Invitations (part 3 of 3)

Now, while some look at the parable of the great banquet and see Israel as those that have offered up excuses as to why they cannot attend, and then accordingly see the extension of an invitation to the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame, along with a further extension of invitations to those that must be compelled to come in as the invitation to the church, without getting into Jesus’ clash with the Temple and its authorities, it can be said that such an interpretation is incomplete, mis-directed, and quite unfortunate. 

If Jesus is casting Himself in the role of the man that is hosting the banquet, then His mention of the poor, crippled, blind, and lame fits nicely with His programmatic declaration at the synagogue as recorded in Luke’s fourth chapter, which is then worked out in Jesus’ public ministry, as He goes and reaches out to the poor, crippled, blind, and lame throughout Israel. 

Putting the standard and unfortunate interpretation to the side, and plugging in Israel’s defining narrative, it is possible to view the excuse makers as Adam and Eve, with the first round of additional invitations sent out to Israel.  If that is the case, then the second round of invitations are sent out to the Gentiles.  These are the ones that must be urged, compelled, and cajoled to come in (Luke 14:23), especially when considering the fact that (at that time) Israel had been actively restricting the covenantal blessings to themselves, expecting the kingdom of their God to benefit them alone as they are seated at the places of great honor at the expected messianic banquet. 

Though they are most assuredly invited and continue to be invited to participate in their God’s covenantal offering for the world, the Israel of Jesus’ day made it clear to Gentiles that the covenant was for Israel alone.  Accordingly, many were overtly careful to keep the boundaries of covenant identification (circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath-keeping) firmly in place and binding on any that wanted to place themselves in a position to enjoy the covenantal blessings of Israel’s God. 

Is there an over-reach in this analogy?  As is always the case, that does exist as a possibility, but is it necessary to look closely at how Luke presents the second and third rounds of invitations.  First, the slave is directed to go out to (1) the streets and (2) alleys, where he will find the poor, crippled, blind, and the lame---those to whom Jesus’ Israel-focused ministry is primarily directed, and who are the regular recipients of its benefits (think of what Jesus tells John the Baptist’s disciples in reference to His ministry within Israel---“Go tell John what you have seen and heard: The blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor have good news proclaimed to them” 7:22) . 

Then, once that is done, the slave is sent to (3) the highways and (4) the country roads, which is where he will find those that must be convinced to come to the banquet, as this would very much be a surprising invitation.  Why does that matter?  Well, in wrapping things up, this study turns to Acts, where Luke continues His story, where he often draws to conclusion things that were begun in the Gospel.  What is to be found in the first chapter?  Specifically, one finds something that could be considered an excellent parallel to the story of the great banquet.  How so? 

The parable of the banquet in Luke fourteen is prompted by an anonymous declaration of “Blessed is everyone who will feast in the kingdom of God!” (14:15b)  So the immediate context of the story is the kingdom of the Creator God, and Jesus proceeds to provide a glimpse into His thoughts concerning the same.  In the course of the telling, Luke presents the directives with the four-fold destination: streets, alleys, highways, country roads.  In the first chapter of Acts, the disciples speak to Jesus and say “Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” (1:6b), thus providing the immediate context for Jesus’ statement to follow. 

Again, as in Luke fourteen, sharing His understanding of the nature of the kingdom of Israel’s God, Jesus answers by eventually saying “you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you” (1:8a).  To this Jesus adds a directive with a four-fold destination, saying “and you will be My witnesses in (1) Jerusalem, and in all (2) Judea” (1:8b), the streets and alleys, “and (3) Samaria, and to the (4) farthest parts of the earth” (1:8b), which can be thought of as the highways and country roads.  Such is the nature of the Creator God’s gracious invitation.      

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. 

Absalom (part 1)

Now David’s son Absalom… - 2 Samuel 13:1a  (NET)

In this way, David’s son Absalom is introduced into the Scriptural narrative.  The story of Absalom well embodies the ongoing story of Israel, founded in the exodus by which they were defined (a life and worldview practically centered upon a remembrance of the Passover) and almost always at risk of being exiled from their promised land if they failed to uphold the covenant responsibilities that had been assigned to them. 

Absalom is introduced by way of the story of the rape of his sister, Tamar.  Chapter thirteen of second Samuel begins with “Now David’s son Absalom had a beautiful sister named Tamar” (13:1a).  For some reason, Tamar is not presented as David’s daughter, but rather, as Absalom’s sister.  It is said that Amnon, another of David’s sons “fell madly in love with Tamar” (13:1b).  This “love” eventually resulted in her being raped by Amnon.  Obviously, Tamar is humiliated and disgraced.  A pall of exile (part of Israel’s own story) is cast over her life.

Afterwards, “Tamar, devastated, lived in the house of her brother Absalom” (13:20b), and “Absalom hated Amnon because he had humiliated his sister Tamar” (13:22b).  Absalom understood that Amnon, through his actions, had brought the shame of exile to his sister.  She was suffering.  In due time he planned on bringing her vindication, with this occurring through the killing of Amnon.  Absalom held a grudge against Amnon for a considerable length of time, and the story of Absalom’s revenge picks up “Two years later” (13:23a).  Absalom conceived a plan by which he could secure his revenge, and send Amnon into the exile of death.  After Amnon’s demise has been accomplished, it is reported that “This is what Absalom has talked about from the day that Amnon humiliated his sister Tamar” (13:32b). 

