (Prov 17:25). Foolish children cause trouble and shame for their fathers: “A foolish son is ruin to his father,” on par with a quarrelsome wife (Prov 19:13); a child who is “a companion of gluttons shames his father” (Prov 28:7); “He who loves wisdom makes his father glad, but a companion of prostitutes squanders his wealth” (Prov 29:3).

Children should listen to their father’s instruction (Prov 1:8), and keep their father’s commandments (Prov 6:20). Listening to a father’s instruction allows a child to “gain insight” (Prov 4:1). “A wise son hears his father’s instruction, but a scoffer does not listen to rebuke” (Prov 13:1). “The one who keeps the law [i.e., instruction, torah] is a son with understanding, but a companion of gluttons shames his father” (Prov 28:7). “A fool despises his father's instruction, but whoever heeds reproof is prudent” (Prov 15:5). As a means of learning wisdom, the book of Proverbs calls upon us to listen to our parents: “Listen to your father who gave you life,and do not despise your mother when she is old” (Prov 23:22). An unwillingness to listen to our parents goes together with an unwillingness to listen to God. Therefore, respect for one’s parents is important. Whoever thinks that stealing from one’s parents is okay “is a companion of a destructive man” (Prov 28:24). Cursing one’s parents leads to eternal death (Prov 20:20). “The eye that mocks a father, and scorns to obey a mother, will be picked out by the ravens of the valley, and eaten by the vultures” (Prov 30:17). Using violence against one’s parents “brings shame and reproach” (Prov 19:26).

Wise and godly children are the key to a father’s happiness. This means that fathers can promote their own happiness by teaching their children well.

The Covenantal Logic and Meaning of Paul’s Argument in Romans 4:15–17a

2011-08-27T23:33:00.009+10:00

In Rom 4:13–17a, Paul gives a succinct explanation as to why the promise of the blessing of life must ultimately come through faith rather than through the Mosaic faith of obedience to torah. This further strengthens his argument in Rom 4:1–12 that the example of Abraham proves that the blessing of justification comes through faith rather than through the works of the law of Moses. The fact that Abraham was right with God even before he was circumcised proves that justification is not limited solely to bona fide members of the Mosaic covenant, contrary to what Paul’s non-Christian Jewish opponents and the Christian Judaizers were advocating; but this needed further explication.

Therefore, in Rom 4:13, Paul considers the issue of how the promise that God made with Abraham (for him and all of his spiritual descendants to inherit the world) would be realized. The promise was not “through the law … but through the righteousness of faith” (Rom 4:13). It is very important to realize that the word law in Rom 4:13 refers specifically to the law of Moses. The word law in Rom 4:13 is not law in general, but specifically the law over which Paul and his Jewish opponents were arguing, i.e., the law of Moses. We need to recognize at this point that the divine promise of blessing given to Abraham in Gen 12:2–3 is grammatically, and therefore logically, dependent on the command of Gen 12:1 (see “The Inheritance of Eternal Life through Faith instead of Law in Romans 4:13” for a more detailed explanation of this). But the law of command given to Abraham in Gen 12:1 is not law in the sense of being Mosaic law. As Paul points out in Gal 3:17, the law of Moses did not arrive on the scene until 430 years afterwards. In other words, the promise of the blessing of life that God graciously made with Abraham was not subject to the Mosaic covenant when it was first made. Even though this promise would effectively come under the regulation of the Mosaic covenant after Sinai, the promise was larger than the law of Moses. The Abrahamic covenant was not a subset of the Mosaic covenant; rather, the Mosaic covenant was a subset of the Abrahamic.

The significance of the promise being realized through the righteousness of faith for Abraham in the beginning is that, if the giving of the law some 430 years later were to change that original condition, then God would have shown himself to be inconsistent and unfaithful to his word. If the giving of the Mosaic law changed the original condition regarding the realization of the promise, then this would be to render faith useless, and the covenant of promise itself would end up being annulled (Rom 4:14). Implied in Paul’s argument in Rom 4:14 is that God would not do such a thing as this. Having entered into an agreement with Abraham concerning how Abraham and his descendants would be blessed, God could not rightly change this commitment midstream.

This then prompted the question (particularly to Paul’s Jewish opponents) concerning why the Mosaic covenant was given in the first place. If the Mosaic covenant is not the ultimate regulator of the realization of the promise, then why was the Mosaic covenant made in the first place? Why save Israel out of Egypt to place the nation under the law? Paul answers this question very succinctly in Rom 4:15: “For the law produces wrath; but where there is no law, neither is there transgression.” What Paul is really saying here is that the primary function of the law in old covenant Israel was to bring about God’s wrath against the people. This is not to say that obedience to the law was not the way of life for the small minority of Israelites who had the law written in their hearts during the old covenant age. Paul is speaking in Rom 4:15 in terms of the broad sweep of salvation history during the old covenant age. Romans 4:15 is not an abstract theological statement, but a statement explaining the function of covenant failure in salvation history. The law of Moses, far from being the solution (as Paul’s Jewish opponents were advocating), was part of the problem. The main purpose in God giving Israel the law was so that God’s anger would be revealed against sinful Israel, i.e., that Israel would be rendered guilty before God, without excuse (Rom 3:19–20).

In Rom 4:16 Paul explains the deeper purpose behind the primarily negative purpose in God giving the law. He identifies two main reasons. Firstly, the law was given to Israel so that God’s dealing with humanity might be “according to grace.” If Israel had kept covenant with God, and received blessing as a result, that would still be the work of God; but Israel initially failing, only to be restored later on, makes for a better story in the sense that the gracious side of God’s character has an opportunity to be revealed. It is almost as if God, wanting to prove his greatness and humanity’s total dependence on him, has deliberately set things up for humanity in Adam, and Israel in Moses, to fail, “in order that every mouth might be stopped, and the whole world come under the judgment of God” (Rom 3:19–20), in order that his gracious response might be seen and appreciated. Simply put, the fact that the promise of eternal life ultimately comes through faith in Jesus rather than through submission to the Mosaic covenant serves to highlight God’s grace. Secondly, justification by faith also means that salvation is not just limited to Israel, but every believer (regardless of ethnic origin) can participate in the promise. Didn’t God say in Gen 17:5 that Abraham would be “the father of many nations” (Rom 4:17)? In fact, that is the meaning of the name Abraham! “No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations” (Gen 17:5).

Paul’s Jewish opponents found it hard to accept, but Paul argues strongly in Rom 4 for the primacy of the new covenant in Christ over against the old covenant in Moses. That, in the salvation historical purposes of God, the Mosaic covenant would be superseded by a new covenant in Christ Jesus serves to highlight God’s grace and to open up salvation to the Gentiles in fulfillment of God’s promise of Gen 12:3.

The Meaning of Justification by Faith versus Justification by the Works of the Law in the Historical Context of the Early Church

2011-08-22T12:26:00.005+10:00

One of the problems in dealing with the Apostle Paul’s teaching on justification by faith versus justification by works is the common assumption that Paul was talking about works and law in general. But this is to ignore the historical particularity in which the epistles to the Galatians and the Romans were written.

The wider historical and theological context in which Paul functioned was dominated by Jewish views about justification and the Jewish response to Jesus. There is clear evidence from the New Testament that the main theological issue that the early church had to grapple with was the place of the law of Moses in God’s purposes of salvation. There is also clear evidence from the New Testament that the orthodox Jewish view about salvation at the time was that people were saved by keeping the Mosaic covenant. This is the covenant that God had entered into with the people of Israel at Mount Sinai, which was renewed and expanded on the plains of Moab before Israel entered the promised land. Following the teaching of Moses in Deut 6:25, the orthodox Jews of the first century understood that obedience to the law of Moses constituted their individual and national righteousness before God. In other words, a right covenant response led to the enjoyment of a status of covenant righteousness. The key to understanding Paul’s teaching in Galatians and Romans lies in understanding that this orthodox Jewish belief about righteousness was known in Jewish circles as justification by the works of the law.

Justification proper denotes a judicial pronouncement that the defendant before the court is innocent of wrongdoing, that he or she is in the right as far as the law of the court is concerned. From this emerges a related sense of the term justification which focuses on the resultant legal status of the person in question. Being justified by the judge, the defendant enjoys the legal status of righteousness. Justification can also denote, therefore, the state of being justified; and this is the primary sense of the term in the way that it was used in the early church. The issue of the day was: how can people be right with God; how do we need to respond to God today in order to be right with God (i.e., to hear his public verdict of justification) on the day of judgment? The debate in the early church about justification was ultimately, therefore, a debate about how people can be in a right relationship with God.

Given the orthodox Jewish view of justification, it is not surprising that a significant number of early Christians (primarily of Jewish origin) also believed that justification came through keeping the law of Moses. In believing this, they were being consistent with the orthodox Jewish tradition with which they were familiar; and this was the primary motivation behind the push on the part of the Christian Judaizers, that Gentile converts needed to become Jews and to follow the law of Moses to be saved. The summary of the content of the teaching of Paul’s Judaizing opponents in Acts 15:1, 5 is clear evidence for this. But as the decision of the Jerusalem Council clearly delineated, the apostolic belief of the early church was that, following the coming of Jesus and the commencement of the new covenant, the means of justification in the new covenant age is faith in Jesus rather than obedience to the law of Moses. This orthodox Christian belief came to be known as justification by faith by way of contrast to the traditional Jewish view of justification by the works of the law. Failing to understand the meaning of these terms in their historical context will distort our interpretation of Paul.

A Critique of Douglas Moo on Justification

2011-08-16T15:17:00.010+10:00

On 11 August 2011 Douglas Moo delivered a lecture entitled Justification in the Crosshairs (see “Douglas Moo on Justification”). I found Moo’s lecture to be very stimulating. He expressed himself clearly, and was easy to follow.

In terms of a critique of the content of his views on justification, the major weakness with his presentation was that it presupposed a particular concept of faith and works from the beginning. The terms faith and works were not defined. I assume that Moo’s definition of these terms would be similar to Martin Luther’s anthropological definition. The question needs to be asked, however: what is the biblical concept of faith? In particular, what is the Old Testament concept of emunah (אמונה), and is Paul’s use of faith language consistent with the Old Testament use of emunah? The issue at this point is: is faith (following Luther) a positive response of the human spirit solely to divine promise, or (following the Old Testament) the proper covenant response to the totality of divine revelation? A lot of Protestant discussions of justification assume a Lutheran faith versus works distinction from the outset, and fail to critique these inherited presuppositions in the light of Scripture.

I agree with Moo’s opinion of what justification in the realm of salvation is. Justification in the realm of salvation is the divine declaration by God in his function as Judge that a particular individual is legally in the right, assessed from God’s standard of righteousness. In other words, justification is the divine declaration that a particular person has lived up to (for whatever reason) God’s standard of righteousness. I also agree, as Moo stated contra Tom Wright, that belonging to God’s people is not justification, but a necessary consequence thereof.

In terms of how justification occurs, Moo’s discussion focused on absolute justification, and failed to acknowledge that the Bible also speaks about justification on the level of covenant responsibilities. Absolute justification is concerned with absolute moral perfection. On this level, Moo correctly pointed out that double imputation occurs in the substitutionary function of Christ as the perfect sacrifice that brings forgiveness to his people. Imputation itself (in terms of how systematic theology uses the term) is not justification per se, but justification in Christ on the level of absolute righteousness does presuppose double imputation. It is hard to avoid using the language of imputation at this point, given its usage as a technical term in Christian theology; but at the same time, it is important to notice that imputation in Scripture (i.e, the usage of חשב and λογίζω) has to do with the judicial reckoning of someone as righteous or wicked. Imputation in its scriptural usage is an integral part of the act of judicial justification; but in its systematic theological usage imputation has to do with how the righteous status of Christ is transferred to the believer, thereby enabling the divine judicial pronouncement (which is justification proper) to be made. Even though there are problems with the overlap of similar terms between biblical theology and systematics at this point, I nevertheless believe that the doctrine of double imputation can be derived from Scripture from the way in which atonement took place in the tabernacle. On the Day of Atonement, the priest placed his hand on the head of the goat, symbolizing the transfer of the sins of the people onto the scapegoat (Lev 16:20–22). The death of the other goat, which had to be a perfect specimen (like all sacrificial animals), also meant that the blood of the perfect sacrificial victim could cleanse the sins of the people represented (Lev 16:17–19). This requirement of “perfection” on the part of the animal sacrificial victims was a foreshadowing of Christ, who also had to be perfect or “without blemish” (see Heb 9:13–14). Hence, Christ’s active obedience to the will of God was necessary for his absolute righteousness to be established in order that he might be able to perfect the people of God absolutely through his offering of himself as a sacrifice of atonement.

I also agree with Moo that the phrase the works of the law is more than what James Dunn and Tom Wright have allowed for. Paul’s problem with the works of the law extended to the totality of the law, not just the boundary markers of circumcision, the food laws, and the Sabbath. Moo is correct, therefore, to state that the works of the law denotes obedience to Mosaic torah. The phrase the works of the law is Jewish code for doing the law, i.e., being faithful to the torah of Moses. I believe, however, that Moo is incorrect to assert that the works of the law were viewed by Paul as being a subset of works (i.e., obedience) in general. The logical convenience of this a fortiori argument by Moo is that the common Lutheran anthropological distinction between faith and works can stand. Moo’s a fortiori argument is valid, as long as it is applied to the domain of absolute righteousness. I suspect, however, that Moo does not limit the application of his a fortiori argument in this way. The lack of a concept of covenant righteousness in Moo’s system means that he fails to ask the question of whether or not the issue of justification that was being debated in the early church functioned primarily on the level of covenantal justification rather than on the level of absolute righteousness. The role of Christ in providing perfect atonement was not a point of debate between between Paul and the Christian Judaizers. The point of debate was how people benefit from Christ and everything that he has done: by following the law of Moses (the works of the law), or by following the gospel of Christ (faith)? If Moo’s larger set of works includes Christian obedience such that good works or evangelical obedience have no role in relation to justification on the level of covenant responsibilities, then Moo has effectively excised those parts of the New Testament which link good works or obedience in with justification and salvation (e.g., Matt 7:21; 25:14–46; John 14:21, 23–24; 15:2, 6, 10; Rom 2:6–11, 13; Gal 6:7–9)? I know that Moo acknowledges that works have some part to play in relation to the future aspect of justification, but his lack of a concept of covenant righteousness muddies the water at this point. Adopting the classic Calvinist concept of double justification could bring clarity to his argument.

In regard to the phrase the faith of Christ and variants of this, I agree with Moo that the issue of the day was how people benefit from the salvation that Christ has come to bring. In the light of this broader context, it would make sense that the default meaning of the phrase the faith of Christ would be the faith that a believer has in Christ. Obviously more specific contextual issues are involved in particular instances of this phrase; but where there is no immediate contextual argument to the contrary, then the phrase the faith of Christ and its equivalents should be taken in the default sense.

In discussing the time at which justification takes place, Moo correctly states that initial justification occurs at the point of conversion. If justification is “in Christ,” then justification is one of the benefits of being a member of Christ’s body. Moo did not mention that conversion in the early church ordinarily also involved a formal confession of faith in the context of baptism, but to link initial justification in with conversion is nevertheless correct. Moo also did not speak of a state of justification that the believer abides in (thanks to his or her union with Christ), yet I think that it would have been worthwhile to mention this in passing. Moo emphasized that there is also a future aspect to justification; and he is to be commended for doing so, despite the controversial nature of this to some Protestants. He noted that works have some role to play in this future aspect of justification, but he said that he was unsure of how this could be fully reconciled with the idea of justification by faith alone. He said that there is a biblical tension here that we have to acknowledge. This is where a concept of covenantal justification could have been cited to great effect. On the last day believers will also be judged according to their works. That is to say, there will be a judgment for believers in accordance with how they have lived up to their responsibilities before God on the level of the covenant. On that day believers will hear Christ the Judge say, “Well done, good and faithful servant,” or words to that effect. The expression well done, good and faithful servant is by definition a justification. It is a legal pronouncement acknowledging that one has fulfilled one’s covenant responsibilities before God (in the context of the absolute righteousness of Christ). This justification operates on the level of covenant responsibilities. It is, therefore, wrong to effectively confuse this justification with the absolute justification that comes through Christ. There is definitely a linkage between the two, but they operate on separate conceptual levels. From a biblical point of view, the only people who benefit from the atoning power of the covenant sacrifice(s) are the covenantally righteous as opposed to the wicked. By not distinguishing the absolute and covenantal types of justification from each other from the outset, Moo has effectively had to take cover behind the idea of “biblical tension” at this point in a manner which is unnecessary and a little vague.

In speaking of how the biblical view of justification leads to assurance without presumption on the part of the believer, I find myself in thorough agreement with Moo. Yet Moo views a believer’s striving for holiness as being separate from faith. Could it be that faith on the level of the covenant includes a believer’s striving for holiness? This possibility was not entertained, neither was the question of what happens to justification if a believer commits apostasy and is cut off from Christ, nor the question of how it is that a believer can know that they have been justified in the first place. In regard to the knowledge of one’s individual justification, Moo’s presentation of the doctrine of justification could benefit from a consideration of chapter 18 of the Westminster Confession where the assurance (i.e., the knowledge) of grace and salvation (including the truth of individual justification) is something about which only those “as truly believe in the Lord Jesus, and love Him in sincerity, endeavouring to walk in all good conscience before Him” can be assured (WCF 18.1). In other words, a knowledge of one’s justification is deduced from the experiential reality of a believer’s union with Christ, and it is contingent on being (and remaining) in Christ. In the words of the Westminster Confession, the assurance of being “in the state of grace” is “founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation, the inward evidence of those graces unto which these promises are made, [and] the testimony of the Spirit of adoption witnessing with our spirits that we are the children of God … without extraordinary revelation” (WCF 18.1–3).

I would, therefore, have preferred for Moo to speak about initial justification on the level of the covenant, which assumes (subject to a believer’s perseverance) the application of absolute justification in Christ, and also about a state of justification in which one abides in Christ, along with justification on the final day on both the covenantal and absolute levels.

Overall, I think that Moo has tried to be balanced and to grapple honestly with the biblical teaching on justification; but so much of the New Testament teaching on justification presupposes Old Testament covenantal categories. To the extent that Moo did not allow the Old Testament conceptual background on justification to impact his interpretation of Paul, the snapshot of justification presented in the lecture was deficient. But it was good to stimulated by a humble, thoughtful Christian scholar on this important issue; and I pray God’s blessing upon him and his work in the future.

Douglas Moo on Justification

2011-08-12T23:28:00.006+10:00

On 11 August 2011 Douglas Moo, an influential New Testament scholar, delivered the Eliza Ferrie Public Lecture at the Audrey Keown Theatre at the Presbyterian Ladies College in Croydon, New South Wales, Australia. The lecture was entitled Justification in the Crosshairs.

Introduction

Douglas Moo

Moo began by identifying himself as a child of the Reformation committed to the principles of semper reformanda and sola scriptura. He then noted that the doctrine of justification has moved firmly into the center of theological discussion in recent years, due to the influence of the New Perspective on Paul, the desire for ecumenical unity, a general cultural distaste for doctrine, and an emphasis on practical Christianity.

The major part of the lecture focused on what Moo regards as the key issues of justification: (1) what is justification; (2) how does justification happen; and (3) when does justification occur?

What is Justification?

Moo identified three main opinions regarding justification. He contrasted justification as total transformation (i.e., a right legal status before God plus moral renewal) with the purely forensic view of justification advocated by the Reformers, where justification is simply the declaration of the status of being legally in the right before God. The third influential view identified by Moo was the idea of Tom Wright that justification is God’s declaration that we belong to his people, i.e., that Gentiles are incorporated into the people of God with the same status before God as the Jews.

Moo sided with the second view, stating that the relevant Greek words focus on legal standing. He dismissed the objection against this view that it makes justification into a legal fiction. Justification is a legal decision that has important and real consequences. Justification concerns the individual’s personal relationship before God. This vertical dimension is primary. Contra Tom Wright, belonging to God’s people is not justification, but a necessary result of justification.

How Does Justification Occur?

Moo followed John Calvin’s idea that justification and sanctification are two of the important benefits experienced by those united to Christ by faith. While noting that a belief in imputation was not ascribed to universally among the Reformers, Moo argued that double imputation (i.e., the idea that through union with Christ our sin is imputed to him, and his righteousness is imputed to us) is “a reasonable and appropriate deduction” from Scripture. Moo agrees with Luther’s idea of Christ’s righteousness as being an alien righteousness, and he spoke of Christ’s active and passive righteousness as being involved in the righteousness imputed to believers.

Regarding the meaning of the phrase the works of the law, Moo distinguished between torah faithfulness and doing torah. He cited James Dunn as a representative of the first view, where the phrase the works of the law is taken as denoting faithfulness to the Mosaic law torah with a view to maintaining Israel’s special status before God, distinct from Gentiles. This narrow definition of the works of the law allows the advocates of this position to distinguish the works of the law from works in general. Disagreeing with the idea that the phrase the works of the law denotes an exclusively Jewish torah faithfulness, Moo nevertheless expressed his opinion that this phrase specifically denotes obedience to Mosaic torah. At the same time, however, Moo stated that the works of the law should be considered to be a subset of works generally. Using a kind of a fortiori argument, his application of the Pauline teaching about faith and works is: if doing the torah of Moses was unable to save Israel, then doing any “lesser” kinds of works must be even more deficient.

On the issue of the meaning of the phrase the faith of Christ in Pauline usage, Moo is of the opinion that the wider context of Galatians supports the idea that the faith of Christ denotes the believer’s faith in Christ rather than the faithfulness of Christ himself.

When Does Justification Occur?

Moo began this section of his lecture by stating that certain forms of Protestant theology have an unbalanced view of certain aspects of justification. Citing Rom 5:1, 9, Moo stated that justification is talked about in the New Testament as being a definitive event in the present. In other words, justification is settled at the point of conversion. Justification leads to a holy life which in turn leads to salvation on the final day.

But this is not all there is to justification. Moo also stressed that there exists a future aspect to justification, an idea to which mainstream Protestant theology has given little attention. He upheld the NIV’s translation of Gal 5:5 as an example of justification in the future. The issue in Galatians is not initial justification, but justification understood as vindication in the future on the last day. Moo stressed that it is incorrect to speak of two justifications, but being faithful to Scripture does lead us to speak of two aspects of justification. There is “a biblical tension at this point” that should be acknowledged. While expressing that he was not totally sure how these two aspects of justification could be reconciled, Moo suggested that the future aspect of justification is probably to be understood in terms of being a public confirmation on the last day of the initial justification that has already taken place in the life of a believer.

Moo linked this second aspect of justification in with the biblical doctrine of judgment according to works. Disagreeing with the common Protestant view that views works as merely evidential, Moo argued that works contribute to final salvation “in some way,” yet it must be understood that these works are those that God enables the believer to perform. Moo contrasted the zero sum model that views divine agency and human agency as operating in competition with each other with the biblical tension model that views divine agency and human agency working together, the divine agency being primary, and human agency secondary.

The Practical Implications of Justification

Moo stated that justification, understood within the biblical tension of the present and future aspects of the concept, leads to assurance without presumption. We are justified fully by faith, yet at the same time we need to earnestly strive for holiness.

Summary

Moo concluded his lecture by stating that the ultimate cause of justification is the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the believer, whereas the instrumental cause is faith alone, yet this is a faith that goes together with works (Jas 2:14–25; Gal 5:6).

A Prayer of Covenant Renewal

2011-08-07T00:06:00.002+10:00

If our covenant relationship with God is like a marriage, then perhaps it’s time to renew our marriage vows. Here is a suggested prayer of covenant renewal based on the traditional Christian vows of marriage:

“Lord Jesus, I take you anew this day, to be my Savior and Lord, to have and to hold from this day forth, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, and obey, till death does depart, and I am raised up to live with you in glory forever more. Amen.”

