All The Saints (part 9)

One might be tempted to question the legitimacy of the assertion that there is Temple language to be found in Colossians.  Admittedly, on the surface it appears to be a bit of an unwarranted leap.  However, if one were to recognize the parallels between the second chapter of Ephesians, acknowledging it as something of an unspoken gloss on what is to be found in the first chapter of Colossians, then it is quite safe to tread this theoretical path. 

What is it in Colossians one that may put one in mind of the Temple?  Specifically, what may put a reader in mind of the Temple in conjunction with Paul’s attempts at opening wide the gates of the covenant to all peoples?  It could be suggested that a leading contender for this role would be the words that close out the twenty-second verse of the first chapter, which are “to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before Him” (Colossians 1:22b).  This study has already reviewed what precedes these words, where Paul wrote “And you were at one time strangers and enemies in your minds as expressed through your evil deeds, but now He has reconciled you by His physical body through death” (1:21-22a). 

Also, the parallel in Ephesians has already been noted, with this parallel becoming increasingly important as a means to penetrate into Paul’s thinking and the issues which he is addressing in nearly all of the churches with which he has contact.  It is worth quoting again at length: “you were at that time without the Messiah, alienated from the citizenship of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.  But now in Christ Jesus you who used to be far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.  For He is our peace, the one who made both groups into one and who destroyed the middle wall of partition, the hostility… and to reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by which the hostility has been killed” (2:12-14,16). 

The similarities between the two citations should be quite obvious.  Given that, it is not at all unreasonable to suspect that the similitude will continue, especially as it appears to be an unbroken stream of thought that results in Paul’s talk of the church as the Temple, with Gentiles obviously included in those that compose the Temple.  The same can be said of Colossians, in that it is an unbroken stream of thought that has Paul moving from strangers, foreigners, reconciliation, and death, to a holy, blemish-less and blameless presentation before Him (Jesus presenting His new covenant people, made up of people from all nations, before Israel’s Creator God). 

Though there is no explicit mention of Temple or church, as can be seen in Ephesians, the talk of those that are holy, without blemish, and blameless in presentation that flows directly from reconciliation, and which occupies the same space reserved for Temple talk in Ephesians, serves as a functional allusion to the Temple.  How so?  More specifically, how does this function in relation to the wider concern of the first chapter, which is the strident, Gentile-inclusive “all”? 

All The Saints (part 7)

The “all” barrage continues on into the next verse, which reads “He Himself is before all things and all things are held together in Him” (Colossians 1:17), which flows right into “He is the head of the body, the church, as well as the beginning, the firstborn among the dead, so that He Himself may become first in all things” (1:18).  So here Paul writes about “all things” and “all things,” with the “all-inclusiveness” of humanity being carried in its basket of meaning and implication, moving directly into mention of the body of believers, that being the church, which is composed of all nations, apart from the covenant markers that delineated national Israel. 

This becomes inextricably linked with the assembly of Israel when “firstborn,” as part of “firstborn among the dead,” is attached to it.  This is an interesting phrase with an interesting addendum.  While “firstborn” is a position of honor, and while “the dead” can certainly be honored, talk of “the dead” in connection with Jesus generates thoughts of the cross.  If the cross is indeed brought to mind, this creates an interesting juxtaposition of honor and shame, as honor is identified with life, and shame is identified with death.  Jesus then, receives His honor at the place of shameful death as part of the cosmic reversal in which the last become first and the first become last, and in which that which is the source and place of greatest shame (the cross) is converted into the place of highest honor. 

In His willful trek to the cross, Jesus, by going to the lowest place, ascends to the highest place, becoming “first in all things.”  As “firstborn” implies the first of many, while also carrying its congregational cognitive in connection with the whole of Israel, the attachment of “among the dead” provides a double-meaning of tremendous importance to those that follow Jesus, with its demand that those who do indeed follow Him also be willing to go to the places of shame, carrying the message of the kingdom of the Creator God and being the place where heaven and earth overlap---representing and bringing that kingdom’s reign to those places where death attempts to assert its complete, total, despairing, humanity and creation defacing reign in defiance of Jesus.    