With Amnon’s death, Absalom most likely feels as if he has brought vindication to his sister, somehow relieving her of the shame and disgrace that she has experienced.  However, in the process of doing what he believed would bring his sister’s suffering to an end and thus providing her with something like exodus (Israel’s story constantly superimposed on individual stories), Absalom brings exile upon himself. 

Surely, Absalom calculated this as part of the risk of what he was undertaking, and would have imagined that something like this might be necessary.  It is said that “Absalom fled and went to King Talmai son of Ammihud of Geshur” (13:37a).  Absalom’s exile brought a measure of exile to David himself, as part of him was bound up with his son, so “David grieved over his son every day” (13:37b).  Interestingly, Absalom’s self-imposed exile from his homeland lasted longer than his grudge against Amnon.  While he had plotted against Amnon for two full years, Absalom remained in Geshur for three years (13:38).  Throughout that time, “the king longed to go to Absalom, for he had since been consoled over the death of Amnon” (13:39). 

Clearly then, this correlates rather well with the broad narrative scheme of the Scriptures that begins with the first exile---an exile that was truly self-imposed---which was that of Adam and Eve.  Though obviously their exile began on a different basis from that of Absalom, in that they did not commit a vengeful murder, they did in fact bring death upon themselves and upon the whole of their progeny.  It is not surprising then, to find that vengeful murder is in the heart of one of their sons, as evidenced by Cain’s jealousy-fueled murder of his brother Abel.  Having brought death, Adam and Eve were exiled from the place of the Creator God’s presence, from the Garden of Eden, and from the Creator’s good creation.  Like Absalom, fleeing from possible punishment, their exile began with their attempting to flee from the Creator God by hiding themselves in the garden. 

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 6 of 6)

Here again, one simply finds passion misdirected to that which dishonors, springing from self-idolatry, rather than to that which acknowledges and honors the Creator God.  In a sharp and revealing contrast to the shame that was said to have been experienced by Adam and Eve when their eyes were opened and they realized what they had done and that they were naked, Paul insists that mankind’s course of dishonor and idolatry would quickly reach the point at which “Men committed shameless acts with men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error” (Romans 1:27b). 

Indeed, it would appear to be the general argument of Scripture that, because of the corruption that occurred at what is recognized as the fall of man, which is pointed to as the time at which the truth of the covenant God and of man’s purpose in this world to honor the Creator rather than self began to be suppressed, that death began its long reign.  Borrowing the language of the Apostle, this was a due penalty indeed.  With this in mind, Paul goes on to describe the lot of all of humanity, writing “And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done” (1:28). 

Thusly, from time immemorial mankind has been “filled with every kind of unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice… rife with envy, murder, strife, deceit, hostility” (1:28a).  It goes beyond that, as Paul goes on to write, “They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, contrivers of all sorts of evil, disobedient to parents, senseless, covenant-breakers, heartless, ruthless” (1:29-31).  This would certainly seem to run amiss of that which the Creator intended for His specially created image-bearers.  Paul continues, writing that even though all this be the case “they fully know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but also approve of those who practice them” (1:32).  

So yes, because man had been imprinted with/as the divine image, he retains, even in the midst of his self-worship and petulant refusal to acknowledge a god beyond himself.  Here Paul implies that there is still a basic, residual knowledge and understanding of the Creator God’s decree of death for violation of His covenant, though the fallen image-bearers impotently rage against and attempt to deny that decree, along with the just Creator that stands behind it.  In spite of this damning indictment, the reader of the letter to the Romans eventually come to find that, because of the love of God, the Christ died (5:8) for that same humanity just described, which is most definitely a truth that should not, cannot, and will not be suppressed.   

Suppression Of Truth (part 5 of 6)

Amplifying the seriousness of the charge, the Apostle Paul repeats himself and says that this situation with humanity developed because “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, Who is blessed forever!” (1:25)  Of all of the things that can be said about the fall of man, it should probably be made abundantly clear that it is said to have occurred because they believed the lie. 

In believing the lie, not only did they, in effect, point their faith towards the serpent, honoring that part of the creation more than the Creator, but above all things, it occurred because they knew themselves to be the pinnacle of their God’s creation.  With that knowledge, it would not be a stretch to surmise that they sought to worship themselves.  The serpent merely provided the justification for that which was already desired.  In many ways, this mindset continues unabated to this very day.  It is the single darkest component of man’s fallen state, and it could be said that this is what keeps humanity entrenched in the state of falling short of the glory of their Creator God. 

At this point in Romans, Paul can be understood to be moving on from Adam and Eve and surveying the scope of human history from the that day until his own, as he writes, “For this reason”---holding the lie as truth and in so doing worshiping the creation rather than the Creator---“God gave them over to dishonorable passions” (1:26a).  The implication would seem to be that mankind’s passions were no longer directed towards honoring the Creator God by engaging in the purpose for which he was created, but rather, those passions are directed towards that which dishonored the Creator by dishonoring the image of the God in which he had been made. 

It could be said that this dishonor was a diminishing of what can be called “human-ness.”   This diminishing stood in stark contrast to the Creator’s very first command to those made in and as His image, which was to “Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28).  Bringing forth life is one of the primary ways in which mankind can participate in and represent that image with which it has been endowed, and it will generally involve much sacrifice and care and concern on the part of the ones responsible (human parents) for the creation of that life. 

