Vindication For Joy & Rejoicing (part 3)

This mention of “sorrow” should vaults the conscious reader to a recollection of the “suffering servant” of Isaiah, thus providing (along with Jesus before He would come to His time of suffering) a more fully-rounded sense of what these sorrows would and did entail.  The verses that follow remind the modern reader of the letter to the Hebrews and the great High Priest that is able to sympathize with the human weaknesses that continue to be experienced by the covenant people(4:15), the Gospel of Luke and Jesus weeping over the city of Jerusalem (19:41), and the Gospel of John and Jesus weeping within the story of the raising of the one whom He loved (11:35), as one finds “When they were sick, I wore sackcloth, and refrained from eating food.  I mourned for them as I would for a friend or my brother.  I bowed down in sorrow as if I were mourning for my mother” (Psalm 35:13a,14). 

Unfortunately, Jesus did not receive complete reciprocity in these matters, and because of that He could say, “when I stumbled, they rejoiced and gathered together; they gathered together to ambush me” (35:15a).  As He would begin to undergo the various inflictions of physical brutality---the whip that would be endured as He made His way to His ultimate vindication---Jesus could maintain His reflection on this Psalm and its words in which “They tore at me without stopping to rest” (35:15b).  As He stumbled under the weight of the beam that He is reported to have attempted to carry to Golgotha, Jesus would remember “When I tripped, they taunted me relentlessly, and tried to bite me” (35:16). 

Again, it is necessary to pause to remember that this particular adversary is not death, at least not directly, but rather it is men presumably corrupted by the power of darkness, as that darkness attempted to assert its power over the one that would eventually come to be recognized and called the Son-of-God-in-power (Romans 1:4 – contra Caesar).  Jesus could cry out “O Lord, how long are you going to just stand there and watch this?  Rescue me from their destructive attacks; guard my life from the young lions!  Do not let those who are my enemies for no reason gloat over me!  Do not let those who hate me without cause carry out their wicked schemes!  They are ready to devour me; they say, ‘Aha!  Aha!  We’ve got you!” (35:17,19,21)  In all this, Jesus does not call for divine retribution against His human antagonists.  He always knew who and what was the true enemy from which He sought and hoped for vindication.  

                                

Even if He did speak such words that were, in essence, “My Father, if possible, let this cup pass for Me” (Matthew 26:39b), the watchword over all of this, as Jesus endured the great painful and shaming ordeal on behalf of Israel and the creation, is “Yet not what I will, but what You will” (26:39c). The will of the Father, of course, can be found in what follows in this Psalm, which is “take notice, Lord!  O Lord, do not remain far from me!  Rouse yourself, wake up and vindicate me!  My God and Lord, defend my just cause!  Vindicate me by Your justice, O Lord my God!” (35:22-24a) 

This vindication would ultimately be the Resurrection, as Jesus would march forth from the tomb into a new world---that being the inaugurated kingdom of God on earth---in which the hosts of heaven were marshaled to witness His victorious coronation as King, and in which Jesus would honor the faithful Father for His vindicating justice, saying “I will give you thanks in the great assembly; I will praise You before a large crowd of people!” (35:18) 

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.   

Nebuchadnezzar's Fall (part 8 of 8)

According to the Gospel of John, in Jesus the world sees the glory of the Creator God (1:14).  From Paul, it is learned that Jesus came to be looked upon as the second Adam, perfectly fulfilling the role that the Creator God had intended to be performed by the first Adam.  As he says, by the first Adam, death entered the world (Romans 5:12).  Life came, as he also indicates, by the gift of grace because of the covenant faithfulness of the Creator God (Romans 5:18), through the second Adam.  Why?  So that those that call Jesus “Lord,” which is said to occur by the Spirit and by faith, might be the embodiment of the Creator God’s righteousness---the embodiment of His faithfulness in and for the world, which, according to Scripture, was His original purpose for the ones with which He crowned His creation. 

Moving beyond Paul, the Hebrews author, in speaking of Jesus, tells us that He was the radiance of the glory of the Creator God while also being the representation of His essence (1:3).  Yes, the position of the early church was that Jesus’ bearing of the divine image was carried out in a consummate perfection.  Because of that, as they reasoned and as has been believed since then, life reigned through Him (unlike the death engendered by the first Adam), as had been the Creator God’s intention for His creation.

Returning to Daniel then, Nebuchadnezzar is heard to go on to say, “At that time my sanity returned to me.  I was restored to the honor of my kingdom, and my splendor returned to me” (Daniel 4:36a).  In union with the Lord Jesus, believers are able to say this as well.  Mankind was made to have dominion over this world, and as kings and priests to the Most High God via an allegiance to Jesus as Lord, in recognition of His representation of the Creator God and all that such recognition demands, humanity is restored to the honor of that kingdom, with the return of the splendor of the Creator God’s glory upon them, as they reign with Jesus (though in submission to Him as His servants in and for the world) in the kingdom of God that was established at His Resurrection. 

In Christ, as believers are mysteriously empowered by and as the Spirit of the Creator God to a faithful and worshipful trust in that God that created all things, they are made to finally grasp on to that glory for which they were intended.  By a trust in the Gospel of Jesus, which is demonstrated in preaching the Gospel of Jesus (the crucified and Resurrected Messiah is Lord of all) in both word and deed, the power of the Creator God is made manifest (heaven comes to earth as the believer becomes a temporal Temple) and the believer become the embodiment of the righteousness (covenant faithfulness) of the Creator God, as was Jesus.  In union with Him, believers become the second Adam along with Him, and thus no longer fall short of the glory of their Creator---they rightly bear the divine image.  In Christ, humanity’s dominion over and responsibilities toward their God’s creation are returned, and they are made to be servants of the Most High, being lights into the world, reflecting His glory.    

