Invitations (part 2)

This is where it gets even more interesting, and also where the narrative connections, both that of Jesus in Luke/Acts and Jesus inside the Creator God’s plan, take over and are revealed.  As has already been seen, “…The the master of the household was furious at the report of the excuses for lack of attendance at the banquet and said to his slave “Go out quickly to the streets and alleys of the city, and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame.”  Then the slave said, “Sir, what you instructed has been done, and there is still room.”  So the master said to his slave, “Go out to the highways and the country roads and urge people to come in, so that my house will be filled” (14:21b-23).  How does this fit within the over-arching Biblical narrative? 

Taking in the whole scope of Scripture, the offering of excuses should remind an observer of the oft-repeated offering of excuses to be found within the pages of the sacred writ.  While one can think about the excuses on offer from Jeremiah, Saul, Gideon, and Moses, as to why the Creator God could not effectively use them, one can here be sent all the way back to the very first excuses of Scripture, which are to be found in the opening pages of Genesis.  There, effectively, the Creator God had made preparations for something wonderful (a banquet of sorts) and sent out His invitations.  Those invitations, of course, were extended to the first divine image-bearers, that being Adam and Eve. 

“God created humankind in His own image, in the image of God He created them, male and female He created them” (1:27).  It is then that a directive (an invitation) is given to this pair.  They are invited to partake in the Creator’s intentions for His world.  “God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply!  Fill the earth and subdue it!  Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and every creature that moves on the ground.’” (1:28) 

Without getting into the order of the creation accounts on offer in chapters one and two, the reader will go on to learn that “The Lord God took the man and placed him in the orchard in Eden to care for it and to maintain it.  Then the Lord God commanded the man, ‘You may freely eat fruit from every tree of the orchard, but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die” (2:15-17).  With this, the invitation takes on specificity. 

Shortly thereafter, at least in terms of the narrative, it is reported that “the serpent was more shrewd than any of the wild animals that the Lord God had made.  He said to the woman, ‘Is it really true that God said, “You must not eat from any tree of the orchard?”  The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit from the trees of the orchard; but concerning the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the orchard God said, ‘You must not eat from it, and you must not touch it, or else you will die.’”’” (3:1-3) 

Without offering up the remainder of this part of the story, as all should be quite familiar with how it turned out, suffice it to say that both Adam and Eve ate from the tree, thereby introducing death into the world.  They rejected the Creator’s invitation.  Then what did they do?  They offered up excuses.  The Creator God asked “Did you eat from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” (3:11b)  What was Adam’s excuse?  “The woman whom You gave me, she gave me some fruit from the tree and I ate it” (3:12).  What was Eve’s excuse?  “The serpent tricked me, and I ate” (3:13b). 

Understandably, the covenant God is angry with these individuals that have now declined His invitation of participation in His purposes.  However, what the big picture of Scripture reveals is that the same God re-directs His anger.  That re-direction begins, in earnest, in chapter twelve of Genesis, when the covenant God invites Abraham (Abram) to participate in His plan.  Abraham’s (Abram’s) acceptance of the Creator God’s gracious invitation is prelude to, and because of the promise of descendants, looks toward Israel’s invitation to participate with their God in His plans for the redemption of the entire creation. 

Love On John's Terms (part 14)

Amazingly, the author of this Gospel presents the people as having already forgotten about the bread that was in fact provided, though it has just been referenced by Jesus.  Interestingly enough, if one was to examine Jesus’ statement closely, which was “I tell you the solemn truth, you are looking for me not because you saw miraculous signs, but because you ate all the loaves of bread you wanted” (John 6:26), there might be an inclination to think that Jesus draws a distinction between the performance of miraculous signs and the provision of bread.  However, taking that step might be drawing the distinction a bit too sharply.  Surely the multiplication of the loaves must be taken as a miraculous sign---as much as was the provision of manna in the wilderness. 

So it seems as if Jesus is indicating that it was not the miraculous sign of the bread being multiplied that has caused the people to continue to come to Him, but rather the filling of their bellies.  This appears to function as a reflection upon Israel in the wilderness, in that even though daily bread was miraculously provided to the people of the covenant God, the story of their time in the wilderness is underlined by a startling lack of belief in their God’s ability to fulfill His promises. 