This necessary sacrifice, care, and concern towards a creation sounds very much like the attitude of the God that is both revealed and discovered in the pages of Scripture.  It is possible that Paul sees the rejection of this creation of life, together with the sacrifice, care, and concern that is learned in this creation and rearing of fellow humans, as a core component of the self-idolatry that is rampant within humanity, and addresses it in writing words such as “For their women exchanged the natural sexual relations for unnatural ones, and likewise the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed in their passions for one another” (1:26b-27a).  

Suppression Of Truth (part 4)

What is the end of this becoming foolish and its expression of foolish statements?  Paul writes that the ones who did not glorify the Creator God, nor give Him thanks, but became futile in their thoughts with darkened hearts, who claimed to be wise but instead became fools, “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image resembling mortal human beings or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles” (Romans 1:23). 

What Adam and Eve accomplished was indeed the beginning of idolatry, and it began with self-worship, along with a complete disregard of their God and a forgetfulness of the Creator.  A forgotten Creator, together with self-worship, can be seen when Eve gives birth to a son and declares herself to have been able to create a man.  With that, man, rather than continuing to comprehend himself as the steward of life, now looked at himself as being able to bring forth life---as god-like. 

There is an implication that once the Creator God is shoved to the side and replaced by another creator, then the fact that there was an act of creation (along with an associated gifting of responsibilities) by that Creator falls quickly from the mind.  Having forgotten their Creator, and no longer bearing in mind that they were part of a good created order, Adam and Eve (and those to whom they gave birth) could look around them, observing the entire order of nature, and surmise that the animals that they saw had brought themselves into existence, that they could also pro-create and generate life, and that they were therefore worthy of worship as well.  So began the interminable fall into the practice of idolatry that has gripped mankind from the very beginning.  The Scriptures seem to insist that it is only the grace of the covenant God of Israel that enables one to break free from the ingrained tendency to idolatry, so as to be able to see the Creator in His glory, and in doing so, seek to honor and give worship to Him.      

   

With mankind having made its nearly irrevocable fall into idolatry, worshiping that which is not the Creator God, and thereby deciding for themselves that there is no god beyond himself and that to which he ascribes divinity, Paul continues his potential reflection on the creation story and insists that “God gave them over in the desires of their hearts to impurity, to dishonor their bodies among themselves” (Romans 1:24). 

The Creator God was to be honored by mankind’s stewardship of His good creation, but man, as can be observed from the fall and all that followed, had and has an altogether different plan.  It becomes patently clear from Genesis that the serpent merely simply seized upon the desire of the human heart to honor only self, and Paul, because of his constant assertion that the God of Israel is ultimately in control of all things, describes this as the Creator God giving humanity over to the desires of the heart. 

With this self-honor, in truth, the opposite transpired.  With this self-honor, impurity imposed itself into the world.  With this self-honor came dishonor.  That dishonor, resulting from the rejection of their God’s plan for them, manifested itself in death.  The blame for this does not lie with the serpent, but with mankind alone, who alone was created as the divine image for the cosmos.  This dishonor came at their own hands, as humanity is said to have engaged in the process of dishonoring their bodies through their own decisions and actions---doing so among themselves.  What had been made in perfection and for life was now subject to the dishonor of death, far removed from the God-glorifying honor of the Creator, which is the purpose for which they had been created. 

Suppression Of Truth (part 3)

Building on what has been said then, not only would glorifying the Creator God have consisted of Adam and Eve (the original image and covenant bearers) following His direct command, but through disobedience they would, apparently for the first time according to the story told in Genesis, fall short of His glory as well (sin), thereby losing the ability to adequately and properly and perfectly reflect the glory of their Creator into the world. 

Though this was supposed to be rectified by the call of Abraham and Israel, this expected rectification would ultimately be left undone until Jesus placed a foot on to the stage of history.  Clearly then, Adam and Eve can be understood to have not been thankful for the responsibility with which they had been charged, nor the exalted position with which they had been blessed.  Continuing to allow an overplay between the first chapter of Romans and the beginning of the Scriptural narrative, with the influence of the serpent, their thoughts did indeed become futile.  It could certainly be said that their thoughts were turned towards themselves and away from that which was their God’s purpose for them. 

It could even be said that the inward turning of thought was the beginning of futility, along with being the beginning of idolatry, as Adam and Eve were convinced to focus on themselves and that which they could gain for themselves (becoming like God, knowing right and wrong), rather than on what their God had done for them and what it was that they were supposed to be doing in and for the world, and for His glorification. 

In consideration of the statement from the Apostle Paul that “their senseless hearts were darkened,” could it not be said that, prior to the ill-fated taking from the tree and the subsequent fall, that they had no sense of nakedness, no sense of shame, no sense of fear, no sense of the knowledge of good and evil, no sense of remorse, and no sense of guilt?  Now and quite unfortunately, following the cataclysmic act of the fall, these senses were all present, having been darkened by the presence of sin---falling short of the glory of the Creator God (bearing His image in and for the world).  The insistence of Scripture is that prior to this paradoxical livening and deadening of their senses, they lived in a conscious state that were devoid of these things, but with what had been done, that condition was darkened by an evil presence. 

Yes, they ate from the tree.  It is said to have been the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  As the story goes, the serpent told them that if they did so, they would become like divine beings.  The serpent said that their eyes would be opened.  The serpent said that they could have power.  Power?  Yes, because they understood the power of their God; and because this tree was connected with knowledge, it could be said that on display here is the first human premonition that knowledge is power, and they wanted it. 

