A Tradition Of Wells (part 11 of 11)

The Jeremiah narrative happens upon a well on two occasions.  In the sixth chapter, as Jeremiah verbally depicts the destruction that is going to come upon Jerusalem due to its idolatry, he shares some of the Lord’s thoughts concerning the city.  The God of Israel can be heard to say “Cut down the trees around Jerusalem and build up a siege ramp against its walls.  This is the city which is to be punished.  Nothing but oppression happens in it.  As a well continually pours out fresh water so it continually pours out wicked deeds.  Sounds of violence and destruction echo throughout it.  All I see are sick and wounded people” (6:6-7). 

This is, of course, a reflection upon Israel’s covenant failures.  For this, the Creator God brings His curse against His covenant people.  Death is coming to them.  It is against this that Jesus can be heard speaking, when He says “whoever drinks some of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again, but the water that I will give him will become a fountain of water springing up to eternal life” (John 4:14).  This eternal life is so much more than a one-way ticket to heaven upon death.  Rather, it is an entrance into the covenant people of the Creator God, in which one shares in the covenant blessings promised by the God of Israel (Leviticus 26, Deuteronomy 28), and presumably the resurrection of the righteous at the end of the age. 

Not long thereafter, the Samaritan woman questions Jesus about whether Jerusalem is the appropriate place to offer worship.  Might this be a reflection on what the Creator God says about Jerusalem in Jeremiah (a well that pours out wicked deeds rather than fresh water)?  Jesus responds by telling her “a time is coming… when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth” (4:23a).  Further on in Jeremiah, the prophet laments over that which he speaks, saying “I wish that my head were a well full of water and my eyes were a fountain full of tears!  If they were, I could cry day and night for those of my dear people who have been killed” (9:1). 

Hosea is the next prophet to be heard, as he spoke to the situation of the northern kingdom of Israel.  Referring to the judgment of the Creator God that was coming upon that portion of His people, Hosea says “Even though he flourishes like a reed plant, a scorching east wind will come, a wind from the Lord rising up from the desert.  As a result, his spring will dry up; his well will become dry.  That wind will spoil all his delightful foods in the containers in his storehouse” (13:15).  Beyond the natural fact that water is necessary for life for all peoples everywhere, wells had been a source of life for Israel, stretching back to Abraham as a place of marriage and ultimately offspring that continued their God’s covenant purposes.  Here, their God speaks of a well that would become dry.  Specifically, this is directed against Samaria (13:16), which is the setting for Jesus well meeting.  This provides added color to Jesus’ talk of “living water” (4:10) and “a fountain of water springing up to eternal life, as well as Jesus’ directing of the woman’s attention away from either Samaria or Jerusalem as the center of worship. 

In a similar instance, to round out and wrap up this study, is to be found in the prophetic work of Micah.  Here, it is possible to readily identify informative points of contact with the Johannine well story, as Micah speaks of the Creator God’s judgment that comes “because of Jacob’s rebellion and the sins of the nation of Israel” (1:15a).  Not unlike the woman’s question to Jesus about the proper place of worship, and being mindful of Jesus’ response, Micah can be heard to rhetorically inquire “How has Jacob rebelled, you ask?  Samaria epitomizes their rebellion!  Where are Judah’s pagan worship centers, you ask?  They are right in Jerusalem!” (1:15b).  As Micah goes on to describe the tribulation that will come their way, he is heard saying “Therefore you will have to say farewell to Moresheth Gath.  The residents of Achzib will be as disappointing as a dried up well to the kings of Israel” (1:14).  

Calling Down Fire (part 5 of 6)

So, given the prevailing sense of the “Roman peace” (pax Romana) when Jesus’ disciples arrive in a village and in a house and say “May peace be on this house,” one can almost imagine them being met with some trepidation.  Again, this is not un-familiar.  It is not difficult to envision the people, as they receive this greeting, thinking “Great, more peace,” as they entertain what they know and perhaps have experienced to be Caesar’s notion of peace. 

Then, when those same disciples go out into the public square and begin speaking of the kingdom of the Creator God that has come upon them (heaven has invaded earth and the Creator God is ruling the world through the true Son of God, Jesus the Christ of Nazareth), that message of peace, coupled with kingdom, could very well continue to invoke thoughts of Rome’s crushing domination and their means of establishing peace and extending their kingdom.  This, of course, is where attentiveness to the sick comes in as being dramatically important to the kingdom message, as it was and would never cease to be a distinctive badge worn by the disciples of the Christ. 

Naturally, the distinction is drawn because the usual, traveling preacher would pay little if any attention to the sick, as there would be almost nothing to be gained from them financially.  Similarly, the Caesar or his representative also cared little to nothing for the sick, as those that were sick to the point of being an unproductive subject of the empire, could very well be looked upon as nothing more than a burden that members of the local populace were all to happy to shift to Rome. 

Still, even with the healing of the sick (conscientiously serving them and attending to their basic needs so that they might recover their health and so be healed, and this alongside recoveries that could be described as nothing short of miraculous) accompanying the message of the rule of the Christ on earth, this preaching of the kingdom of God that had come, as indicated and proved out by the Resurrection, could create a natural skepticism and induce a “here we go again” attitude amongst the populace, as they would be fully cognizant of the Caesar’s methods that would be meted out to those that rejected the message. 