Even though the people were faithful to go out to gather the manna each and every day (excluding the Sabbath), they did not follow through on the deeds that their God required, which was a faithful belief in His ability to perform on behalf of His people, according to His covenant promises, as He worked out His intention to bring them into the promised land and set them on high as a kingdom of people to represent His glory (making Israel a new Adam in a new garden of Eden, as a microcosm of the Creator God’s intentions for the entirety of His created order). 

It might be the case that Jesus is here making the same type of point, while the author also shows Him reflecting back to the people’s desire to acclaim Him as their king, so that He might take on, overthrow, and drive out the Romans.  If Jesus would have acceded to the people’s demands, such would be yet another instance of Israel not following through on the deeds that their God requires, rather than operating on a faithful belief that their God will enter into history on His own terms and timing, to perform on behalf of His people according to what was understood to be His covenant promises to them.  The taking of actions against the Romans could be akin to the instances of Israel’s wilderness experience in which the people took it upon themselves to act to bring themselves into their God’s purposed kingdom, with these instances never turning out well. 

While all of these things are being considered, while also considering the fact that the author is making a presentation to a community that is hearing this in a single sitting, that is ensconced within a controlled oral tradition, and is well-versed in the history of Israel, it would not at all be a mis-step to consider the provision of bread, prima facie, as an act of love to which disciples of Jesus should aspire.  Even though it was not met with a proper response, or at least with the response that Jesus may have desired, Jesus still met a physical need.  He did so, as far as this Gospel is concerned, as an action of the incarnate God of Israel.  As a loving and compassionate God revealed Himself to His people on a continual basis through the provision of manna, and did so for His people in spite of what are reported to be consistent failings, so Jesus acted out of love and compassion to reveal His God in much the same way.      

Only Son (part 13)

In the twenty-sixth verse of the first chapter of Genesis, after God has pronounced everything as good and established an order in this world that He so obviously loved, He takes one final step and says “Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness, so they may rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move on the earth” (Genesis 1:26). 

Yes, the Creator God loved the world, and He showed forth that love by creating a being in and as His own image that would reflect His glory into the creation and be a reminder of His creative power and His rule.  He created Adam.  He sent the one originally understood, as part of the story of the covenant people, to be His one and only son into the world to rule the creation in proxy for Him.  If this is understood, then the one that has that understanding is one step closer to appreciating the full impact of Jesus’ words to Nicodemus. 

Genesis insists that “God created humankind in His own image, in the image of God He created them, male and female He created them” (1:27).  Furthermore, in relation to being created in and as the image of the Creator God, so as to bear that image in and for the whole of the creation, the language of covenant is employed when the author confirms that “God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply!  Fill the earth and subdue it!” (1:28a)  What follows from that report is rounded off with “God saw all that He had made---and it was very good!” (1:31a) 

So humankind (Adam) is given a charge by their Creator.  It could easily be said that the covenant God of Israel loved His good creation (world).  Owing to that love, He created a son (Adam) in His own image and sent that son into the world with a specific purpose.  What was that purpose?  It was to rule and steward and subdue and represent the Creator to the world.  Ultimately though, there was something underlying all of that.  The foundation on which those purposes rested was belief.  It was trust. 

Trust in what?  “The Lord God commanded the man, ‘You may freely eat fruit from every tree of the orchard, but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (2:16-17a).  This was an obvious commandment and a test.  The Creator God loved the world and sent His one and only son into the world, and set up a perimeter to see whether or not His Son would follow the commandment as part of the charge to be reflect his Father’s glory into the world.  Would the word of the Creator be believed?  Of course, all live with the sad result of the failure associated with this relatively simple commandment, which was that it was not something to which Adam (the one originally thought of as the son of God) adhered. 

The corollary to the Creator God’s commandment to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is well known, as it was said “for when you eat from it you will surely die” (2:17b).  Genesis reports that Adam, as the divine image-bearer, had been offered up the fruit of every tree of the garden, save one.  One of those trees was the tree of life (2:9).  When Adam and Eve were exiled from the garden after violating their God’s clear commandment (thereby finding themselves outside of their God’s purpose for them), careful attention is paid to this tree of life. 