It is said that part of the motivation for taking and eating from the tree was that not only was the fruit “attractive to the eye” (Genesis 3:6b), but that it was also “desirable for making one wise” (3:6c).  Did wisdom come?  What is to be found in the next verse here in Romans?  “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools” (1:22).  Fools!  What is it that the Scriptures have to say about fools?  The Psalmist writes that “Fools say to themselves, ‘There is no God.’  They sin and commit evil deeds; none of them does what is right” (14:1).  So what one here observes is that Eve first, and then Adam, desiring wisdom but becoming fools.  In essence and effect, as they cast off their right bearing of the divine image, they declarie that “there is no God.”  Is this not what they were truly expressing in their desire to become like gods, beings that know good and evil? 

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. 

Suppression Of Truth (part 1)

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth by their unrighteousness – Romans 1:18  (NET)

Immediately after speaking of what he understood to be the mysterious and inherent power of the Gospel (the proclamation that Jesus is Lord of all), the Apostle Paul launches into a statement concerning the pouring out of the wrath of the Creator God, and the connection of the pouring out of that wrath to ungodliness and unrighteousness.  Following that lead-in, the remainder of the first chapter of the letter to the Romans is decidedly direct, as Paul, in his writing here, would seem to have in mind certain individuals or groups of people to which his words are directed.  Rather than analyze in an attempt to ascertain to whom or to what situation the words from verse eighteen through thirty-two are directed, it would probably be better to take into consideration the grand narrative of the Scriptures so as to make an appropriate application. 

So in looking at the eighteenth verse, and contemplating the scope of the Scriptural narrative, one could identify the verse with the presumptive parents of the human race, that being Adam and Eve.  Because human beings were made in and as the image of the Creator God, it should be understood that an aspect of godliness is rightly bearing the divine image.  Accordingly, ungodliness could be considered to be the failure to adequately and properly bear the divine image. 

Righteousness is perhaps best defined as “covenant faithfulness” (faithfulness to the covenant, whatever that covenant may be during the course of the Scriptural narrative), and that particular trait is usually and accurately ascribed to the Creator God, though when humans find themselves attaining to righteousness, it can also be said that they are in a state of faithfulness to the particular covenant that is to govern their interactions with their Creator and their fellow man. 

Unrighteousness then, conversely, is a state of not being faithful to the covenant (covenant unfaithfulness).  When Adam and Eve partook of the “forbidden fruit,” in contradiction of their Lord’s command, they were not faithful to the covenant under which they were tasked to operate.  Consequently, they found themselves in a state of unrighteousness.  This resulted in them not being able to completely fulfill the Creator God’s intention for what was understood to be the pinnacle of His creation that bore His image, and was responsible to play the role of reflecting His glory into the world, stewarding the creation, and constantly reminding the creation of the God that was responsible for its existence. 

According to the Genesis narrative, Adam and Eve, having eaten the fruit, now found themselves unable to attain to the reflection of their God’s glory for which they had been created.  Thus, entering into a condition of unrighteousness, they also succumbed to the condition of ungodliness and they fell short of the glory of God.  This is marked out as the beginning of sin.  With this, the indication is that mankind began to lose its right knowledge of the Creator God; and with this presence of the force of sin that marred and distorted the divine image that was supposed to represent and reveal the Creator, one could say, the truth of the Creator God began to be suppressed.   

Joshua's Battle (part 2)

That corruption of human nature creates an internal conflict against being fully human (as the Creator God intended for the divine image-bearers), and thus causing a falling short of the glory of God.  Of course, that conflict is inward but expresses itself outward, and shows itself through human interaction with this world and with other divine image-bearers. 

It would appear that Scripture is insistent that victory in this conflict, in which the original intention for the human being wins out, is somehow made through the operation of the Spirit of God through the very power of the Gospel, as like that which was experienced by Joshua and Israel as they attempted to subdue the promised land, none of the corrupted parts of human nature want to make peace via submission to Jesus and His claim to Lordship. 

As it stands, just as Adam and Eve are reported to have been successfully tempted with the idea that they could be like “divine beings,” human, and understandably because they are made as the image of their Creator, seem to have a desire to rule and worship themselves.  However, all must be conquered.  The analogy that is here being drawn thus raises a question, especially in light of the Gospel declaration that Jesus is Lord. 

On the surface, it is then easy to understand the need for Israel to enter the land and conquer.  Or is it?  Israel had promises.  Joshua had promises.  After the death of Moses, the God of Israel is said to have spoken to Joshua and said, “No one will be able to resist you all the days of your life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you.  I will not abandon you or leave you alone” (1:5).  Joshua was promised that none would be able to resist, but as can be seen, that didn’t stop many from attempting. 

The Creator God continued His words to Joshua, saying “Be strong and brave!  You must lead these people in the conquest of the land that I solemnly promised their ancestors I would hand over to them” (1:6).  So  here Israel has the promise that their God would “hand over” the land to them, but as one traverses the book of Joshua, and if the obvious supernatural intervention is stripped from the tale, the story that is left does not seem like much of a handover. 