In this light, what is it that Jesus tell His disciples?  He says, “whenever you enter a town and the people do not welcome you, go into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet we wipe off against you’.” (10:11a)  This was a different approach.  This was certainly not a calling down of fire.  Far from it.  When heard within the appropriate context, it hardly even sounds like the invoking of a curse.  Where Caesar would have whetted his sword with blood (which would then need to be wiped off) and left men, women, and children lying in the dusty streets for their rebellion in rejecting him, Jesus suggests a different though significant, symbolic action.  

Justified By Faithfulness (part 7)

For Paul, very little good could come from this new movement and its new covenant marker.  Worse than that, not only were these people encouraging the dismissal of these long-standing covenant markers, they were also going further and saying that the Creator God’s true desire and intention, through His Messiah, was to bring all peoples, and even the accursed Gentile nations, into His covenant, without those Gentiles having to effectively become Jews by adopting the approved covenant markers themselves.  This was to be abhorred and condemned.  The pre-conversion Paul would have seen this as being absolutely contrary to what was necessary and required, and that it could do nothing more than continue and even extend their God’s curse upon His people Israel, which would manifest itself as a continued denial of His blessings. 

Now, the same man, with a radically altered and transformed worldview owing to what he said was his encounter with the resurrected Jesus of Nazareth, Paul had modified his position in an extraordinary way.  The transformation and renewal of thinking was profound indeed.  Whereas before he had previously held wholeheartedly to the idea that one is in fact justified by the works of the law (espousing and maintaining the covenant markers which set one apart as a Jew and therefore a part of the Creator God’s people and in positive covenant standing before Him), he now contended that “no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 2:16a).  Covenant standing was now going to be centered upon Jesus.  Again, Paul points to the faithfulness of the God of Israel, which is foundational and key, as represented by Jesus the Messiah, and by extension His crucifixion, His Resurrection, and the fact that His Resurrection proved Him to be the Creator God’s Messiah for His people. 

Adding to this, Paul writes, “And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law” (2:16b).  Here, realizing his God’s complete faithfulness to His people and His promises, with that faithfulness represented by what Jesus had been and accomplished on behalf of the Creator God’s covenant people and for all of mankind, Paul has completed his paradigm shift.  He now says that the covenant marker is belief in Jesus as the risen Messiah.  That is, one is now justified, or righteous, or in positive covenant status before the Creator God and therefore able to experience the blessings that said God has promised to His covenant people now drafted from all nations and accepted as Gentiles, by believing that Jesus was and is the embodiment of Israel’s God and King of all creation.  The old covenant markers, that being the works of the law, have summarily been set aside and replaced by this new covenant marker of belief in Jesus as Messiah. 

Paul joins with the group that is dismissive of the works of the law and of Jewish identification markers as that which will bring God’s blessing, and also throws open the doors of the kingdom of heaven to the Gentiles, who can now enter upon that kingdom without having to undergo circumcision, observe Sabbaths, or follow the prescribed dietary laws.  He even goes so far as to expand this kingdom principle, based on what he has learned and knows of the life of Jesus, and indicates that not only is there no longer to be a division along the lines of Jew and Gentile, but that in union with Christ---in believing that Jesus is Lord, and with that serving as the covenant marker of the renewed people of God---there is no longer slave nor free, or even male and female. 

Making Jesus central to the covenant was monumentally transformational, providing a sweeping change in all things and all areas of life.  Indeed, in that day, many believers in Jesus came to look upon themselves as a new and third humanity, representing a new way of being divine image bearers (human), and understanding themselves to be somehow infused with the same power that raised Jesus from the dead, along with the power and responsibility of eternal life (the life of the age to come intruding upon the present age) through belief in Jesus, as they were now animated by His Spirit and living in His Kingdom and for His purposes.  While certainly respecting earthly powers and offering the respect that was due to them, and while acknowledging the Caesar (the one that held the title of lord of all and son of god), they knew of no true King but the crucified one.    

Preaching & Believing (part 2)

Before going further, it is worthwhile to examine what it is that Paul most likely means when he speaks of “being saved.”  As a Jew, raised in the context of a deep-rooted understanding of covenant, the Scriptural narrative, and the context of exodus and exile, when Paul uses this term he has a specific point of reference and definition.  For the covenant people of Israel, the Creator God’s salvation would have been widely construed as being delivered from foreign bondage and exile, which represented their God’s curse upon them for covenant failures. 

Therefore, being “saved” implies a deliverance from cursing and exile, with a concordant rescue from foreign subjugation.  When the covenant God delivered Israel from their bondage in Egypt and brought them into the land of promise, they would have understood themselves as having been saved.  Most decidedly, they experienced the salvation of their God.  When their God repeatedly delivered them from oppression in the days of the Judges and made them to regain control of their promised land, each time, they would think of themselves as being saved.  When Judah was spared from Assyria, maintaining an albeit temporary self-rule under their God’s anointed kings, they would have thought of themselves as being saved.  These were all acts of salvation. 