In humble submission to the claims of the Lord, confessing themselves as slaves to Him so that He might fulfill the great hope of the believer and make them to rule with Him, the one that throws in his lot with Jesus casts away all pride in self and says along with Nebuchadnezzar: “I was reinstated over my kingdom…I became even greater than before” (4:36b).  With a continued reflection on the grand narrative of the Scriptures, from creation to fall, and from Resurrection to restoration, as all are enabled to learn about a faithful and powerful God, the believer then lifts up his heart to “praise and exalt and glorify the King of heaven, for all His deeds are right and His ways are just.  He is able to bring down those who live in pride” (4:37b).  

Veil Of The Temple (part 2)

When the second tabernacle was built, that being Solomon’s temple, these curtains can be found again, though obviously larger and more elaborate than those that had been made for the tabernacle of the wilderness.  Though it is not mentioned in the descriptions of the temple in the first book of the King, when one moves to the continuing narrative (a purposeful, condensed version of the books of Samuel and the Kings) of the nation of Israel as presented in the second book of the Chronicles, it is found that Solomon “made the curtain out of violet, purple, crimson, and white fabrics” (3:14a). 

When the temple is rebuilt following the return of Judah from Babylon, as chronicled in the latter historical books, a detailed description of what was made for it, done in it, and placed in it, is not provided.  However, what is provided in the account of its rebuilding and dedication, is that those who saw the second temple, if they had seen the first temple before it suffered destruction at the hands of the Babylonian forces, wept. 

It is said that they wept, not only because the second temple paled in comparison to the first temple, but also because of what it did not contain, which was, among other things, the Ark of the Covenant and their Lord’s Shekinah (the presence of the Creator God of Israel, represented by a cloud filling the sanctuary, as had reportedly been the case with both the tabernacle and the first temple).  However, though it lacked these things, and lacked specifically that which was hidden by the veil, one can be assured that the second temple contained a curtain of division from the Most Holy Place similar to the first temple, which had been based on the pattern of the veil of the tabernacle. 

This temple was the same temple that would eventually come to be re-furbished and expanded by Herod the Great, which was the temple in which the veil was rent upon the death of the Christ.  As part of his building program, Herod the Great had sought to restore the temple to its original splendor.  This restoration, undoubtedly, would have included the creation of a veil that would have rivaled the beauty and majesty of the veil that had been crafted for Solomon’s temple.  

As one continues to make progress through the Hebrew Scriptures, there is another temple to be discovered.  This temple (now the fourth to be referenced in the course of the compiled story of Israel --- tabernacle, first temple, rebuilt temple) is what is known as “Ezekiel’s Temple.”  This temple, one notes with great interest, has no veil of separation from the Most Holy Place.  Though Ezekiel’s temple differs from the others in many ways, this is probably one of the more significant differences.  No mistake is made when it is insisted that the veil is an important feature of the temple.  Therefore, the absence of a veil much be considered to be an important feature as well. 

The veil of the temple is part of the consciousness of the covenant people.  So much so that in the ninth chapter of Hebrews, the author mentions the curtain that separated the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place, speaking specifically of the tabernacle in this case, though his audience could have easily connected it with the veil of the two temples, while also, as a believing community of Jesus-followers, remembering the purported tearing of the veil that was said to have occurred upon the death of Jesus.  Further demonstrating his understanding of the significance and importance of the veil as it pertains to the way in which the Creator God is to be understood and approached, he also writes about the fact that the high priest could only enter behind that veil but once a year, with the blood that he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance (Hebrews 9:7).    

Birth Of A Nation (part 1 of 2)

Can a country be brought forth in one day?  Can a nation be born in a single moment? – Isaiah 66:8b  (NET)

The answer to this question, posed by the prophet Isaiah, is yes.  A country can be brought forth in one day, and indeed, a nation can be born in a single moment.  This is especially so if that day and that moment is the Resurrection of the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, from the grave, with the birth of a nation (a kingdom, an empire) without borders, encompassing the entire globe.  In his proleptic vision of a world in which Israel’s God rules without challenge (though certainly post-Christ-event observers read messianic events back into the text), Isaiah writes, “Yet as soon as Zion goes into labor she gives birth to sons!” (66:8c)  Zion, in popular prophetic language, is the Lord’s mountain, often serving as the purported location of the New Jerusalem, of which it is said, “Be happy for Jerusalem and rejoice with her, all you who love her!” (66:10a) 

With what appears to be a nod to the sixty-sixth chapter of Isaiah, the author of the letter to the Hebrews pens, “But you have come to Mount Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the assembly and congregation of the firstborn, who are enrolled in heaven” (12:22-23a).  Let it be said that the language of “Zion,” while also standing in for a physical location, is the language of the kingdom of heaven, and the kingdom of heaven that will be enlarged by the Gospel proclamation that Jesus is Lord of all, is that which was inaugurated and unleashed upon the earth as a kingdom without end at the Resurrection of Jesus. 