Covenant Commitment

2011-08-01T23:50:00.005+10:00

One of the key ideas for understanding the biblical concept of covenant is the idea of commitment. The Jewish understanding of the need for commitment to the Mosaic covenant can be illustrated via the example of Mattathias, the father of Judas Maccabeus. In 168 B.C. the Greek king Antiochus IV instituted a large-scale persecution of the Jewish people who were under his control. He forbade the Jews from following the law of Moses, and ordered anyone who had a copy of any books of the Hebrew Bible to be put to death. He replaced the temple sacrifices with pagan sacrifices, and allowed prostitutes to operate in the temple.

On one occasion when the officers who had been sent out into the cities and towns to force the Jews to participate in pagan sacrifices came to the town of Modein, about 27 km north-west of Jerusalem, the king’s officers said to the elderly Mattathias, “You are a ruler and an honorable and great man in this city … Now therefore you come first and fulfill the king’s commandment … and you and your children will be honored with silver and gold and many rewards” (1 Macc 2:17–18); but Mattathias answered them, “Though all the nations that are under the king’s dominion obey him and every one fall away from the religion of their fathers … yet will I and my sons and my brothers walk in the covenant of our fathers. God forbid that we should forsake the law and the ordinances. We will not obey the king’s words to leave our religion” (1 Macc 2:19–22). When Mattathias had finished saying this, a Jew stepped out “in the sight of all” to offer a sacrifice on the altar “according to the king’s commandment” (1 Macc 2:23). When Mattathias saw this, “he was inflamed with zeal” and ran and slaughtered the apostate Jew and the king’s commissioner, and pulled down the altar (1 Macc 2:24–25). Then he went throughout the city, crying out, “Whosoever is zealous for the law and keeps the covenant, let him follow me!” (1 Macc 2:27). Thus Mattathias and his sons fled into the mountains, and conducted guerrilla warfare against the Greeks until they retook Jerusalem and re-established the proper worship of God at the temple.

Killing two people, destroying an altar, and instigating a rebellion may seem a little extreme; but we cannot fault Mattathias’s commitment. But what was he committed to? According to 1 Macc 2:27, Mattathias was committed to the law and the covenant. The covenant was important for Mattathias, because it is one of the key concepts in the Bible.

The word covenant occurs some 300 times in the NIV translation, which is a relatively high figure. This means that anyone who has read through large sections of the Bible will have had to encounter the concept of covenant. It is a cause for worry, therefore, that many Christians are unaware of the existence and importance of this concept. This is all the more ironic considering that every time people speak of the Old Testament and the New Testament, the concept of covenant is effectively being invoked. The term testament in English is simply derived from the Latin term testamentum, which was used to translate the Hebrew and Greek words that usually mean covenant.

The concept of covenant is also important for understanding the significance of the Lord’s Supper. If we do not understand the concept of covenant, then we will not really be clear about what Jesus meant when he took the cup of wine during the supper and said, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Luke 22:20).

What then is a covenant? A covenant is basically an arrangement between two parties wherein one or both of the parties solemnly bind themselves to act in a positive way within a relationship. In the ancient world these covenants were generally speaking legally-binding, written agreements that spelled out the privileges and obligations of each party in the relationship. Usually, as part of such an agreement, the parties committed themselves to faithfully keep their obligations to each other by placing themselves under the threat of a penalty, in the form of an oath or curse.

This is exactly the kind of relationship that Israel had with God. God and Israel entered into an agreement concerning the nature of their relationship at Mount Sinai, after God had rescued Israel out of slavery in Egypt (Exod 24). This covenant was renewed on the plains of Moab before Israel entered the promised land after the period of forty years wandering in the wilderness.

This covenant, which the New Testament calls the old covenant, was a legally-binding written agreement between God and Israel in which God promised to bless Israel on condition of her obedience and to punish her on condition of disobedience. This can be seen very clearly in the conclusion to Moses’ final sermon (the fourth sermon recorded in the book of Deuteronomy):

“See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of Yahweh your God that I am commanding you today, by loving Yahweh your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and Yahweh your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of. But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess. I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, loving Yahweh your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days, that you may dwell in the land that Yahweh swore to give to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob” (Deut 30:15–20).

According to Moses, obedience would lead to life and blessing, but disobedience would lead to the fulfillment of the curses of exile and death. If Israel kept God’s commandments, then they would experience the blessing of being God’s people living in the Holy Land. But what is meant by obedience at this point?

It is a popular view in Christian circles to say that the obedience that God required of Israel under the old covenant was absolute, nothing short of perfection. But this is to overlook the covenantal context in which this call was made. The fact of the matter is that the Old Testament speaks of the Mosaic covenant as something that Israel was potentially able to keep. In other words, the obedience that God required of Israel under that covenant was theoretically attainable. The writer of Ps 119, for example, claimed to be someone who kept God’s law: “This blessing has fallen to me, that I have kept your precepts” (Ps 119:56). The writer of Ps 119 clearly claimed to be someone who had kept God’s law. He was able to say this, not because he had obeyed God’s law perfectly, but because built within the Mosaic law itself was the provision of all the temple sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins, which means that God did not require Israel to be perfect in order for the blessings of the covenant to come. God in his grace had already made provision for their sin in giving them the temple sacrifices (the burnt offering, the sin offering, and the guilt offering, all of which had atonement or reconciliation as a significant part of their function); but in order to benefit from the sacrifice for sin, it was necessary for Israel to obey God in the sense of being committed to the relationship with God as defined by the covenant.

So when God called Israel to obedience, we are not meant to understand by that absolute perfection but rather covenant commitment. God wanted Israel to be committed to him, to be faithful to him, like a husband and wife within their marriage.

Indeed, the best illustration that we have today of a covenant relationship is marriage. Marriage is a covenant, a relationship between two parties based on the promise of ongoing commitment and faithfulness. When a man and a woman get married, they promise to live in an exclusive relationship as husband and wife. This is expressed in the marriage vows: “I, X, take you, Y, to be my wife, to have and to hold from this day forth, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part.” In the vows, the husband and the wife promise to commit themselves to each other, and to be faithful to each other, for the rest of their lives.

Marriage is a covenant, and this is one of the reasons that the Bible often uses marriage as an illustration of God’s relationship with Israel. God is often pictured in the Old Testament as the husband and Israel the wife. But where and when did they get married? At Mount Sinai! This is where God entered formally into a new stage in his special relationship with the people of Israel. As part of this relationship, God spelled out for his people very clearly how they needed to be committed to him.

God spoke of this commitment (through Moses) in terms of obedience:

“Now this is the commandment, the statutes and the rules, that Yahweh your God commanded me to teach you, that you may do them in the land to which you are going over to possess, that you may fear Yahweh your God, you and your son and your son’s son, by keeping all his statutes and his commandments, which I command you, all the days of your life, and that your days may be long. Hear therefore, O Israel, and be careful to do them, that it may go well with you, and that you may multiply greatly, as Yahweh, the God of your fathers, has promised you, in a land flowing with milk and honey” (Deut 6:1–3).

The law of Moses spelled out what commitment to God looks like. And as the people of Israel lived out their commitment to God, great blessing would result.

God also spoke of commitment to him in terms of love: “Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one. So you shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might” (Deut 6:4–5).

And what was the source of such love? “And these words that I am commanding you today shall be on your heart” (Deut 6:6).

Loving God requires God’s law (i.e., God’s word) being in your heart; and for God’s law to be in the heart, there needs to be teaching and learning:

”You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates” (Deut 6:7–9).

The important thing for Christians in all of this is that the old covenant concepts of covenant privilege, covenant instruction, and covenant commitment also apply to Christians, because Christians are also in a covenant relationship with God. Christians are in a special relationship with God, just like the people of Israel. The formal beginning and sign of being in this special relationship with God is baptism. If at least one of your ancestors were Christians, then perhaps you baptized as a child. Or perhaps you were baptized as an adult upon the profession of faith in Christ. Whatever the case, being baptized means that you are formally a part of the church, which is the bride of Christ. It is like baptism is the marriage ceremony between yourself and Christ. And if it is true that all who are baptized are married to Christ, then we learn how to love and be faithful to Jesus by listening to God’s word.

Why is it that we read and study the Bible when we come to church? Historically Christians do this not just because that is our tradition. No, in church (and hopefully outside of church too) Christians study God’s word in order to understand more and more what it means to be in a covenant relationship with God. We study God’s word in order to know what being committed to Jesus looks like, so that each day our commitment to him might be stronger and stronger, that our love for God might be greater and greater, so that we might prove to be faithful followers of the Lord Jesus.

It is appropriate for every Christian to ask himself or herself every day: “Have I been concerned to keep my covenant vows with God that I entered into with him at the time of my baptism? Have I been concerned to be a faithful disciple or student of the Lord Jesus?”

Commitment means being prepared to give up one’s life for the cause of Christ. As Jesus said: “greater love has no one than this, that a person lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Real commitment means allowing Jesus’ teaching to transform the way that we live our lives. It means always being ready to give of ourselves for God and for others. True disciples are always keen to take the Master’s teaching to heart so as to know what he would have us do. As Jesus also said: “if you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15). Jesus was not speaking of perfection here, otherwise no one could love him, for no one can obey him absolutely perfectly! Not perfection per se, but covenant commitment! That is what Jesus is calling us to. If you love Jesus, then you will be committed to doing his will rather than your own, no matter what the cost.

Tsedeq Righteousness in Hosea

2011-07-25T12:05:00.004+10:00

The noun צדק occurs two times in the book of Hosea, which compares with one instance each of the noun צדקה and the adjective צדיק.

The first occurance of צדק in Hosea is in Hos 2:19 [2:21 MT]. At the time of Israel’s eschatological restoration, the Baals will have been removed from Israel (Hos 2:16–17); and there will be a covenant with creation, resulting in universal peace (Hos 2:18). For Israel, who is portrayed in Hos 2 as an unfaithful wife who has been banished by her husband, it is highly significant that Yahweh promised to one day take her back. This receiving back is pictured in Hos 2:19–20 as a betrothal. The three-fold use of ארש (betroth) makes this promise emphatic: “And I will betroth you to me forever. I will betroth you to me in righteousness (צדק) and in justice (משפט), in kindness (חסד) and in mercy (רחמים). I will betroth you to me in faithfulness (אמונה). And you shall know Yahweh” (Hos 2:19–20).

A betrothal is a pledge to marry. ארש has connotations of a payment made, because betrothals involved the exchange of gifts. A gift would be given to the bride’s family and also to the bride. The Hebrew idiom is to betroth (ארש) someone to (ל) oneself with (ב) some kind of gift. In 2 Sam 3:14, David, for example, had to remind Saul of the agreed betrothal gift by saying that he had betrothed (ארש) Michal to (ל) himself with (ב) one hundred Philistine foreskins: ארשתי לי במאה ערלות פלשתים I have betrothed (her) to myself with one hundred foreskins of the Philistines.

Noting that the idiom ארש ב is used in Hos 2:19 [2:21 MT], we have to say that in the proposition I will betroth you to me in righteousness and justice, both righteousness and justice are portrayed metaphorically as being gifts from the bridegroom to his future wife. This suggests that, as part of God’s plan, Israel would come to possess righteousness and justice for herself. It is true that righteousness, justice, kindness, mercy, and faithfulness are all attributes of God. It is also true that these attributes of God would be revealed in God accomplishing Israel’s echatological restoration. But the idiom ארש ב suggests that, by receiving the gifts given to her by God, Israel herself would come to possess these things. In this way, Israel would come to reflect these attributes of her husband.

The pairing of צדק in Hos 2:19 [2:21 MT] with משפט—which indicates behavior that is in accordance with the legal judgments pronounced by God in his role as King—suggests that צדק should be understood in this verse in the active sense of right behavior. This pairing of צדק and משפט is similar, therefore, to the pairing of צדקה and משפט in Gen 18:19.

The second instance of צדק in the book of Hosea is found in Hos 10:12: “Sow for yourselves righteousness (צדקה); reap kindness; break up your fallow ground, for it is the time to seek Yahweh, until he comes and rains righteousness (צדק) upon you.” Hosea 10 is an oracle of indictment and judgment that is directed primarily against the northern kingdom of Israel. Israel was indicted for having plowed iniquity and for having reaped injustice (Hos 10:13). Continuing in this way would bring the curses of the covenant down against Israel, so God called out to Israel through the prophet Hosea for them to sow צדקה instead. They were to do this in the hope that as they returned to God, so too God would return to them (as per Deut 30:1–3; Zech 1:3). In effect, Hos 10:12 is a command from God for all Israel to repent and to start walking in the way of righteousness as a precondition for Yahweh coming and raining צדק upon them. צדק here, therefore, is probably to be understood in the more global sense of a righteous status before God plus the blessing that flows from such status.

The Promise Not Received: The Meaning of Hebrews 11:39–40

2011-07-17T00:35:00.010+10:00

The list of heroes of the faith in Heb 11 makes explicit reference to sixteen individual heroes of the faith. In Heb 11:4–31 there are ten individuals mentioned: Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and Rahab. These all receive a least a line or two from the author illustrating their faith. Then in Heb 11:32 another six individuals are named: Gideon, Barak, Sampson, Jephthah, David, and Samuel. However the exploits of the faith of these believers are not explored. But Heb 11 does not just list individuals: the people of Israel are implied in v. 29 and v. 30, and the prophets are mentioned in v. 32.

In real life these heroes had their ups and downs. Commended for their faith, at times this faith was not as strong as it could have been. Yet despite their weaknesses

through faith they conquered kingdoms, worked righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. Women received back their dead by resurrection. Some, not accepting release, were tortured, in order that they might attain a better resurrection. Others experienced mocking and flogging, and even chains and prison. They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword. They went about in sheep skins, in goat skins, destitute, afflicted, mistreated … wandering about in deserts and mountains and caves and the crevices of the earth (Heb 11:33–38).

Through faith these heroes of faith experienced a mixture of things: victory as well as suffering. Through faith some “obtained promises” in the sense that they saw the fulfillment of some of God’s promises to them. Yet it is clear from Heb 11:39 that none of them experienced “the promise.”

But what is meant by the promise at this point? The phrase the promise (allowing for different grammatical case) also occurs in Heb 11:9, whereas the plural form the promises appears in Heb 11:13, 17. All of these have an Abrahamic connection. Abraham was promised nationhood (Gen 12:2), fame (Gen 12:2), blessing (Gen 12:2), land (Gen 12:7), and offspring (Gen 12:7). All in all, this would seem to be the promise of life in the heavenly land, the eternal city of God (Heb 11:10, 16).

The use of the phrase the promise elsewhere in Hebrews also supports the idea that the promise in Heb 11:39 is the promise of eternal life. Hebrews 4:1 speaks of the promise of entering an eschatological Sabbath rest. In Heb 6:15, 17 the promise is the promise of blessing and many offspring that God made to Abraham (and specifically the promise in Gen 22:17). The idea of the new covenant legally established on “better promises” (Heb 8:6), and talk of “the promise of eternal inheritance” in Heb 9:15, strengthens the idea of the promise in Heb 11:39 as being related to the promises of the eternal (i.e., the new) covenant. This is the promise which is the object of the Christian’s hope (Heb 10:23), which centers on entering into the presence of God in the heavenly temple (Heb 10:19–20). It is the promise that is fulfilled for believers after endurance in doing the will of God until “the coming one” comes (Heb 11:36–37). According to Heb 12:26, it is the promise of Hag 2:6 concerning the unshakeable eschatological kingdom, the heavenly Jerusalem (see Heb 12:22, 27–28).

We can conclude, therefore, that the ancient heroes of faith saw the fulfillment of some of God’s promises; but despite their faith testifying that they were people of faith, “they did not receive the promise” of eternal life in their lifetime (Heb 11:39). Faith is prepared to accept that there may no reward for the faithful in this world; and that if this be the case, then the reward will come in full in the heavenly country (Heb 11:6, 13–16).

In the plan of God, “God foresaw something better for us” (Heb 11:40), i.e., God had in mind that the full realization of his promise of blessing and life would be experienced by us, the new covenant believers. Hebrews 11:40 acknowledges that God’s plan of salvation is worked out in stages that lead to an eschatological climax. Believers under the old covenant by definition could not receive the fullness of blessing and salvation, because the fullness of blessing and salvation is something that was going to be achieved as part of the new covenant. It is for this reason that the ancient heroes of faith did not receive in full the promise of eternal life in their lifetime, “lest they be perfected without us” (Heb 11:40).

Through faith, and ultimately by way of resurrection, old covenant believers and new covenant believers alike will experience together the reward of faith, the fullness of the blessing of eternal life.

Echoes of Saul in the Samuel Narrative of 1 Samuel

2011-07-13T12:12:00.007+10:00

Saul is not identified by name in the book of Samuel until 1 Sam 9:2, but there are echoes of Saul in the Samuel narrative in 1 Sam 1–8. The name שאול Saul looks like a Qal passive participle form of the root שאל, and means asked for. In 1 Sam 1–8 there are seven verbal uses of the root שאל along with effectively three uses of the noun שאלה. This usage of the שאל root in 1 Sam 1–8 seems to be a deliberate attempt on the part of the narrator to pre-empt the appearance of Saul, who is an important character in the book, and significantly Samuel’s replacement as leader over Israel.

The first appearance of the שאל root in the book of Samuel occurs in 1 Sam 1:17. After understanding the reason for Hannah’s silent prayer, Eli responded by saying to her: “Go in peace, for the God of Israel will grant your request (שלתך) which you have asked (שאלת) him” (1 Sam 1:17). שלתך (which occurs in the Leningrad text) is a form of the noun שלה. This is a variant form of שאלה that emerges because of the quiescing of the alef. However שאלתך can be found in a large number of other Masoretic texts at this point.

This double use of the שאל root in 1 Sam 1:17 would possibly be unremarkable except for the appearance of the same root in 1 Sam 1:20 in connection with Samuel’s name. After giving birth to her son, “she called his name Samuel, ‘because I have asked for him (שאלתיו) from Yahweh.’” Strangely, Samuel’s name is explained in the narrative using the שאל root, even though the word Samuel is not derived from this root. Samuel presumably means something like his name is God. The effect of linking Samuel with the שאל root is to set up an analogy between Hannah’s asking for a son, and Israel’s asking for a king. Perhaps there is also a hint here that Samuel is the true Saul, the kind of leader that Israel should have been seeking all along.

After weaning the child, Hannah brought him to Eli in fulfillment of her vow to the Lord (see 1 Sam 1:11). She re-introduced herself to Eli by saying: “I prayed for this child, and Yahweh granted me my request (שאלתי) which I asked (שאלתי) of him, and so I have loaned (השאלתהו) him to Yahweh. All of the days that he exists, he is loaned (שאול, i.e., Saul) to Yahweh” (1 Sam 1:27). Once again, the narrator (through the language of Hannah) is deliberately toying with the name of Saul. In being loaned or given to Yahweh, Samuel is literally Saul to Yahweh. How can Samuel be as Saul to Yahweh? This not only reflects the fact that Samuel was given to Hannah through her petition, but presumably Samuel is also Saul to Yahweh in the sense that Samuel is a model of the kind of leader that Israel needs, the kind that Israel should have been looking to Yahweh to receive.

The connection between Samuel and שאל is further highlighted in 1 Sam 2:20. Every time Elkanah went to worship Yahweh in Shiloh, Hannah had the opportunity to visit her son; and on each occasion Eli would bless Elkanah, saying: “May Yahweh establish a seed for you from this woman in return for the request (השאלה) that one asked (שאל) of Yahweh” (1 Sam 2:20). In effect, therefore, every time Elkanah went up to Shiloh, the “Saul-like” status of Samuel was proclaimed.

The final use of the שאל root in the Samuel narrative appropriately occurs at the end of the narrative, shortly before the introduction to Saul in 1 Sam 9. The elders of Israel asked Samuel for a king to judge them (1 Sam 8:5–6). This request was both a rejection the kingship of Yahweh over Israel, as well as a rejection of Samuel’s leadership (1 Sam 8:6–7). God asked Samuel to acquiesce in the people’s desire for a king, but there was great danger for the people in having a king like the nations. Samuel’s warning in this regard is introduced in 1 Sam 8:10 with the following words: “Samuel told all the words of Yahweh to the people who had asked (השאלים) him for a king.” In asking for a king like the nations, Israel had rejected the godly Saul (i.e., Samuel) for a Saul of their own imagination.

The Faith of Abraham in Hebrews 11

2011-07-04T18:58:00.007+10:00

The biblical concept of emunah (אמונה) or faith (as it is explained in the Old Testament) basically means saying amen (אמן) to the word of God. Faith is an acceptance of divine revelation. Faith says yes to whatever God says, whether that word be command, promise, or warning. The concept of faith in Hebrews is consistent with this definition, but the core component of faith for the author of Hebrews is directed to God’s promise. For the author of Hebrews, faith is not mainly an eschatological concept in the sense that it is viewed as operating primarily in the eschatological age à la Paul. Rather, in Hebrews, faith is a necessary historical constant that applies throughout salvation history, but which nevertheless possesses a very strong eschatological orientation whereby the faithful look to God for salvation and reward at the time of the realization of God’s promise at Christ’s second coming (Heb 10:35-39; 11:6). I have discussed this previously in my post “The Concept of Faith in Hebrews.”

This eschatological orientation is linked by the author of Hebrews in with the concept of realization. This is particularly evident in the author’s discussion of faith in Heb 11. A number of times in this chapter, faith is spoken of as being that which believes that God can make something either out of what is not or what is not yet. “Faith is the substance of what is hoped for, the proof of what is not seen” (Heb 11:1). By saying that faith is the substance of what is hoped for, the author means that faith believes that what is hoped for (which emerges a response to God’s promise) will one day be realized. Likewise the idea that faith is the proof of what is not seen. Here the reality of what God has promised is viewed as being not seen, i.e., before the realization of the eschatological elements of God’s promises, we do not yet experience what will ultimately be. But faith takes what is not yet seen as certain one day to be seen. Faith is the conviction that the future will be as God has said it will be. This actually means that faith can only exist so long as God has not yet brought about the things that he has promised. By definition faith can only flourish in a hostile environment, where what God has promised has not yet come true (at least in totality).

The kind of faith that accepts that the ultimate realization of what currently is not yet is the same kind of faith that belives in a Creator God. As the author to the Hebrews writes: “by faith we discern that the world has been formed by the word of God, so that what is seen has come into being not from things visible” (Heb 11:3). Faith accepts the idea that God can create something out of nothing, that God can make the invisible visible.

The clearest example of a person with the kind of faith that believes in the ultimate realization of what is currently unrealized (at least according to the literary structure of Heb 11) is Abraham. “By faith Abraham obeyed when was called to go forth to the place that he was going to receive as an inheritance” (Heb 11:8). God’s words to Abraham in Gen 12:1–3 contained command and promise. Abraham accepted both. Accepting the reality of a promised land, Abraham accepted the reality of need to set out according to God’s command. The link between faith and obedience is very strong in Heb 11:8. Faith and obedience necessarily go together. This obedience on Abraham’s part is all the more remarkable, given that “he went forth not knowing where he was going” (Heb 11:8). But for faith to be faith there cannot currently be full knowledge. For faith to be faith, there must remain an element of mystery.

Faith by definition can only operate in an environment where what has been promised has not yet been realized, and often this means that faith will be lived out in an environment where virtually the opposite of what God has promised is our current reality. This too is something that Abraham experienced. “By faith [Abraham] sojourned in the land of promise as in an alien land” (Heb 11:9). Canaan was the promised land, but when Abraham arrived there it was already possessed by others (see Gen 12:6). Abraham’s land by deed of promise was currently the Cannanites land by deed of possession. Yet Abraham believed that one day all of that would be his. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were fellow heirs of God’s promise regarding the land; but the fact of the unrealized nature of the full reality of God’s promise meant that Abraham and his son and grandson lived in the land as nomads “in tents” (Heb 11:9). In the midst of this time of promise not yet fulfilled Abraham looked forward in expectation at “the city that has foundations [i.e., a city that is stable and endures] whose builder and creator is God” (Heb 11:10). In other words, the current unrealized aspects of God’s promise made Abraham look to the future for an eternal and eschatological realization of what had been promised.