Whenever the Creator God entered in to defeat Israel’s enemies, ending cursing (as outlined in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28) or staving off exile, that deliverance is spoken of as salvation.  When the Creator God would save Israel, it would be related to being saved from the curses that are set forth in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, which set for the culminating curse of exile from their land and subjection to foreign destruction and domination. 

It must be remembered that Paul’s Jewish readers would have this in mind when considering his words and his overall message.  This would have been the air that they breathed, and the hearing of the message of the Gospel and its salvation would have been inseparable from the mindset fostered by their shared and defining history.  Yes, Jewish hearers would have in mind the entire narrative of their Scriptures, and therefore, when hearing about salvation, would also take into consideration the cursing of all mankind that began with Adam.  Early non-Jewish believers would have been educated into the Jewish narrative, so as to be able to comprehend the Creator God of Israel and make sense of the Christ-event.   

Though Paul would say that Israel’s history was instructive, especially in learning about the faithful God that would become embodied in Jesus of Nazareth, Paul would not necessarily want his Gentile readers to take Israel’s Deuteronomic curses into consideration when they considered their own cursing and exile.  Those curses were specific to Israel, as they were associated with the covenant established with Israel at Sinai.  Paul would want Gentile hearers and believers to understand that a better covenant had been enacted at Calvary, and that the covenant was more in line with the Abrahamic covenant and its directive towards all peoples, not just Israel. 

So Paul, in his message that was geared towards all peoples, would utilize mankind’s curse, along with the curse on all of the creation that was understood to have begun with Adam, as the point of reference for that from which they were being saved.  Under the covenant of Jesus, salvation, for all mankind, Jew and Gentile, would involve being delivered from the curse of death, along with the end of exile from the Creator God’s fellowship, under which man was not truly able to rightly bear the divine image in which he had been created. 

Veil Of The Temple (part 8 of 9)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Veil Of The Temple (part 5)

As part of the curse that came upon Adam, when he, as reported in the Scriptural narrative, failed in his commission to steward the perfect creation of the one that would to be known as the Lord God of Israel, to have dominion over the earth, and to bear the divine image as he was created to do, he was banished from the Garden of Eden. When Adam rebelled against his divine purpose, and in so doing allowed death and evil to enter into this world as indicated in the story, he was banished from the place where he would have his fellowship with the Creator God.  He was removed from the place of access to his Creator. 

Not only was he removed from this place of fellowship and purity and perfection and the tree of life, but the Genesis narrative informs the reader that two cherubim were stationed at the east end of the Garden.  It was insisted upon and understood that this was done in order to bar Adam’s way from returning to the place from whence he had been banished.  Those cherubim stood with whirling swords of fire, figuratively veiling mankind from the place of the Creator God’s presence.  Prior to this, the God of covenants was said to have openly walked in the midst of His creation, freely engaging in open fellowship with the creatures that had been made in His image, but this was brought to an end through Adam’s transgression and thus would happen no more.  Adam, as the representative of all of humanity, had accomplished this. 

When the covenant God took it upon Himself, based on His promise to Abraham, with whom He had entered into a covenant, to redeem a people from out of bondage of Egypt, for the purpose of separating them for Himself and for His purposes, to appoint them to be the reflectors of His glory into His world, to again steward His creation and to bear His image, to be a shining light to the nations, and to be the instruments of His service, He once again, as He had done with Adam as the divine image-bearer, chose to place Himself in the midst of His creation.  He chose to enter into fellowship.  This time, however, there would be limitations.  It was not open and it was not free.  There were boundaries.  It was both similar and dis-similar to the situation of Genesis. 

When the tabernacle was erected, with its Holy Place and its Most Holy Place, the Creator God limited Himself to appearing in the Most Holy Place.  He limited Himself to direct fellowship with Moses alone.  Furthermore, it would be decreed that only the High Priest would be able to enter into His presence, and that, only once a year, as the representative of the people of the Creator God.  Where did this entering into the presence of the Creator God take place?  It took place behind the veil.  It took place behind the veil that was decorated with angelic sentries---cherubim. 

What was the penalty for a presumptuous entrance behind the veil?  The penalty was death.  The penalty was being cut down, figuratively, by “the flame of a whirling sword.”  This was true of the tabernacle, and of Solomon’s temple, and was held to as a tradition of the second temple, which stood in Jesus’ day.  There was no entrance behind the veil.  Cherubim guarded the way.  There was to be no direct access to or fellowship with the Creator God by man.  This could be looked upon as mankind’s ongoing curse. 

In Jesus’ day, it would be reasonable to presume that when the people saw the cherubim, read about the cherubim, were verbally reminded of the cherubim, and contemplated that veil of separation, their thoughts could have quite rightly turned to Adam, to Eden, to the fall of man, to the cursing of creation (a reminder of exile), to the expulsion from Eden (another reminder of exile), and to the cherubim that were set forth as a result of that fall.  It becomes clear that the veil of the temple was so much more than something that prevented people from seeing what stood behind it.  The veil was so much more than a reminder that man had been separated from his Creator.  