Quite to the contrary, the handover of the promised land is presented as a near-constant battle.  As has already been noted, nobody was making peace with Israel (except one by stealth means, and it was a very tentative “peace”), and the covenant people were required to carry out a lengthy campaign in the land.  This stand against Israel was the case even in the face of what seemed to be well-known (at least as far as is communicated within the narrative itself), as Rahab, the famous harlot from Jericho, who must have had “contact” with a diverse group of people from the whole of what was the promised land, is shown to speak with a knowledge of the covenant God of Israel as she says “I know the Lord is handing this land over to you.  We are absolutely terrified of you, and all who live in the land are cringing before you” (2:9). 

So in looking at this situation with Israel, with their promises and with the supposed existence of the terror of Israel of which Rahab speaks, one is then forced to consider a thought: “If Jesus’ kingdom has been established, and He is reigning at this very moment, then why does it continue to be necessary to fight?  Why must there be a battle?  Why does death continue?”      

According To His Own Image (part 2 of 2)

Eve had been told that if she ate the fruit of the tree of which her and Adam had been commanded not to eat, that she would become like a divine being (Genesis 3:5).  Interestingly and with the words of the serpent in mind, it is to be noted that the very first words to be heard from human lips following the expulsion from the garden were “I have created a man just as the Lord did” (4:1b). 

Prior to reading about Adam fathering a son in his own likeness and according to his own image, one finds that “When God created humankind, He made them in the likeness of God.  He created them male and female; when they were created, He blessed them and named them ‘humankind’.” (5:1b)  This is quite the contrast to that which would come to be said of Adam.  The Creator God created humankind in His likeness and image, but Adam was said to have fathered a son in his own likeness and image.  Quite the contrast indeed. 

The being that is the first to be called the son of God (Adam - Luke 3:38), was fathered in and as the image of the Creator God.  He was reported to have been given dominion and rule.  He was given “every seed-bearing plant on the face of the entire earth and every tree that has seed in it” (1:29b).  The Creator said to His image-bearers that “They will be yours for food” (1:29c).  With what is an obviously very careful choice of language, as it is uttered against the backdrop of the cosmic creation mythology, it is said of the first being to be fathered by humankind, that he was fathered in his father’s (Adam) image. 

Unfortunately, due to what is put forth as a faithless rebellion against their God’s command, the dominion and rule had been forfeited.  This son would be told, in stark contrast to that which was first told to his father, that “cursed is the ground… 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 it is to this day.  As the Scripture says: “This is the record of the family line of Adam” (5:1a), as generation after generation come into being and pass away, all fathered in the image and likeness of Adam.  Though today’s generations live within a world in which the kingdom of God has been established, and in which Jesus (the second Adam-Romans 5), Who is the Son of God that is the representation of God’s essence (Hebrews 1:3) and the image of the invisible God that is the firstborn over all creation (Colossians 1:15), Who has rule and dominion because of His death and death-conquering Resurrection through which God began to set His creation to rights, all still struggle with the cursing effect of the fall, in the inaugurated but not yet consummated kingdom of God.   

According To His Own Image (part 1 of 2)

When Adam had lived 130 years he fathered a son in his own likeness, according to his own image, and he named him Seth. – Genesis 5:3  (NET)

From the beginning, it seems that Seth was looked upon as something of a replacement for Abel.  His name means “placed” or “appointed”.  Upon his birth, Eve, who is said to have named him, declared that “God has given me another child in place of Abel because Cain killed him” (4:25).  In the name that is given to him, and in the statement of Eve, there is a faint echo of what was said by Eve when she gave birth to her first son, Cain. 

When Cain was born, Eve said, “I have created a man just as the Lord did!” (4:1b)  This can be expanded upon, and considering the ordinary course of the process of giving birth, it is possible to hear Eve saying, “The Creator God brought forth this world in which we live from the waters, and I brought forth a man through the waters.”  Given the mindset reflected in “I have created a man just as the Lord did,” one can imagine her repeating this type of statement upon the birth of Abel, and along with what is recorded in the Scriptural narrative, also doing so upon the birth of Seth.  With the name given to Seth, there is almost a sense of “Not only can I create a man just as the Lord did, but I can also appoint and replace that which was lost.  The Creator can restore His creation.  I can do the same.” 

From there, Scripture moves along to the genealogy of Adam, which is then traced through Seth.  It is reported that Adam “fathered a son in his own likeness, according to his image, and he named him Seth” (5:3b).  Seeing these words, and considering that the entirety of the Genesis narrative is shaped and premised by the first two chapters of the story, it is possible to look to the first chapter of Genesis so as to consider the creation of man. 

There it is reported that “God said, ‘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 creatures that move on the earth’.” (1:26)  In this there is both creation and vocation.  The divine image that humankind was intended to be and to bear, from the outset, included ruling over the earth.  That rule was to exercised in the image and likeness of the Creator God, reflecting His glory into the world and reminding the creation of its Creator. 

Continuing to the very next verse one is able to read the confirmation of the intention of the Creator, as “God created humankind in His own image, in the image of God He created them, male and female He created them” (1:27). In accordance with the plan that went along with His original consideration of their creation, the Creator God is said to have spoken to the human beings that He had created and said “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” (1:28b).  When humankind took up the charge to multiply, with this occurring (at least according to the Biblical record) after the fall, doing so induced an understandable measure of pride in the achievement.  Indeed, the words that the serpent is said to have spoken to Eve rang true. 

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. 