This demonstrates that the tree of life is of special concern to the Creator God, thus it is said that “When He drove the man out, He placed on the eastern side of the orchard in Eden angelic sentries who used the flame of a whirling sword to guard the way to the tree of life” (3:24).  This is explaining in the report of the Creator saying “Now that the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil, he must not be allowed to stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever” (3:22).  Clearly then, it is being communicated that the covenant God did not want His now fallen image-bearer to live forever in a state of corruption, so He made a move to limit access to the tree of life.  Apparently, it is to be taken that the fruit of this tree was designed to render possible such an eternal existence. 

Suppression Of Truth (part 2)

It is said that this suppression of truth occurred even though what could be known about the God of creation had been made quite plain to them (Romans 1:19).  Indeed, Scripture seems to indicate that Adam and Eve had a regular fellowship with the Creator, in His very presence, as it was following their eye-opening fruit-eating that “the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God moving about in the orchard at the breezy time of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the orchard” (Genesis 3:8).  This could be taken as an indication that such was a regular occurrence.  In that time spent with Adam and Eve, it could be presumed to have been the case that it is to be understood that the covenant God made Himself and His ways and His expectations very plain to them. 

Based upon that, could it not be asserted that the experience of Adam and Eve is reflected in the next verse, where Paul writes “since the creation of the world His invisible attributes---His eternal power and divine nature---have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made”? (Romans 1:20a)  Paul’s position is that though they would not have been able to tangibly see or feel the eternal power of the Creator God, it would most certainly have been the case that they would have been brought into an understanding of it by the very fact of their existence, along with that of the world.  They would have understood that power by observing what was all around them---what had been made. 

The Creator God’s divine nature would have been understood, especially by Adam, as having been made in and as the image of God, and undoubtedly having had that communicated to him as he was given the responsibility of naming all of the living creatures (according to Genesis 2:20).  This was part of the exercise of the stewarding authority over the creation that had been delivered to Adam.  Along with that, Adam had been placed in Eden, in the world, to care for it and to maintain it (2:15). 

These two things, along with the command in regards to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, would presumably have given Adam a vision of God’s nature, as part of the bearing of the divine image (which would seem to entail some measure of a shared nature) was the authority over and responsibility for his God’s creation.  It is owing to this direct knowledge of and fellowship with the Creator God, with the explicit commands of that God and responsibilities that sprang from that knowledge and fellowship, that would have left Adam and Eve “without excuse” (Romans 1:20b) when it came time for their God to question them about the matter involving the serpent, the fruit, and their rebellion.      

Following the assertion that there is a lack of any excuse, as one continues to view these verses from the first chapter of Romans through the lens of Adam and Eve and the fall, one goes on to read “For although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or give Him thanks, but became futile in their thoughts and their senseless hearts were darkened” (Romans 1:21).  Once again, it is appropriate to here reflect on the implied fact that Adam and Eve most certainly knew the Creator God, and in a way that would have been quite unique to them alone.  In the midst of this knowledge and this way of knowing, they still rebelled against Him and ate the fruit.  In that, there was most certainly no glory given to their God.  There was no thankfulness. 

Nebuchadnezzar's Fall (part 4)

According to the Scriptural narrative, as the first divine image-bearer, Adam had been given complete dominion over the covenant God’s good creation.  Through his actions however, as creation’s representative before its God---the creation’s king and ruler as it were---that creation had become marred.  In what amounted to bringing himself honor through self-worship, in full knowledge of his desire to be like his Creator God with whom he was said to have regular and direct fellowship (presumably that he might best know how to be the divine image bearer in and for the creation), Adam fell from the position of authority into which he had been placed. 