Terms Of The Covenant (part 1 of 2)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Israel & Adam (part 1 of 2)

Israel was set apart to the Lord; they were like the firstfruits of a harvest to Him. – Jeremiah 2:3a  (NET)

There are interesting similarities to be found between Adam (and Eve) and Israel.  As it is well-nigh possible that the story of Adam is the story of Israel in microcosm, while also being the pre-story for the existence of Israel and the explanation for the superiority of Israel’s God, the similarities make perfect sense. 

In terms of the Scriptural narrative, Adam, of course, was the first of humankind.  He is also represented as the first person to enter into a covenant with the Creator God.  By comparison, Israel was chosen out of all humankind, beginning with Abraham, to be the special, covenant people for the Lord.  As Adam is said to have strayed from the Lord in the matter of the fruit and the rebellion from his simple charge, the actions of God’s chosen, special covenant people would later cause their God to ask why “they strayed so far from Me” (2:5b). 

That straying was highlighted by the prophet Jeremiah and marked by the fact that “They paid allegiance to worthless idols, and so became worthless to Me” (2:5c).  Essentially, they were following the path of Adam, who paid attention (allegiance) to the words of the serpent, as reported by his wife, and thereby relinquished the responsibilities that had been given to Him by God, bringing a curse upon the earth.  It could be said that Adam became worthless to God, and humankind (forsaking covenant responsibility) became a liability in creation. 

The covenant God said to Israel through His prophet Jeremiah: “I brought you into a fertile land so you could enjoy its fruits and its rich bounty” (2:7a).  Likewise, humankind had been delivered into a perfect creation, a fertile land, given responsibility for stewardship and dominion over that creation.  Instruction was provided such that all but one small part of its fruits and its rich bounty could be enjoyed.  However, because Adam could not restrict himself to that which God had offered for Him to enjoy, that perfect creation of God “was ruined in the sight of God; the earth was filled with violence” (Genesis 6:11). 

Because of Adam’s actions, “God saw the earth, and indeed it was ruined, for all living creatures on the earth were sinful” (6:12).  That is, they had been subjected to corruption and decay because of humankind’s rebellion and faithlessness to the obligations of the covenant as divine image-bearer.  Similarly, Israel had been delivered into the bountiful land but God said that they had “defiled it,” adding that “you made the land I call My own loathsome to Me” (Jeremiah 2:7b).

The Lord goes on to ask, “Has a nation ever changed its gods (even though they are not really gods at all)?  But My people have exchanged Me, their glorious God, for a god that cannot help them all!” (2:11).  The question that is asked and answered concerning Israel, working back through Adam, can then be equally applied to all of humankind.  Just as Israel stooped and fell to the worship of other gods, so too did Adam (first, according to Israel’ story).  For whom did Adam exchange his allegiance?  First, his allegiance went to his wife.  Secondly, it went to the serpent, for the one that could effectively countermand the directives of their Creator, causing humankind to break faith with their God, is the one that is trusted and so worshiped.

Measure Given, Measure Received (part 4)

Jesus continues and says, “bless those who curse you” (6:28a).  Once again, we have a specific, historical reference.  His Jewish hearers were quite familiar with what was implied when the word “curse” was used.  Jesus was not talking about people that might say bad things about you.  No.  With these words, He is referencing Israel’s historical narrative and the covenant promises of their God.  The people knew that they were still living under the Creator God’s curse.  They knew that they were under the curse because they were dominated by foreign powers.  This is what their God had promised in the book of Deuteronomy if His people failed to live up to Torah, and failed to fulfill their covenant responsibilities to be a light to the nations. 

They had been in subjection to foreign powers since the day of Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon, having been subject to Babylon, Persia, Greece, Egypt, Syria, and now Rome.  As long as the Creator God’s people did not rule themselves, then they were still experiencing the curse that their God had promised to bring upon them.  Because of this, not only was Rome their hated enemy that probably hated them in return, but Rome also would be incorrectly viewed as the power that was cursing them.  If Rome was gone, then so too, they might think, would their God’s curse upon them be gone.  This was just one more reason to desire Rome’s overthrow and to begrudge living under their rule.  What Jesus was demanding was truly a revolutionary mindset!  Love Rome?  Ask their God to bless Rome?  Unthinkable! 

It is possible to go deeper into this issue of Jesus’ insistence upon blessing those who curse you.  Not only does the presence of the Romans as the rulers of God’s covenant people and their land serve as a daily reminder that their God’s curse is still upon them (subject to foreign power, in accordance with Leviticus and Deuteronomy), but these words from Jesus would serve as a reminder of what was looked upon as the ultimate curse, which is/was the Roman cross.  Rome used the cross as a tool for execution and as a means of the expression of their power. 

Crucifixion, by and large, was the method of capital punishment reserved for rebel subjects and recalcitrant slaves, and historical records indicate that Rome was not hesitant in employing crucifixion, sometimes crucifying thousands of people at one time.  As if it was not enough that Jesus’ hearers would have seen or heard about fellow citizens in their day and throughout their recent history that had been crucified by Rome, coupled with that was the Deuteronomic insistence that indicated that anyone hanged on a tree was cursed by the covenant God.  This, naturally, propounded the idea of the cross as ultimate cursing. 