Renewed (part 3 of 4)

Paul looks forward to a heavenly house, which, in his estimation (as that estimation is based upon his worldview that is now informed by the Resurrection), is a body that is suited for the kingdom of heaven that ultimately is the covenant God’s restored creation.  To that end he writes “after we have put on our heavenly house, we will not be found naked” (2 Corinthians 5:3).  Paul believes that he and other believers will not be without a body (no disembodied post-mortem experience in a faraway place as the final and ultimate hope and destination of those that believe on the Christ), but will rather have the experience of a renewed physicality, as did Christ upon His Resurrection, here in this re-constituted world where Jesus rules as Lord and where the Creator God dwells with His people.

Continuing with this theme, Paul goes on to write “For we groan while we are on this tent, since we are weighed down, because we do not want to be unclothed, but clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life” (5:4).  Once again, there is an ability to correlate the groaning of the believer with the groaning of creation (never forget the exodus undertones when Paul speaks of groaning), as well as the similar groaning that is so carefully detailed in the eighth chapter of Romans.  The believer groans in his tent--- in the perishable body that will run down and decay.  He groans because he looks forward to a body that will never run down and never decay and never die, because the power of sin and death was defeated at the cross and triumphed over in Jesus’ Resurrection.  He groans because of the anticipation of being fully clothed, of being fully human, of properly bearing the image of God as all were designed to do before the great rebellion in which man first realized that he was unclothed. 

Though man was first naked before God before the fall, he was truly clothed; but just as happened to Adam and Eve, there is eventually a realization of being unclothed, desirous of re-gaining, through God’s great victory in Christ, the good creation that existed before the fall.  Not only will that creation be re-gained, and not only will there be a re-gaining of true clothing, but that creation and clothing will be enhanced and made into something truly unknown and glorious, having been experienced by only one person in all of history, because of the awesome power of God that was put forth in the Resurrection.  The believer experiences that power through the preaching and living of the Gospel, by which it is at work in this world, though it is not yet experienced in the fullness of its power.  That day, however, will come.  In that day, what is mortal, what can and will die, will be, as Paul writes, completely “swallowed up by life.”       

     

As he continues his written contemplation of the renewal and restoration that is implied by the Gospel and the Resurrection, Paul writes, “Now the one who prepared us for this very purpose is God” (2 Corinthians 5:5a).  This purpose, by way of reiteration, is being clothed with a “heavenly dwelling,” a renewed body that is suited for an existence in the to-be-consummated kingdom of heaven on earth, not just attaining to heaven.  This purpose is to live beyond despair, and instead, living in the light of that “eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison” (4:17b). 

How has the Creator God prepared His people for this?  Paul says that those that live in allegiance to His kingdom through allegiance to the Christ are prepared because He “gave us the Spirit as a down payment” (5:5b).  That is, the activity of the Holy Spirit, apparently gifting faith and stirring belief in the Gospel and the renewed life to come, is the down payment, or guarantee, of that God accomplishing a final redemption through a thorough and complete rescue from the power of death (spiritually and physically).  In this state of belief, as one believes in the very thing that is the power of God unto salvation, one can trust and experience a foretaste of the power of the Resurrection to come.  

Movement (part 1 of 3)

The God of Israel is the God of exodus.  The Scriptural narrative is one of constant movement, not only in action but also in location.  This may aid us in discovering why, though God would allow a Temple to be built in Jerusalem and though He would fill that Temple with His glory, that He did not ask for that Temple to be constructed.  The underlying movement theme of Scripture gives us insights as to why God was satisfied to be represented by a tabernacle---dwelling in the midst of His people in a portable temple. 

If the Scriptures unfold before us a repetition of exile and exodus, then asserting that the idea of movement is an important element for the God of the Scriptures, is not unjustified.  In the Bible’s second verse, we read that “the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the water” (Genesis 1:2b) preceding the restorative and ordering acts that followed and culminated with the creation of the being that would bear God’s image.  After Adam and Eve had trespassed beyond the boundary of their divine covenant, we read that they “heard the sound of the Lord moving about in the orchard” (3:8b), prompting them to hide in fear.  When judgment is pronounced upon them, they are expelled from the garden (3:23).  This expulsion is also described as their being driven out (3:24). 

Noah was sent by God into an ark to escape the flood (an exile of sorts).  Later on, he and his family went forth from the ark (an exodus).  After this departure from the ark, God’s command to them was to “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (9:1b).  This filling of the earth seems to imply a demand to move and to spread out across the lands of the world.  This process appeared to be underway, which we see as we reach the eleventh chapter of Genesis.  There we find “When the people moved eastward, they found a plan in Shinar and settled there” (11:2).  This, in and of itself, is not a problem, because in order for the earth to be filled, there will have to be some settling.  However, this settling apparently took a form that was contrary to God’s clear intentions, and must have involved a great number of people.  There, it was said “Come, let’s build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens,” presumably so that it would be too high to be overtaken by another flood, “so that we may make a name for ourselves” (11:4a).  This is a problem because man is meant to bear God’s image in the world and to gain Him the glory that is due to Him.  As we bear in mind that God never asked for a temple such as the one that David desired to build, is there a possibility that we can ascribe such thinking to King David? 