The nineteenth verse states “For God was pleased to have all fullness dwell in the Son” (1:19).  This reinforces that which has been asserted in verses fifteen and sixteen, while also continuing the heavy theme of “all” that appears to be so crucial to Colossians in particular, as well as to Paul and the church in general.  It is appended by “and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself by making peace through the blood of His cross---through Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven” (1:20). 

“All” features from first to last, is here linked to reconciliation and “peace,” is contexted by the “cross” (which ties neatly back to the “dead” of verse eighteen), and drawing conclusions from the formulaic setting forth of some of the earliest doctrines of Jesus, flows nicely into the twenty-first and twenty-second verse, where Paul insists that “you were at one time strangers and enemies in your minds as expressed through your evil deeds, but now He has reconciled you by His physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before Him” (1:21-22). 

Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 23)

At the same time, Paul does not romanticize widows, and does not unduly elevate them, as he still stresses the equality of the church and the need for all to be treated equally---this was the counter-cultural corrective to the usual treatment of widows.  It stands written: “Honor widows who are truly in need” (1 Timothy 5:3a).  Unsurprisingly, Paul commences with the use of “honor” language.  As is known, this goes far beyond treating them deferentially or simply respecting them, as talk of honoring widows affords them a status (a status that is to be shared by all, as all honor would ultimately be directed to the Lord that has subjected Himself to the greatest shame) which they would be unable to attain outside of the church.  This is balanced with the “in need,” as Paul keeps the unity of the church body in view, always cognizant of the fact that the scale, owing to the social conditioning that is a component of human nature, can often be tipped too far to one side, with widows being afforded honor that is quickly converted to rank, status, and special privilege. 

The “in need” is followed up with “if a widow has children or grandchildren, they should first learn to fulfill their duty towards their own household and so repay their parents what is owed them” (5:4a).  Here one notes the mention of “their own household,” which is a contrast with the church body, which, owing to the fact that the gatherings of the church took place in private homes around a common meal, would be often referred to as a “household.”  Though there would be no honor involved in caring for a widowed mother or grandmother, and especially because there would be sacrifice on the part of the children and the grandchildren, it is insisted upon that “this is what pleases God” (5:4b).  Speech, conduct, love, faithfulness, and purity indeed. 

In contrast to the widow that has children or grandchildren, “the widow who is truly in need, and completely on her own, has set her hope on God and continues in her pleas and prayers night and day” (5:5).  As part of the non-romanticizing of widows, on the other hand, “the one who lives for pleasure is dead even while she lives” (5:6).  Here, it is necessary to make a further point about honor and shame, in that shame was equivalent to death.  So an interesting construct has been created. 

Paul insists that widows that are truly in need be honored, which will include her receiving the support of the church body and their meeting all of the necessities of her life, which is contrary to cultural norms.  This has been tempered with a call to duty for children and grandchildren of widows to live sacrificially, in accordance with the demands that the Creator God has placed upon His covenant people.  Paul then revisits the widow that is truly in need, who should be on the receiving end of the honor that would not normally come to her, pointing out that part of her commendation stems from her continuation in pleas and prayers, contrasting that with the widow that is concerned only with the pursuit of pleasure (Epicureanism?), who is already dead (shameful).    

To this is added, “Reinforce these commands, so that they will be beyond reproach” (5:7)---reproach being a term of honor versus shame, as conceptions of honor and shame are reworked and appropriately retooled within the church.  Though the church community will not be structured by perceptions and assignments of honor and shame, Paul very much desires the community of the covenant of faith to develop new and revolutionary ideas in regards to that which is truly honorable and deserving of honor, and of that which is shameful and deserving of shame.  To that end, he insists that “if someone does not provide for his own, especially his own family, he has denied the faith,” the mark of the covenant that is calling Jesus Lord, with all that is implied thereby, “and is worse than an unbeliever” (5:8).  For the body of Christ, there could be no greater source of shame.    

Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 19)

In the fourth chapter, Paul states that “every creation of God is good” (1 Timothy 4:4a).  With such words, the Apostle reaches back to the opening words of the Scriptural narrative, affirming the words that close out the first chapter of Genesis, which are “God saw all that He had made---and it was very good!” (1:31a)  One may think that such a statement is hardly revolutionary or counter-cultural, but in the Greco-Roman world, it was. 

Now, before ascertaining the counter-cultural character of this particular statement, which can be heard alongside the declaration of the covenant God’s creation being very good, it is necessary to recognize that this is not an assertion made in isolation.  Paul has written “Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the later times some will depart from the faith and occupy themselves with deceiving spirits and demonic teachings, influenced by the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared.  They will prohibit marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.  For every creation of God is good and no food is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving.  For it is sanctified by God’s word and by prayer” (4:1-5). 

What Paul has in mind as these things are written, and the issues to which he addresses himself by these words, are not relevant to this study.  Even though the statement about every creation of the covenant God being good does not stand alone and asks to be heard in context, it is also possible to hear Paul operating on multiple levels of communication.  Though he may be directly addressing a known issue within the church community, it is not preposterous to suggest that Timothy, along with those that will hear this letter, will pick up on statements that may be directed to wider cultural forces that could have a deleterious effect on the church of the Christ. 

The Hebrew mindset, which affirmed their God’s good creation, and by and large looked forward to their God’s redemption of His people and His creation---expecting that which defaced His good creation (death) to be defeated and removed and anticipating a resurrection of the righteous dead (especially Israel) into a restored world that will once again be pronounced as very good (a hope that was rightly carried over into Christianity)---stood in opposition to two major, highly influential, and when it comes to the Greco-Roman world, nearly universally adhered to religious/philosophical “schools” of the day, which were “Stoicism” and "Epicureanism.”  Regardless of which god(s) one worshiped in that day, be it the Caesar or any other deity, one’s religious tendencies could be colored by one of the two philosophical bents.  Naturally, those who worshiped Jesus as Lord and God could fall into the same patterns.  Undoubtedly, as shall be seen, this is something against which Paul wanted to be on guard.    

Plato, with his teaching about “forms,” in which (though this is much simplified) all earthly things were merely imperfect forms of that which existed in the heavenly realms, greatly influenced both the stoic and the epicurean approaches to life.  Essentially, the influential Platonic philosophy reduced all of life to the physical, which was bad, and to the spiritual, which was good.  Regardless of one’s particular philosophy, this would largely be the basis for one’s religious approach to life.  With this as a very shallow foundation, it is now possible to proceed to learn about these ideologies. 

Binding & Loosing (part 3)

This sets the stage for what is to come, especially when one considers that it seems to have been well understood by the followers of Jesus that it was the Spirit of God at work to animate Him following His Resurrection, with that Spirit then animating His church (as evidenced by the church working to be kingdom-bringers---bringing heaven to earth---bringing to earth that which looks like the rule of the Creator God through His Messiah). 

If this is the case, then when Jesus goes on to say “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 16:19a), the kingdom of heaven being the hoped-for and expected reality of the covenant God’s rule on earth through His Messiah, which was foundational to Jesus’ message as well as that which His ministry embodied as the hoped-for reality to which it pointed, then Jesus, when speaking of the “keys,” speaks of the church.  Talk of keys is then not necessarily an abstraction.   

At the same time, believers must always be careful to not confuse the church with the kingdom of heaven.  Those who compose the church are the representatives of the kingdom of heaven, but the church is never to be thought of as the kingdom of heaven itself.  The church is to be the herald of the Creator God’s kingdom come to earth, and is to be the place of the overlap of heaven and earth.  It is to be the locus of binding and loosing.  That binding is the binding of the operative powers of death and the many forms that it takes in this world, whereas that loosing is the loosing of people and the creation from those same destructive powers.  Can such an assertion be made? 