In the book of Revelation, which possesses its own vision of the presence of the kingdom of heaven and which rests upon the same over-arching Scriptural narrative on which rests Isaiah and the letter to the Hebrews, the heavenly Jerusalem comes to earth.  One recognizes the influence of the Isaianic vision there as well, as the believing community continued to draw from the narrative of the Hebrew Scriptures in their attempt to understand the work of the Christ and its implications, in the Creator God’s declaration that “just as the new heavens and the new earth I am about to make will remain standing before Me…so your descendants and your name will remain”(66:22).  That new heavens and new earth seem to be tied to the birth of this new nation, which is an eternal nation that is populated by descendants that share in eternal life in a renewed creation---at the intersection of heaven and earth.      

Tying the birth of a nation to the Resurrection of Jesus and the labor and birthing of sons of Zion, it can be said that yes, as soon as Zion goes into labor---as soon as the kingdom of heaven begins to be manifest on earth by the power of the Resurrection, the preaching of the Resurrection, and the power of the preaching of Gospel of Jesus (He is Lord) and the consequent belief in these things---Zion does indeed give birth to sons.  Those sons are indeed sons of the kingdom of heaven.  Those sons are the manifestation and the revelation of the sons of God (a name given to the covenant people), brothers in the union of belief with the risen Christ, for whom the creation has been eagerly awaiting (Romans 8:19).

Noah & Abraham (part 2 of 2)

Continuing here in chapter twelve of Genesis, the covenant making God continues speaking to Abram and says, “I will bless those who bless you, but the one who treats you lightly I must curse, and all the families of the earth will bless one another by your name” (12:3). With these words, a further connection is forged between Abraham and Noah, as Abraham stands in the line of covenant speaking and covenant language that begins with Noah, because according to the Scriptural narrative, there is only a people to be blessed through the nation into which the Creator God has promised to make Abram, because God told Noah (and Noah was faithful to), “be fruitful and multiply; increase abundantly on the earth and multiply on it” (9:7).

Continuing on then, we can look to chapter fifteen, in which Abraham, still childless though having a promise from God, says “O sovereign Lord, what will you give me since I continue to be childless, and my heir is Eliezer of Damascus?...  Since you have not given me a descendant, then look, one born in my house will be my heir!” (15:2-3)  By this report, it becomes quite clear that Abraham was taking his God very seriously.  He was not wavering at the promise.  In fact, it could be said that these are questions rooted in faith.  Presumably, because of that ongoing response of faith, the Creator God does not rebuke Abraham but rather says to him, “This man will not be your heir, but instead a son who comes from your own body will be your heir…  Gaze into the sky and count the stars---if you are able to count them!...  So will your descendants be” (15:4-5).  Here is where we find the source of Paul’s quote in Romans (which would call to mind the Abraham narrative), where we then read “Abraham believed the Lord, and the Lord considered his response of faith as proof of genuine loyalty” (15:6).  Here, along with seeing that righteousness (in right covenant standing) is equated with a genuine loyalty to God, we learn that just like had been experienced by Noah, Abraham was given a promise of things not yet seen, reverently regarded the promise of his God, and through faith became an heir of righteousness.

Staying in Romans and going forward, which continues to give us insight into the ways in which the Abraham story was understood in the days of Paul (and Jesus), we find that “Against hope Abraham believed in hope with the result that he became the father of many nations according to the pronouncement, ‘so will your descendants be’.” (4:18)  Like Abraham, did not Noah believe God against all reasonable probability?  Remember, the Noah story, as part of the Israel story, is understood against the backdrop of the Abraham story (for without the Abraham story, there is no Israel story, and no record or purpose for the Noah story). 

For the Noah story, it appears to be the case that what God was talking about seemed highly unlikely, based on mankind’s experience up to that point.  It was no different for Abraham.  The people of that time understood that really old people didn’t have children.  Yet Abraham, and Noah likewise, “did not waver in unbelief about the promise of God but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God” (4:20).  The Creator God received glory through Noah’s faith-motivated construction of the ark, in confident expectation that his God would deliver on His promise.  Both Noah and Abraham were “fully convinced that what God had promised He was also able to do” (4:21).  This “was credited to Abraham as righteousness” (4:22), which is what the Hebrews’ author would come to say of Noah as well. 

So what is it to which all of this is leading?  Just like Noah, and just like Abraham, who became the heir of righteousness (Noah) and the father of many nations (Abraham) when they believed, so believers in the Christ likewise become heirs of the Creator God’s promise of a resurrection just like Jesus when they believe in His new covenant of the Gospel message that Jesus is Lord.  Believers become recipients of what Paul refers to as the down payment ,and heirs of the complete inheritance of eternal life (the life of the age to come breaking into the creation) that is set forth in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.  As Paul writes, in the same way that Abraham was credited with a complete trust in his God’s covenant faithfulness, it is those “to whom it will be credited, those who believe in the One Who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead” (Romans 4:24).  Though Noah became an heir of righteousness that comes by faith, “God had provided something better for us” (Hebrews 11:40a), that being those that believe in, and live as if Jesus is Lord, as they walk and serve in response to Christ’s Resurrection power---as instruments for the out-raying of the glory of their God.        

Noah & Abraham (part 1 of 2)

By faith Noah, when he was warned about things not yet seen, with reverent regard constructed an ark for the deliverance of his family.  Through faith he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith. – Hebrews 11:7  (NET)

Such an interesting character, this Noah fellow.  The story of him and his ark is one that people have loved to tell.  It is a fascinating tale of the Creator God’s judgment upon wickedness through the flooding of the world, along with the miraculous preservation of the pairs of animals, as the animals, along with Noah and his family, rested safely in the ark.  Here in the epistle to the Hebrews, as indicated by our text, the reader comes to learn something quite interesting about Noah.  It is learned that “he was warned about things not yet seen.” 