Furthermore, part of the justification for the construction of this tower is found in the statement of “Otherwise we will be scattered across the face of the earth” (11:4b).  Obviously, this stands in stark contrast to that which God had demanded of Noah and his family, which we can imagine had been well communicated to and through their descendants (thus accounting for the continued movement recorded in the second verse of this chapter).  Scattering and movement was what God desired.  Pointing up the motif of movement, and the contrast provided by man’s new desire to become stationary, “the Lord came down to see the city and the tower that the people had started building” (11:5).  In response, the Lord said, “Come, let’s go down and confuse their language so they won’t be able to understand each other” (11:7).  When the people failed to move, the Lord moved.  What was the result?  The result was movement, as “the Lord scattered them from there across the face of the entire earth” (11:8a).

When we first meet Abram (Abraham), he is moving.  We find that “Terah took his son Abram,” along with other family members, “and with them he set out from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to Canaan” (11:30a).  However, Terah did not reach Canaan, instead he settled in Haran.  It is in Haran, according to the record of Genesis, that Abram receives his calling from the Lord.  What are the first words that the Lord is said to have spoken to Abram?  They are “Go out.”  God tells Abram to “Go out from your country, your relatives, and your father’s household to the land that I will show you” (12:1).  How did Abram respond?  “Abram left… for the land of Canaan.  They entered the land of Canaan” (12:4a,5b).  So Abram had left Ur, he had left Haran, and he had entered Canaan.  What is that we find Abram doing in subsequent verses?  He builds altars.  Also, upon reaching Bethel, which is translated as “house of God,” Abram “pitched his tent” (12:8).  This is not at all unlike what we will find in the book of Exodus.  Shortly after Israel leaves Egypt, they are given instructions regarding altars and a tent.  The God of exodus shows Himself as such early and often.      

Solomon & Shimei (part 3 of 3)

Apart from the fact that the machinations of power are quite interesting, and that all of the recorded events of Solomon’s life are fascinating on a number of levels, one might be curious as to why so much time and space (in the Bible) is being given to an examination of the “Shimei situation.”  On the surface, it seems like a reasonable curiosity, but in the face of that curiosity, we cannot fail to notice that Shimei makes three separate appearances within the Biblical record.  Pondering the reasons for that by exploring those appearances is altogether proper and rewarding.  At the same time, we do well to acknowledge that Shimei’s first two appearances occur in connection with the overall Scriptural theme of exile and exodus. 

Our first encounter with Shimei is conjoined with David’s exile from Jerusalem, in subjugation.  The second encounter is coupled with David’s exodus (from exile), as he returns to Jerusalem, his subjugation ended.  The third time that we happen upon Shimei, the story ends with Shimei’s own exile (his death), though he has been given the chance to live a life of exodus in Jerusalem (living within Solomon’s will).  Beyond the overt exile and exodus theme embodied by Solomon’s proceedings in regards to Shimei, we can quite profitably look even more deeply into this matter, and in doing so, discover a microcosm of one of the occurrences with which the grand Scriptural narrative began, as Shimei is demonstrated to be analogous to Adam.  Though the microcosm and analogy are limited in scope, we shall find it to be quite useful. 

Returning to the text of the first book of the Kings, we see that Solomon has summoned Shimei and instructed him to build a house in Jerusalem and live there (2:36a).  Solomon places a commanding addendum to this, saying “you may not leave there to go anywhere!” (2:36b)  Likewise, following His creative act, God summoned Adam and commanded him to tend the garden in which he had been placed, while also instructing him “you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Genesis 2:17a).  What was to happen to Shimei if he left Jerusalem---if he stepped outside of Solomon’s will and violated his command?  Solomon told him “If you ever do leave and cross the Kidron Valley, know for sure that you will certainly die!” (2:37a).  Adam, as we well know, in regards to the fruit of the tree, was told “for when you eat from it you will surely die” (2:17b). 

The command of God, like that of Solomon, was quite clear.  Adam, like Shimei, was expected to abide within the given parameters.  Stepping outside of those parameters would result in death.  After remaining faithful to his covenant with Solomon for a period of time, Shimei was told that two of his servants had run away, so he went out after them.  Shimei knew better.  He had observed Solomon’s commandment for three years, but now fell to this temptation to assert his authority as a master.  This parallels Adam’s experience quite well.   Adam, after obeying for some period of time, fell victim to the same type of temptation.  The serpent offered Adam (and Eve, lest we forget) the opportunity to assert themselves as masters (gods) in their own right, which would be especially tempting, seeing as how the Creator had given them dominion over the earth.  The news of Shimei’s excursion beyond the boundaries delineated by the covenant came to Solomon’s attention, as would the actions of Adam.  Solomon summoned Shimei before him and reminded him of the oath along with the penalty associated with the violation of that oath.  Solomon asked: “Why then have you broken the oath you made before the Lord and disobeyed the order I gave you?” (2:43)  The Genesis record has God calling out to Adam, along with Adam’s fearful response.  God asks Adam (as if He did not know), “Did you eat from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” (3:11b) 

The author of the “King-ly” history does not even go so far as to provide us with an account of Shimei’s response to Solomon.  He knew he was guilty.  As we have seen, Shimei’s reward for his violation was death.  Adam, on the other hand, points the finger of blame to Eve, who in turn points the finger of blame at the serpent.  God calls each of the responsible parties to account, just as Solomon had told Shimei that he would be responsible for his own death if he over-stepped the prescribed boundaries, and draws this particular episode to a close by ultimately pronouncing a sentence of death, stating “for you are dust, and to dust you will return” (3:19b). 