Due to this, Adam was told “cursed is the ground thanks to you; in painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.  It will produce thorns and thistles for you, but you will eat the grain of the field.  By the sweat of your brow you will eat food until you return to the ground” (3:17b-19a).  So the creation itself was unable to escape the judgment that came to its representative.  How is this reflected in the Nebuchadnezzar story?  In much the same way that Adam had been driven from the garden of Eden, because of the king’s self-worship, when he was stripped of his rule and authority, the Creator God said to him, “You will be driven from human society” (Daniel 4:32a).  Adam had given up his full humanity, which is a fate that would come to Nebuchadnezzar as well. 

Yes, it must be understood that, in his fall, Adam gave up and rejected what it meant to be fully human.  Adam, having been made as the image of the Creator God for the world---designed to trust and honor and worship his Creator, lost that which the Creator God had apparently intended for humankind.  This realization makes Nebuchadnezzar’s plight of being “driven from human society” all the more fascinating. 

To this fact of being driven from human society, the God of Israel added that Nebuchadnezzar would “live with the wild animals” (4:32b).  With his dominion over creation taken from him, in which he was clearly placed by the Creator God (much like Nebuchadnezzar had been given power and a kingdom by that same God for a particular purpose and time) in a stewarding, care-taking, responsible, and God-like superiority over the beasts of the field (how would the Creator of all things treat His creation?), Adam’s expulsion from the garden now meant that he too was going to live with the wild animals. 

Why?  Why is there this parallel in the stories of Adam and Nebuchadnezzar?  It is because, quite frankly, humans become what they worship.  Adam, as Scripture seems to indicate, turned his thoughts upon himself, essentially worshiping the creature.  Nebuchadnezzar, in many respects, did the same.  With that being so, the Creator God drove both of them to join the realm over which they had previously ruled, and to live like the remainder of the created order---to live like that which they had now come to worship.  By over-reaching, both of them denied the Creator God’s purpose for them.         

Along with being driven from human society and living with wild animals, the covenant God tells Nebuchadnezzar that he “will be fed grass like oxen” (Daniel 4:32c).  As one continues to compare this king’s fall with the fall of the earth’s first ruler (Adam-the divine image-bearer that originally been given sovereignty over the creation), is it possible to find a corollary with this statement in the fall of man?  In a way, yes.  

Nebuchadnezzar's Fall (part 3)

Looking to Genesis then, it is not difficult to observe that the fall of Nebuchadnezzar well mirrors the fall of man.  How so?  Firstly, with the statements that are attributed to him, he appears to have assigned himself the place of the Creator God.  He effectively deified himself.  This, of course, was not all uncommon in that day.  Having previously spoken of Daniel’s God by declaring “How great are His signs!  How mighty are His wonders!  His kingdom will last forever, and His authority continues from one generation to the next” (Daniel 4:3), by his declaration concerning “the great Babylon that I have built for my royal residence by my own mighty strength and for my majestic honor” (4:30b), he re-assigned the words that had previously been offered up in recognition of the God of Israel, to himself.  This is hubris indeed.   

So how does this mirror the fall of man?  If one were to turn to the third chapter of Genesis, the reader would find the serpent speaking to Eve in regards to the “forbidden fruit” and saying, “God knows that when you eat from it your eyes open and you will be like divine beings who know good and evil” (3:5).  So what was the temptation that was offered to Eve?  Essentially, it would seem that she was being told that she could be like the Creator God. 

Moving forward then, efforts must be made to place flesh and blood on the story, imagining that, having taken the step of eating but not dying (at least not physically in that moment as she may have expected), she would have taken the next step of communicating similar information to that which she had heard from the serpent to her husband Adam.  Thus he also ate the fruit.  In this, he too, not satisfied with having been made as the divine image in and for the creation, and rather than humbly and faithfully serving as a steward of the creation over which he had been given dominion by the Creator, Adam desired to be like the Creator God.  In the eating of the fruit, in what was a likely a full knowledge of what it was that he hoped to attain (being like his Creator), like Nebuchadnezzar, Adam (and Eve) appropriated to themselves that which was not theirs. 

For Nebuchadnezzar, the awful announcement and execution of judgment came with rapidity.  The Creator God does not ultimately abide those that He ordains for a purpose transgressing their roles.  Thus, the voice from heaven rang out, informing the self-idolatrous king that had put himself in the place of the Creator God and was now thinking of himself along the same lines that he had previously thought of God, “that your kingdom has been removed from you” (Daniel 4:31b). 