Essentially, in this, though these “things not yet seen” was an alert concerning a coming event that was ultimately a negative event, a promise about something to come was shared with Noah.  Having received this warning, Noah, “with reverent regard constructed an ark for the deliverance of his family.”  So Noah, though he could not look out and see what his God had promised, as the writer of the Hebrews letter indicates (thus sharing the common perception of the Noah story in that day), responded in faith to the promise by building an ark for the purpose of delivering his family.  We can also hear the author speaking according to the over-arching exile and exodus motif that seems to pervade the understanding of those that would compose Scripture, as an exile of judgment (flood) was at hand, but the Creator God provides an exodus (deliverance via the ark). 

According to this writer, what was the result of this response of faith from Noah?  Reflecting what can be understood to be a then-prevalent interpretation of the Noah tradition, the reader is informed that “he,” that being Noah, “condemned the world,” but more importantly for our purposes here, through this response of faith to what was understood to be the unseen promise of his God, Noah “became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.”

Because Scripture must be read with the entire narrative in mind, and because a purported recipient of the epistle to the Hebrews would hear the text with a mind shaped by the story of Israel (as should be the case for any that confess Jesus as Lord), this statement about Noah would (and should) immediately call someone to mind.  Of whom is the hearer/reader reminded?  Naturally, the reader quickly realizes that this statement about Noah make him sound a lot like Abraham. 

That said, if one was to look into the fourth chapter of Romans, and thus see a first century reckoning (through the lens of the Christ-event) of how the story of Abraham was then perceived (not necessarily using Romans as a vehicle for the interpretation of Hebrews), what is it that could be found there in regards to Abraham?  One would read “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness” (4:3b).  With this, of course, the Apostle Paul is quoting from the fifteenth chapter of the book of Genesis, which would function to call to mind the entirety of that chapter, and indeed the entire Abraham story, as said chapter plays a crucial role in that story. 

Before one can look to that particular portion of Genesis, however, there is a need to know why this is said of Abraham.  In chapter of twelve of Genesis, the Creator God is reported to have spoken to the man that was then named Abram, saying “Go out from your country, your relatives, and your father’s household to the land that I will show you.  Then I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will make your name great, so that you will exemplify divine blessing” (12:1b-2).  Here, and though the story of Noah chronologically and Scripturally precedes the story of Abraham, because knowledge of the story of Noah is contingent on knowledge of the story of Abraham, and because the story of Noah, for the covenant people of God, can be interpreted through the story of Abraham, one could safely pause and say that Noah, in the salvation that God offered to him, most assuredly exemplified divine blessing. 

Slavery (part 1 of 2)

“Every seven years each of you must free any fellow Hebrews who have sold themselves to you.  After they have served you for six years, you shall set them free.” – Jeremiah 34:14a  (NET)

This seems to be a simple enough directive, and is prefaced with Israel’s God offering a reminder to His covenant people, through Jeremiah, that “I made a covenant with your ancestors when I brought them out of Egypt where they had been slaves” (34:13b).  The text above is what follows.  Because the people of Israel had been in perpetual slavery in Egypt, with seemingly no way out of it, God wanted to be sure that His people did not perpetually enslave any of their fellow countrymen, who would most likely come into the state of slavery as a result of indebtedness.  Generally, there was a path out of debt slavery, but this would not always be the case, depending on the level of debt incurred. 

Just as their God had entered in to their situation in order to free them from their slavery to the Egyptians, having heard the groaning of His people in their condition of oppression, so their God was, in a sense, here entering in to make sure that a state of slavery among His people would not be persistent.  We can certainly imagine that the God of Israel would not want to have to hear the groaning of His own people, as they are oppressed by their fellow covenant-bearers, and therefore need to deliver the cursing of plagues upon His own people for this transgression. 

Not only was the basis for the freeing of slaves rooted in the remembrance of their Egyptian slavery and the subsequent deliverance that they experienced, but the act of freeing the slaves would be a great reminder of God’s saving power.  By freeing their own slaves, and doing so in a way that demonstrated mercy along with a willingness to sacrifice and endure hardship for the sake of their fellow citizen, the people of Israel were able to seize on the opportunity to enact and reenact the deliverance that had come their way in Egypt.  Unfortunately, we go on to hear the Creator God saying “But your ancestors did not obey Me or pay any attention to Me” (34:14b). 

What was the contingent basis for this communication from their God through Jeremiah?  During the reign of King Zedekiah there was an agreement that the people of Jerusalem were “to grant their slaves freedom” (34:8b).  It had been the case that “All the people and their leaders had agreed to this” (34:10a).  We can read that, “They originally complied with the covenant and freed them.  But later they had changed their minds.  They had taken back their male and female slaves that they had freed and forced them to be slaves again” (34:10c-11).  “That was when the Lord spoke to Jeremiah” (34:12), expressing His displeasure at this situation.  An analogy could be here adapted, in which the Israelites who freed their slaves, but then changed their minds and took them back again, are akin to Pharaoh and the Egyptians, who eventually freed their slaves and attempted to take them back.  This, of course, did not go well for them. 