Both Shimei and Adam were given the chance to live lives of exodus---enjoying the blessings of life within the boundaries of a willful covenant drafted by their respective kings.  Both Shimei and Adam were tempted beyond the boundaries of that covenant for similar reasons.  In the end, King Solomon was empowered, and Shimei’s final exile was immediate.  If there was to be further punishment for Shimei, then as we previously heard from Solomon, that was the Lord’s business.  Adam’s experience, however, was somewhat different.  According to the Genesis account, Adam lived a great deal of time in his exilic state before the exile of physical death overtook him.  He was first exiled from the garden, forced to consider the exile of creation for which he was responsible, to mourn over the exodus that he had forfeited, and to contemplate the cursing and pain which he had brought to creation.  He would even see one of his sons commit murder.  This punishment from the Lord was probably greater than the merciful death that would eventually come. 

Unexpectedly for us, though this was a likely intention in the construction and presentation of this story, there is much to be gleaned from the accounts of Shimei; for in it, through all its seemingly unrelated twists and turns, we are pointed towards God’s redemption project, and we are reminded of the providence and faithfulness of the covenant-making God.        

David's Idolatry (part 2 of 3)

As a result of David’s failure in this area, with his idolatry having been revealed to himself, the prophet Gad goes to speak to David.  It is in the content of what it is that is spoken to David that we find the reason why God was angry with Israel.  Gad was instructed, by the Lord, to say to David, “This is what the Lord says: I am offering you three forms of judgment.  Pick one of them and I will carry it out against you” (2 Samuel 24:12).  What follows, in the choice of judgments given, will direct us to the basis for God’s anger.  In this, we will realize that God was not only angry with Israel, but that He was also angry with David as well. 

“Gad went to David and told him, ‘Shall seven years of famine come upon your land?  Or shall you flee for three months from your enemy with him in hot pursuit?  Or shall there be three days of plague in your land?  Now decide what I should tell the One Who sent me.’” (24:13)  Are these judgments random?  Of course not.  These are a portion of the prescribed exilic curses.  These three potential judgments force us to look to the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy (though possibly post-David compilations, though the thoughts therein contained, in conjunction with Leviticus, would reflect the general tradition and operational mindset of the covenant people throughout their history), and to the understanding of their covenant and of the nature of their covenant God within which Israel operated.  In the twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy we find all of these judgments, both implicitly and explicitly. 

Through Moses, the Lord speaks of His people being “cursed in the field,” with “basket and… mixing bowl cursed… as well as the produce of your soil” (28:16b,17,18b).  In addition, “The sky above your heads will be bronze and the earth beneath you iron.  The Lord will make the rain of your land powder and dust” (28:23-24a).  Taken together, these things point implicitly to the curse of famine.  We here find that “The Lord will allow you to be struck down before your enemies; you will attack them from one direction but flee from them in seven directions” (28:25a).  This points to the optional judgment of Israel being forced to flee from their enemies.  Explicitly, we find that “The Lord will plague you with deadly diseases… He will afflict you with weakness, fever, inflammation, infection, sword, blight, and mildew; these will attack you until you perish” (28:21-22).  Quite obviously, this correlates with the “three days of plague in your land.”  So no, these are not random selections on God’s behalf, but rather, they are overt and direct reminders of His covenant, of the covenant responsibilities of His people, and of the personal and perpetual covenant that God had made with the king that is now being forced to make a choice.  These are reminders of the curses that will come upon the people, and indeed, have come upon the people in various ways and at various times, for their falling into idolatry. 

Deuteronomy informs the people that curses will fall upon them if they “ignore the Lord your God and are not careful to keep all His commandments and statutes” (28:15).  However, the initial presentation of the curses, to be found in the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviticus, is far more direct in speaking to that which will bring these curses that are wrapped up together with the ultimate judgment of exile.  There, we find a greater degree of specificity in expectation, as we read “You must not make for yourselves idols, so you must not set up for yourselves a carved image or a pillar, and you must not place a sculpted stone in your land to bow down before it” (26:1).  To that is quickly added, by way of rounding out the primary things that God is requiring from His covenant people, “You must keep My Sabbaths and reverence My sanctuary” (26:2).  Clearly, there is a greater weight of judgment attached to idolatry, which makes perfect sense, especially considering that it was essentially the idolatry of the original humans that brought about the fall of man and of creation, for which Israel has been raised up as a part of God’s corrective measures for His divine image bearers and His once-good world. 

If we take in the grand, cosmic picture, then we will see that the judgments that God is offering to David and Israel here in the twenty-fourth chapter of second Samuel, are, in reality, nothing more than localized manifestations of the curses that came upon mankind and the world at the fall.  Indeed, the curses outlined and presented to Israel in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy, are actually rather detailed expansions on the initial curses that were spelled out to Adam and Eve---cursed ground, pain, and death.  As it relates to this story, are these not to be equated with famine, to being afflicted with plague, and to being pursued by an enemy?  This presents itself as grand evidence of a consistent and faithful God, as well as evidence that Israel was very much looked upon by the Lord as a second Adam, charged with bearing His image into the world and of reminding the whole of the created order of their Creator God.  It is this fact that informs us as to why Israel’s God looked upon and reacted so harshly against the idolatry on display, while opening our eyes to the deep-rooted redemptive plan that underlies the goings-on of this particular chapter of the story of Israel and of David.