The idea of faith as involving the belief that God can make the invisible visible and the impossible possible is seen in the birth of Isaac to the elderly Sarah and Abraham. Despite her inclination to disbelieve (see Gen 18:12), “by faith” Sarah “considered faithful him who had promised” (Heb 11:11). “So also from one man, and he moreover as good as dead, [descendants] were born, like the stars of heaven for multitude, and like the innumerable sand of the seashore” (Heb 11:12). Elderly Sarah and Abraham’s infertility was an important component of the “hostile environment” in which faith by definition must exist.

But the testing of Abraham’s faith did not stop with the problem of siring an heir. The testing of his faith reached its climax when God ordered him to offer up Isaac as a sacrifice (see Gen 22:1–2). In calling for Abraham to do this, God was in effect telling Abraham to end the life of the one through whom the promise would be realized. It was akin to destroying the promise. Despite this, “by faith Abraham offered up Isaac … his only son, of whom it was said, ‘Through Isaac shall your seed be called’” (Heb 11:17–18). Abraham’s reasoning at that time must have been: Even though God has called upon me to destroy the promise by sacrificing my son, if he is the one through whom the promise will be fulfilled, then God will have to raise him from the dead. Hence, the words of the author in Heb 11:19 that Abraham “considered that God was able even to raise [Isaac] from the dead.” The faith that believes that God has the power to make the nonexistent existent, the invisible visible, and the unrealized realized is the same kind of faith that believes that God has the power to make the dead live. Faith believes in the possibility, indeed the future reality, of resurrection.

A New Commentary on the Book of Revelation by Dr William Dumbrell

2011-06-25T20:21:00.031+10:00

On 21 June 2011 Redeemer Baptist Press held a book launch at historic Castle Hill House in Castle Hill, a suburb of Sydney, Australia, for Dr William J. Dumbrell’s latest commentary Revelation: Visions for Today: A New Covenant Commentary.

In launching his book, Dr Dumbrell spoke about the importance of seeing the bigger picture of the Bible, and the place of the book of Revelation in helping us in this task. Pursuing the basic message of the Bible is a task that Dr Dumbrell has actively been working on since the 1970s.

According to Dumbrell, we need to read the whole of the Bible before reading the parts. The Bible proclaims an ultimate destination for the human race, and tells us how to get there. The Bible traces a movement from Eden in the garden to Eden restored in the new Jerusalem. The various parts of the Bible, therefore, need to be read and understood in the light of this basic biblical-theological trajectory. In particular, the New Testament needs to be read with the Old Testament in mind, hence Dr Dumbrell’s desire to write commenaries on the New Testament despite his renown as a scholar of the Old.

“Evil, conquered by the cross, will finally be eliminated from human experience. New covenant believers will therefore experience the divine purpose and provision of life in a new Eden” (William J. Dumbrell, Revelation: Visions for Today: A New Covenant Commentary).

The Universal Rule of Christ according to Psalm 2

2011-06-20T19:20:00.005+10:00

The British Empire at its height commanded 20% of the world’s land surface and over a quarter of the world’s population. They used to say: “The sun will never set on the British Empire.” But historically with the fall of Singapore the British Empire started to unravel. This retreat of Britain from its colonies in Asia was completed in 1997 when Hong Kong was handed back to China.

The truth is that superpowers come and go. With the fall of the Soviet Empire, America is now the undisputed world superpower, but the question is: For how long?

I’m no prophet, but it seems like China is on its way to becoming the next world superpower. It’ll be interesting to see (provided the world doesn’t end in the meantime) who China sides with: with the West, or with the Muslim world whose oil is so important to China’s future development?

But whoever is the superpower of tomorrow, there’s one thing for certain: they won’t be a superpower forever.

King Nebuchadnezzar, the ruler of Babylon, which was the superpower of the Ancient Near East back in the sixth century B.C., is recorded in the Bible at the height of his reign walking on the roof of the royal palace in Babylon, proud of his achievements. Looking down upon the vista of his kingdom below, he said: “Isn’t this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” (Dan 4:30). But while these words were in the king’s mouth, a voice from heaven announced to him that he would shortly be driven out from human society to live in the fields like a wild animal, eating grass, “until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will” (Dan 4:31–32).

Nebuchadnezzar eventually learnt his lesson, and came to acknowledge that God’s “dominion is an everlasting dominion, and [that] his kingdom [alone] endures [forever]” (Dan 4:34); but sadly not everyone is willing to submit to this truth.

In Ps 2:1–3 David reflects upon the empty rebellion of the world against God. He begins in v. 1 by asking a question: “Why do the nations throng tumultuously and the peoples devise empty schemes?” The nations are like a thronging crowd or raging mob, raising their fists in the air against God. But why do they do this? Is it possible to successfully oppose the Creator of this universe? It doesn’t make sense. It’s a futile act.

And yet “the kings of the earth take their stand, and the rulers sit close together, against Yahweh and his anointed.” The nations are led in this rebellion by their rulers (Ps 2:2). Their rulers sit closely together to take counsel and to devise their plans. They are united in their opposition against God and his anointed one, the Messiah, which translated into Greek is the Christos, the Christ. And their plan is to rebel against God’s authority.

In Ps 2:3 the content of their plan can be seen: “Let’s tear apart their bonds, and cast their ropes from us.” Their obligations of submission and service to God are pictured as bonds to be broken, as ropes to be cast off.

If God is the Creator of the world, and if Jesus Christ is God’s chosen King, then it is simply the height of arrogance to think that we can escape the rule of God.

And yet the nations and their rulers still seek to rebel against God. Back in May 2011 the Australian Broadcasting Corporation program Foreign Correspondent presented a story on the persecution of religion in China. The story is called True Believers, and is well worth watching. The larger part of the story focuses on the rapid growth of Christianity in China, and some of the attempts of the Chinese government to hinder the growth of underground churches.

But whether it be state sponsored opposition like in China, outright prohibition like in Saudi Arabia, or the scoffing ridicule of atheistic progressives in the West, truth be told, thinking you can successfully rebel against God is totally ridiculous.

Psalm 2:4–6 records God’s response to such opposition: “He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord mocks them. Then he will speak to them in his anger and dismay them in his fury: ‘But I have installed my king upon Zion, my holy mountain.’”

God’s attitude to those who oppose him is basically to laugh at their puny efforts. Imagine what an elephant might think on learning that the bunch of ants in front of him was planning to capture and destroy him. An elephant scared of ants? Not likely.

Any such efforts on the part of human beings are but “empty schemes” as Ps 2:1 indicates. Seriously, you reckon you can take on God and win? Don’t you realize that God is the one who created this universe? He only has to open his mouth, and whatever he wills happens. To take on God is pure stupidity. Whoever opposes God will definitely lose.

But laughing at the puny efforts of humans to rebel against him isn’t the totality of God’s response. In Ps 2:5, David prophesies that one day God will act against those who oppose him. One day God will speak clearly, and reveal his anger. On that day God’s wrath against the rebellious will be evident for all to see; and, according to Ps 2:6, God will point to the rule of Christ in Zion, which is Jerusalem, as proof of his sovereignty.

Think about it: the world’s opposition to God and his Messiah reached its climax at the cross when God’s Messiah, Jesus, was brutally killed. The rulers of the Jews at the time, symbolizing the attitude of the nations to God, scoffed at the man hanging on the cross. If you’re the Son of God, come down off the cross! You saved others; can’t you save yourself? Come down, and we’ll believe you! The Roman soldiers also mocked him. But these mocking voices were not the last word. You think you can rebel against me? You think you can destroy the Messiah? Well then, you’ve got another think coming! Witness the resurrection of my Messiah! Witness his ascension into heaven! Witness his enthronement at my right hand on the throne of Messiah! Witness the expansion of his rule throughout the world!

According to Ps 2, the installation of the Messiah as King at the right hand of the Father in heaven is the key event in God’s response to human rebellion. It was only after great opposition that he came to the throne; but having ascended the throne of highest power in the heights of heaven, there is no power or authority on earth that will be able to oppose him. As the Son of Man prophecy in Dan 7 makes clear: “behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days, and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away; and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed” (Dan 7:13–14).

In Ps 2:7–9, David recalls the decree, the abiding law, that God has made concerning the Messiah: “You are my Son; today I have begotten you. Ask of me, and I will give the nations as your inheritance and the ends of the earth as your possession. You will break them with a rod of iron; like a potter’s vessel you will smash them.”

Psalm 2:7 links God’s installation of his King in Zion with God’s proclamation of the sonship of the Messiah. Jesus’ ascension and enthronement in heaven marks the commencement of his rule in Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem. Jesus’ ascension and enthronement in heaven is proof that he is the only begotten Son of the Father. As the Apostle Peter in his Pentecost sermon in Acts 2 observed, the outpouring of God’s Holy Spirit on the church is proof that Jesus has been “exalted at the right hand of God,” and that Jesus has been made “both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:33, 36). Jesus, the Son of Man is Christ, the Son of God. Jesus is God’s chosen King, and the fulfillment of the ancient Chinese ideal of Shèngmíng Tiãnzĭ (圣明天子), the enlightened Son of Heaven, the perfect ruler who brings peace and harmony throughout his kingdom.

Ascended on high, Jesus the Messiah has become the Son of God in power; and enthroned as the risen Lord in heaven, Jesus has the right, according to God’s plan, to ask God the Father to give him the nations of the world as his inheritance, the ends of the earth as his possession. This is why you have various languages represented when the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the church at Pentecost. This is why we have Jews, Samaritans, Greeks, and Romans responding to the gospel in the book of Acts. The book of Acts records the beginning of the Messiah’s work to take control over the nations, the commencement of the messianic work of bringing Planet Earth back in submission to the rightful rule of God.

According to Ps 2:9, the Messiah will exercise strong rule over the nations. Any nation that opposes the rule of Messiah will be broken with a rod of iron, and smashed like a piece of pottery.

All in all, Ps 2:7–9 describe the universal rule of Christ; and this is the political reality that is currently being worked out in human history. The big political issue of the world today isn’t the politics of East versus West, or the politics of climate change. The biggest political issue of the world today is responding appropriately to the new political reality that stems from the fact of the enthronement of Jesus as King over the whole of the Planet Earth after his ascension into heaven.

Now if it is true that Jesus is the King of the world, how should we respond? David spells this out in vv. 10–12 of this psalm.

According to Ps 2:10 the rulers of the world are to be wise and to be warned. The truth that Jesus is Lord has implications for the leaders of every nation on earth. It applies as equally to Prime Minister of England as to the President of the United States, and even the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China. Wisdom here involves sniffing the political wind, understanding who is the ascendant political power in the world today, and submitting oneself to this political power in genuine service. The rulers of the earth need to stop rebelling against the rule of God that God is exercising through Jesus.

And if this applies to the leaders of the world, it also applies to ordinary individuals. God wants all human beings to be wise. He wants us to understand the truth, and to repent of our feeble attempts at rebellion. If it is true that Jesus is the Christ, the King of the world, and that anyone who stubbornly opposes him will be crushed, then the wise response is obvious.

In fact, David spells out the proper response in Ps 2:11–12: “Serve Yahweh in fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way; for his anger burns quickly. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.”

God is strong and powerful. He is mighty and majestic. Realistically acknowledging the power and authority of God is to fear him. This fear leads us to submission and to service. And this is David’s strong recommendation in v. 11: “Serve Yahweh in fear”! Because God is the powerful Creator of everything, we need to submit to him, and serve him. God inspires fear in all who know him, but at the same time serving him is a wonderful privilege. Think about it: you are being invited to come before the King of creation to enter into his service. There is no higher calling! Pursuing this privilege, serving the one true God, is a joyful occupation; but one that we dare not take lightly. It is mingled with fear and trembling. God fills us with joy, but at the same time he is awesome and scary!

In Ps 2:12 David links this submission to God with submission to the Messiah. Serving God means kissing the Son. But what does it mean to kiss the Son? The kissing in view here is an act of obeisance. It’s like bowing down before the king. To kiss the Son is to acknowledge the superiority of the Son of God. It is an act of submission and a pledge of obedience to God’s chosen regent on earth.

And this is significance of Ps 2 for the world today. God calls upon everyone throughout the world to serve him by submitting to his Son, the Messiah.

In a nutshell, submission to Christ is what Christianity is all about. The central truth of Christianity is the confession that Jesus is Lord (Rom 10:9). God has decreed with a decree that cannot be altered that the world must submit to the Son of God, the anointed one, the Messiah. We cannot submit to God without submitting to the Son of God. We cannot experience true blessing without turning to Jesus as a our place of refuge and safety. As the author of Hebrews says in Heb 5:9: Jesus is “the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him.”

So the question for every person alive today is: Have you kissed the Son of God yet? Have you come in submission to Jesus Christ? Have you confessed that Jesus is Lord, and are you submitting today to his rule over your life?

Every single person on this planet has need of such submission, for this is the only pathway to blessing. David reminds us in Ps 2:12 that if we don’t submit to the Messiah, then we will be destroyed when God’s anger burns forth. God is slow to anger, but if we push him too far “his wrath is quickly kindled.”

In the light of the primary political reality of our world, the gospel message is a call for every single person living on Planet Earth today to confess that Jesus is Lord.

The truth is that Jesus is Lord. Jesus is King over the nations. This is a fact seen in the multi-ethnic nature of the church throughout the world. The Christian church is made up of people of different cultural backgrounds who are united under the one rule of Jesus the King. As the Apostle Paul has said: “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). From as far afield as the cathedral villages of Europe, the bustling cities of Asia, the great plains of Africa, and the sunburnt outback of Australia, there are people in every country on the face of our earth who know this truth: that Jesus is Lord. They have seen the new political paradigm, and understood that submission to Christ is the wise way forward and the key to blessing.

As Christian brothers and sisters in China and other countries know, at times confessing that Jesus is Lord is not an easy thing to do. But this is how things were even back in the beginning. To go around saying that Jesus is Lord was for the early Christians a potentially dangerous and subversive act, because it clashed with the political reality of that day, where Caesar, the Roman emperor, was ordinarily acknowledged as κύριος, i.e., as Lord. Many Christians suffered in those early days because Caesar did not like the fact that the Christians acknowledged someone apart from him as κύριος. How ironic that in the space of less than 300 years, the Roman emperor himself would come to acknowledge that Jesus indeed is Lord.

And surely history has proven Emperor Constantine right. Wherever you go on this planet, there are people who have come in obedience and submission, acknowledging that Jesus is the King.

What king in world history has had more subjects than King Jesus? What king in world history has been acknowledged as king by people of every country on this planet? History itself proves that Jesus is the Messiah, that he is the King of kings and Lord of lords. To swim against the tide of history is useless. The wise thing to do is to submit to Jesus as Lord and to serve him forever.

Jesus Our Swimming Instructor

2011-06-16T00:26:00.003+10:00

The dark bottle-green liquid pierced by the occasional shaft of sunlight. As a child I stood near the ferry terminals at the quay looking down into the watery green unknown. The image haunts me still.

How many of us have looked down into deep water, and thought, “I wonder what's down there”? It really is the dark unknown, the green liquid covering like a blanket an unknown world full of strange creatures and mottled light.

As a child nothing frightened me more than the thought of falling alone into this green unknown. The thought of everything below me. Below could see me, but I couldn’t see below!

And even though I’m grown up now, the thought of floating alone in the harbor still frightens me. The thought of my legs dangling below, with who knows how many fathoms down to the murky bottom.

If only it were just a thought and not reality!

Ever since our first parents believed the lie, and followed the serpent out into the green unknown, we’ve all been dreaming, just like shipwrecked men who satisfy their stomachs by dreaming of succulent dishes. We imagine that we’re really back on land, and that the water surrounding us is just a momentary unpleasantry akin to rain from a passing cloud.

Some cloud! A cloud that has overshadowed the false dream of human existence for thousands of years, since virtually the beginning.

But I’ve had enough of that dream that humanity can forge a better destiny for itself apart from its Creator. The dream’s had it. It’s as false an idea as a mouthful of gravel making a satisfying meal.

My legs are dangling below, and I know it. I know it, and I hate it. I know that I’m not the master of my own destiny that secular humanism says I am. This world and all its problems are too big for me, like the dark mass of the harbor below. And I want out. I want to walk on land, and not just dream about it.

Yet to think that there was one man who left his haven on the shore to plunge into the darkness of the deep to come to us and save us. He came to comfort us in the midst of the dark green unknown of life in a confusing world, and to teach us how to swim and how to reach God’s haven. Yet that we might understand more of what he has done for us, how he sacrificed his life to the deep that we might have safe passage to the shore. That we might see all the more that apart from him our bones are doomed to feed the creatures of the dark bottle-green liquid, to see that apart from a commitment to his way of life we have no hope whatsoever, our dreams simply delusions.

Friends, in this life it’s either sink or swim, and swimming is much to be preferred over sinking. Listen to words of your swim instructor. Listen to the words of Jesus. Follow his instructions, and swim with all of your might. For a time the green fathoms of hurt and confusion and sin and despair will still surround you; but you’ll be heading in the right direction, with Jesus to guide and encourage you, until you reach the safety of the eternal shore. And then finally we will be able … to rest.

Salvation in Jesus: A Summary of the Christian Gospel

2011-06-08T15:49:00.003+10:00

God is the Supreme Being in all of reality. He is eternal and all-powerful. He created everything in the universe, including us human beings. The first human beings originally lived in a holy garden in the presence of God, but they were responsible to obey God’s commandments in order to continue in the blessing of life until the fullness of eternal life came upon them.

But the first human beings rebelled against God, and fell into sin. God, who is holy and pure, expelled sinful humanity from his presence. The consequence of this is that the human race lost the blessing of eternal life, and we now must live in a chaotic and dangerous world that is under God’s curse.

But God, because of his love for the world that he has made, had a plan to restore the blessing of life to the world and to save sinful humanity. According to this plan, just over 2,000 years ago God himself entered into the world in the person of the Lord Jesus. While in the world, the Lord Jesus taught the truth and accomplished salvation, rescuing humanity from sin and eternal death. Jesus accomplished this salvation by sacrificing his sinless life through his death on the cross, in order to pay for our sins. On the third day after his death, the Lord Jesus came back to life from the dead, and appeared to his disciples during forty days, after which he ascended into heaven. Thanks to his ascension into heaven, humanity, with Jesus as our leader, is finally able to return into the presence of God and to experience the blessing of eternal life.

In the light of what God has done through Jesus, God now calls upon every person to receive salvation by submitting to the lordship of Jesus. Those who submit to Jesus receive the gift of God’s Holy Spirit, who enables them to experience the blessing of eternal life.

God has appointed a day when the Lord Jesus will return to earth in order to judge every person. Those among Jesus’ disciples who have been faithful will then enter into the fullness of the blessing of eternal life, whereas those disciples who have been unfaithful to Jesus, along with everyone else who has been in rebellion against God, will experience eternal punishment in hell.

In order to avoid eternal punishment, we need to receive salvation by submitting to the lordship of Jesus. Submitting to Jesus’ lordship can be summarized as involving three things: faith, repentance, and baptism.

(1) Faith is accepting the truth about Jesus in God’s plan of salvation as revealed in God’s word, the Bible (as summarized above).

(2) Repentance is acknowledging our sins before God, and endeavoring in his strength to abandon our sinful way of life, in order to live in a way that pleases God through obedience to his commandments.

(3) Baptism is the Christian rite of initiation. Through baptism, a person confesses one’s belief that Jesus is the King of the universe, and receives the salvation that Jesus has come to give. Through baptism, a person officially becomes a disciple of the Lord Jesus and a member of the Christian church. Baptism is ordinarily performed by a designated leader in the Christian community. After confessing one’s faith in Jesus as Lord, the person being baptized is immersed in water, or has water poured or sprinkled over one’s head, as a symbol of cleansing from sin, of the reception of the Holy Spirit, and new life.

Having submitted to Jesus as Lord through faith, repentance, and baptism, all Christians need to live as faithful disciples of Jesus. This involves persevering in faith and repentance until the end of one’s life. On the day of judgment those who have lived as faithful disciples of the Lord Jesus will receive their eternal resurrection bodies, and experience the fullness of life in the presence of God forever.

Tsedaqah Righteousness in Amos

2011-06-05T00:35:00.004+10:00

There are three instances of צדקה in Amos, and two instances of the adjective צדיק, but no instances of צדק as a noun or verb. In all three instances of צדקה, the noun is paired with משפט (justice). For Amos, it seems that צדקה is used primarily to denote judicial righteousness, or else active righteousness that has judicial justice at its core.

The first instance of צדקה in Amos is found in Amos 5:7. This verse is has some textual and exegetical difficulties. Taking the Masoretic Text as is—ההפכים ללענה משפט וצדקה לארץ הניחו—the verse seems to translate as “you who turn justice into wormwood, and set righteousness to the earth.”

Amos 5:1–17 is the third of three discourses in the middle of the book of Amos. These discourses can be delineated thanks to the recurrent expression “hear this word” in Amos 3:1; 4:1; 5:1. The third discourse can be further divided into a lament over the coming military defeat of Israel (5:1–3) and a call to repentance (5:4–17). The seek me and live refrain in 5:4, 6, 14 recalls the life language of Moses in Deuteronomy (e.g., Deut 30:19–20), but occurs here as a call to repentance. Israel was to seek Yahweh, but not at the illegitimate centres of worship at Bethel or Gilgal, or even at the shrine in Beersheba in Judah (5:5). In this context, 5:7 seems to function basically as a vocative expression of indictment. The call in 5:10–12, 15 to “establish justice at the gate” and to stop oppressing the poor suggests that the content of v. 7 is characterizing wealthy Israelite society as abusing the legal system, turning it into an instrument of bitter oppression over the poor and needy. If this is so, then the parallel of צדקה with משפט in v. 7 suggests that צדקה here particularly denotes judicial righteousness rather than the more general idea of active righteousness. Yet judicial righteousness cannot be totally divorced from active righteousness. Judicial righteousness is an expression of active righteousness in a judicial context, as well as being that which defends and fosters active righteousness within society.

This interpretation of the Masoretic Text makes good sense, but it should be noted that the LXX translation of Amos 5:7 is rather different: “the Lord is he who makes justice on high, and he has established righteousness in the earth.” The LXX takes κύριος as the subject of the clauses in the verse, and looks to have read ללענה as למעלה (εἰς ὕψος). In the end, I reckon that the use of ללענה in combination with צדקה in Amos 6:12 (see below) supports the Masoretic Text rather than the LXX at his point.

The next occurrence of צדקה in Amos occurs in the woe oracle (5:18–27) that follows the third discourse (i.e., 5:1–17). The coming day of Yahweh would be a time of judgment against those who do evil, meaning that the day of the Yahweh would actually be a day of “darkness … and gloom” for Israel (5:18, 20). The reason for this was because God was not pleased with Israel’s cultic worship (5:21–23). Why? Because their worship (apart from being exercised at various illegal shrines around the country) was hypocritical. This is evident from the content of 5:24 when Yahweh calls upon Israel to “let justice roll like water, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.” The practice of worshiping Yahweh without a genuine righteousness expressed in their way of life was to make a mockery of the cult and the relationship with Yahweh that was maintained through it. It is probably best to take צדקה here in the more general sense of active righteousness, although in the wider context—i.e., given the relative proximity of 5:24 to 5:7, and the use of ויגל (and let it roll) in 5:24 that harks back to the word play with הגלגל (Gilgal) and גלה יגלה (it will surely go into exile)—a denotation of judicial righteousness, or at least to see judicial righteousness as the primary focus of צדקה here, is also a strong possibility.