For a moment, by freeing their slaves, the people showed their God something quite different than what He had been consistently shown by their ancestors.  Through Jeremiah, this God reportedly says to His people that “Recently…you yourselves showed a change of heart and did what is pleasing to Me” (34:15a).  It could be said that they actually showed some trust in their God, relying upon His just decrees and trusting that things would work out just fine even if they were to suffer what might seem to be financial loss in releasing their slaves.  God says that they pleased Him in that “You granted your fellow countrymen their freedom and you made a covenant to that effect in My presence in the house that I have claimed for My own” (34:15b).  However, they quickly returned to what had come to be their historical form, as God says “But then you turned right around and showed that you did not honor Me.  Each of you took back your male and female slaves whom you had freed as they desired, and you forced them to be your slaves again” (34:16). 

Highly Exalted Kingdom (part 1 of 2)

And David knew that the Lord had established him as king over Israel, and that his kingdom was highly exalted for the sake of his people Israel. – 1 Chronicles 14:2  (ESV)

There are many that insist that King David is set forth in the Hebrew Scriptures as a type of Christ, that is, a type of the promised Messiah for God’s people Israel.  This makes sense to a point, most specifically in light of the fact that Messianic expectations in the time of Jesus were inextricably linked to the re-establishment of a monarchy like that which was in place in Israel, under David.  Rather than to look to David individually, it is better to see that, like David, the Messiah would be established as king over Israel, that is, as king over a God-governed people that are consistently cognizant of their covenant responsibilities and act in and for the world according to that understanding. 

These God-governed people, those in a covenant of faithfulness with the Creator God based on allegiance to His principles and purposes, were to be the ones by whom God would exercise His dominion over the earth, extending the blessings of His covenant, through them as the subjects of His kingdom of heaven, to the families of the world and to all creation.  It can most assuredly be declared, in contemplation of the kingdom of the Messiah, that His kingdom was to be highly exalted for the sake of God’s covenant people.

The Scriptural witness seems to indicate that King David felt as though his kingdom had truly been established when the Ark of the Covenant had been brought into Jerusalem.  That is, when that which symbolized the presence of God was brought into the midst of the people of God.  It was on that day that “David first appointed that thanksgiving be sung to the Lord” (1 Chronicles 16:7).  Do not such ideas force us to contemplate our Lord Jesus?  Because Jesus would prove Himself to be the long-awaited Messiah, deliverer, redeemer, and King of Israel, it can truly be said that the kingdom of God, the kingdom of His people, was established when the One that symbolized the presence of God, that indeed was “the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of His nature” (Hebrews 1:3a), came to dwell in the midst of God’s people. 

In response to that, what was the song that was to be sung?  What song should we sing?  With David, we sing, “Oh give thanks to the Lord; call upon His Name; make known His deeds among the peoples!  Sing to Him; sing praises to Him; tell of all His wondrous works!  Seek the Lord and His strength; seek His presence continually!  Remember the wondrous works that He has done, His miracles and the judgments He uttered, O offspring of Israel His servant, sons of Jacob, His chosen ones!” (16:8-9, 11-13)  That sounds like a call to preach, in word and deed, the message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, of Him as King and Lord of all creation. 

Why sing such songs of praise?  Because doing so is a recognition of God’s covenant faithfulness, and His allowing them to participate in bringing to pass for His people all that He has promised.  Is that so?  Well, that’s what David thought, as he follows those first few lines by proclaiming that “He is the Lord our God; His judgments are in all the earth.  Remember His covenant forever, the word that He commanded, for a thousand generations, the covenant that He made with Abraham, His sworn promise to Isaac, which He confirmed as a statute to Jacob, as an everlasting covenant to Israel” (16:14-17).  It is in the midst of his kingdom being established that David demands a bringing to mind of God’s covenant.

God In The Camp

“A god has come into the camp” – 1 Samuel 4:7b  (ESV)

In the fourth chapter of the first book of Samuel, as part of the story by which Israel understood itself, defined itself, and presented itself to the nations, we read that “Israel went out to battle against the Philistines” (4:1b).  The battle did not go well.  “Israel was defeated by the Philistines” (4:2b).  It is said that four thousand men of Israel were killed.  Naturally, the elders of Israel were quite distraught about this situation, and they wondered why the battle went the way that it did.  They asked, “Why has the Lord defeated us today before the Philistines?” (4:3b)  Such an interesting question.  They understood themselves to be God’s covenant people, with an internal understanding of promises of victory in battle as they gained and maintained dominion over their land of promise, so the cause for loss in battle was to be searched for outside of the sheer strength of their enemies.  For that reason, they speak of their defeat as having been wrought by the Lord, rather than by the Philistines themselves.

The question is followed by a declaration, as they said, “Let us bring the ark of the covenant of the Lord here from Shiloh, that it may come among us and save us from the power of our enemies” (4:3b).  At first glance, this seems like the correct response, and the right thing to do; but if we look carefully, we’ll notice that they are not necessarily on the right track, which will be borne out by what we find happening in just a few verses.  Though they rightfully put things in the Lord’s hand by asking why it was that the Lord had defeated them before the Philistines, when they shift to speaking about the next steps to take, the language subtly shifts.  They talk of bringing “the ark of the covenant of the Lord” to this place of battle, but then say that they are going to do this, not so that the Lord of the covenant will be with them and save them, but that “it,” that being the ark itself, that “it may come among us and save us from the power of our enemies.”   