It could certainly be said that Adam’s experience, as set forth in the Scriptural narrative, was no different.  Illustrating this, Genesis reports that “the Lord God said, ‘Now that the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil, he must not be allowed to stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.’  So the Lord God expelled him from the orchard in Eden to cultivate the ground from which he had been taken” (Genesis 3:22-23).  In Adam’s situation, it seems that the last thing that the Creator God wanted was for Adam to eat of the tree of life, and therefore, be able to live forever in his now corrupted and completely unintended state. 

Veil Of The Temple (part 8 of 9)

Until Jesus’ Resurrection took place, and the power of the Resurrection that came to be understood as the point at which the Creator God had begun to renew and restore a corrupted creation was unleashed into the world, those that had been raised in their tombs at the time of Jesus’ death were not yet allowed to enter into the world in which the Christ was going to become King and in which the creation was going to be renewed. 

This has a number of implications.  Those that have been crucified with Christ, who are those that go down into the curse of death with Him as their representative by casting their allegiance with Him and confessing Him as King, and who were born into a world in which death is understood to have reigned victorious because of the contra-covenant actions of their first representative Adam, have also been raised with the Christ. 

Believing in Jesus, which, because of the crucifixion and the claim to Resurrection, is so improbable that it is generally acknowledged that such belief must come as a gift of God that is made operable by the Holy Spirit, makes the believers alive but waiting in their tombs, ready to enter into His new creation when the final Resurrection takes place and to assist in that project in an effort to show that the kingdom of the Creator God, through Christ, has been established on earth, making those efforts at bringing heaven to earth in conjunction with the ongoing hope for the final and ultimate consummation of the Christ’s kingdom on earth.

Now, one might wonder why it was that only “many saints who had died were raised.”  If the power of Christ’s death truly had the effect of shredding the veil of separation and moving the cherubim aside, signifying that the curse was broken and Eden was once again accessible to man as part of the Creator God’s plan, why only “many”?  Why not all?  This probably has to do with what was then-current burial practice, in which the dead were laid in a tomb until the flesh decomposed from the body. 

Once that decomposition had occurred, the bones of the deceased were then placed in an ossuary (a bone box).  What Matthew may desire to communicate, as He communicates the significance of Jesus’ death and the significance of the Resurrection that those that are familiar with the story know is coming, is that those that were raised at the death of Jesus, which coincided with the rending of the veil, were most likely those that had recently died, but had not decomposed.  They were not given a renewed body suitable for the new creation, as Jesus would receive.  They were not given a Resurrection body, but had been raised in much the same way that Lazarus had been raised, with a body still subject to death and corruption, in the midst of a creation that was still subject to death and corruption. 

So it is for believers in this day.  In another implication, believers can understand that even though they have been raised with Christ, and that they take part in the kingdom of heaven as they call Jesus Lord and King, believing in His Gospel, they are very much subject to death and corruption, still living in a world that is subject to the same, though this world is constantly being re-shaped by the power of the Creator God as He works through His covenant  people to accomplish His good.  They await their new bodies, their glorified bodies, which they hope to receive when Jesus returns, when death is given its final defeat, and when the curse of death is finally and completely removed from this world, which is that for which the entire creation groans.  They experience new life and fellowship with the Creator God through union with His Christ (belief in the Gospel that Jesus is Lord), with the curse broken.  

Terms Of The Covenant (part 2 of 2)

What the Creator God is presumed to have said to Judah through Jeremiah, the same God effectively and presumably said to Adam, which was “Obey me and carry out the terms of the agreement exactly as I commanded you.  If you do, you will be My people and I will be your God” (Jeremiah 11:4b).  Had Adam been faithful to the covenant conditions that had been delivered to him, death would not have come upon him and (again, presumably) the creation over which he was given dominion. 