The final instance of צדקה in Amos occurs in Amos 6:12. The wording of the clauses that pair משפט and צדקה is quite similar to the reference from Amos 5:7: “Will horses run on a cliff, or will someone plow there with oxen? But you have turned justice into poison, and the fruit of righteousness into wormwood.” This verse occurs within an oath oracle (Amos 6:8–14) which speaks of the certainty of judgment upon the strongholds of Israel and “the pride of Jacob” (v. 8), which is most likely a reference to the city of Samaria. The similarity between this verse and Amos 5:7 suggests that צדקה as judicial righteousness is probably in focus, but once again the more general sense of active righteousness is not impossible.

Overall, how delimited צדקה is in these three instances in Amos is completely dependent on the context, and weighing up the context is often a משפט of probabilities.

Understanding the Old and New Covenants in Biblical Covenant Theology

2011-05-28T18:29:00.008+10:00

A biblical theology that is truly biblical must necessarily deal with the biblical concept of covenant. This means that a biblical theology that is truly biblical will necessarily be a kind of covenant theology. This is necessarily so because of the way in which God has used covenants to structure his relationship with Israel and indeed all of humanity.

When thinking of covenant theology, a question arises concerning the legitimacy of the system of theology involving the covenant of works and the covenant of grace that is taught in the Westminster Confession. My opinion is that the distinction between a covenant of works in the garden of Eden and a postlapsarian covenant of grace that is taught in the Westminster Confession is helpful provided it is understood and applied in a manner consistent with the biblical description of God’s prelapsarian and postlapsarian dealings with humanity. For example, it is not correct to assume that the human obligation of obedience (i.e., works) in the garden means that there was no such thing as non-redemptive grace in the garden. Furthermore, given that the Old Testament establishes the framework of the covenant theology of the Bible, any covenant theology that is truly biblical must be consistent with the Old Testament teaching on the covenants as revealed in various key texts such as the book of Deuteronomy.

If by a covenant of works we understand that there could be no blessing in the garden of Eden without perfect obedience to the word of God, then the term covenant of works can be a helpful concept. And if by the covenant of grace we understand that blessing in the postlapsarian world is conditional upon a positive but imperfect response to the word of God in the context of atoning grace (what the Westminster Confession calls faith), then this can also be a helpful term.

But there is more to the covenant theology of the Bible than just a distinction between a so-called covenant of works and a covenant of grace. As the advocates of new covenant theology assert, it should be recognized that the primary covenantal distinction in the Bible and in Paul is not the distinction between the so-called covenant of works and the covenant of grace, but the distinction between the old covenant in Moses and the new covenant in Christ. Yet the advocates of new covenant theology are also mistaken when they deny that the old covenant was a covenant of grace.

The old covenant versus new covenant distinction that is present in the Bible is ultimately a distinction between different administrations of God’s singular gracious dealings with his people. The old covenant is a covenant of grace because the offer of the forgiveness of sins in Christ was proleptically communicated to the righteous within Israel through the Mosaic sacrificial system. Because atonement was offered to Israel as part of the Mosaic sacrificial system, the old covenant must be distinguished from the Adamic administration under which there was no system of atonement but only the punishment of death in the case of sin. It is important to recognize, therefore, that the personal covenantal obligation of the people of Israel was not perfect obedience. Although it is true that no one can live in the presence of God without moral perfection, the grace of the old covenant is seen in the fact that this need for moral perfection was not required of the nation or of the individual members of the covenant per se, but graciously provided by God through the sacrificial system, which functioned as a means by which the perfect righteousness of Christ could be imputed proleptically to the old covenant saints.

But even though the old covenant was a covenant of grace, it is important to understand that God laid down a condition for the people of Israel that to benefit from the grace offered as part of the covenant the people were required to exhibit faith on both a national and an individual level, where faith is understood to mean a holistic commitment to the whole word of God as revealed through Moses and the prophets. Furthermore, it is necessary to understand that, because God’s old covenant revelation is characteristically described in the Old Testament as law, the proper holistic response of faith is frequently spoken of in the Old Testament (as it has been in orthodox Judaism throughout the centuries) as doing the law. This means that the old covenant is described in the Bible as being a gracious covenant that requires the works of covenant obedience (i.e., holistic covenant faith) on the part of Israel. In the context of the grace of atonement offered through the Mosaic sacrificial system, these works of covenant obedience consisted of a persevering commitment to the covenant with God and its stipulations. In other words, the old covenant was a conditional covenant of grace. The condition of the Mosaic covenant was faith; but this faith was understood in holistic terms, and primarily expressed using the language of hearing and doing, i.e., covenant obedience.

Despite the fact that the old covenant was a covenant of grace, it is also important to understand that the conditional nature of the old covenant meant that Israel’s lack of commitment to the Mosaic covenant on a national level resulted in the old covenant becoming a covenant of condemnation, with the law of Moses functioning primarily as a “law of sin and death” (Rom 8:2). Even those who had kept faith with God under the old covenant were caught up in the condemnation of the nation as a whole. They were unable to experience eschatological justification and the fullness of covenant blessing because of the covenant rebellion of the majority. In this way, the old covenant ironically but providentially proved to be a replication of the so-called (Adamic) covenant of works, even though it was a covenant of grace. Hence, Paul’s teaching that “the law [of Moses] was added to increase the trespass [of Adam]” (Rom 5:20), and that “by the works of the law all flesh will not be justified” (Rom 3:20). That is to say, because of Israel’s failure as a nation in keeping covenant faith with God (i.e, because of their failure to keep the law of Moses), the old covenant was unable to bring eschatological justification and the fullness of salvation and blessing to humanity.

But this failure of the old covenant to achieve the fullness of covenant blessing for humanity was part of God’s plan. The so-called pedagogical function of the law is properly to be found in the idea that the failure of Israel under the law of Moses highlights the need for the new covenant in Christ as the solution to the problem of human sin that is described in the Old Testament. There was grace present in the old covenant, but a greater work of God’s grace was necessary for the fullness of salvation to be achieved. This new work of grace through the new covenant in Christ was clearly prophesied in the Old Testament, where it is taught that God would establish a new covenant by sending Christ, his suffering but Spirit-filled Servant, to make atonement for God’s people, and to break the power of sin on the cross, who thereupon would pour out the Holy Spirit to effect the circumcision of the hearts of not only the people of Israel but Gentiles as well, so that many people of many nations might be brought to faith in Christ, and experience the grace of forgiveness from God, so that God’s promise of the blessing of the nations in Abraham might be fulfilled.

Because Old Testament prophecy speaks of the new covenant as effecting the proper response that was required of Israel but lacking under the old covenant, and because the new covenant is portrayed as being the fulfillment of the old covenant, the new covenant in Christ exhibits the same covenant dynamics as the old covenant. Thus, the condition for benefiting from the grace of God offered in Christ likewise is faith, but in the new covenant age this is to be understood as a holistic commitment to the whole new word of God as revealed through Christ and his apostles. This contrasts with the holistic commitment to God’s word in the law of Moses under the old covenant. In the transition from the old covenant to the new, there is, therefore, a change in the mediators and content of covenant law; but this is not to be understood as if Moses and Christ are opposed to each other. Old covenant law commanded that when the Messiah appeared, Israel and the nations must submit to his authority and obey his word (Deut 18:15, 19; Ps 2:10–12). With the coming of the new covenant in Christ, therefore, the old covenant has been superseded. Indeed, the old covenant has now become more comprehensively a covenant of condemnation than what it proved to be for old covenant Israel previously, because maintaining a primary allegiance to Moses even though the Messiah has come is to deny the lordship of Christ and constitutes rebellion against God. Hence, Paul’s teaching that justification is by faith in Christ and no longer by the works of the Mosaic law (Rom 10:5–6).

The new covenant, therefore, like the old covenant, is a conditional covenant of grace; but the new covenant will succeed where the old covenant failed precisely because Christ will work through the power of the Holy Spirit to ensure that the new covenant community (as a whole) will fulfill the covenant condition of holistic faith. Those individuals who exhibit the right response of faith under the new covenant experience the grace of justification in the present, and will (on condition on perseverance in faith) be justified by God on the day of judgment, and thereby qualified to live eternally in God’s holy presence, experiencing the fullness of salvation and covenant blessing forever more.

Tsedeq Righteousness in Ezekiel

2011-05-23T23:13:00.002+10:00

In a previous post (see “Tsedeq Righteousness in the Pentateuch”) we observed that the Hebrew noun צדק can denote what is right in a judicial context and also in business dealings. The noun צדק occurs four times in the book of Ezekiel, and it confirms the situation regarding צדק observed in the Pentateuch while adding a new sense to the word that is important in the Prophets and the Writings.

The first instance of צדק in Ezekiel occurs in Ezek 3:20 in the context of Ezekiel’s call to be a watchman over the house of Israel: “When a righteous man turns from his righteousness (מצדקו), and does iniquity, and I set a stumbling block before him, he shall die.” Turning from one’s צדק is linked here with doing עול (iniquity). Furthermore, as a result of such apostasy, “his righteous deeds (צדקתיו) which he has done shall not be remembered.” In this verse, therefore, צדק seems to denote right behavior.

In Ezek 45:10 צדק occurs three times in the one verse. In the context of the eschatological vision of Ezek 40–48 God says: “You shall have just balances, a just ephah, and a just bath.” The content of this verse is very similar to Lev 19:36: “You shall have just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin.” The effect of this is to portray the eschatological age as being one characterized by צדק. Weights and measures, and business transactions in general, will (in the age to come) reflect צדק, the quality of that which is right or correct.

Tsedaqah Righteousness in the Former Prophets

2011-05-17T00:33:00.018+10:00

The noun צדק does not occur in the Former Prophets, but the related term צדקה occurs twelve times in this section of the Old Testament canon. Previously (see “Tsedaqah Righteousness in Genesis” and “Tsedaqah Righteousness in Deuteronomy”) we have noted that צדקה can be used to denote right behavior (active righteousness), the legal status of being in the right that flows from right behavior (stative righteousness), or the judicial act of establishing what is right (judicial righteousness or justice).

In 2 Sam 8:15 David is described in ideal terms as being a king who “does justice and righteousness for all his people.” The king also functioned as the highest judge in the land, and was required to execute justice by pronouncing legal judgments that accord with God’s standards of what is right. This verse links righteousness (צדקה) very closely with justice (משפט). By coming to correct legal decisions, David did צדקה in the sense that his judicial pronouncements defended and established what was morally and legally correct for those who sought justice from his court.

צדקה also occurs on the lips of Saul’s grandson, Mephibosheth. When David returned to Jerusalem after the rebellion of Absalom had ended, Mephibosheth went to see David, and was questioned by David as to why he had not accompanied him when he had left Jerusalem while fleeing from Absalom. In response, Mephibosheth explained how his servant Ziba had told lies about him to David, but he was prepared for David to deal with his case however David saw fit: “my lord the king is as an angel of God, so do what is good in your eyes. For all my father’s house were nothing but dead men before my lord the king, yet you have set your servant among those who eat at your own table. What right (צדקה) therefore do I have to cry out again to the king?” (2 Sam 19:27–28). Mephibosheth’s צדקה at this point is his right to call for the execution of צדקה for himself personally on the basis that צדקה was lacking in his regard (on account of the injustice of Ziba’s slander). Having received mercy previously from the hands of David, Mephibosheth felt that he was in no position to demand צדקה from David this time around.

צדקה as active righteousness occurs in 1 Kgs 3:6. Here Solomon speaks in prayer to God concerning his father, David, who is described by Solomon as being someone who walked before Yahweh “in truth (אמת) and in righteousness (צדקה) and in the uprightness of heart (ישרת לבב).” An upright heart is a morally good heart; and the heart being the integrating center of the human psyche in biblical anthropology, a right heart naturally results in right behavior. Such צדקה is אמת in the sense of being that which accords with the accepted standard of behavior, i.e., behavior that actualizes what a person has obligated oneself to do. For David, his צדקה was his covenant faithfulness to God. As a member of Israel in covenant with God, David’s walking in righteousness consisted of him living in a manner consistent with the stipulations of the Mosaic covenant.

צדקה also occurs on the lips of the Queen of Sheba. The queen on her visit to Israel acknowledged that “Yahweh … made [Solomon] king in order to do justice and righteousness” (1 Kgs 10:9). The meaning of צדקה in this verse is simlar to 2 Sam 8:15 where משפט and צדקה are paired. One of the key functions of the king in Israel was to establish judicial righteousness in his personal legal decisions and throughout the nation as a whole.

The Reconstruction of the Pronunciation of the Divine Name Yahweh

2011-05-09T11:31:00.002+10:00

The scholarly consensus is that the divine name יהוה was originally pronounced as Yahweh. But what evidence is there to support the pronunciation of יהוה as Yahweh?

God’s self-indentification in Exod 3:14 as אהיה אשר אהיה strongly suggests that the divine name יהוה is related to the Hebrew verb היה (be), the older form of which had vav (i.e., waw) rather than yod as the second root letter, i.e., הוה. The third person masculine singular form of היה is יִהְיֶה. This suggests that יהוה may originally have had a pointing something like יִהְוֶה, which is a word of two syllables.

Taking יִהְוֶה as the starting point, there is quite a deal of evidence in the Hebrew Bible that the first syllable of יהוה should be similar to יָהּ. Overall there are three broad pieces of evidence for this.

Firstly, יָהּ occurs as the name for God in the Hebrew Bible in poetry, especially in the psalms (see Exod 15:2; 17:16; Isa 12:2; 26:4; 38:11; Ps 68:5, 19; 77:12; 89:9; 94:7, 12; 102:19; 115:18; 118:5, 14, 17–19; 122:4; 130:3; 135:4; 150:6. Hebrew poetry is known to be more conservative in terms of vocabulary, i.e., older lexical items tend to be preserved in poetry compared to prose. It should also be noted that the mappiq (or dot) in the ה indicates that the ה is taken to be a consonant rather than simply as a vowel letter.

Secondly the name יָהּ is preserved in the set phrase haleluyah (Ps 104:35; 105:45; 106:1, 48; 111:1; 112:1; 113:1; 115:17–18; 116:19; 117:2; 135:1, 3, 21; 146:1, 10; 147:1, 20; 148:1, 14; 149:1, 9; 150:1, 6). Appropriately the final word in the Psalter is הַלְלוּ–יָהּ. This set phrase is simply a masculine plural Piel imperative form of the verb הלל which takes the poetic name of God יָהּ as a direct object.

Thirdly, the name יָהּ is preserved in the names of individuals such as Elijah (אֵלִיָּ֫הוּ), Uzziah (עֻזִיָּה), Josiah (יֹאשִׁיָּ֫הוּ), Jeremiah (יִרְמְיָ֫הוּ), Zechariah (זְכַרְיָה), etc.

Thus, there is strong evidence that the first syllable of the divine name יהוה should sound like יָהּ. Modifying our starting point with this information gives the form יַהְוֶה, i.e., Yahweh. The qámets of יָהּ has reduced to pátakh in יַהְוֶה because the first syallable is closed and unstressed.

The main linguistic argument against the reconstruction יַהְוֶה is is that the instances of יָהּ cited above all occur either as an independent syllable or as a final syllable, and not as a first syllable. The only attested form of יָהּ that occurs as a prefix form is actually יְהוֹ, which has been preserved in names such as Joshua (יְהוֹשֻׁעַ), Jehoshaphat (יְהוֹשָׁפָט) and Jehoiakim (יְהוֹיָקִים). But standing against this is the transliteration of יהוה into Greek by Epiphanius (c. 315–403) and Theodoret (c. 393–c. 457) as ’Ιαβέ. If this transliteration is accurate, then Yahweh stands as being the most probable original pronunciation of the word יהוה.

The Mispronunciation of Yahweh as Jehovah

2011-05-06T19:15:00.012+10:00

The claim was made in a previous post (see “The Meaning of the Name Yahweh or Jehovah”) that Jehovah is the incorrect pronunciation of the Hebrew word יהוה, which the scholarly consensus reckons should be pronounced as Yahweh (see “The Reconstruction of the Pronunciation of the Divine Name Yahweh”).

The word Jehovah, despite its presence traditionally in many English translations of the Bible, is actually a nonsense word from the perspective of the Hebrew language. There is no such word as Jehovah in Hebrew. Jehovah is in reality a nonsense word because it is made up of the consonants of one word and the vowels of another.

The confusion stems from the Jewish tradition of qere and ketiv. The Aramaic word ketiv (written as כְּתִיב in Aramaic) denotes the uncorrected consonants of a problematic word that appears in the Masoretic text. כְּתִיב means it is written. The Aramiac word qere (written as קְרֵי in Aramaic) denotes the correct reading according to Masoretic manuscript tradition. קְרֵי means to be read. The qere is indicated in later Hebrew manuscripts and Hebrew Bibles by the sign ק in the margin. The consonants of the qere are written above the ק. They are to be viewed from the Masoretic perspective as constituting the consonants of the correct reading. The vowels of the qere are not written in the margin; but importantly are written in the body of the text together with the ketiv.

A good example of the way in which the qere and ketiv works is Lev 9:22. This verse has the form יָדַו in the body of the verse, and the qere form ידיו in the margin. The ketiv Thus, the qere is signaling that a yod has dropped out of the text during transmission. The qere together with the vowels written in the text gives the more regular form יָדַיו.

However, not all of the qere are written in the margin of the text. A large number of the more frequent instances of qere are treated as assumed knowledge. These qere are called perpetual qere.

And this brings us back to the divine name יהוה and the word Jehovah, because the most famous example of a perpetual qere is the divine name יהוה. As all Jews familiar with the Hebrew Bible know, the perpetual qere of יהוה is the word אֲדֹנָי (pronounced adonai), which means Lord or Master. The Masoretes, following Jewish practice, considered the divine name יהוה too sacred to pronounce safely, so they substituted אֲדֹנָי for יהוה when reading this word in the Scriptures.

Unaware of the existence of qere and ketiv in the Masoretic tradition, early translators of the Hebrew Bible read the ketiv of יהוה and the vowels of its qere as going together to form one word. When the consonants of יהוה (y + h + w + h) are combined with the vowels of אֲדֹנָי (shewa + khólem + qámets, which sounds like: e + o + a) , the word יְ | הֹ | וָה (yehowah) is the result. The name Jehovah, therefore, is simply the transliteration into Latin of the word that results from the confusion of the ketiv with the vowels of the qere of the divine name יהוה. The name Jehovah is not a real Hebrew word, and Jehovah is not an accurate pronunciation of the divine name יהוה.

The Immanuel Theme of the Bible Viewed through the Prism of Ezekiel 37:15–28

2011-04-27T12:29:00.006+10:00

One of the amazing things about Christianity is the idea that God created human beings to be his friends. Think about it: the Creator of this universe wants to be friends with you! That’s pretty amazing. We know that friendship is one of God’s intentions in creating the world, because of the final picture painted in the Bible in Rev 21–22, where God’s final goal for creation involves the eternal union of heaven and earth. The city of God, the new Jerusalem, will descend from heaven to be established on earth. As God says in Rev 21:3: “Behold, the dwelling of God is with humanity. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them.” This is the all-important Immanuel theme of the Bible. The word Immanuel or Emmanuel is a Hebrew expression that means God with us. The idea of God being with his people is the Immanuel theme of Scripture.

We are told in Rev 21:4 that as a result of God being with his people, “[God] will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away.” It’s a wonderful picture of harmony and peace.

But look at the world around you. What do you see? Do you see a world of unity and peace, a world where there is no more crying or death or pain? No, the world that we currently know is obviously not like that. There is so much pain, so many tears, so much death. Instead of peace and harmony, we see war and chaos. Instead of unity, we see disunity and hatred.

In the last few years, we’ve seen disunity at many levels throughout the world. Disunity between fundamentalist Islam and the West. Disunity between Israeli and Palestinian. In many nations there has been disunity in politics, and in the West there is a growing cleavage between people with conservative social values and those who are more progressive when it comes to social attitudes.

Our world is clearly characterized by disunity, and Christians are not immune to this. Within our churches, there’s not only division between denominations, but sadly even disunity within individual churches, when individual Christians are not able to live peaceably with one another. Within families, sadly there is often disunity too. Disunity between parent and child, disunity between husband and wife, disunity between brothers and sisters. If you’ve ever had a bad relationship or a falling out with someone, then you know how unhappy disunity can make you feel.

Disunity has been a human problem for many thousands of years … in fact, ever since Adam and Eve when Adam blamed Eve for making him eat the forbidden fruit. God’s people, Israel, were also not immune from the problem of disunity. In the year 930 B.C., the united kingdom of Israel under David and Solomon became divided into the kingdoms of Judah in the south and Israel in the north. The twelve tribes of Israel were now two tribes against ten.

Why did such a split occur? You might recall how after the death of King Solomon, his son, Rehoboam, took the advice of his young friends rather than the advice of the elders, and spoke harshly to the northern tribes when they were looking for some relief from the burden of labor that Solomon had exacted from them. You want relief? Well, I’ll have you know, my pinky is fatter than my father’s thighs! Rehoboam was going to make them work even harder. As a result of his foolish reply, the northern tribes rebelled and invited Jeroboam to be their king, and this was the beginning of the split between the northern and southern tribes of Israel.

We might be tempted to conclude on the basis of this that the split happened as a result of Rehoboam’s foolishness. It is true that Rehoboam’s foolishness was a cause, but it was not the ultimate cause. Rehoboam’s foolishness was actually a fulfillment of God’s word of judgment upon Solomon for leading Israel into idolatry. The ultimate cause of disunity and division in Israel stemmed from sin against God.

Disunity and division is never nice. When you argue with your husband or wife, or with your kids, when there’s conflict between friends, we all feel horrible. Certainly the division and conflict that we see coming out of many parts of the world whenever we turn on the telly also makes us feel sick, particularly when we see shocking injuries and death as the result of war. Sometimes the state of the world leads us to the point of despair.

It’s normal to feel horrible in the face of such a disunited and divided world. But the disunity and division that we see around us, in our world, in society, even in our churches, ought not make us despair totally. For the good news is that God is committed to bringing unity out of disunity, and harmony out of division.

Ezekiel 37:15–28 is just one example of a passage of Scripture that gives us a wonderful assurance that disunity and division will not endure forever in God’s plan for the world. The word of the Lord came to Ezekiel, and called him to take two sticks; on one, he was to write Judah and on the other the word Joseph (Ezek 37:15–16). The name Joseph here represents the northern kingdom of Israel, as Joseph was the father of Ephraim, the largest of the tribes of the northern kingdom. After taking hold of these two sticks, Ezekiel was to place them together to become one stick, and then to hold this united stick in his hand (Ezek 37:17).

This action was an action of prophetic force. The two sticks joined as one in Ezekiel’s hand was prophetic of the reunion of Judah and Israel in God’s hand in the outworking of history. It is to be noted that the sticks were not just placed together, but that they were to be held together so as to become one stick (Ezek 37:19). As Ezekiel held this unified stick in his hand, God was making a statement: not only would the divisions within God’s people be healed, but the disunity and distance that existed between God and his disobedient people would also be overcome.

As noted above, the division between Judah and Israel was ultimately caused by sin. Division among the people of God is always symptomatic of a prior division between God and human beings somewhere. When Cain was unhappy with God, what happened? He killed his brother Abel. Likewise the disunity in the world today fundamentally stems from the disunity that exists between humanity and God.

For God’s people of old, disunity and division was quite obvious. Not only was there division between the kingdom in the north and the kingdom in the south, but as God’s people continued to sin against God without any real repentance, it came to the point in time when God’s patience had run out. God had put up with Israel for over 800 years: from the time of the exodus rescue out of Egypt to the time of the defeat and exile of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah at the hands of the Assyrian and Babylonian armies respectively.