The threat of this curse, under Rome’s dominion, was an ever-present reality hanging over the heads of all peoples that were subject to Rome, and owing to the words found in their books of the law, carried an even greater and more ominous weight for the people of the Creator God.  With this two-fold examination of Jesus’ directive to “bless those who curse you” (Luke 6:28a), and the rejoinder to “pray for those who mistreat you” (6:28b), the words that Jesus spoke while suffering through His execution become even more poignant and meaningful.  Essentially, we find Jesus practicing what He preached when He says, “Father, forgive them, for they don’t know what they are doing” (23:34a).  Though this statement by Jesus is omitted by many important manuscripts, what it conveys fits very well with the message that He preached.

Broken The Permanent Treaty (part 2 of 2)

Yet again, Isaiah speaks of the fact that man fades away into death, doing so through employing the imagery of the disappearance of the inhabitants of the earth.  As has been said, the impact of man’s sin (failure to rightly bear the divine image by violating the covenant requirements established by the Creator God) extends beyond himself, reaching the created order, which is why Isaiah insists that “The new wine dries up, the vines shrivel up,” and with terminology that would remind his readers or hearers of the exodus (set in motion by the groaning of Israel in its slavery), and can put readers of the post-Christ era in mind of Romans chapter eight and liberation of the creation, saying “all those who like to celebrate groan” (24:7).          

Bringing an awareness of the Adam and exodus story forward to the time in which he was writing, Isaiah could easily have looked around him, considered what it was that Israel was charged with doing and being under their God’s covenant, and determined that Israel had done the same thing as Adam.  In a sense, Israel was also recapitulating what Egypt had done to them.  Whereas Israel, now representing mankind, was supposed to be the means by which the Creator God revealed Himself, the way in which that God had chosen to deal with the problem of evil in the world, and accordingly functioned as a shining light of the Creator God’s glory to draw all men to Himself and bring them into a right standing with Him under His covenant, they were instead actively engaging in the further defiling of the earth that has begun under the influence of their purported progenitor (Adam). 

Contrary to what was occurring under the watch of His covenant people, the Creator God’s plan, beginning with Abraham, was to reverse the devastation of the curse through those covenant people, but instead they contributed to its ongoing devastation.  Israel, of course, had been given specific laws and ways of living as the covenant people so that they might rightly bear the divine image by their God, yet the recorded history of this people insists that they violated those laws almost unceasingly.  From time to time, their history suggests that Israel would recognize the violations and come to repentance, but for the most part, there was an utter disregard for the regulations that had been delivered to them, especially in the area of caring for orphans and widows. 

Yes, just like Adam, sadly, the Creator God’s people had broken their everlasting covenant, failing to uphold their covenant requirements to represent the Creator to the whole of the creation.  As a result, devastating judgment of cursing and exile would come upon them, with this cursing provided context by the promises of both Deuteronomy twenty-eight and Leviticus twenty-six.  This would occur as an outworking of their God’s faithful justice.  He had brought them into a treaty---an everlasting covenant with Him---and the execution of coming destruction, in according with the aforementioned promises, was the ongoing demonstration of their God’s righteousness (covenant faithfulness) towards His people and towards His creation. 

Ultimately, it would take a Redeemer ---a messiah, for the Creator God Himself, as it would be understood to act in the flesh, returning to His people to repair the treaty and to set His people and this world to rights, doing so through a people who organized their lives according to a new covenant, a renewed Israel, that live in a believing covenantal union with Jesus.          

Broken The Permanent Treaty (part 1 of 2)

The earth is defiled by its inhabitants, for they have violated laws, disregarded the regulation, and broken the permanent treaty. – Isaiah 24:5  (NET)

Before one reaches the verse above, one also encounters the verses which state that “The earth will be completely devastated and thoroughly ransacked.  For the Lord has decreed this judgment.  The earth dries up and withers; the prominent people of the earth fade away” (24:3-4).  Though this was clearly not the Creator God’s intention for His good creation, this is the situation wrought by man’s rebellion in the garden.  Man was able to have this impact on the earth because He is the creature made in God’s image (the divine image-bearer).  Man was specifically tasked by God and was given the responsibility to steward the creation---to steward it wisely as the vice-regent of the Creator God---and failed to do so, introducing evil and its effects into the world. 

In the Scriptural narrative, it is Adam’s faithlessness to what were his God-given responsibilities and limitations by which the earth becomes defiled.  The narrative insists that Adam willfully and egregiously violated the law that had been given to him by his Creator.  Tying this together with what is offered by Isaiah, it can be said that he most certainly disregarded the regulation.  The covenant God of Israel had designed His creation to be permanently good, and for man to tend His good creation in perpetuity, but that permanence proved to be fleeting.  As Isaiah writes, mankind broke “the permanent treaty.” 