The Scriptural narrative suggests that Eden and the covenant God’s creation would have remained in the state of perfection in which it was delivered to man.  If His chosen people were faithful, Israel’s God promised to “keep the promise I swore on oath to your ancestors to give them a land flowing with milk and honey” (11:5a).  “Milk and honey” could certainly also be rendered as “fertile fields and fine pastures,” which could also serve as a description of the land into which man had been placed before the curse of his covenant failure caused it to be overrun with thorns and thistles.

It is possible to hear the Creator God not only speaking to the people of Judah, but to all that would eventually come to be His covenant people, as He says, “I solemnly warned your ancestors (Israel & Adam respectively) to obey Me.  I warned them again and again, every since I delivered the out of Egypt until this very day” (11:7).  Obviously, Adam was not personally delivered out of Egypt, though He was placed, as Israel would eventually be, in a land of the Creator God’s choosing. 

The described paths of Adam and Israel converge again, as one reads “But they did not listen to Me or pay any attention to Me!” (11:8a).  Clearly, this could be said of both, which lends credence to seeing Adam as the embodiment of Israel in the creation narrative.  “Each one of them,” the Creator God says, “followed the stubborn inclinations of his own wicked heart.  So I brought on them all the punishments threatened in the covenant because they did not carry out its terms as I commanded them to do” (11:8b). 

For His covenant people, the punishment was the curse that Jeremiah insisted was on its way; and for Adam and all of humankind, the punishment was death.  Why?  Because the Creator God is faithful to His covenants, even if and when those that are charged to be His image-bearers are not.  The Creator God of Israel demanded and expected trust, but the story of Scripture indicates that He did not receive it.  He expected these creatures that had been made in His image to reflect His glory, but they failed.        

For Israel and for Adam (and all the descendants of Adam), it could be said, “The people of Judah and the citizens of Jerusalem have plotted rebellion against Me…  They too have paid allegiance to other gods and worshiped them” (11:9,10b).  Both rebelled and, for all practical purposes, fell into idolatry.  Israel found itself bowing to the gods of the surrounding nations, whether by choice or through force, whereas Adam, beginning the idolatry with which each of his progeny (according to the Scriptures) is afflicted, seems to have bowed down to and worshiped himself, making himself the measure of all things, in trustful worship of the creature rather than the Creator.  The sovereign Lord’s response to this is consistent, as He says, “those gods will by no means be able to save them when disaster strikes them” (11:12b).  A redeemer would be necessary.    

Terms Of The Covenant (part 1 of 2)

Tell them that the Lord, the God of Israel, says, “Anyone who does not keep the terms of the covenant will be under a curse.” – Jeremiah 11:3  (NET)

So it was for the people of the Creator God, Israel (specifically those of the southern kingdom of Judah in the time of Jeremiah).  The curses under which they would find themselves are presented with utmost clarity in the twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy (expounding on the Levitical curses).  Because Jeremiah is speaking on the coming destruction of Jerusalem and subjugation of Judah by the Babylonians, and because such subjugation and oppression can be located within the extensive list of curses that Israel’s God had promised to bring upon His covenant people if they did not keep the terms of the covenant, it can be reliably affirmed that the Creator God’s people had not kept to the terms of the covenant. 

More specifically, the covenant people had not lived up to their responsibility to properly bear the divine image, as set forth in the laws that were understood to have been provided to them by their God, through Moses.  To Judah in Jeremiah’s day, in reference to the terms of the covenant and its curses, the Creator God said, “Those are the terms that I charged your ancestors to keep when I brought them out of Egypt, that place which was like an iron-smelting furnace” (11:4a).   

However, it would behoove later observers not to look down upon them or speak poorly of them because of this.  The covenant people were unable to keep the terms of the covenant because they were human, and therefore, as the story of Scripture seems to be supposed to be understood, subject to the same failings to be found in the head of the entire race, that being Adam.  The covenant that Israel violated was not the first covenant to be violated.  They were not the first to find failure when it came to the Creator God’s expectations.  To find that occurrence, one must look to the book of Genesis, remembering that the Genesis narrative is crucial for the self-identification and self-understanding of the people of Israel. 