The exile of God’s people from the promised land was a reversal of the exodus. Israel had originally been saved by God from slavery in Egypt with the purpose that they would go and live in God’s presence, serving him in the Holy Land; but now like Adam in the garden of Eden, because of disobedience, Israel had lost the right to live in God’s presence. The exile of Israel and Judah to lands over a thousand km away from the promised land is indicative of the division that existed in their relationship with God. They were now distant from God in more ways than one: not only distant physically from Jerusalem, which was the place where God specially revealed his presence in the temple; but they were distant from God spiritually as well.

But distance and division is not what God longs for. Thankfully God’s plan for his people and for the world as a whole is for disunity and division to be rectified. This is Ezekiel’s message in Ezek 37:15–28. The joining of two sticks, one representing Judah, the other Israel, symbolizes the reunion of God’s people under the rightful and eternal rule of the Davidic King. Ezekiel 37:21–23 records a series of divine promises:

“Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all around, and bring them to their own land. And I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. And one king shall be king over them all, and they shall be no longer two nations, and no longer divided into two kingdoms. They shall not defile themselves any more with their idols and their detestable things, or with any of their transgressions. But I will save them from all the backslidings in which they have sinned, and will cleanse them; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.”

This is a promise by God that he would bring his wayward people back. God planned to cleanse his people of their sins, and they would dwell obediently and permanently in the Holy Land as the people of God. God would make “an everlasting covenant” of peace with them, and bless them, and dwell among them, with his sanctuary and presence in their midst … forever more.
God’s promises continue in Ezek37:24–27:

“My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall walk in my rules and be careful to obey my statutes. They shall dwell in the land that I gave to my servant Jacob, where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children's children shall dwell there forever, and David my servant shall be their prince forever. I will make a covenant of peace with them. It shall be an everlasting covenant with them. And I will set them in their land, and multiply them, and set my sanctuary in their midst forever more. My dwelling place shall be with them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.”

Do you see what God is promising here? There would be one king, one shepherd over the people of God. This shepherd king would led the people of God in the way of obedience as part of an eternal covenant of peace, and the truth of Immanuel would be realized.

When we realize that this is a prophecy of what God would achieve through Jesus, surely we must marvel at the way in which God has been working towards the fulfillment of his plan of Immanuel. And even more so to think that we who are living in the world today have seen the fulfillment of this prophecy in the Lord Jesus. The New Testament tells us that Jesus is the promised Davidic King, the one who has come to bring about not only unity between God’s people, but also unity between God’s people and God himself! In Christ Jesus, the division between us and God has been overcome, and unity restored; and this is why there is unity between God’s people in Christ, whether they be Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female. The unity that our world longs for, this is what God is bringing about through Jesus, the suffering Spirit-filled Servant Shepherd King.

The restoration of unity between God and humanity is expressed particularly clearly in the expression they will be my people, and I will be their God. This expression can be found twice in Ezek 37, once in v. 23, and once in v. 27. This expression, or slight variations on it, occurs some fifteen times in the Bible, and five times in Ezekiel. So it is apparent that the Immanuel theme is quite an important idea in the book of Ezekiel relatively speaking.

And when it comes to Immanuel, we ought to note that the expression is God with us and not us with God. The stress in the Bible is on God coming to be with us, not on us going to be with him. The Lord Jesus came down into our world in order to take us up with him into the very presence of God, and this involves Jesus coming again to bring about the full unification of heaven and earth. The picture in Rev 21–22 is heaven coming down to Earth in order that our world might become “heaven on earth.” The way the Bible puts it, God actually created Planet Earth to be the palace or temple where he would come to dwell with his people eternally.

Often as Christians, we tend to think that when we die, we go to be with God in heaven and … that’s about all there is to it. After we die, we exist as disembodied souls in heaven forever more. Well, it’s true that upon death, the souls of Christians go to be with God in heaven; but from the Bible’s point of view, going as souls to be with God in heaven is not the end of the story. For just as Jesus died and was raised from the dead, so too believers will be raised from the dead, and our souls will be joined to our resurrection bodies to live together in bodily form with all of God’s people ultimately not in heaven up there but in heaven down here.

Viewed in the light of the wider purposes of God, it is also possible to say that bringing heaven to earth is actually the main reason why Jesus came in the flesh. It is true that Jesus had to became a man in order that he might die for us so that we might be saved from our sins, but this important reason is not the only reason why Jesus became a human being. The fact is that Jesus’ incarnation was an important part of God’s plan from the very beginning, because, even apart from the problem of human sinfulness, God has always had the intention of living with his people in his dwelling place on earth.

This brings us to one of the other amazing truths of Christianity, which is that, in creating a physical world, God had the intention that one day he would come to dwell in this physical world in a physical way in the person of the Lord Jesus, our Immanuel. The physical presence of God in human form is what the Bible calls the image of God. God’s ultimate plan for this world is for his dwelling place to be established on earth, for Christ, the visible image of invisible God (Col 1:15), to return to dwell in our midst forever more in a renewed world.

The siginificance of this for the human race is that, through Jesus, God is with us. Through Jesus, the Immanuel plan of God has been fulfilled. This means that, through Jesus, disunity and division has been overcome. Sure, the world around us is still racked with conflict and discord, but the fundamental change from disunity to unity has taken place through the Lord Jesus, through his death and resurrection. Jesus has extinguished the chaos and disorder of death through the restorative power of his resurrection. As a result, in God’s plan, the world as we see it today is not the world as it will be.

Even though we still do not yet see a world of perfect peace and harmony, we need to remember that the goal of unity and harmony that God has for his world has in principle been achieved with Jesus’ resurrection and ascension into heaven, and God has promised that the fullness of Immanuel will be achieved at the second coming of Christ, when God will return to be with his people forever more.

The truth of Immanuel means that, one day, the followers of Jesus will experience life in a world where disunity and division will be no more, a world in which there is no more pain, no more crying, no more sickness, no more death. I hope you’ll agree that, if you are a Christian, this is something amazing to look forward to.

David Livingstone, the famous Scottish missionary and explorer who served the Lord among what were usually hostile tribes in southern Africa in the mid-nineteenth century once wrote about what sustained him through all the difficulties that he had had to face. “Would you like me to tell you what supported me through all the years of exile among a people whose language I could not understand, and whose attitude to me was always uncertain and often hostile? It was this: ‘Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” On these words I staked everything, and they never failed.” David Livingstone staked everything upon the truth of Immanuel, and it never failed him.

So, whatever your situation in the world, whatever the suffering, whatever the pain, whatever the confusion, whatever the disappointment, if you are a follower of Jesus, you need not despair! Because God is with you! The truth is that, in Christ, the Immanuel, God is with us! He is with his people now through the power of his Holy Spirit, yet we look forward to the day when we shall see him face to face, when he will be physically present with his people forever more in a world where disunity and division and disease and death no longer exist.

In Christ, God is with us!

The Concept of Resurrection in the Old Testament with Special Reference to Ezekiel 37:1–14

2011-04-22T00:18:00.009+10:00

Is there such a thing as life after death? Scientific atheism, which is growing in popularity in the West these days, says no; but those who believe that death is the end of a person’s existence are in the minority, historically speaking. Apart from some of the ancient Greeks, most people have believed in some kind of life after death.

But what about the orthodox Hebrews of the historical period of the Old Testament? What did they believe about life after death? Some people think that the Old Testament does not say much about life after death. There are also scholars who say that the concept of resurrection was only a new development relatively later on in the history of the Old Testament, and that resurrection was an idea that was borrowed from other ancient Near Eastern cultures, quite possibly from the Zoroastrian religion of the Persians.

Now it is true that the teaching about life after death in the Old Testament is not systematically developed, but the number of passages in the Old Testament that give voice to a hope and trust in God for deliverance from death is by no means small. The Old Testament saints believed that upon death the soul of the deceased went down to a place called Sheol which is often translated in our English Bibles as the pit or the grave, or in Chinese as 阴间 (yīnjiān), the dark place.

The orthodox ancient Hebrews believed in Sheol. They believed that there was a place that the soul of the dead person went to after the death of the body. But existence in Sheol should not really be described as life after death. As far as the Old Testament is concerned, although the souls of the dead had a kind of existence in Sheol, this existence after death was not life!

Existence in Sheol was not considered to be life for a number of reasons: because there is no praise of God in Sheol (Ps 6:5); and because it is a dark and dreary place, distant from God (Ps 88:10–12). As such, Sheol was not considered to be an abode fitting for the righteous, but is properly the appointed destination for the wicked and foolish (Ps 9:17; 49:13–15).

But the hope that the Old Testament believers had was that Yahweh was the one who controlled the movement of souls in and out of Sheol. Like an air traffic-controller who determines which plane comes into the airspace around an airport, which planes come in to land and which planes take off, God is viewed in the Old Testament as being the person who determines not only who goes down into Sheol, but also who gets to get out of that dark and dreary abode.

God has the power to preserve a person’s life by keeping them from descending into Sheol; but as we know, death is one of the few certain things in life. This means that God’s usual practice is to allow people (one day) to descend into Sheol. But the firm hope of the Old Testament saints was that although we might die, God is able to raise or redeem people up from Sheol with the purpose that those so redeemed might, as Ps 116:9 says, “walk before Yahweh in the land of the living.”

There are many psalms where the psalmist trusts in God to deliver him from death. In Ps 49:15, the psalmist says full of confidence: “God will ransom my soul from the power of Sheol.” In Ps 27:13, the psalmist says: “I believe that I shall see the goodness of Yahweh in the land of the living!” And Ps 37:29 says that “the righteous will be preserved for ever” and “will possess the land and dwell in it for ever.”

In other words, the Old Testament hope for life after death was the hope of life lived out in the presence of God in the Holy Land. The Old Testament saints had the hope of experiencing life in the land of the living, which involved being in God’s presence forever more. The Old Testament saints believed that God had promised that those who walk in his way would, after death, come to live life in the world again such that their relationship with God might continue.

But how could this idea of experiencing life in the land after death be fulfilled, if not by way of resurrection? The Old Testament belief in the restoration of the soul of the righteous dead to life in the land of the living clearly implies resurrection. As it says in Ps 30:3: “O Yahweh, you have brought up my soul from Sheol; you restored me to life from among those who go down to the pit.” Being saved up out of the grave is basically the language of resurrection.

This concept of life through resurrection is something that is clearly seen in Ezek 37:1–14. Here the prophet Ezekiel is given a vision concerning the restoration of Israel, and the interesting thing about it is that it is pictured in terms of a large-scale resurrection.

At the commencement of the vision, Israel is pictured as many dry bones lying scattered across the ground in a valley (Ezek 37:1–2). Then God asked Ezekiel, “Can these bones live?” Ezekiel wasn’t sure, but he knew that God knew (Ezek 37:3). Then God commanded Ezekiel to prophesy. God said that, as the bones heard the word of God, they would be moved by the Spirit and arranged in place, then joined by sinews, and covered with flesh, and then covered with skin (Ezek 37:4–6).

So Ezekiel did as he was commanded. He pronounced God’s word over the dry, lifeless bones; and as he prophesied, “there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, and the bones came together, bone to its bone” (Ezek 37:7). The sinews, flesh, and skin linked and wrapped the bones into human form; but strangely the bodies were not alive (Ezek 37:8). God called upon Ezekiel to prophesy again, to summon the Spirit to give life to the bodies (Ezek 37:9). So once again Ezekiel did as he was commanded, and the Spirit obeyed the call. The Spirit gave breath to the bodies, and “they came alive and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army” (Ezek 37:10).

Ezekiel 37:1–14 is a vision of the resurrection power of the word of God. God can make dead bones live! And the purpose of this vision? From Ezek 37:11 it is clear that God gave this vision to Ezekiel in order to encourage the people of Israel who had come to despair of life because they were experiencing God’s judgment upon the covenant rebellion of Israel. They had lost hope, but their situation wasn’t truly hopeless. What about the life-giving power of the word of God, the very same word that created this universe back in the beginning? The life-giving of the word and Spirit of God means that Israel could have hope for the future. Specifically, this vision was also a promise, a promise that God would raise them from their graves and restore them back to life back in their own land:

“Behold, I will open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel. And you shall know that I am Yahweh, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am Yahweh; I have spoken, and I will do it” (Ezek 37:12–14).

All of us are getting on in life … some of us perhaps more than others. We human beings all usually hope that death will be some time in coming, but the truth is that we never know when or how death will come upon us. Whether we like or not, waiting at the end of life for all of us is a dreadful reality … death. Naturally no one likes the thought of having to die. The English philosopher, Francis Bacon, once said, “Men fear death as children fear to go into the dark.”

Stepping out into the dark unknown is scary; but as we face death, as we look into the dark abyss, Christians need not be like those who, as the Apostle Paul said, “grieve as others do who have no hope” (1 Thess 4:13). Christians are not like Theocritus, the Greek poet of the third century B.C. who said: “There is hope for those who are alive, but those who have died are without hope.” Being without hope is not true for the Christian. In the face of death, Christians have the hope of life. And this isn’t just wishful thinking, a kind of denial of reality. This hope is based on the reality of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, and on the reality of the life-giving power of the Creator of this universe.

Jesus through his own resurrection has broken the hold of the power of death over God’s creation. Furthermore, the Lord Jesus has said that “the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live” (John 5:25). It is because of the power of the word of Almighty God that one day the bona fide members of Christ’s church, like Israel, will be restored to life in the land of the living.

The famous preacher Martin Lloyd-Jones once described the early Christians who often faced the prospect of a horrible death in periods of severe persecution, as being able to “face death with a smile.” Obviously they were not necessarily literally smiling when they died, but they did die with hope in their hearts. They died knowing that not only would they go upon death to be in God’s presence spiritually, but more importantly that (at Christ’s return to earth) God would act to raise them from the dead, and to restore them to life in the land of the living, where they would live in God’s presence and experience blessing forever more. That is the only way in which the early Christians could face death with a smile.

But what about us? As you face the awful reality of death, and your own death in particular, do you have hope for life after death in your heart? I hope you do. Christians can have a sure hope like no other people have, a hope that is backed up by the reality of the resurrection of Jesus.

The fact of the matter is that God has promised life to those who follow Jesus Christ, and life he will give to such people. God will definitely act to restore his people to life in the land of the living. He did that for Jesus, and he will do it also for us who believe. Believers may have to wait a while until they experience the fullness of this life, but in God’s good timing one day they will experience resurrection and eternal blessing in the presence of God in a renewed world. The God who brought life out of nothing back in the beginning is the God who brought life out of death in the resurrection of Jesus, and the God who will bring life out of death at the end of time when Jesus returns to judge all people.

Just as Ezekiel’s prophecy gave hope to the downhearted people of Israel, so too the word of God gives hope to people today. The gospel, at the heart of which stands the resurrection of Christ, is a prophetic promise that what God did for Jesus, so too he will do for those who are followers of Jesus. So whatever happens to you in the future, if you are a disciple of the Lord Jesus, you can face all things, even death, with the hope of eternal life in your heart. The resurrection of Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament hope of deliverance from Sheol and eternal life in the land of the living.

The Meaning of the Name Yahweh or Jehovah

2011-04-15T00:31:00.010+10:00

Yahweh is the most probable reconstruction of the divine name יהוה (see “The Reconstruction of the Pronunciation of the Divine Name Yahweh”). This name (pronounced incorrectly as Jehovah—see “The Mispronunciation of Yahweh as Jehovah”) is considered by Jews to be the supreme name of God, so sacred that they dare not pronounce it. Instead of speaking the name יהוה they substitute the name Adonai, which means Lord or Master. The Septuagint, the early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, followed this tradition, and translated יהוה as κύριος, which means lord. From this Jewish usage has come the tradition followed in most English translations of the Bible where יהוה is translated as LORD or the LORD (i.e, the three letters o r d in LORD are written in small capitals).

The tradition of avoiding the pronunciation of God’s name is understandable—the sin of blasphemy is a serious sin—but at the same time there numerous psalms which actually call upon God’s people to bless or praise the name of Yahweh (e.g., Ps 113:1–3; 116:4, 13, 17; 129:8; 135:1; 148:1, 5, 13). Furthermore, by avoiding the name, the meaning of the name Yahweh is masked, and an opportunity to understand an important aspect of the character of God is potentially lost.

So what does the name Yahweh mean? The word יהוה is associated in Exod 3:14 with the Hebrew expression אהיה אשׁר אהיה, which means I am who I am or I will be who I will be. אהיה (ehyeh) is simply the first person singular form of the Hebrew imperfect verb היה (hayah), the Hebrew verb to be. The third person masculine singular imperfect form of היה is יהיה (yihyeh), which in turn looks and sounds like it is related to the divine name Yahweh. It seems, therefore, that the expression אהיה אשׁר אהיה is a word play on the divine name. This suggests in turn that the name Yahweh originally meant he is. Yahweh is not so much the great I Am but the great He Is.

But in what sense is Yahweh the great He Is? Some have suggested that the name Yahweh communicates the eternal existence of God. While it is true theologically that Yahweh is an eternal being, this is not the best explanation of the sense of the name Yahweh.

The expression I will be with you in Exod 3:12 preempts the expression I am who I am in Exod 3:14. This suggests that the meaning of the name Yahweh is (in part) connected with the idea of God being present with his people.

But there is more to the meaning of the name Yahweh than simply the idea of God’s presence with his people. In Exod 6:2 God says to Moses that he “appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty; but by [his] name Yahweh [he] did not make myself known to them.” Some people have suggested in the light of this that the patriarchs did not know God by the the name Yahweh. But this contradicts Gen 4:26 where it says “at [the time of Seth] people began to call upon the name of Yahweh.” Genesis 4:26 suggests that very early on in human history the name Yahweh was known by human beings, and used in the worship of God. We also have the name Yahweh used on the lips of Noah (Gen 9:26), Abraham (Gen 12:8; 14:22; 15:2, 8; 21:33; 22:14); Sarah (Gen 16:2, 5); the angel of Yahweh (Gen 16:11); and other angels (19:13). We also have Yahweh identifying himself as Yahweh to Abraham (Gen 15:7), or using the name to refer to himself (Gen 18:14; 22:16). So, if the biblical text is accepted as being an accurate record of historical reality at these points, then clearly the patriarchs knew and employed the divine name Yahweh.

According to Exod 6:2–8, the significance of this name would be revealed through the events of the exodus. God spoke to Moses and said to him:

“I am Yahweh. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty; but by my name Yahweh I did not make myself known to them. I also established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they lived as sojourners. Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the people of Israel whom the Egyptians hold as slaves, and I have remembered my covenant. Say therefore to the people of Israel, ‘I am Yahweh, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from slavery to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment. I will take you to be my people, and I will be your God, and you shall know that I am Yahweh your God, who has brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. I will bring you into the land that I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. I will give it to you for a possession. I am Yahweh” (Exod 6:2–8).

The idea that God appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai (rather than Yahweh) is derived from the language used at various points in Genesis. God appeared to Abraham in Gen 17:1, and identified himself as El Shaddai. In Gen 28:3 Isaac blesses Jacob by the name El Shaddai. Jacob had wanted to know God’s name (Gen 32:29); but God appeared to him shortly thereafter, identifying himself to Jacob as El Shaddai, and changing Jacob’s name to Israel (Gen 35:9–11; see also Gen 48:3).

The name El Shaddai communicates something of the destructive potential of God and his power, but Yahweh was going to reveal a different aspect of his character through what he was about to do for the people of Israel who were at that time being oppressed by the Egyptians. But how would the events of the exodus reveal the significance of the name Yahweh?

It is true that God’s power would be revealed through the events of the exodus (see Exod 9:16; 14:31), but God’s word to Moses in Exod 6:2–8 emphasizes how God’s deliverance of Israel from slavery in Egypt was going to be in fulfillment of the promises of the covenant that God had entered into with Abraham, Isaaac, and Jacob previously. Yahweh would keep his word. He had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that he would deliver their descendants from oppression, and take them to the promised land. This was what Yahweh was about to fulfill.

In this way, the exodus deliverance was going to show that God keeps his promises, and this lies at the heart of the meaning of the name Yahweh. God is I am who I am in the sense of I will do as I have promised. In the exodus, therefore, Yahweh displays the meaning of his name, the Ever-Faithful God, the God who keeps his promises.

Yahweh = He Is (Faithful)

What is the New Covenant? The Concept of the Covenant of Peace in Ezekiel 34

2011-04-11T11:33:00.006+10:00

Disoriented, distressed, and perhaps even depressed. Exiled to Babylon, Ezekiel and his countrymen would have been wondering: How did this happen to us? What’s gone wrong? Why have we lost our land? Why have we been exiled?

When things go wrong, when tragedy strikes, it’s natural to ask the question why. But often when we ask that question, sadly there isn’t a clear or satisfactory answer. Like when a child is born with some kind of defect, or when people lose their lives in accidents. The scientists or the police can often explain how, but the question of why still remains. Why? Sometimes we don’t know why. But for Israel, the situation was different. For them, the why of their situation was very clear … because God wanted it to be clear. God sent prophets to the people to clearly point out why. And the answer that the Old Testament prophets gave was crystal clear. Israel was in exile because Israel hadn’t been living in accordance with her obligations under the covenant.

Ezekiel 34 explores an important aspect of this covenant failure. Israel is pictured in this chapter as a flock of sheep. Her leaders are pictured as shepherds. Shepherds are supposed to look after the sheep, but that is not how the majority of the leaders of Israel had acted. Instead of taking care of the sheep, the leaders of Israel had been using the sheep for their own benefit. Instead of feeding the sheep, they had been feeding off them.

In Ezek 34:3–5 God indicts the shepherds of Israel:

You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat ones, but you do not feed the sheep. The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them. So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they becme food for all the wild beasts. My sheep were scattered; they wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. My sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none to search or seek for them.

That is, except for God. The kings of Israel might have led the people astray; but if an important part of the failure of Israel could be linked to ungodly shepherds, then the solution was for God himself to be Israel’s shepherd. This solution is found in Ezek 34:11–15 where God says:

I, I myself will search for my sheep, and I will seek them out. As a shepherd seeks out his flock when he is among his sheep that have been scattered, so will I seek out my sheep, and I will rescue them from all places where they have been scattered … And I will bring them out from the peoples and gather them from the countries, and will bring them into their own land. And I will feed them on the mountains of Israel … I will feed them with good pasture, and on the mountain heights of Israel shall be their grazing land. There they shall lie down in good grazing land, and on rich pasture they shall feed on the mountains of Israel. I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep.

Here we have God promising that he personally would come to take over the role of leadership in Israel. And this is connected in Ezek 34:23 with God establishing over Israel “one shepherd, [his] servant David,” who would feed the sheep, and be their shepherd.

In the light of Ezek 34:23 it is clear that when Jesus came proclaiming himself as the Good Shepherd, he wasn’t just picturing himself as a shepherd because he liked sheep, or because he thought that it was a good metaphor. Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd” because he wanted his opponents and the Jewish people to understand that he was the fulfillment of Ezek 34. He was the shepherd king, of the line of King David, who has come to bring God’s people back.

And it is significant that this time of God himself coming to seek and to save his lost sheep is connected in Ezek 34:25 with the idea of “a covenant of peace.”

Covenant is a concept that is very important for an understanding of our relationship with God, and for understanding the overall message of the Bible; but sadly the idea of covenant isn’t heard very often in churches today. In fact, the word covenant isn’t used much at all in the whole of the English language these days, except perhaps in the fields of law and theology. But when we read the Bible and want to understand God’s plan for the world, we have to deal with the term covenant. The word occurs some 301 times in the ESV translation. The Hebrew word for covenant (ברית) occurs 286 times in the Old Testament. So if you’re reading the Bible, you’re bound to encounter the idea of covenant.

But what is a covenant? The history of this word in English goes back to the Old French word convenant which means coming together. In biblical usage, a covenant is basically an arrangement between two parties wherein one or both of the parties solemnly bind themselves to act in a certain way within a relationship. The word translated as covenant in our Bibles can also be translated as treaty, alliance, pact, or compact. In the ancient world covenants were often legally-binding, written agreements that spelled out the privileges and obligations of each party in the relationship. And usually, as part of such an agreement, the parties committed themselves to faithfully keep their obligations to each other by placing themselves under the threat of a penalty, in the form of an oath or curse, and this would often be symbolized by the slaughter and cutting up of a sacrificial animal.