Another rendering of the Hebrew that is here translated “permanent treaty” would be “the everlasting covenant.”  Adam, representing all mankind, violated the everlasting covenant of the Creator God.  Naturally, any talk of covenant would immediately call to mind the covenant governing the relationship between Israel and its God.  What was the result of this defiling, violation, disregarding, and breaking?  “To the woman He said, ‘I will greatly increase your labor pains; with pain you will give birth to children.  You will want to control your husband, but he will dominate you’.  But to Adam He said, ‘Because you obeyed your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, “You must not eat from it,” cursed is the ground thanks to you; in painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.  It will produce thorns and thistles for you, but you will eat of the grain of the field.  By the sweat of your brow you will eat food until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you will return’.” (Genesis 3:16-19) 

Yes, the Lord decreed this judgment.  The earth would be devastated and ransacked by thorns and thistles and pain and hostility.  Though the earth had produced bountifully, in effect it would now be dried up and withered.  Man would indeed fade away into dust.  It is in the stream of identity that flows from this understanding of their story that begins with Adam in which Isaiah would write, “So a treaty curse devours the earth; its inhabitants pay for their guilt.  This is why the inhabitants of the earth disappear, and are reduced to just a handful of people” (24:6).  Isaiah, whose worldview is shaped by the Adam story and all that flows from it, appears to indicate that Israel is effectively recapitulating the fall of Adam, failing in their stewarding responsibilities and their everlasting covenant.  

Thus, as one continues to focus in on what occurred with Adam, so as to read or hear Isaiah from within the sweep of the Scriptural narrative, it can be seen that God cursed the earth because of the broken treaty, the ignored agreement, the disregarded covenant.  As a result, man has continually suffered from death and decay and all that goes with man stepping outside of the bounds of God’s covenant.  

Garments Of Salvation

I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; my soul shall exult in my God, for He has clothed me with the garments of salvation; He has covered me with the robe of righteousness. – Isaiah 61:10a  (ESV)

That robe of righteousness can perhaps be best understood as the robe of the Creator God of Israel’s covenant faithfulness.  God’s robe of righteousness---covenant faithfulness---is also called the garments of salvation.  What is salvation?  Salvation is redemption and deliverance from the curse of the divine image bearers rejection of God’s covenant and its associated sickness, disease, and death---that which took root in this world because of the rebellion against God that is known as the fall of man. 

In that fall, a creation that had been pronounced as good, in which sickness and disease had no place, indeed, in which it was not possible for man to die, became a damaged creation which bore thorns and thistles, and in which it was now not possible for man not to die, as his physical body would eventually be ravaged by the effects of age.  Isaiah writes that, as part of the fulfillment of God’s covenant, first made with Abraham, that God would clothe His covenant people with the garments of salvation, effectively, reversing the curse of the fall.  This reversal would extend to the whole of God’s creation as well.  That garment of salvation, and the reversal of that curse, is the evidence of God’s faithfulness to His covenant.  It is a robe that it is the evidence of His righteousness. 

Isaiah goes on to gloriously describe this putting on of garments, comparing it to the way that “a bridegroom decks himself like a priest with a beautiful headdress, and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels” (61:10b).  Is it not significant that talk of what God will do for His covenant people naturally leads to talk of the bridegroom and the bride?  It is in this light that we think of the fifth chapter of Ephesians and Paul writing “Husbands (bridegrooms), love your wives (brides), as Christ (bridegroom) loved the church (bride) and gave Himself up for her, that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the Word, so that He might present the church to Himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such think, that she might be holy and without blemish” (5:25-27).

Keeping ourselves in the New Testament, let us seek an even fuller understanding of our text, with its garments and robes.  Bearing in mind what has been said about the fall and its effect on man’s physical body, as well as its effect on a previously very good creation, we turn to the fifteenth chapter of Corinthians.  There, we are able to glimpse what the Apostle Paul might have had in mind as he considered Isaiah’s presentation of the garments of salvation and the robe of righteousness.  He writes, “Behold!  I tell you a mystery.  We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.  For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed” (15:51-52).  Now here’s the key: “For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.  When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: ‘Death is swallowed up in victory.’ ‘O death, where is your victory?  O death, where is your sting?’” (15:53-55) 

Paul looks forward to a time when this body that is subject to the stinging and victorious march of the curse of death, will be changed.  Here, it can also be said that that to which he looked forward was also something of a reality when a man confesses Jesus as Lord.  That being understood, Paul looks forward to the time when what is perishable puts on imperishable, and what is mortal puts on immortality.  He looks forward to a time when man will be placed in a renewed creation that is good, and once again, he will find it possible not to die.  This is when it will be said that death has been defeated.  Neither Paul nor Isaiah expected death to be defeated simply because God’s covenant people have passed into some disembodied state sans body.  No, death will be defeated when the curse is reversed and God has put His world right.  This imperishable and immortal body is a garment of salvation, as it is not subject to the curse.  This imperishable and immortal body is the robe of the working out of God’s covenant faithfulness. 

In contemplation of God’s covenant faithfulness, and what it implies, Isaiah goes on to write, “For as the earth brings forth its sprouts, and as a garden causes what is sown in it to sprout up, so the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise to sprout up before all nations” (61:11).  It is no accident that Isaiah brings in this talk of the earth and gardens sprouting.  He understands that when God’s consummates His covenant, that the curse will be lifted from all of creation, and all will be renewed.  We find Paul picking up on this theme in the eighth chapter of Romans, when he famously writes about “the creation” being “subject to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it” (8:20).  It was man that subjected creation to futility because of his rebellion against his Creator; but because God is faithful, “the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (8:21). 