“So the people sent to Shiloh and brought from there the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts, Who is enthroned on the cherubim” (4:4a).  Here, we can’t help but make a note of the fact that great, swelling words are used to describe the ark, and speak of the Lord of hosts, but in the midst of that, we cannot forget the words that were previously spoken.  In bringing the ark, they have plainly said that they expect the ark to save them from the power of their enemies, rather than the Lord Whose faithful and covenant fulfilling power the ark represents.  Also, the fact is almost comically mentioned that “the two sons of Eli. Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God” (4:4b).  Right there, we have a clue that things are not going to go well for Israel here, because these two guys are not spoken of very highly.  In fact, they are referred to as “worthless men,” who “did not know the Lord” (1 Samuel 2:12).  They “treated the offerings of the Lord with contempt” (2:17b), and they would “lay with the women who were serving at the entrance to the tent of meeting” (2:22b).  We are told that “it was the will of the Lord to put them to death” (2:25b), and that “both of them shall die on the same day” (2:34b).    The men going to battle, with the ark or without the ark, would have been well-advised to keep these two far from them. 

So, “As soon as the ark of the covenant of the Lord came into the camp, all Israel gave a mighty shout” (4:5a).  They were so excited that the ark had come into the camp.  Not the Lord, but the ark.  Now, the ark may have been thought to be, as the ultimate focal point of Israel’s portable temple, the actual resting place of their God.  Therefore, in a sense, the bringing of the ark into the camp may have been, in their mind, the same as bringing the Lord into the camp, but it seems that the text as a whole does not want to convey this idea. 

The Philistines heard this and said, “What does this great shouting in the camp of the Hebrews mean?” (4:6b).  Making inquiries, “they learned that the ark of the Lord had come to the camp” (4:6c), and “the Philistines were afraid” (4:7a).  Why were they afraid?  Reinforcing the “resting place” concept, they thought “A god has come into the camp” (4:7b).  They were right.  A god had come into the camp.  Not the God, but a god.  The ark had come into the camp, and the Israelites looked to the ark, rather than looking to or remembering the Lord of the ark.  The Philistines were right in saying that a god had come into the camp, because Israel had reduced the ark of the Lord into nothing more than an idol.  Because of this, and bearing out the idea that the author wants to convey the idolatry and its associated problems that would lead to Israel being defeated by its enemies, “the Philistines fought, and Israel was defeated, and they fled, every man to his home.  And there was a very great slaughter, for there fell of Israel thirty thousand foot soldiers.  And the ark of God was captured, and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, died” (4:10-11). 

In the first battle, only four thousand died.  Once the idolatry of Israel in regards to the ark was manifest, which is that which always brought God’s judgment upon them and upon all of His covenant people in accordance with the promises of His covenant faithfulness, thirty thousand died and Israel was stripped of that which had become little more than an idol.    

God Of Tents (part 4 of 4)

All of this movement, from Adam to Jesus, can be thought of as examples of exodus (along with appropriate applications of exile), which is the way that God effects His purposes.  God reveals Himself, through the example of those that He has ordained to represent Him, as a God of “going-out”---as a God of exodus.  This, of course, is why Scripture and its story exists---to represent God.  They exist not primarily to serve man and to inform man how to live, but rather, they exist primarily to reveal God, and in that revealing, to bring Him glory.  This revelation for the purpose of knowing God is given so that those who are supposed to bear His image might be able to do so rightly.  This, of course, is why we undertake and so highly value theology, for we cannot serve our Creator God with a knowledge of His purposes for us if we do not know Him. 

We do not approach the Scriptures so as to first learn about ourselves, or to gain encouragement for ourselves, or to find out what God has for us.  All of these things take place as secondary results.  We approach the Scriptures in order to learn about God.  Because we are made in His image, it is in learning about God that we learn about ourselves.  This is encouraging because we learn that God has a purpose for us as His image-bearers, and the Scriptures provide us with a hope that He is at work, quite faithfully, to bring about those purposes in us, for us, and through us.  If we ever take a moment to consider why it is that we gather together as Christians, in church, it is in this that we find the answer. 

The author of the letter to the Hebrews is adamant about the regular gathering together of those that call Jesus Lord, as he writes, “And let us take thought of how to spur one another on to love and good works, not abandoning our own meetings…encouraging each other” (10:24-25a).  When looked at on the surface and from the outside, by those that do not yet call Jesus Lord, we would have to be compelled to admit that our regular (predominantly Sunday) gatherings as individual church bodies is quite the peculiar practice.  Naturally, it is as peculiar as the very message upon which the church is built, which is that of an eminently shameful and ghastly crucifixion, the extraordinarily ridiculous notion of a man’s resurrection from the dead, and the somewhat ludicrous idea that those two things, taken together and then punctuated by an ascension, prove that the crucified man was the very embodiment of God and is the sovereign and ruling Lord of all in a kingdom that has been inaugurated on earth and awaits its final consummation in the coming together of God’s realm of existence (heaven) and man’s realm of existence (earth). 

So why do we do it?  What is the primary function of “going to church”?  Is it for ourselves?  Of course it is.  Why?  We do it to escape the pressures of the world for an hour, as something akin to a temporary rescue from foreign subjugation within our larger rescue from foreign subjugation.  We gather to be encouraged by a message of God’s love in Christ.  We come together to sing songs of praise as a correct response to the grace of God.  We gather to hear the preached Word of God.  First and foremost, we gather to hear the Word preached in some way, shape, or form, that we may learn how to play our parts in the grand drama of God’s creation and new creation project.  All other reasons take second place, for it is the divine proclamation that is of paramount importance. 