And this is exactly the kind of relationship that Israel had with God. God and Israel had entered into an agreement with each other about the nature of their relationship at Mount Sinai, after God had rescued Israel out of slavery in Egypt. God and Israel entered into a covenant with each other. The ceremony that took place at that time is recorded in Exod 24. This covenant was renewed on the plains of Moab before Israel entered the promised land after the forty years wandering in the wilderness. This renewal and expansion of the covenant on the plains of Moab is recorded in the book of Deuteronomy.

This covenant, which the New Testament calls the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14), was a legally-binding written agreement between God and Israel in which God promised to bless Israel on condition of Israel’s obedience and to punish her on condition of disobedience. Moses makes this clear in the book of Deuteronomy. At the conclusion of the final sermon that he ever preached, Moses called out to the people:

Look, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of Yahweh your God that I am commanding you today, by loving Yahweh your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and Yahweh your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of. But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish (Deut 30:15–18).

The book of Deuteronomy testifies that obedience would lead to life and blessing, but disobedience would lead to the fulfilment of the curses of exile and death. If Israel kept God’s commandments, that is, if they were committed to following God’s word in their life, then they would experience the blessing of being God’s people living in the Holy Land.

Now some Christians think that it was impossible for Israel to keep this covenant with God, but this is to forget how God provided a means for the forgiveness of sin as part of the covenant itself. The different animal sacrifices that could be offered at the temple (the burnt offering, the sin offering, and the guilt offering) all had atonement or reconciliation as a significant part of their function. The old covenant made provision for the forgiveness of sin. It was a covenant of grace. But despite this, the old covenant still proved to be a catastrophic failure on a national level. Because of Israel’s lack of commitment to God and his way, being led astray (as we see in Ezek 34) by ungodly leaders, the curses of the covenant came down upon Israel, the climax of which was exile to a foreign land. Because Israel was not holy as God is holy, they lost the privilege of living in the Holy Land.

The consequences were tragic. Famine, death, destruction, exile. Yet, in the midst of this awful tragedy, God never gave up on his people. In a quite wonderful way, at the lowest ebb of Israel’s relationship with God, God continued to send prophets to his people to announce a period in the future when Israel would be restored to life in a perfect and permanent relationship of obedience to God. God would not abandon his people to the punishment they deserved. He would come to bring them back. This time of restoration of the old covenant relationship between God and Israel is what the Old Testament calls the new covenant.

The phrase new covenant only occurs once in the Old Testament, in Jer 31:31; but both Ezekiel and Isaiah speak of the new covenant three times as a covenant of peace (Isa 54:10; Ezek 34:25; 37:26). Even more popular than covenant of peace is the phrase everlasting covenant, which occurs six times altogether as a reference to the new covenant (see Isa 55:3; 61:8; Jer 32:40; 50:5; Ezek 16:60; 37:26).

It is difficult to understand God’s purposes for the world without understanding the concept of covenant, and perhaps the best illustration for us today about what a covenant is all about is the concept of marriage.

Marriage is a covenant, and God’s relationship with Israel is like a marriage. The wedding ceremony took place at Mount Sinai. There both parties promised to love each other exclusively. Sadly, however, from when the honeymoon was not yet even finished and for over 600 years onwards, the marriage between God and Israel was on the rocks. Like many bad marriages, it ended up in separation, when the northern kingdom of Israel was exiled by the Assyrians, and then over 100 years later when the southern kingdom of Judah was defeated by the Babylonians. But in the midst of this period of separation, God kept sending letters to his sweetheart, Israel, saying that he wanted her back. Indeed, he promised that he would arrange things so that Israel would come back. The problem that led to the breakdown of the marriage was Israel’s unwillingness to obey God, but God promised that he would act to make Israel willing to obey him, so that in the end Israel would experience wonderful blessing in a restored relationship with God.

This new stage in the marriage, this time of blessing and peace within the relationship, is what the Bible calls the new covenant. And this is why the New Testament is called the New Testament, where testament is just an alternate word for covenant. The New Testament is simply the collection of books and letters that proclaims and explains the arrival of the new covenant. The New Testament is the historical record of the beginning of this wonderful, new stage in God’s marriage not just with Israel, but with all the nations of the world.

The new covenant is the fulfillment of God’s positive purposes for his creation. This is indicated in Ezek 34:25–31, where various positive consequences of the new covenant are delineated. The result of the covenant of peace is security, prosperity, blessing, and intimacy with God:

I will make with them a covenant of peace and banish wild beasts from the land, so that they may dwell securely in the wilderness and sleep in the woods. And I will make them and the places all around my hill a blessing, and I will send down the showers in their season; they shall be showers of blessing. And the trees of the field shall yield their fruit, and the earth shall yield its increase, and they shall be secure in their land. And they shall know that I am Yahweh, when I break the bars of their yoke, and deliver them from the hand of those who enslaved them. They shall no more be a prey to the nations, nor shall the beasts of the land devour them. They shall dwell securely, and none shall make them afraid. And I will provide for them renowned plantations so that they shall no more be consumed with hunger in the land, and no longer suffer the reproach of the nations. And they shall know that I am Yahweh their God with them, and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, declares Lord Yahweh. And you are my sheep, human sheep of my pasture, and I am your God, declares Lord Yahweh.

When you think about it, the Bible, with this movement from the old covenant to the new covenant, is telling us that the history of the world is basically one big, fantastic love story! It’s a story that moves from love rejected to love rekindled. And the exciting thing for Christians is that we, like Israel, are in this covenant relationship with God. We are part of this love story!

The New Testament teaches that Christians are in a covenant relationship with God; but we relate to God no longer on the basis of the old covenant, but on the basis of the new covenant. There has been a change from the old relationship characterized by unfaithfulness and disobedience on the part of Israel to a new relationship where the church has the power of Christ’s new life working in us to lead us back to God and to love him. Jesus is the one who has made the difference. He’s the one who’s saved the marriage, so that God’s original promise of blessing might be fulfilled. The overarching purpose of what God is doing in the world is breathtaking in its scope. It is something for which we ought always to thank God.

But, at the same time, understanding the concept of covenant can also help us better understand, not only the place of Jesus in God’s plan, but also the nature of our relationship with God, and what God desires to see in us. Think about it. If the church is like the wife in the divine marriage covenant, then what is our role in this relationship? What is required of us, and how are we to live? Well, like a wife loves her husband (or at least is supposed to), the job of each individual Christian is to love God, to be faithful to him, and (like women used to pledge as part of their marriage vows in earlier times) to be obedient.

Jesus picks up this idea in John 15 when he said to his disciples: “as the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love ... These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full” (John 15:9–11).

At the heart of the new covenant for the believer is the constant discipline of striving to love Jesus and to live in obedience to him. As we love God, we experience more of his love for us, and we have joy in our hearts. But the key on our part, as always, is faithfully following the Lord Jesus and his way of life in the context of the grace of the cross.

This is a key part of what the new covenant is all about: God’s people loving and obeying God as he has revealed himself to the world in the person of Jesus, and the resultant benefit of experiencing great blessing in intimate relationship with God. Jesus is the one who has saved the marriage. He died on the cross to atone for our rebellion, and through his resurrection he has brought new life into this relationship. But to benefit from this, we need to be participating in the new covenant in a positive way. If you’re not a follower of Jesus yet, you need to become one. And if you’re a follower already, you need to keep on following. Christians need to be committed to the covenant with God, and to find joy in being faith-full rather than faith-less, in being covenant keepers rather than covenant breakers. This is our responsibility and privilege within the new covenant of peace and blessing that Jesus died to achieve. Christians, honor Jesus’ death on your behalf by honoring him as your Shepherd King. This is what Jesus has come to achieve.

The Theme of Judgment in Ezekiel 7 Read in the Light of Hebrews 10:26–31

2011-04-04T12:09:00.004+10:00

In the world today there are many people who don’t understand that the Creator of this world exists, and that he has created our world for a reason. Key among those reasons, according to the Bible, is God’s desire to express himself. God created the world in the first place because he wanted to share the knowledge of who he is, and what he is like, with creatures made in his image with the express purpose that they might be able to know and appreciate this. To this end, God has directed the history of the world in such a way that, despite the presence of evil, this world, in the wisdom of God, is the perfect world for achieving his purposes of self-revelation.

In other words, God has made this world with the express desire of revealing his character to us human beings. The book of Ezekiel, for example, teaches us that God is glorious and majestic. It tells us that God desires to live with his people. Christians obviously find these positive characteristics of God attractive, and it is amazing to consider that God has achieved his plan of being present among us through Jesus, our temple, the visible image of invisible God among us. And speaking more generally of the character of God as it is revealed in the Bible, all Christians are aware, and many non-Christians too, that God is a God of love. In fact some people think that God is so much a God of love that he never raises his voice!

God can be warm and fuzzy, but is that all there is to God? What about the scarier aspects of his character, like his holiness and justice? The Bible doesn’t just encourage; it also warns. And Ezek 7 is one of those passages from the Bible that hits hard. Ezekiel 7 is one of those passages of the Bible that screams out “Warning!”

Most people don’t like being warned. How many soccer players do you see chasing after the referee, asking to be given a yellow card? And how many soccer players are happy when the referee gives them a yellow card even if the referee was justified in giving it? As children growing up, I’m sure there would have been times when you didn’t listen to the words of warning and discipline from your parents. The Bible frequently warns, but it does so for our benefit.

Ezekiel 7 warns us because it speaks about judgment. The theme of judgment is a prominent theme in Ezekiel, and in fact a prominent idea in all of the prophetic books of the Old Testament. The scary thing about judgment that is communicated in the Old Testament is that God is clearly revealed as being a God who judges and punishes. And if that were not scary enough, it is even scarier to realize that God is a God who judges his people! Didn’t the Apostle Peter say that judgment begins with the household of God (1 Pet 4:17)? There are many privileges in being God’s people; but being close to such an awesome, holy, and powerful God is also a dangerous place to be.

That God is a God who judges his people is very clear in Ezek 7. In fact every verse of this chapter speaks of judgment. In v. 3 God says: “the end is upon you ... I will let loose my anger upon you and ... judge you according to your ways, and I will punish you for all your abominations.” Verse 5 announces “disaster after disaster”! Verse 7: “your doom has come upon you!” Verses 8–9: “Now I will soon pour out my wrath upon you, and spend my anger against you, and judge you according to your ways ... my eye will not spare, nor will I have pity.” And vv. 15–16 continue the theme: “The sword is without; pestilence and famine are within. He who is in the field dies by the sword, and him who is in the city famine and pestilence devour. And if any survivors escape, they will be on the mountains, like doves of the valleys, all of them moaning, each one over his iniquity.”

Judah was going to be punished by way of military defeat, and this was fulfilled just six years after the proclamation of this prophecy when the Babylonian army destroyed Jerusalem, and took many of the Jewish people away into exile. Clearly God is a God who judges his people. But why?

In asking why God judges his people, Amos 3:2 provides an interesting starting point. Here God says to the people of Israel: “You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for your iniquities.” You can just imagine Israel saying: “Thanks, God. You’re going to punish us, because we’re special. Thanks!” But it makes sense: parents discipline their own children, not the children of others.

The fact that God judges his people is explained by the special nature of their relationship. Because the nation of Israel was in a special relationship with God, they would be judged by God in accordance with the agreement that they had entered into with God at Mount Sinai. The covenant established then clearly spelled out the consequences of sin and rebellion. For example, from Lev 26: “if you will not listen to me and will not do all these commandments, if you spurn my statutes, and if your soul abhors my rules, so that you will not do all my commandments, but break my covenant, then I will do this to you,” followed by 24 verses of bad things.

The covenant made between God and Israel at Sinai, and confirmed in the plains of Moab before Israel entered the promised land, clearly spelled out that the experience of the blessings of life in intimate relationship with God could only be experienced on the condition that God’s people were committed to obeying him. Their relationship was like a marriage. Unfaithfulness, especially unfaithfulness to God in the form of the worship of other gods, would seriously jeopardize the happiness of the relationship. As the covenant agreement delineated, God would judge Israel on the basis of whether or not they remained committed to their relationship with him.

Keep the covenant, and be blessed; break the covenant, and be punished. Punishment in this covenant relationship was always a possibility, but it is interesting to note that in the vast majority of instances God’s punishment was not meted out straight away. In dealing with rebellious Israel, the Old Testament shows us that God in his mercy and forbearance was prepared to put up with sin for a time, in order that the human race might continue, that Israel might continue, and that people might come to repentance. The fact that it was 800 years from the time of the sin of the golden calf until God had finally had enough of Israel’s continual rebelliousness, and expelled them from his presence in the land, speaks volumes about God’s long-suffering patience.

God is clearly a God of justice and judgment, but at the same he defines himself as one who is “merciful and gracious, slow to anger ... forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin” (Exod 34:6–7). God always gives people a chance to repent and receive forgiveness.

This is implied in Ezek 7:9, where God says: “I will punish you according to your ways, while your abominations are in your midst.” This leaves open the option for the people to remove their ungodly abominations, in order to escape punishment. God is always prepared to forgive, but forgiveness is given on the condition of repentance.

The Old Testament clearly teaches that God is a God who judges his people. That’s a historical fact, but the question for us is: Is God still like that? Christians are part of God’s people too, so is God a God who judges us Christians?

What do you reckon? Has God changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament? There are some Christians who think that back in the Old Testament God was a God of judgment, but today it’s different. After all, doesn’t the Apostle Paul say that “there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom 8:1)? There are people who, on the basis of that verse, like to think that as long as they believe in Jesus it doesn’t matter how they live.

So what do you reckon? Has God changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament? Can God still punish his people today?

The message of the New Testament in this regard is clear. God has not changed in the crossover from the Old to the New. If anything, God’s judgment of his people now is potentially even more severe than back then.

But maybe you’re thinking: Mmm, how can this be? Isn’t God a God who dearly loves me? Yes, it’s true to say that God dearly loves his people, but we need to understand that we Christians are also in a covenant relationship with God.

One of the most helpful New Testament books to explain this is the book of Hebrews. God teaches us through the book of Hebrews that Christians are also in a covenant relationship with God. Sure, we no longer relate to God on the basis of the old Mosaic covenant, but on the basis of the new covenant in Christ. But the new covenant is the fulfillment of the old covenant, and operates with the same relational dynamics. Under the old covenant, entrance into God’s presence was restricted. It is only under the new covenant that humanity can actually be seated before the presence of God in heaven. In Christ we regain, and even heighten, the degree of glory that Adam once experienced but lost back in the garden of Eden. But with this greater degree of access into and privilege before the presence of God comes greater responsibility.

That is why the author to the Hebrews says in Heb 10:26–30:

For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.”

Hebrews 10:26–30 clearly presupposes that it is possible for Christians to break covenant with God. Breaking covenant with God means profaning the blood of the covenant, which is the blood of none other than Jesus himself (Heb 10:29). God views the blood of his son as precious! It was not split on the cross lightly, and God will avenge himself upon those of his people who break covenant with him, who treat the blood of the Son of God without respect.

Christians we have received knowledge of the truth, therefore we must not continue deliberately in sin (Heb 10:26). We need to persevere in faith and repentance. Ezekiel 7 and Heb 10 stand, therefore, as warnings to all Christians. Make sure that you’re not living a lie, saying you’re a Christian while not living as one. To say that we belong to God when we aren’t concerned about striving after a holy life is hypocrisy. God loves us dearly, but both the Old and New Testaments teach that God’s saving love can be withdrawn from those who spurn his grace and mercy through stubborn disobedience.

This may sound shocking to some, and I hope it does to many. The truth is that, just like Israel of old, Christians who break covenant with God will be judged and dealt with. That’s a scary thought, but at the same time we need to be confident in the grace and mercy of God, and also in the truth of the perseverance of the elect. The key in all of this is perseverance in faith and repentance. That means every day being concerned to walk in God’s way, and being disciplined in repenting of sin. The Apostle Paul who said “there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” also said: “Note then the kindness and severity of God: severity towards those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise, you too will be cut off” (Rom 11:22). We should never take God’s grace for granted, even though grace is (by definition) something that God grants to the undeserving.

So be warned! The Old Testament prophetic warnings also apply to Christians. It is wrong to presume that they don’t. “These things … were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come. Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor 10:11–12). Or as Paul said to the Galatians, after talking about the works of the flesh, such as fornication, idolatry, hatred, jealousy, drunkenness: “I warn you, as I warned you before ... those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God … whatever a person sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; but he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life” (Gal 5:21; 6:7–8).

Christians need to remember that judgment begins with the household of God. Each one of us one day will have to appear before the judgment seat of Christ, and give an account. On that day God will be looking for a genuine covenant-keeping faith in his people: not merely an intellectual faith, but a faith based in the heart flowing to all areas of our life; not just a cultural faith, but a faith that is real and genuine, that makes a difference to how we live. If you are in rebellion against God, and are not concerned to repent of your sins, you have no right to presume that God’s saving love and mercy is yours. Remember that Jesus said: “if you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love” (John 15:10); that if we do not abide in him and bear fruit, we will be cut off from the vine, thrown into the fire, and burnt up (John 15:6); that whoever hears his word but does not do accordingly is like the foolish man who built his house on sand instead of rock (Matt 7:26).

So in the light of Ezek 7 (and the rest of Scripture) … how have you been living lately? Have you been endeavoring to keep covenant with God? Have you been endeavoring to live the life of faith? Have you been depending on the grace of God so as to walk in obedience, confessing your sins to God on a regular basis? Then you have nothing to fear concerning God’s judgment. Your sins have been forgiven through the blood of Christ. But if your faith has not been genuine, if other things are more important to you than keeping the commandments of Christ, then tonight God is warning you: turn away from your ungodly way of life, and return to him, and start walking again in the newness of life.

As the author to the Hebrews says: “it’s a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31)! Remember: God cannot be mocked! He knows your heart, and the day of judgment is coming. Be reconciled to God before it is too late! Don’t forfeit your heavenly inheritance through stubborn rebellion, but through growth in godliness make your calling and election sure (2 Pet 1:10).

I acknowledge that the theme of judgment isn’t the most palatable idea to many people today. This can be seen in the fact that some people criticize fire and brimstone type sermons as out of date, and possibly even offensive. Maybe, but it’s good for Chrisitans to be warned every so often. It’s good to be shocked out of the complacency that can often envelope our lives.

It’s a bit like the stories you hear about the good old days, how when a young kid was in trouble with the law, the local copper would give him a good kick up the pants, and a stern word or two, before taking him back home in disgrace to the parents. The way people tell it, a good kick up the pants from the local copper straightened out the wild kids real fast. I acknowledge that being warned is not necessarily a pleasant experience, but if God kicks us up the pants once in a while, who are we to complain? It’s actually for our good.

Remember: “it’s a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God”! In the light of this fact, therefore, we need to resolve to take our relationship with God seriously. Being in, and staying in, a right relationship with our “awful” yet loving God is a wonderful privilege, but a privilege that should not be taken lightly.

Tsedaqah Righteousness in Deuteronomy

2011-03-27T00:40:00.006+11:00

צדקה occurs nine times in the Pentateuch, and six times in the book of Deuteronomy. The other three pentateuchal occurances of צדקה are found in the book of Genesis (see “Tsedaqah Righteousness in Genesis”).

The first use of צדקה in Deuteronomy is found in Deut 6:25. This verse is very significant for understanding how righteousness was defined under the Mosaic covenant. In this verse Moses links stative righteousness with obedience to torah: “And it will be righteousness (צדקה) for us, if we are careful to do all this commandment before the Lord our God, as he has commanded us.” Israel’s covenant responsibility before God was to keep the stipulations of the covenant, i.e., to do torah. By walking in the way of torah, Israel would keep covenant with God, and as a consequence enjoy the status of covenant righteousness before God. In a covenantal context, righteousness is a legal status that applies to those who keep their covenant responsibilities. In the context of the Mosaic covenant, righteousness was a legal status bestowed by the Lord of the covenant upon those who (due to torah being written on the heart) were obedient to the stipulations spelled out in the law of the covenant. God’s bestowal of the status of covenant righteousness upon covenant keepers (through judicial proclamation) means that a concept of justification by obedience to torah applied under the Mosaic covenantal arrangement. This came to be known in Jewish parlance as justification by the works of the law. In other words, Deut 6:25 establishes the fact that a doctrine of the justification by the works of the law applied under the terms of the old covenant.

Even though covenant righteousness was demanded of Israel, and actually required in order to possess the promised land (e.g., Deut 6:18; 8:1), the book of Deuteronomy also states that possessing the promised land would not be achieved as a result of Israel’s righteousness. In Deut 9:4–6, the term צדקה occurs three times in three verses. Here Moses warns the people against spiritual pride:

“Do not say in your heart, after Yahweh your God has thrust them out before you, ‘It is because of my righteousness (צדקה) that Yahweh has brought me in to possess this land,’ whereas it is because of the wickedness of these nations that Yahweh is driving them out before you. Not because of your righteousness (צדקה) or the uprightness of your heart are you going in to possess their land, but because of the wickedness of these nations Yahweh your God is driving them out from before you, and that he may confirm the word that Yahweh swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. Know, therefore, that Yahweh your God is not giving you this good land to possess because of your righteousness (צדקה), for you are a stubborn people.”

On the one hand, righteousness was required for Israel to enter and possess the land; on the other hand, Israel’s righteousness would not be the cause of such entry and possession. Reconciling these two elements, Israel’s righteousness would be an instrumental cause for entry into and possession of the land, but not the immediate primary cause. The immediate primary cause for Israel’s entry into and possession of the land was God’s desire to punish the wickedness of the original inhabitants of the land, as well as God’s desire to fulfill the promise that he made with the patriarchs. It should be noted that the righteousness in view in these verses is paralleled in v. 5 with uprightness of heart. An upright heart (inscripturated with torah) leads to obedience, which results in an enjoyment of the state of righteousness on the level of the covenant. Covenant righteousness is necessary for salvation; but, given that the obedience underlying such righteousness is a gift of God (see Deut 8:18), it is out of place to boast in one’s righteousness status before God as if it were the ultimate cause of one’s salvation. True righteousness knows humility.

צדקה also occurs in Deut 24:13. The pledge of a poor debtor, which often consisted of an item of clothing, was to be restored before nightfall. Treating the poor with compassion in this way would “be righteousness for you before Yahweh your God.” This can be viewed as a particular application of the principle stated in Deut 6:25: that obedience to torah results in stative righteousness on the level of the covenant.

In Deut 33:21, the phrase צדקת יהוה the righteousness of Yahweh occurs as part of Moses’ final blessing of Israel. This phrase is paralleled with the phrase his judgments: “[Gad] came with the heads of the people; he executed the righteousness of Yahweh, and his judgments for Israel.” In this verse, doing צדקה seems to denote executing justice. Here justice can be viewed as being a form of active righteousness on the part of Yahweh in his function as King and Judge. Functioning judicially, doing right means that the King must punish evildoers and accomplish justice. Gad would play a part in accomplishing God’s justice by fighting with his brothers against the Canaanites.

Tsedaqah Righteousness in Genesis

2011-03-22T00:14:00.006+11:00

In the post entitled “Tsedeq Righteousness in the Pentateuch”, we looked at the use of the noun צדק in the Pentateuch. But there is another word based on the צדק root that is also commonly translated into English as righteousness. This is the noun צדקה.‎ צדק is a masculine noun, whereas צדקה is grammatically feminine. In what way do these two terms differ from each other? I will attempt to answer this question over time as we investigate the use of the צדק family of words in the Old Testament. צדקה occurs nine times in the Pentateuch, and three times in the book of Genesis.