For all of this, and quite rightly if we believe in Jesus’ Lordship and so find ourselves as a part of God’s covenant people in faith, we should “greatly rejoice in the Lord;” and our souls should, most assuredly, exult in our God.  We are “an offspring the Lord has blessed” (61:9b), and we praise Him for His unending faithfulness.  

Deceptively Revealing (part 2 of 2)

When Isaac spoke these words to Esau, it was not to his ears alone that they came.  “Rebekah,” Isaac’s wife, “had been listening while Isaac spoke to his son Esau” (Genesis 27:5).  Apparently, she was rightly alarmed at what she had heard.  When Isaac, who had been marked as the bearer of the divine covenant that had first come to Abraham, spoke to Esau about blessing him, Rebekah knew that, because of Isaac’s use of “bless,” that it was the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant to which he referred.  Isaac was intent upon passing the blessing on to Esau. 

Before we contemplate the way that Rebekah responded to what she had heard, we should take a moment to consider what it is that Isaac is doing, and whether or not he can actually do what both Isaac and Rebekah (and most likely Esau) know that he is about to attempt to do.  Can Isaac actually pass along the Abrahamic covenant?  No, he cannot.  That is the prerogative of the God that enters into covenant.  Isaac did not have the covenant passed along to him by Abraham, but rather, the Scriptures inform us that it was the Lord who spoke to Isaac and informed him that he was to be the bearer of the divine covenant.  This lined-up with what Abraham had been told about the son that would be born to he and Sarah.  Here, Isaac, fully aware of his plans and intentions, is presuming to usurp the promise that had come to him, while presuming to encroach upon an area that belonged to God alone.  So though it is unlikely that Isaac’s actions are going to be effectual in relation to the bearer of the covenant, his completing the task to which he had set himself would only prove to be problematic down the road, especially in the area of family relations and positions of honor within the extended household. 

This is only a part of what it was that prompted Rebekah to take action.  What was that action?  Well, it was deception.  Rebekah, in full awareness of the family’s history of deception, jumps right into the family “business,” doing what she believes to be an absolute necessity.  Just as Isaac figured that deception had worked for him and his dad in the past, so too could Rebekah reach the same conclusion.  So “Rebekah said to her son Jacob, ‘Look, I overheard your father… Now then, my son, do exactly what I tell you!’” (27:6a,8)  With that, she proceeded to unfold a plan and give Jacob instructions that would allow him to go before his father in his brother’s place, telling her son that in this way his father would “bless you before he dies” (27:10b). 

Why would she go to such trouble?  It is because she had a promise from the Lord.  That promise came to her when she was pregnant with both Jacob and Esau.  She was told that “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples will be separated from within you.  One people will be stronger than the other, and the older will serve the younger” (25:23).  Because Rebekah was married to the younger son of Abraham, and because it was he that bore the divine covenant in the world, this would naturally lead to the belief that her younger son (the one that came out second) would also be the recipient of the covenant that the Lord had made with Abraham and was carrying out at that time through Isaac.  One would think that it would be foolish to believe that she did not make this promise known to Isaac.  However, it might very well be the case that she did not do so.  So naturally, as the boys grew, Isaac would have favored the older son, which would not have been surprising, and we are told that “Isaac loved Esau because he had a taste for fresh game” (25:28a).  However, it is specifically said that “Rebekah loved Jacob” (25:28b). 

While it is quite natural for the older son to be favored, we can probably attribute this special love for her younger son to the promise that she had received, and the knowledge that it was he that was going to receive and bear forth the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant.  Viewed in this light, it would not be terribly difficult to believe that Rebekah kept the Lord’s message to herself, though this would carry the risk of Isaac attempting to do what he was now doing, which is what has now prompted Rebekah’s actions.  As we remember that Isaac himself was the younger son of Abraham, it is doubtful that he would have difficulty accepting the receipt of a report from Rebekah dealing with what she had been told by the Lord, so his actions to bless the older son further indicate that he had not been made aware of this promise. 

When Rebekah speaks to Jacob, he responds with a protest, indicating that he didn’t see how it was possible for him to carry out this deception, due to the physical differences between he and his brother.  Within his protest, we get a glimpse of the notion that Rebekah has shared the knowledge of her promise with Jacob, as he says, “My father may touch me!  Then he’ll think I’m mocking him and I’ll bring a curse on myself instead of a blessing” (27:12).  It is with this that Jacob reveals the fact that he is aware of the promise concerning his position, but is simply concerned with how his mother is suggesting he go about receiving the blessing that would affirm this in the eyes of his brother and the whole of his father’s household.  Along with this, by use of the language of blessing and cursing, he demonstrates his awareness of the covenant that his father carries.  We should expect this of him, as Isaac would have made this well known to his sons.  Rebekah’s response has her taking up the language of covenant as well, saying “Any curse against you will fall on me, my son!  Just obey me!” (27:13b).  She was confident that the deception would be successful, and that it would result in blessing, as such things (deceptions) had so often done for her husband and her father-in-law.         