There one is able to read that “The Lord God took the man and placed him in the orchard in Eden to care for it and to maintain it” (Genesis 2:15).  This care and maintenance was a portion of the Creator God’s covenant with the being that had been created in His image.  Reading on, one  also finds it said that “You may freely eat fruit from every tree of the orchard, but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die” (2:16-17).  Of course, owing to the knowledge of pain and suffering, information about which provides a daily bombardment of the sense, all are quite aware that the terms of this covenant were violated. 

Again, as the Scriptural narrative seems to insist, owing to that violation, because the Creator God is faithful to His covenants, all of humanity and creation came under a curse, as death is said to have made its entry into the world.  The curse came upon the good creation of the covenant God for the same reason that the curse came upon that same God’s people, Israel.  Terms of the covenant were not kept.      

Remaking Creation (part 2)

It is with thoughts of this defining story of a captive, groaning Israel now placed squarely in the midst of Paul’s words here that we now read “Not only this, but we ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we eagerly await our adoption, the redemption of our bodies” (8:23).  God redeemed Israel from their slavery and delivered them into a land of promise, flowing with milk and honey, and so too is He going to do the same for His renewed Israel who call Jesus “King.”  We know this to be true because the Spirit has convinced us of the truth of the firstfruits of that redemption, that being Jesus, raised physically and bodily into a world that was now forever changed, His physical body now a spiritual body because it is animated by the power of heaven.  God redeemed Jesus’ body from its bondage to death, delivering it, renewed, remade, and re-created from the grave, and that same Spirit is now at work, renewing, remaking, and re-creating anywhere and everywhere a person engages in an activity that declares a belief in the Gospel of Jesus and the kingdom that said belief and Gospel entails.  Israel’s small portion of good land was merely a signpost of the good land that would be the restored creation.  

Like Israel out of Egypt, “in hope we were saved” (8:24a).  It is hope because we can only catch glimpses of it, in the midst of the ongoing bondage that is to be observed all around us.  Yes, this family of God is very much like Israel in Egypt, who groaned in hopeful expectation; and to this end, Paul writes “Now hope that is seen is not hope, because who hopes for what he sees?  But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with endurance” (8:24b-25).  Israel hoped and God acted.  We hope and God acts.  We will continue to hope and we will continue to see God acting, through us, as those actions, which may entail suffering and shame, continually point us towards the consummation of all things and the glorious advent of the kingdom of God on earth.

As we move on to verse twenty-six of chapter eight, we see that Paul continues the theme that is at work, which is the enfolding of all peoples within the defining narrative of the covenant people of God.  He writes “In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness, for we do not know how we should pray, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with inexpressible groaning” (8:26).  The context for this statement is still Israel’s groaning under Egyptian bondage.  The context for this is still the crying out of verse fifteen, the bondage of decay of verse twenty-one, the groaning of creation expressed in verse twenty-two, and the inward groaning of verse twenty-three.  As we saw in verse twenty-five, and in the hoping for what cannot be seen, Israel hoped for what it could not see when in Egypt.  According to the story, known by Paul and by which Israel defined itself, Israel had the hope of a promise that had been made to Abraham.  In the fifteenth chapter of Genesis we read “Then the Lord said to Abram, ‘Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a foreign country.  They will be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years.  But I will execute judgment on the nation that they will serve.  Afterward they will come out with many possessions” (15:14). 

With the point being made repeatedly in Paul’s communications that the Gentile peoples have been enfolded into the story of Israel, in a need to embrace that narrative as their own that they may understand the ministry of Jesus and the actions, intentions, and desires of the Creator God as they go about the business of participating in the kingdom of God that had been announced, enacted, and advanced in the life, death, and Resurrection of Jesus; and with that enfolding necessarily reaching beyond Israel as a unique people and stretching back to Abraham as Gentiles join the worldwide covenant family that was promised to Abraham (of which the nation of Israel was a foretaste, much like Israel’s promised land, hearkening back to the unsullied world and the garden of Eden, was to be a glimpse of the restored creation to come), it is necessary to include this particular portion of the Abraham story, as it is gives shape to the groaning of Israel in Egypt.  Though the labor of their bondage may have seemed futile, there was a hope, based on a promise, and they were able to entrust that God was at work.