The first use of צדקה in Genesis occurs in the famous verse Gen 15:6: “And [Abram] continued to believe Yahweh, and [Yahweh] counted it to him as righteousness (צדקה).” The noun צדקה is best understood here as denoting stative righteousness, i.e., the state of being in the right with God. Abraham’s faith response to the word of God was the right response to God’s revelation. This right response led to Abraham being considered by God to be in the right in terms of his relationship with God. It should be noted that the צדקה attributed to Abraham in this specific instance was not an alien righteousness. There is no sense of the alien righteousness of Christ apparent in the narrative in Gen 15. That is not to say that the alien righteousness of Christ is not present in the wider theological context—it is always presupposed in the background in the wider canonical context of the Scriptures—but it should not be imported into the term צדקה in Gen 15:6, which speaks of the state of personal righteousness that Abraham enjoyed before God on the basis of his faith in the word of God. The Apostle Paul’s treatment of Gen 15:6 in Rom 4 and Gal 3:6 has often been interpreted in terms of the alien righteousness of Christ, but I have problems accepting that Paul would have distorted the original meaning of Gen 15:6 by importing a concept of alien righteousness into the text. That is not the focus of Gen 15:6 in its original context.

The next instance of צדקה in Genesis occurs in Gen 18:19. In Yahweh’s self-deliberation as to whether he should tell Abraham about his intention to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, he says: “For I have known [Abram], that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of Yahweh by doing righteousness (צדקה) and justice, so that Yahweh might bring to Abraham what he has promised him.” Yahweh chose to enter into an intimate covenant relationship with Abraham with a view to Abraham commanding his extended family (including future generations) to keep the way of Yahweh. Abraham and his family would keep the way of Yahweh by doing righteousness and justice. The concept of doing righteousness is a key concept in the Old Testament. To do righteousness is to do what is right, to do righteous deeds. In Gen 18:19, צדקה denotes active righteousness, i.e., righteous acts, behavior that is right from God’s perspective. צדקה is paralleled here with justice (משׁפט ), which is behavior that is in accordance with the legal judgments pronounced by God in his role as King. Significantly, Gen 18:19 speaks of doing righteousness as the way by which God would bring about the fulfillment of his promise to bless Abraham, Israel, and the families of the earth (Gen 12:2–3). Obedience or keeping the way of Yahweh has always been necessary on the part of God’s people in order for the promised blessings to be realized (see also Gen 22:16–18).

The third and final instance of צדקה in Genesis occurs in Gen 30:33. In his negotiation with Laban concerning wages to be paid for looking after Laban’s flocks, Jacob proposed that he receive the speckled sheep and goats, and black lambs, as his wages. This would make it easy for Laban to test Jacob’s righteousness. As it is recorded in Gen 30:32–33, Jacob said to Laban: “Let me pass through all your flock today, removing from it every speckled and spotted sheep, and every black lamb, and the spotted and speckled among the goats, and they shall be my wages. So my righteousness (צדקה) will answer for me later, when you come to look into my wages with you. Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats, and black among the lambs, if found with me, shall be counted stolen.” Here Jacob’s צדקה is his right behavior, in particular, his honesty in only taking the speckled and black sheep or goats as his wages. This is ironic given that Jacob will use underhanded means and selective breeding by which to swindle Laban (see Gen 30:37–42)!

Tsedeq Righteousness in the Pentateuch

2011-03-14T17:00:00.009+11:00

The noun צדק, normally translated into English as righteousness, occurs twelve times in the Pentateuch. All but one of these instances of צדק occur in legal material.

The first use of צדק occurs in Lev 19:15: “You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness (צדק) shall you judge your neighbor.” Here צדק is portrayed as the right standard of legal judgment. Judging with צדק contrasts with doing עול in judgment. עול is wrongdoing or unrighteousness. צדק can denote, therefore, what is legally right or correct. It was the legal standard of justice that God required the judiciary of Israel to uphold in their courts of law.

The idea of צדק as a right standard in legal judgments is also found in the book of Deuteronomy. Moses uses the language of judging righteousness to describe the key task of the judiciary: “And I charged your judges at that time, ‘Hear the cases between your brothers, and judge righteously (צדק) between a man and his brother or the alien who is with him’” (Deut 1:16). He also uses the language of judging a judgment of righteousness: “You shall appoint judges and officers in all your towns that Yahweh your God is giving you, according to your tribes, and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment (משׁפט־צדק)” (Deut 16:18). Judging a righteous judgment involves not taking bribes to pervert the course of justice (Deut 16:19). Given that צדק can express a right standard in legal judgments, the word justice can be an adequate translation into English: “Justice (צדק), justice (צדק), you shall follow, that you may live and inherit the land that Yahweh your God is giving you” (Deut 16:20).

צדק was also to characterize business transactions, and particularly weights and measures: “You shall have just (צדק) balances, just (צדק) weights, a just (צדק) ephah, and a just (צדק) hin” (Lev 19:36). צדק here denotes the quality of that which is right or correct. This idea also occurs in Deuteronomy: “A full and correct (צדק) weight you shall have, a full and correct (צדק) measure you shall have, that your days may be long in the land that Yahweh your God is giving you” (Deut 25:15). Like in Deut 16:20, the length of Israel’s inhabitation of the promised land is linked with the presence or absence of צדק in Israel.

The only other mention of צדק in the Pentateuch occurs in the expression sacrifices of righteousness (זבחי צדק) in Deut 33:19. In his final blessing of the people, Moses blesses Zebulun and Issachar, and says: “They shall call peoples to the mountain; there they will offer sacrifices of righteousness; for they will suck the abundance of the seas, and the hidden treasures of the sand.” If this is a reference to the calling of the Gentiles, then perhaps what is in mind is that the Gentiles would come to offer right sacrifices to God (as opposed to illegitimate ones offered to false gods). The phrase זבחי צדק also occurs in Ps 4:6; 51:21, where the expression seems to incorporate not only the idea that the sacrifices are rightly offered (i.e., offered in accordance with the law of the one true God), but possibly also the broader idea that they function to restore people to a right standing before God in terms of the covenant.

The Vision of the New Temple in Ezekiel 40–48

2011-03-05T18:49:00.004+11:00

I sometimes wonder if life would be easier to endure just by switching off whenever the news is being broadcast. How many instances of sadness, suffering, and death bombard us each day through the avenue of the daily news, whether it be on tele, on the radio, or in the newspapers? Yet even if we were able to cut ourselves off from the suffering of others, we can’t cut ourselves off from ourselves, and our own experience of suffering. Even though we believe in God, the world situation and our own personal problems, whether it be problems in the family, financial difficulties or bad health, these things can easily drag us down.

Back in the sixth century B.C., there were many Jews who were having a hard time. A large number of the Jewish people had been captured by enemy forces, and taken over 1,000 km away from their homeland to live in a foreign land. They had become exiles. Furthermore, they knew that Jerusalem, the capital city of their country, had been burnt to the ground; and this included the temple, their most sacred site. I’m sure, if we were to put ourselves in their shoes, we’d feel absolutely terrible; and perhaps even on the verge of depression.

And for people of faith, the suffering (if anything) is intensified, because God’s character and purposes are called into question. Hadn’t God promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that he would bless their descendants, the people of Israel? But now the terrible reality in which Israel found herself—defeated and destroyed—it was the complete opposite of blessing. Instead of blessing, they felt like they’d been cursed. Had God changed his mind about Israel? Is it that God had had enough to the point that he’d turned his back on his people and his promises towards them? Or maybe God was still for them, but just didn’t have the power to bless his people as he had promised. Was God too weak to keep his promise of blessing?

Ezekiel too would have been deeply concerned about such issues. He was destined to be a priest by occupation; but now the temple had been destroyed. He was out of a job, and had lost his homeland. But even more important than any personal hardship was the question of God’s faithfulness to his people.

The book of Ezekiel, like most of the Old Testament prophetic books is concerned to answer such questions. Through the prophetic books, we are assured that the problem of the suffering of God’s people does not exist because of a problem in God. It’s not that God is not faithful, or that he is not powerful enough. God is not the problem.

But if God is not the problem, who or what is? The answer is clear. The problem actually lies with us and our attitude to God. The problem is humanity in rebellion against God. The Bible teaches that all human suffering ultimately stems from the fact of human disobedience. The ultimate cause of suffering is sin. And when sin gets hold of God’s people, as it did Israel of old, then disaster is on its way. When sin gets hold of God’s people, there will be judgment. We see an example of this principle with the destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians in 586 B.C. What happened to Israel at this stage was a replay of what happened to Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, but on a much larger scale. We’re no longer talking about just two people, but a whole nation which was removed from God’s presence, and who suffered greatly in the process!

Even if you’ve never suffered from depression, all of us have had our moments of being sad and sorrowful. Apparently there’s a Chinese proverb that says: “a day of sorrow is longer than a month of joy.” How true that is! How time seems to drag on when things are going wrong. Florence Nightingale, the famous nurse, went through a stage in her life when she was deeply depressed. Four years before she went to a city in present-day Turkey during the Crimean War as a nurse to look after wounded soldiers, she wrote: “O weary days, O evenings that never end! For how many long years I have watched the drawing-room clock and thought it would never reach the ten! ... In my thirty-first year I see nothing desirable but death.”

When things are going wrong, we’re often tempted to despair of life. We start to doubt God’s goodness, or to doubt his power, or even at times to doubt his very existence!

But thanks be to God that in the middle of the sadness and depression of life, God is ever ready to give us a vision of a better future. In 573 B.C., 24 years after Ezekiel had been taken off in exile to Babylon, and fourteen years after the complete destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, Ezekiel was given a grand vision of the nation of Israel restored to life in the holy land. This wonderful vision is recorded in Ezek 40–48.

In these chapters we read that Ezekiel was taken in the Spirit to the land of Israel, and placed on “a very high mountain,” and on this mountain was a city. This is seen in Ezek 40:2. We have here, like in the early chapters of Genesis, a holy land, a mountain sanctuary. We should note that the mountain sanctuary in Ezekiel’s vision has a number of things in common with the garden of Eden. Like Eden, Ezekiel’s mountain has streams of water flowing from it (Ezek 47:1–12). Significantly, however, the underdeveloped garden has now developed into a city (Ezek 40:1–2); and best of all, the name of the city is Yahweh-shamah, which means the Lord is there (Ezek 48:35—the very last verse of the book). This permanent presence of the Lord contrasts with the garden of Eden, where God used to come to visit only once a day. But at the end of history, as Ezekiel sees it, the garden of Eden will have developed into a city; and this city will be the center of the world as God always intended things to be when he originally created the world. God created this world with the intention that it would be his temple palace, where in the end, after the ups and downs in this love story between God and humanity, God would come to dwell permanently to have eternal fellowship together with the special creature made in his image, us human beings.

So wonderful is the prospect of God coming to live again with his people that the description of this temple palace is savoured in quite some detail in Ezekiel. Next in the vision, recorded in Ezek 40:3, we see an angel, who looks like a surveyor with measuring instruments (a cord and a rod) taking Ezekiel on a tour of the city. Ezekiel was taken on this tour in order that he might tell “the house of Israel” what he saw (Ezek 40:4).

Now the content of what Ezekiel saw is recorded in the next seven and a half chapters (from Ezek 40 to the middle of Ezek 47). The first stage of the tour involved Ezekiel following the angel surveyor as he measured the dimensions of this new temple. The general impression is one of grandeur, although the dimensions of the sanctuary of Ezekiel’s temple importantly were identical to the dimensions of the sanctuary in Solomon’s temple, the one that had recently been destroyed. The meaning of all of this is clear. The temple had been destroyed, but God promised Israel that it would be rebuilt!

After the measurements were completed, Ezekiel was brought back to the east gate, from where he saw “the glory of the God of Israel” coming from the east, from over the Mount of Olives where God’s glory had temporarily withdrawn while Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians (Ezek 43:2). According to this verse, the “sound of [the Lord’s] coming was like the sound of many waters, and the earth shone with his glory.” According to Ezekiel in Ezek 43:3, this new vision of God’s glory was identical to the vision of the likeness of God’s glory that Ezekiel previously saw leaving the temple, back in Ezek 1–10.

Once again we see that this vision is a prophecy given by God to assure his people that there would be a new temple as the focal point of a new land, to which God’s people would return to dwell in security and peace, and to which God himself would also return to dwell forever more among his people. God would return to his people! This is the significance of Ezek 43. God’s glory entered into the temple, and the temple was filled with God’s glory (Ezek 43:4). Ezekiel then heard God himself speaking from inside the temple. As recorded in Ezek 43:7, God identified this new temple as being his eternal dwelling place among his people Israel. This is, as God put it, “the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the people of Israel for ever.”

God had allowed the first temple to be destroyed as part of his judgment upon rebellious Israel; but in the end, there would be another temple. This is the significance of this vision. God’s plan to dwell in the midst of his people forever would not be annulled by the sinfulness of his people. In the end, God’s glory and presence will be present among his people.

Now maybe you’re thinking: well, this is an interesting vision, and I can see its significance, but when is this new temple going to be built? Well, it’s true that there are some Christians who think that this vision of Ezekiel’s is a prophecy that is going to be fulfilled literally when the so-called third temple is built. The first temple, built by Solomon, was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. The second temple, built by Ezra and friends, and renovated by King Herod, was destroyed by the Romans in the year 70 A.D. From the year 70 on, the Jews haven’t had a temple. Some believe that the third temple is on its way. The only problem is that there’s currently a Muslim shrine right on top of the place where any third temple would have to be built. It couldn’t be built without first destroying the Muslim Dome of the Rock, but doing that would possibly cause World War III.

Today there are people around who are promoting the building of the third temple. One of these groups calls itself the Temple Mount and Land of Israel Faithful Movement. On October 16th 2000, this movement planned to anoint and lay the cornerstone for the Third Temple; but due to the tricky political situation at the time, the Israeli authorities decided that the ceremony couldn’t be performed. Instead, the crowd could only congregate in the Western Wall Plaza to march together and demonstrate. As they did so, they swore faithfulness to the God of Israel, to his word, to the Temple Mount, to Jerusalem, and the land of Israel. They promised to never give up their “godly historical task to rebuild the House of God on Mt. Moriah in Jerusalem.” They think that this temple must be rebuilt before the Messiah comes. This movement isn’t a big group in Israel; but they receive significant support from some evangelical Christians that have similar views.

Is this vision of the new temple in Ezek 40–48 the architectural design for a third temple that will be built in Jerusalem? Well, a third temple might be built in Jerusalem—we’ll have to wait and see, but 2 Thess 2:4 possibly suggests that there will be—yet a careful reading of Ezek 40–48 shows that, in giving Ezekiel this vision, God has used language familiar to Ezekiel and his fellow Jews in exile to speak about how God would return to dwell among Israel, but in a greater and more permanent way than before. By way of contrast with the old temple, where the most holy place was confined to the inner sanctum of the temple, the whole of the new temple, and even the land surrounding it, would be considered to be “most holy” (Ezek 43:12). Also, the geographical location of the tribes is “rearranged” so that you have six of the twelve tribes of Israel situated to the north, and six tribes to the south, putting the sanctuary right in the centre of Israel. This is an idealized picture of Israel, different from the old historical arrangement where there were two tribes located to the south, and ten tribes to the north. There would also be a river of life emanating from this temple that would bring life to the fish in its waters and to the fruit trees along its banks, and the fruit of these trees would be used as food, and its leaves for healing (Ezek 47:1–12). Furthermore, the city would have twelve gates, each bearing the name of one of the tribes, and the name of the city would no longer be Jerusalem but Yahweh-shamah. These differences suggest that more is involved here than just a physical third temple.

We also need to consider how the New Testament interprets this vision, particularly in the book of Revelation. The vision of the New Jerusalem (as it’s portrayed in Revelation) has much in common with Ezekiel’s new city, and can be viewed as a reinterpretation of Ezekiel’s vision. That the two visions are basically the same can be seen in that they both portray the city as having twelve gates with the names of the tribes of Israel inscribed on them. They both have the river of life, and fruit trees that provide healing. But the two visions differ in one very important aspect. In Rev 21:22, we read John saying: “But I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb.”

In Ezekiel’s vision, the temple was the focal point; but in John’s vision, the temple is identified totally with God, and in particular with Jesus Christ, the Lamb that was slain but who lives again. In this way we see that the Apostle John understood that the temple in Ezekiel’s vision is not the architectural design of a third temple, but rather a picture of the new creation described in terms of a temple with Christ at its core. The intriguing detail in Ezek 44:1–2 about the permanent closing of the eastern gate proves our point: “This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it, for the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered by it” (Ezek 44:2), the implication being that God has entered the temple never ever to leave again. It is as if God had said: “Shut the doors; I’m never going anywhere again!”

In other words, the new temple in Ezekiel is a picture of God coming to dwell permanently with his people. It is a vision of the new creation, which Christians believe has been fulfilled in the Lord Jesus. Jesus’ resurrection was the commencement of the building of the new temple, and through him we await the full revelation of the new temple, of the new heavens and the new earth, in which righteousness will dwell. In Jesus, the glory of God has returned from his temporary withdrawal over the Mount of Olives to enter permanently into the heavenly temple, which one day, in God’s good timing, will be located on earth.

It is appropriate that this last vision in the book of Ezekiel, the very last vision given by God to Ezekiel (as far as we know) corresponds to the very last vision recorded in the Bible. Both of these visions are a picture of heaven on earth. Here we need to understand that heaven on earth, Emmanuel, is actually God’s end purpose for the world. The final picture we get in the Bible, in the book of Revelation, is the New Jerusalem with God’s throne coming down out of heaven to be established on the new earth. Emmanuel, God with us.

This is what Ezekiel’s vision is about. It’s a picture of the kingdom of God. It’s a picture of God and humanity reconciled. God is there among his people, eternally so, because, as we read in Ezek 43:7, God’s people would never again defile God’s holy name by idolatry. Through the outpouring of God’s Spirit, their hearts will have been changed. And with the transformation of the human heart would come a transformation in the relationship between God and humanity.

Thomas More, Lord Chancellor in England at the time of the Reformation, once said: “Earth has no sorrow that heaven cannot heal.” Is there sorrow in your heart today? Do your days feel weary and your evenings endless? How many times has the thought of the clock ticking over driven you to despair? How many tears? How many instances of death have you had to face? But the heavenly vision tells us of a time when God will comfort his people, when “[God] will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning or crying or pain any more, for the former things have passed away” (Rev 21:4). After judgment and exile, there will be a new temple. God will not abandon us forever. The light of his heavenly glory will shine among us, and we and the world will be transformed.

We human beings might try to seek comfort in various places, but heaven is the only place that can heal our earthly sorrow. God gave Ezekiel this vision to assure all of God’s people that God’s plan for the coming of his kingdom, God’s plan for the ultimate unity of heaven and earth, will be achieved. This vision of heaven on earth has been given, not only because it’s good to know where we’re heading, but also because its has the power to cheer the heavy heart. We know that for us in the here and now, the full reality of heaven on earth is still off in the distance. At times it might feel as if God has abandoned us, but this is not true. Think about how God’s glory has returned to us in the person of Jesus, and think about the unveiling of the fullness of his glory at the return of the Lord Jesus, when heaven and earth will finally be one.

The only solution to our tears is the vision of heaven which God promises us through Ezek 40–48 is the eternal destiny of our planet! So in the midst of sorrow, when the walls are tumbling down, meditate! Meditate day and night on the wonderful promises of God! Bring to mind daily the thought of better things to come, the thought of a new temple, who is the Lord himself, dwelling together with us forever and ever and ever more! Always remember that in Jesus, Yahweh-shamah! This vision of heaven on earth can bring true comfort to the sorrowful, as well as motivate us to flee from all forms of idolatry, to trust solely in God, and to worship him as we ought.

The Age of the Spirit per Ezekiel 36:16–32

2011-03-01T01:16:00.004+11:00

One of the things that I believe we often lack as Christians is an understanding of the bigger picture. In my experience teaching the Old Testament at the Presbyterian Theological Centre in Sydney for 8½ years (until my employment finished there in 2010), I was often struck by the way in which students would come to college knowing many of the details of various stories of the Old Testament, but not understanding with some degree of clarity the bigger picture of the Old Testament. This is understandable to some extent, given the size of the Old Testament—it’s a big collection of books—but it is in understanding something of this bigger picture that we come to understand the Bible with greater clarity, and to experience the power of the word of God to a greater degree.

Why did God create the world? Why has he structured history in the way that he has? Why spend 2,000 years of human history focusing only on one relatively small nation in an obscure part of the Middle East? What was the purpose of God’s election of Israel, and what is the point of the Old Testament? It’s important that we ask these questions, because doing so will lead us to a greater reflection on, and understanding of, the word of God.

The story of Israel in the Old Testament is a detailed description, written out on the pages of human history, of what happens to human society when God’s word is not in the heart of human individuals and human society. Without the word of God, human society reverts to the default position of Gen 1:2. Back then the earth was formless (chaotic), empty (without life), and full of darkness; yet the Spirit of God was present. Unleashing the power of his word and Spirit, God said, “Let there be light”! Through the word of God, darkness was turned into light, chaos was transformed into order, and emptiness was overcome as God created living creatures to inhabit and fill his world. Always the Teacher, even the way in which God created the world was a lesson designed to teach humanity that the word of God brings light and life and order; and that without the word of God, the world will be plunged into disorder and death and darkness.

This is something that Moses, the founder of Israel, understood. After proclaiming the word of God in his final address to Israel, Moses stood before the assembly of the people of Israel, calling upon them, pleading with them: “See, I have set before you today, life and good, death and evil … Choose life” by following God’s word (Deut 30:15, 19).

Yet what did Israel choose? Did Israel choose the word of God? The Old Testament stands as a historical record of the fact that Israel chose the way of the world around them rather than the word of the Creator of the universe. Created to experience God’s blessing, Israel ended up experiencing the curses of the covenant: darkness, death, and disorder.

The problem of sin, and the effects of this, is reflected in Ezek 36:17–19. Israel through their rebellion (especially the sins of idolatry and bloodshed) defiled the land given to them by God. God’s wrath came upon them, and they were scattered and dispersed among the nations.

Ignoring God, and chasing after idols, Israel deserved this punishment; yet judgment for God’s people was not where God would stop. The very fact that Israel was in exile meant that God’s name was being profaned among the nations. The military defeat and exile of Israel had led to people in the surrounding nations having a negative opinion about the power of the God of Israel: “These are the worshippers of Yahweh. The God of Israel, he must be weak. He couldn’t defended his land or save his people,” (Ezek 36:20).

Now the nations might laugh and sniggle; but God, being God, would not let this situation endure forever. God is concerned about his reputation, and that his name be honored. That may sound a little selfish; but after all, God is God! He has every right in the world as the Creator of this world to expect that his name be respected and honored.

So God would act for the sake of his name. God would act to deal with this unacceptable situation by bringing his people back to the promised land. There would be judgment; but following the judgment, there would be restoration. But how was God going to bring his people back to the land?

The average person may not have thought about this much, but how we can get back into the presence of God is really the big question of human history. The human race lost the right to live in God’s presence when our first ancestors, Adam and Eve, sinned against God, and were expelled from God’s land, the holy land of the garden of Eden. Israel, being saved out of Egypt, were given a chance to come back into the land; but even in the land their access to God was restricted. Access into the Most Holy Place, the inner sanctum of the temple in Jerusalem, was restricted to one person, the high priest, who could go into the Most Holy Place yet only once a year. This temporary access of Israel into God’s presence (corresponding to the limitations of the Old Testament sacrificial system with its use of the blood of bulls and sheep and goats) was later reflected on a physical level when Israel, like Adam, lost the right to live in the presence of God because of rebellion.

This two fall theology of the Old Testament was understood by the Apsotle Paul. Paul’s teaching in Rom 5:20, that the law was added in order to increase the trespass, is a summary of the whole of the Old Testament in one short proposition. The law of Moses was given to Israel to compound the problem of the trespass of Adam. The story of Israel replicates the story of Adam.