We can see the evidence of this throughout Scripture.  God speaks and brings the created order into existence.  God speaks to Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and so forth.  The prophets make proclamations.  John the Baptist proclaimed the near advent of the kingdom of God.  Jesus fused His doing with teaching.  Jesus sends His disciples out to tell His message.  The church springs into existence and thousands are ushered into the kingdom when Peter and the disciples begin to preach the message of the Gospel.  Paul points out the crucial elements of hearing and preaching as the way that faith is implanted and the power of the Resurrection takes root within the hearer.  Revelation is a series of pronouncements.  One could go on and on.  It is in the proclamation of the Word of God that God is revealed, and this is the fundamental and primary purpose of the church’s gathering. 

The preacher preaches (the teacher teaches) so that God may be made known.  The preacher preaches so that his hearers can learn about God and know more about God.  Knowledge about God is transmitted so that those that are made in the image of God, who are called to be covenant bearers, might be able to correctly and effectively bear that image and covenant, so that they might be a blessing to all peoples, that God may receive the glory that is due to Him for His mighty acts.  While God is acknowledged through our praises, knowledge of Him is conveyed through preaching.  The primary subject of proclamation in the time and places of regular Christian gatherings for worship must be God, and the primary activity must be proclamation.  Yes, in accordance with the way and the story by which the Creator God is revealed to us, the primary activity that must take place at these regular appointments must be preaching and teaching, for it is in this that the power of the Resurrection is sent forth, and it is in this that knowledge is seated. 

This instruction in knowledge, which has and always will require great discipline and diligence, is of paramount importance, and should not only inspire the hearers to a constant desire to learn more about God, but also to live lives of praise to God.  Living this life of praise will not result in a withdrawal from the world around them, into a self-imposed and ungodly exile that has the believer erecting their own temples.  If learning more about God causes the hearer to retreat from the world, in separation, isolation, and condemnation fostered by an “us versus them” mentality, then that preaching has gone woefully astray from that which is modeled by Jesus, and springs not from a diligent study of Scriptures so as to learn more about God, but from a subjective and self-satisfying interpretation of Scripture designed for little more than the gaining of personal control over the lives of the hearers and the all too familiar pursuit of power.  Instead, living a life of praise will result in the erection of tabernacles, as a symbol of constant exodus, in which, like the one claimed as Lord, the believer goes out to show forth the blessings of God’s kingdom to “tax collectors and sinners,” to the sick, to the thirsty, to the hungry, to those lacking clothes, to those in prison, and to the places where pain and evil are corrupting God’s creation and thwarting the advance of His kingdom.      

Deceptively Revealing (part 1 of 2)

Let us never forget, each and every time we approach the Scriptures, that the communication of the stories of the men, women, and the nation of Israel is designed to reveal God.  Even in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews, which is sometimes thought of as a commendation of the faithfulness of the men and women therein referenced, the actual message that comes ringing through quite loudly and ever so clearly, is that it was God that was faithful by granting faith to those that are mentioned so that He might accomplish His purposes through them.  These stories are not necessarily communicated so as to provide us with examples to emulate, but rather, as the Apostle Paul would tell the church in Corinth, they were written and told again and again for the purpose of instruction, and as examples of God’s faithful actions according to His covenant (1 Corinthians 10:11). 

If we ever find ourselves attempting to imitate one of these Biblical characters and their actions, whether good or bad, it is time to take a step back and examine what it is that we are supposed to be doing, and what it is that is providing our motivation towards imitation.  If our motivation is to put ourselves in a position to enjoy the same types of blessings that they enjoyed, so in order to achieve that end we do what they did that seems good according to our own subjective observations, then our motivation is faulty.  If we are attempting to imitate in the sense that we have a desire for God to use us in the establishment of His kingdom and in the accomplishment of the redemption that He is working out for His creation, without placing demands upon God in regards to the nature of the way in which He is going to use us, then it is more likely that we are taking the right approach. 

That said, we look to Abraham’s family and to Isaac’s blessing of Jacob and Esau.  According to a pattern that fills Genesis, this story begins with something akin to a deception, but it is not something that is incredibly overt at first glance.  We read that “When Isaac was old and his eyes were so weak that he was almost blind, he called his older son Esau and said to him, ‘My Son!... Since I am so old, I could die at any time.  Therefore, take your weapons… and go out into the open fields and hunt down some wild game for me.  Then prepare for me some tasty food, the kind I love, and bring it to me.  Then I will eat it so that I may bless you before I die” (Genesis 27:1-4).  Now why can it be said that this is a deception, though initial appearances to do not provide us with that perspective?  It is because Isaac is speaking about his death, and making it seem as if it is imminent and could happen at any time. 

According to the Scriptural record, Abraham had lived one hundred and seventy five years.  Abraham’s father Terah (Isaac’s grandfather) lived, for two hundred and five years.  At this point, Isaac was at least seventy-five years old, and ultimately, Genesis tells us that he lived to be one hundred and eighty years old.  At the very least, Isaac would know that he had some pretty good genes working for him, and what he might expecting in the area of the duration of his life.  Beyond that, we have almost the entire Scriptural history of the lives of Jacob and Esau, along with the births of all of Jacob’s children in the record that intervenes between Isaac speaking of his death and the actual time of his death.  That record encompasses a minimum of twenty years, though it is probably a much longer period of time. 