Saul's Final Exile (part 2 of 2)

Samuel continues with his condemning report to Saul, going on to tell him that “The Lord will hand you over to the Philistines!” (1 Samuel 28:19a)  For good measure, this is reiterated and expanded upon just a few words later, with Samuel declaring, “The Lord will hand the army of Israel over to the Philistines!” (28:19c)  The intermediate interjection is “Tomorrow both you and your sons will be with me” (28:19b).  Samuel makes it clear that Saul understands that the full measure of God’s curse is going to come upon him, in that he will be handed over to foreign subjugation, and that this will be without rescue, as Saul is going to die along with his sons.  Secondly, Samuel reminds us of the nature of Israel’s kingship, in that the king of Israel represents the people as a whole, and informs Saul that this subjugation will extend beyond him and his sons, affecting the whole of the people. 

With all of these words from the mouth of Samuel, nothing new is being introduced.  Samuel is simply pointing to the covenant faithfulness of Israel’s God, to perform according to His promises, and to bring the justice of His righteousness (God’s justice fulfilling His covenant faithfulness).  Owing to Saul’s failure to carry out what he had been instructed to do against Amalek, and with the culmination of that event on display here at the residence of the witch of Endor, Samuel is informing Saul that “The Lord will allow you to be struck down before your enemies” (Deuteronomy 28:25a).  These words take on an even greater significance when it comes to the death of Saul, in that he was not actually struck down by the Philistines. 

In the midst of the battle with the Philistines, “the archers spotted him and wounded him severely” (31:3b).  Following this wounding, “Saul said to his armor bearer, ‘Draw your sword and stab me with it!  Otherwise these uncircumcised people will come, stab me, and torture me’.” (31:4a)  Here, we take note of Saul’s mention of “uncircumcised people,” in that in his death, prophesied by Samuel, and done so in accordance with covenant violations, Saul makes mention of that which represented God’s original covenant with Abraham, which was circumcision.  It appears that Saul realizes that his death, proximately at the hands of those that were not in covenant, was very much a movement of Israel’s faithful God, and stood in accordance with the Deuteronomic curses.  Saul’s death, however, was not brought about by his armor bearers, nor by the Philistines, but rather, “Saul took his sword and fell on it” (31:4c).  Indeed, Saul was struck down before his enemies, and this by his own hand. 

Returning to Deuteronomy, and continuing with the previously referenced verse, we read, “you will attack them from one direction but flee from them in seven directions” (28:25b).  We find this well represented before the record of Saul’s suicidal death, as we read “Now the Philistines were fighting against Israel.  The men of Israel fled from the Philistines and many of them fell dead upon Mount Gilboa.  The Philistines stayed right on the heels of Saul and his sons.  They struck down Saul’s sons Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malki-shua” (31:1-2).  While noticing the commensurate usage of “struck down in both Deuteronomy and Samuel, we insist that this would not have been unexpected, because this was Samuel’s prophecy---with the prophecy delivered as Samuel, even after his death, was the representative spokesperson of Israel’s covenant God. 

The final part of the verse from Deuteronomy speaks to what occurred following the death of Saul and his sons.  Following the assertion of Israel fleeing from their enemies in every possible direction, we read that Israel “will become an object of terror to all the kingdoms of the earth” (28:25c).  How is this reflected in Saul’s death narrative?  We read that “The next day, when the Philistines came to strip loot from the corpses, they discovered Saul and his three sons lying dead on Mount Gilboa” (31:8).  What comes next is key in making the connection: “They cut off Saul’s head and stripped him of his armor.  They sent messengers to announce the news in the temple of their idols and among their people throughout the surrounding land of the Philistines” (31:9).  It sounds as if the Philistines were using Saul’s head and armor to send a warning to their other enemies, hoping that what had become of him would terrify the kingdoms surrounding them. 

Beyond that, Deuteronomy speaks of the Lord forcing Israel and its king “to go away to a people whom your ancestors have not known, and… serve other gods of wood and stone there” (28:36).  Most certainly, in the ignominious treatment that he was receiving at the hands of his Philistine enemies, though he and his sons were now dead, the Philistine announcement of victory in the “temple of their idols” (31:9), and the placement of “Saul’s armor in the temple of the Ashtoreth’s” (31:10a), seems to have Saul, in a manner of speaking, serving other gods of wood and stone.  Finally, as Saul’s defeat and death relates to the whole of the people over whom he had been appointed to serve as king and deliverer, what do we find happening to them?  Predictably, we learn that “When the men of Israel who were in the valley across the Jordan saw that the men of Israel had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead, they abandoned the cities and fled.  The Philistines came and occupied them” (31:7).  What happened was an exile, wrought by the faithlessness of their king. 

Israel was again subjugated to a foreign power, ultimately because of the idolatry (self-idolatry and Samuel-idolatry) of their king, which was, in the end, merely a reflection of the people’s rejection of their God and their own self-exaltation manifested in their desire to have a king.  Such was the end of the ill-conceived desire to have a ruler in their own image, rather than being the people ruled by the One in Whose image they had been made.