So the Old Testament is a story of two falls: the fall of humanity in Adam, and the fall of Israel through Moses. Both Adam and Israel lived in God’s land, but both ... only for a time. Adam for a few days—we aren't told how long, but the impression is that it wasn’t very long—and Israel for 700 years or so. In each instance the problem that led to exile was ... sin. The problem was disobedience to God, and this was the result of not having God’s word written in the heart.

Without the word of God in our hearts, humanity cannot live in the presence of God. But God made us in his image, so that he might live with us. So any expulsion of humanity from his presence must be temporary. If not, then Satan has won.

Therefore, God’s people will be brought back; and that is the overall message of the book of Ezekiel. The exile will be reversed, and Israel will return to live once more in the presence of God. A key motivation in doing this is God’s regard for his own name. God would act to bring his people back to life in the land, thereby “vindicat[ing] the holiness of [his] great name” (Ezek 36:22–24).

This return is associated with God cleansing his people, and giving them a “new heart” and a “new Spirit,” so that they might be able to obey him. Ezekiel 36:25–28 speaks about a heart transplant operation that would be performed by the Holy Spirit. The stony, unresponsive heart with its arteries clogged by the fat of sinfulness would be replaced with a new, responsive, beating heart of flesh. Animated by the power of God’s Spirit, this new heart would be responsive and obedient to the word of God.

The key to the future blessing of God’s people, according to Ezekiel, is a new heart and a new Spirit. If Adam and Israel failed, and (using the words of Isa 63:10) grieved [God’s] Holy Spirit because the word of God wasn’t in their hearts, then God would solve the problem. Ezekiel 36:26–28 is very significant in the bigger biblical-theological picture of the Bible, identifying the solution to the universal human problem.

The solution is that at some time in the future God’s Spirit would poured out in a comprehensive way in order to act upon the hearts of God’s people in a powerful way, so powerful in fact that God’s people would be transformed from being law breakers to become law keepers. How? Through the law of God written in the heart! Just like back in Gen 1. What is the key to life? It is the word of God.

The prophet Ezekiel, therefore, looked forward to a day when God’s Spirit would be so powerfully pervasive that God’s people would be cleansed of their sin, and moved to obedience, the result of which would be the coming of the blessings of the covenant, with God’s people dwelling secure as the obedient people of God. In fact, as Ezek 36:29–30 shows, these blessings would not be only for Israel, but creation itself would be transformed. No more famines, but fertility and fruitfulness. God’s people would repent of their sins (Ezek 36:31–32); there would be rebuilding and replanting (Ezek 36:33–34), so much so (according to Ezek 36:35) that it will like returning to the garden of Eden! Through the work of God’s Spirit, paradise lost will become paradise restored.

This prophecy regarding the future restoration of Israel is very important for understanding that God’s intention is to bring about a perfect world. Imagine what it would be like to be perfect: a perfect husband (no more dirty clothes left hanging around the place), a perfect wife (no more nagging), perfect kids (you would have to raise your voice), a perfect world (no pollution; no more colds; no more floods or fires or earthquakes or tsunamis; no more terrorism; no more war). I reckon it sounds pretty good. John Lennon could only imagine such a world, but Christians believe that a perfect world will one day be reality. For some it may be a pipe dream, but someone once said that baptism in the Holy Spirit “will do for you what a phone booth did for Clark Kent—it will change you into a different human being”!

Thankfully God doesn’t require us to get changed into Superman gear in a phone booth, but he does require his Spirit to be present in order for life to be experienced. The simple fact of the matter is that “the Spirit gives life” (2 Cor 3:6); and God gives his Spirit in abundance to those who submit to Christ as Lord, to those who have the word of God at work in their lives. The human race has always been tempted to look for life in all the wrong places, but the Bible says that life is found in the Spirit and word of God.

Jesus taught that the Spirit gives life (John 6:63). Indeed, the message of the New Testament is that the age of the full outpouring of the Spirit that the Old Testament prophets looked forward to … this Age of the Spirit that will accomplish God’s plan for a perfect world … this has come with the coming of the Lord Jesus!

According to John 3:34, God the Father gave the Spirit to Jesus the Son “without measure” in order that he might fully reveal the word of God to the world. Jesus performed miracles like no one else has, because he was filled with the power of God’s Spirit beyond measure. And having himself personally dealt with sin and death through his death on the cross, Jesus, the Spirit-filled Second Adam, has led humanity back into God’s land, back into the presence of God. This was achieved through Jesus’ ascension into heaven. And having gone up into heaven, Jesus received the authority promised by the Father in various Old Testament passages to pour out the Holy Spirit on the church at the day of Pentecost, and since that time the promised Age of the Spirit has begun.

During this time, God’s Spirit has been at work in a much more comprehensive way than previously. God’s Spirit has been increasing his influence throughout the world, empowering the growth of the kingdom of God on earth, as the church, the Community of the Spirit, has grown throughout the world. And Christians, becoming members of Christ’s church through faith and baptism, share in this baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is why in 1 Cor 12:13, the Apostle Paul says: “by one Spirit, we were all baptised into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.”

The New Testament proclaims that, with the coming of Jesus, the Age of the Spirit that the Old Testament prophets looked forward to has begun. And present-day Christians have been blessed by God to participate in its unfurling. By the way, unfurling is an important concept to grab hold of here, because the question can be asked: if the Age of the Spirit has begun, then why is there still a struggle with sin in my life? Why do I still see sin in the life of God’s people? Why do I still get sick? Why do I see disease and war and famine and death throughout the world?

The answer to this question is: the Age of the Spirit has begun, but it has not yet reached its climax. The Age of the Spirit has begun in the sense that human hearts throughout the world are now coming under submission to Christ as the gospel is being proclaimed, and as disobedience is slowly being rooted out of the lives of God’s people. But what we see now is only a small picture of what will be on the day when Jesus returns, when the Spirit of God will be unleashed to his maximum capacity so as to fill the universe to overflowing.

Remember Jesus’ parables about the kingdom of God? The kingdom of God is really the realm of the special operations of God’s Spirit, the zone where God’s will is being done on earth as it is currently being done in heaven. Remember how Jesus describes the kingdom of God in his parables? God’s kingdom is like a small mustard seed that grows into a tree (Matt 13:31–32). It is like dough that expands to become a loaf (Matt 13:33). Jesus wants us to understand that the kingdom starts out small, but gets comparatively much much bigger as time goes on. This growth, this development of the kingdom of God over time and throughout the world, is how the Age of the Spirit will unfold. The new Spirit-filled world order is currently being unfurled, but the mind-blowing time will come when we will see the climactic totality of God's plan of universal blessing revealed before our eyes.

This fullness of the Spirit will come in God’s good time; but in the meantime, the important thing for Christians to realise is that we need to be participating in the Spirit! How important is it for you to participate in the Spirit? Have you been working at being as filled with God’s Spirit as much as you possibly can? Or are you busy pursuing other things in life? Christians have the privilege of participating in God’s Spirit, but we also need to pursue an ever greater filling of God’s Spirit. If we are not concerned about growing in God’s Spirit, we need to be careful lest we end up grieving God’s Spirit. Here we can take warning from the historical example of King Saul. He began with God’s Spirit, but ended up grieving God’s Spirit through rebellion (1 Sam 15:23, 26; 16:14). And Israel? All who passed through the sea drank the spiritual drink, says Paul, yet God was not pleased with the majority (1 Cor 10:1–5).

As Christians, we share in the Spirit; but through neglect, it may be that our tank is pretty close to empty. Do you feel today as if you’ve been drained of the Spirit, as if you’re almost running on empty? Well, you need to be topped up! But how does this happen? How can I be refilled with the Holy Spirit?

The answer to this question is straightforward, but it requires some co-operation on our part. Being filled with the Spirit is not necessarily a matter of being able to speak in tongues. Being filled with the Spirit actually correlates to how much God’s word is in our hearts. Being filled with the Spirit results in the fruit of the Spirit (Eph 5:18–21). If we have God’s Spirit, then we will be producing the fruit of the Spirit in our lives, things such as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, and self-control (Gal 5:22–23). But the key to all of this is the simple yet profound idea of having the word of God written in our hearts. When you combine Ezek 36:26–28 with Jer 31:31–33, you get Ezekiel’s idea of the new heart, new Spirit, and new obedience matching up with Jeremiah’s idea of the law written on the heart of God’s people as part of the new covenant. This is why filling with the Spirit in the new covenant age corresponds to the extent to which God’s word has been written on the heart.

Ultimately the writing of God’s word in our heart is a work of God’s Spirit. The Spirit is the one who must do the writing, that’s true. But he can’t do the writing if we’re not doing the hearing (Rom 10:17). God’s word will never be written in our hearts (apart from direct revelation) if we never spend time meditating upon the gospel, or if we never spend time reading God’s word and thinking about it. Why do we read and teach the Bible in church? Why do we sing psalms and Bible-based hymns rather than the latest hit pop song (the majority of which these days are fixated with sex)? What Christians do in church is based on the word of God, because we believe that, as we do so, that is the way that God’s word and Spirit come to fill our hearts.

Back at the end of the second century, there was a Greek boy born into a Christian family in present-day Turkey named Irenaeus. As a young man, Irenaeus grew up in the faith, and moved to Lyons in France. He became a clergyman, and eventually became the Bishop of Lyons. He is famous as one of the Early Church Fathers, and he wrote a number of important works defending the church against heresy. In his writings, he wrote concerning the relationship of the Holy Spirit and the church. One quotation that comes to mind is the following: “If you do not join in what the Church is doing, you have no share in [the] Spirit … For where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and every kind of grace.”

The simple truth of the matter is that the Spirit gives life. It is important, therefore, that all people pursue the presence of the Holy Spirit in their lives. That can only happen by submitting to the lordship of Jesus Christ. And then, having received the gift of the Holy Spirit from the Son, Christians need to walk in the Spirit, and to pursue an ever greater filling with the Spirit, through joining in what the church is doing, and by meditating regularly on God’s word in prayer and in song. Without the Spirit of God, life does not exist. And without the word of God in our lives, we cannot be filled with the Spirit. How serious have you been lately about surrounding yourself and the lives of your loved ones in the word of God? Just as a car needs petrol, so too we need the Spirit of God.

Therefore, pursue the Spirit! Do so with all of your strength! But you do that by listening to the word of God.

Recall what Moses said to Israel. Look, this might be my last sermon before I die, but I’ve proclaimed the word of God to you today. I’ve set before you life and good, death and evil. Choose life by following the word of God!

Brothers and sisters, pursue the word of God! Pursue participation in the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus! The word that gave life to this universe back in the beginning is the word that gives life to us today.

Tense, Aspect, and Mood in Biblical Hebrew Verbs

2011-02-24T09:54:00.004+11:00

One of the problems encountered by the beginning student of Biblical Hebrew is the lack of clarity regarding tense, aspect, and modality in the verb system of Biblical Hebrew. Tense denotes the location in time of the event or state expressed by the verb. Aspect has to do with the way in which the event or state expressed by the verb is viewed as progressing within time, while mood or modality denotes the attitude of the speaker to the reality, necessity, possibility, or probability of the event or state expressed by the verb.

The best way of understanding the verb in Biblical Hebrew is to see it in the light of how it has developed historically. It is generally held that Proto-Hebrew had three major conjugations: the preterite (yaqtul), imperfect (yaqtulu), and perfect (qatala). The preterite was used for past events viewed as a simple whole. In other words, the preterite expressed both past tense and perfective (i.e., aoristic) aspect. The binary opposite of the preterite was the imperfect. The imperfect was used for events that were non-past (i.e., present or future), or else for events that were viewed as being non-perfective (i.e., continuous or iterative). The perfect, however, seems to have been primarily used with stative verbs (without regard to time), but it was also used with dynamic verbs in conditional constructions.

Over time, the imperfect lost its final vowel. This resulted in the imperfect coming to have the same form as the preterite and the jussive. This in turn caused the use of the preterite to be substituted by the use of perfect, although the preterite was preserved for use in poetry and in sequential clauses in narrative (where the preterite takes a vav prefix). The perfect came to be used for states and events viewed as a simple whole theoretically regardless of time, yet because the perfect was used primarily as a replacement for the preterite, naturally the dominant use of the perfect came to be that of a past simple (i.e., a past perfective). The similarity in form between the imperfect and the jussive also led to the imperfect taking on board the non-indicative modal senses of ability, necessity, and possibility of the jussive, leading to the situation in Biblical Hebrew where the imperfect is used to express the present and future tenses, non-perfective aspect, as well as non-indicative modality. On analogy with the sequential use of the preterite, it seems that the weqatal form developed from the modal sense of the perfect in the apodoses of conditional constructions. The weqatal construction is, therefore, basically used as a modal verb in sequential clauses. In addition, the participle, which can express continuous and gnomic aspect, was competing with the use of the imperfect to indicate the present tense, the immediate future, and continuous or gnomic aspect.

The verb system of Biblical Hebrew, therefore, is best thought of historically as being a mixed tense-aspect-mood system. Whether one of tense, aspect, or mood, or a combination of two of these, dominates in a particular situation is ultimately dependent on the context in which the verb is found. The end result can be summarized as follows:

preterite = past simple in a sequential clause or in poetry;

perfect = past (or present or future) simple (typically in earlier Biblical Hebrew in a non-sequential clause);

imperfect = present or future tense; or non-simple aspect; or non-indicative modality;

modal perfect (weqatal) = non-indicative modality in a sequential clause;

participle = present tense; or immediate future; or continuous or gnomic aspect.

The Idolatry of Israel in Ezekiel 8

2011-02-20T20:29:00.003+11:00

When you go sightseeing, you normally have a general idea of what you want to see. Japanese tourists coming to Australia like to see the Sydney Opera House, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, and koalas! If a Japanese tourist came to Australia, and didn’t see the Sydney Opera House, the Harbour Bridge, or a koala, I reckon they’d go back home very disappointed.

Well what about a sightseeing tour of Jerusalem? I reckon you can’t go to Jerusalem without seeing the Temple Mount, the place where the temple of God used to be. I had the opportunity to do that back in 2004, and going up to the Temple Mount was definitely the highlight of my trip, even more so because back then, due to the sensitive political situation, the Temple Mount had been closed to visitors. One day I was visiting the Wailing Wall with my sister and brother-in-law when all of a sudden we saw the Israeli police open up the gates of the ramp way leading up to the Temple Mount. We decided to go for it, and in the space of a few seconds not knowing where I was heading, all of a sudden I found myself virtually alone standing on top of the Temple Mount in brilliant sunshine. It was definitely the highlight on my trip, not only because the Temple Mount is the most famous place in Jerusalem, but because actually getting there was so unexpected.

In the year 592 B.C., Ezekiel was in Babylon, some 1,000 km away from Jerusalem. He had been taken there by the Babylonian army, and had been away from Israel for six years, when all of a sudden God gave him the opportunity in a vision to go back to Jerusalem, and visit the temple. What an opportunity! The chance to go back home, and visit the holiest place on Planet Earth.

Well, after being transported to Jerusalem by “Holy Spirit Airways” (according to Ezek 8:3), Ezekiel finds himself back where he wished he could have been all along … in the temple in Jerusalem. Ezekiel was of priestly descent, so the temple was the place for him to be. If he hadn’t been taken off into exile, he would have been working there. So you’d think that this opportunity to go back to the temple should’ve been a wonderful journey for him. You could imagine how happy he would have been at the prospect of going back.

He turns up in Jerusalem, and rocks up to the northern gate to the inner court of the temple. And behold, the glory of the God of Israel was there (Ezek 8:4)! The same vision of the glory of God that Ezekiel had witnessed in ch. 1 was the vision of God that was facing him in temple. How wonderful! Perhaps Ezekiel was feeling a bit like the psalmist who wrote in Ps 63: “O God, you are my God; earnestly I seek you; my soul thirsts for you; my flesh faints for you, as in a dry and weary land where there is no water. So I have looked upon you in the sanctuary, beholding your power and glory.”

How wonderful to see God’s glory again! But wait a minute. Behind Ezekiel was something that shouldn’t be there in the temple. In fact it was God who pointed it out to Ezekiel. There, north of the altar gate, was something grotesque: the image of jealousy. It was called the image of jealousy because it made God jealous. It was probably a statue of Asherah, a Canaanite fertility goddess; but whatever it was, it shouldn’t have been there, and it made God jealous.

English speakers generally grow up with the idea that jealousy is bad, so this idea of God being jealous sometimes sounds a little strange. Was God right to be jealous of this image? Well, the short answer is yes! God was right to be jealous. Here we need to remember what God had done for Israel previously and the nature of their relationship. We need to remember that when God saved Israel out of Egypt, Israel entered into a covenant with God at Mount Sinai, and God appeared to them on the mountain, and said to them: “I am Yahweh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (Exod 20:2). And then he gave them the Ten Commandments, with numbers one and two as follows:

(1) “you shall not have any other gods before me” (Exod 20:3): in other words, God alone was to be Israel’s God; this was an exclusive relationship with no space possible for any other gods.

And (2) “you shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above or that is on the earth beneath or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children of the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments” (Exod 20:4–6): in other words, no worship of idols was permitted in Israel. No image or any other object was to be worshipped as a god. Israel was to worship the one true God, Yahweh, and him alone.

But here was Israel sticking up a statue of a Canaanite fertility goddess in the temple, the place that was meant to be the exclusive domain of the worship of God. No wonder God was jealous! He had every right to be! Doing what Israel did in the temple is akin to a married person brazenly committing adultery at home in the marriage bed.

But that wasn’t all. In Ezek 8:7–12 we see that at the entrance to the court, after Ezekiel dug through a wall, seventy of the elders of Israel were worshipping idols made in the image of various creepy-crawlies and other kinds of disgusting beasts that had been engraved on the wall. The leaders of Israel were in the dark secretly worshipping animal idols. And they were doing this because they thought that God hadn’t seen their difficulties but had abandoned Israel in the face of the Babylonian armies (Ezek 8:12).

But that wasn’t all! At the entrance of the north gate, Ezekiel saw women were “weeping for Tammuz” (Ezek 8:14). They were weeping as part of the worship of this goddess, their tears representing the rain that they hoped Tammuz, a Babylonian fertility god, would send.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, Ezek 8:16–17 goes even further. In the inner court, 25 men had their backs turned to the Lord’s temple. They were facing east, worshipping the sun! They had turned their backs and their backsides on God, literally as well as figuratively!

Israel had become idolatrous, unfaithful, and had filled the land with violence; and because of this God had been provoked to anger (Ezek 8:17). Israel had provoked God’s jealousy and anger so much so that God said to Ezekiel: “I will act in wrath. My eye will not spare, nor will I have pity. Even if they cry in my ears with a loud voice, I will not hear them” (Ezek 8:18).

With idolatry rampant in the temple, Ezekiel’s sightseeing tour must have been a terrible disappointment. But what is the significance of all of this?

The message of Ezek 8 is clear. God can get angry with his people if they turn their backs on him and engage in rampant idolatry. Chapter 8 is significant in the flow of the book of Ezekiel because it precedes the vision of the glory of God leaving the temple, which is recorded in ch. 10. In other words, we find here in ch. 8 the key reason why God allowed the Babylonian army to capture and destroy Jerusalem. It was because of their idolatry. It was idolatry that led to God’s presence withdrawing from his people. It was because the people of Judah followed the practices of the peoples around them, and worshipped what everyone else worshipped, different gods, each under the form of a particular image, that led God to give effect to the sanctions of the Mosaic covenant. Just as had been agreed upon at the foot of Mount Sinai, if Israel did not want God, then God would leave Israel, leaving her to her own devices. Israel would be easy prey for the next strong army that came along, and this is exactly what happened. In the year 586 B.C., the Babylonian army came and captured Jerusalem; and the temple, the symbol of God’s presence among his people, was destroyed.

The awful picture of a city destroyed speaks powerfully of the consequences of idolatry for God’s people. Idolatry is like a deadly infectious virus against which we must strive to protect ourselves. The sin of idolatry is deadly serious. All sins are bad, but the most serious sin of all is actually the sin of idolatry. The first two commandments of the Ten Commandments come first because they are the most fundamental in terms of our relationship with God. Idolatry is like unfaithfulness in a marriage. There is no faster way than unfaithfulness to destroy a marriage, because the act of unfaithfulness itself is a repudiation of the relationship, which is by definition an exclusive relationship. In a similar way, idolatry strikes at the heart of our relationship with God. If left unchecked and unrepented of, it has the potential to lead to apostasy.

And idolatry was not just a problem for the Old Testament people of God. It is also something that affects Christians today. The Apostle Paul says in 1 Cor 10:1–21: “Let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor 10:12); “these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did” (1 Cor 10:6); “therefore … flee from idolatry” (1 Cor 10:14). “You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” (1 Cor 10:21–22).

Like the Thessalonian Christians, being saved means that Christians have turned away from idols to serve the living and true God (1 Thess 1:9). The problem is, however, that idol worship is all around us, and it can easily creep up on us. John Calvin, the famous Reformer, once said: “Every one of us is, even from his mother’s womb, a master craftsman of idols.” What idols have we been tempted to craft for ourselves lately?

Westerners have traditionally not been tempted to worship physical idols of gods on a large scale. But if we look around at Western society today, there are many idols being worshipped. We may not see many temples with images of Buddha, Shiva, or other gods very often in the West; but they do exist. Around Cabramatta in Sydney where I normally go to church, and where there are many people of Chinese and Vietnamese background, there are lots of Buddhist temples, for example. But just because most Westerners don't see statues doesn’t mean that our society doesn’t have idols. The well-known American evangelist D. L. Moody has said in an American context: "You don’t have to go to heathen lands today to find false gods. America is full of them. Whatever you love more than God is your idol.”

These words apply just as equally to any Western country, not just America. The famous Reformer, Martin Luther, said: “whatever man loves, that is his god. For he carries it in his heart; he goes about with it night and day; he sleeps and wakes with it, be it what it may: wealth or self, pleasure or renown.” As was his want, there’s a bit of overstatement in the teaching of Luther just quoted, but what he is saying is that whatever one loves more than God, that is one’s god.

Is there anything or anyone you love more than God? Luther mentioned wealth. In Col 3:5, Paul describes greed or covetousness as being idolatry. If you find yourself thinking all day about money, chances are you’ve got a problem with the idol that many Westerners worship today: the idol of wealth. Or perhaps your idol is your self? Or perhaps pleasure? Or renown (otherwise known as fame)? Perhaps even your wife or husband? Or your children’s scholastic achievements? Maybe it’s real estate.

If there’s anything that we love more than God, it’s actually an idol! But the message of Ezek 8 is warning us not to turn our backs on God. It is warning us not to engage in idolatry. Idolatry has the potential to destroy our relationship with God, so we need to be extremely careful here. Whatever idol we are tempted to worship, we need to turn our back on it, and make sure that we stay true to the one true and living God, the God who has revealed himself to humanity in Jesus.

Whatever we are tempted to worship, even if it’s a good thing in itself, God calls upon each one of us today to get rid of it! If the idol is something bad, then we’re to get rid of it from our lives. But if the idol is something good, then what we need to do is to put it back in the place it belongs, somewhere below God on a scale of priority.

Idolatry is deadly serious. In Gal 5, Paul lists as one of the works of the flesh, idolatry. He then warns his Christian audience: “I warn you, as I warned you before … those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God” (Gal 5:21). A similar message emerges in 1 Cor 10. We need to be careful that our lifestyle or what we do is not provoking the Lord to jealousy.

Christians have been saved to worship the Lord! Christians have been saved to have God as our number one! But idolatry has the potential to destroy this relationship. We need to make sure, therefore, that we do not endanger our heavenly inheritance, but to repent of any idolatry that has been in our life recently.

Paul said: “you cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). A person cannot worship God and follow demons. May God give each of us the strength and wisdom to ruthlessly root out idolatry from our lives, and to be committed to the pure worship of God instead. We don’t want to provoke the Lord to jealousy, do we?