Regardless, and even though it is quite nearly impossible for a man to know when death will finally come upon him, it seems plausible to posit that Isaac was probably not actually terribly worried about death impinging upon him at that time.  In addition, at this point it appears that Isaac’s brother Ishmael is still alive as well, as we read that Esau, in the wake of the blessings bestowed by his father, “Went to Ishmael” (28:9) to get a wife.  He died relatively young, at the age of one hundred and thirty seven, meaning that Isaac was approximately one hundred twenty four years old when Ishmael passed away.  At the minimum, Isaac is speaking of his death nearly sixty years before death will take him.  So either Isaac was quite mistaken about his physical condition, or he was simply a pessimist that was always seeing death around the corner.  A third option would be to consider that the record of Genesis has both he and his father talking about their fear of being killed by men that would take their wives, and that this was yet another entrance into the practice which seems to be a cornerstone in the edifice of their history, which is deception.   

Isaac's Life Of Exodus (part 2)

Isaac, of course, would be able to easily identify the pattern that was unfolding.  As the bearer of the divine covenant, and as the one through whom God was promising to bless the peoples of the world, it would be unreasonable to suppose that Abraham did not routinely share the details of his life with his family and with all those with whom he came into contact.  Isaac would be fully cognizant of the fact that what he was now experiencing was a mirror of that which had been experienced by his father.  In that light, what son would not think along the lines of “if it worked for him, it will work for me”?  So upon reaching Gerar, which was, coincidentally, the same place that his father had settled (as presumably directed by God as part of Abraham’s movements in the region), Isaac entered into the ploy of informing the people of Gerar that his wife was actually his sister. 

Now for Abraham, this was not an untruth, as his wife was his half-sister.  For Isaac, this was a total deception, as Rebekah was a cousin.  This makes Isaac a bit of a liar, thereby putting him in tremendous Biblical company.  This serves as yet another reminder of the purpose of this Word, which is not to simply tell us the story of various men and women, or the story of a particular people so as to elevate them; but rather, to present to us by way of these stories that are designed to give us a basic understanding of His nature, a faithful God that uses individuals and peoples so as to accomplish His purposes in and for this world. 

Why would Isaac resort to such things?  What would be Isaac’s motivation to present himself and his wife in this way?  The Scriptures inform us that “He was afraid to say, ‘She is my wife,’ for he thought to himself, ‘The men of this place will kill me to get Rebekah because she is very beautiful.’” (26:7b)  On the surface this sounds good.  It is also the same thing we find Abraham communicating to his wife.  When Abraham went to Egypt, he had instructed Sarah (Sarai) to “tell them you are my sister so that it may go well for me because of you and my life will be spared on account of you” (12:13).  When Abram went to Gerar, he “said about his wife Sarah, ‘She is my sister.’” (20:2a) 

In Egypt, “Abram’s wife was taken into the household of Pharaoh, and he (Pharaoh) did treat Abram well on account of her” (12:15b-16a), with Abram receiving a substantial amount of livestock, presumably as a bridal price.  In Gerar, “Abimelech…sent for Sarah and took her” (20:2b).  In both instances, by saying that his wife was his sister, Abraham ended up having his wife taken from him.  In both instances, there is never any indication that Abraham’s life was in danger simply because his wife was beautiful; and in any case, it seems to be the case that the insistence that his wife was his sister put Abraham in the position of not being able to justify denying a request for marriage, should such a request be made.  In fact, what this looks like is a ploy to gain wealth through what is, for all practical purposes, prostitution, while relying on a sense of honor on the part of the men that took his wife, when it would eventually be revealed that she was his wife and not his sister.  Again, in both of the cases of Abraham and Sarah, when the deceived men find out the truth, and when they would be more than justified in killing Abraham for his lies and his dishonorable treatment of them, they act honorably toward Abraham, thus negating the supposed fear of death that had been the foundational need for the deception.  In fact, when it comes to the situation in Gerar, after finding out the truth, “Abimelech gave sheep, cattle, and male and female servants to Abraham,” he told him to “live wherever you please,” and he also gave him “a thousand pieces of silver” (20:14a,15b,16b). 

Though Abraham does gain great wealth through these tactics, is therefore in an even greater position to exemplify divine blessing (as his increasing wealth will given him an even more lofty position from which to tell the story of his covenant God), and though he does have an even greater story of divine faithfulness to tell (depending on the perspective from which the story is told), one cannot help but think that his interactions make him something less than the shining light of God’s glory to these people with which he dealt.  Beyond that, one also cannot help but think that the deceptions that were practiced against the pharaoh of Egypt (by Abraham) and the king of the Philistines (by Abraham and Isaac, as we shall see) must have influenced the later dealings between the Egyptians, the Philistines, and Israel.  Indeed, when we encounter Joseph as the ruler of Egypt, we find that “The Egyptians are not able to eat with Hebrews, for the Egyptians think it is disgusting to do so” (43:32b).  Might this situation that presents some type of underlying conflict between Egyptians and Hebrews have something to do with the deception perpetrated against Pharaoh by Abraham, and the fact that, as a result, “Pharaoh and his household” had been struck “with severe diseases” (12:17)? 

So returning to Isaac again, we find that his purported reasoning, that of fear of being killed, rings somewhat hollow.  It seems that he was relying on the Abrahamic pattern, almost hopeful that his wife’s beauty, along with his reporting that she was his sister, would lead to her being taken up as a wife just as his mother had been, which would thereby lead to greater wealth for himself.  Why not?  His father had been given the covenant, and had done these things and prospered.  Why should the son, who had also been given the covenant, not also engage in such activities?  It seemed to portend an extension of divine blessings.