What can be seen in Jesus from the very beginning of His ministry?  The Gospels report that He “went throughout all of Galilee… preaching the Gospel of the kingdom, and healing all kinds of diseases and sickness among the people” (4:23).  Here Jesus is acknowledged to be performing operations of binding and loosing.  It is possible to take a look at all of Jesus’ pronouncements concerning the kingdom of heaven to be found in Matthew and drawing out the analogies of binding and loosing, but rather than do that, it would be more worthwhile to point out that such binding and loosing, though some tend to see it only as acts of healing from physical sickness, were actually social healings as well.  This social healing allowed for the recipients of the merciful compassion of the covenant God, through Jesus, to be re-admitted as full participants in the community. 

Everywhere that Jesus enacts the kingdom of heaven, thus creating the overlap of the two realms of existence, binding and loosing is occurring.  As Jesus is heard saying “Whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven” (16:19b), He needs to be understood to be saying, “Whenever you act on earth in a way that defeat the powers that attempt to continue to mar the Creator God’s good creation, you have introduced the power of the Creator God’s realm of existence (heaven), into the world.” 

Bearing in mind that talk of heaven and earth in this context is not locative but demonstrative and practical on the part of believers, then likewise, when Jesus is heard to say things like “and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven” (16:19c), rather than hear this with some sense of a vast gulf between heaven and earth, He needs to be heard saying, “Whenever you act on earth in a way in a way that liberates your fellow man, affirming their humanity and bringing them closer to rightly bearing the divine image in which they were created, you enact the power of heaven in the world.” 

Why Scripture? (part 2)

So why do it?  What is the primary function of “going to church”?  Is it for the elevation or betterment of self?  Of course it is.  Why?  This is so for a variety of reasons.  Believers gather together as a community of faith so as to escape the pressures of the world for an hour, as something akin to a temporary rescue from the exile (keeping in historical continuity with Israel) represented by the looming specter of death and its accoutrements.  This temporary rescue takes place inside an eschatological rescue, which has been promised to the Creator God’s people because of the Resurrection of Jesus. 

Believers gather to be encouraged by a message of the Creator God’s love as demonstrated in and through His Christ.  Believers come together to sing songs of praise as a correct response to the grace of their covenant God.  Believers gather to learn about the needs of their community and the wider world, and for giving in response to the sacrificial demands that have been placed upon them by the cross.  Believers gather to hear the preached Word of the covenant God, rooted in the message of that God’s kingdom and the realization of its being set forth by the one looked to as Lord and Savior. 

First and foremost, and even though it takes a form that is quite a bit different from what is there to be recognized in the apostolic churches as seen in Acts or as historically reconstructed from the letters of the New Testament, believers gather to hear the preached Word of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord and all that is implied thereby).  All other reasons take second place, for it is the divine proclamation  that Jesus of Nazareth is the crucified and resurrected Lord of all (the Gospel), that is of paramount importance. 

It is possible to see evidence of the fundamental importance of the divine proclamation throughout Scripture.  The Creator God is said to  have brought the created order into existence through the act of speaking.  This same God speaks to Adam, to Noah, to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and so forth.  The prophets themselves make proclamations, primarily calling the leaders of God’s people to account.  John the Baptist famously proclaimed the near advent of the kingdom of Israel’s God.  Jesus Himself fused His doing with teaching, presenting Himself as the world’s true Lord (as opposed to Caesar or any other temporal ruler) and bringing about the fusion of heaven and earth (the overlap of the Creator’s realm of existence with His creation). 

Jesus sends His disciples out to tell His message and to express the same beliefs about Israel’s covenant God.  In accordance with this, the new covenant people of the church (in historical and theological continuity with Israel as the covenant people) springs into existence and thousands are ushered into the kingdom when Peter and the disciples begin to preach the message that Jesus is Lord (the Gospel). 

The Apostle Paul helpfully points out the crucial elements of hearing and preaching as the way that faith is somehow implanted and the mysterious power of the Resurrection takes root within the hearer.  Revelation is itself a series of pronouncements in the mold of the apocalyptic prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures.  One could go on and on.  It is in the proclamation of the Word of the Creator God, preaching the Gospel that somehow possesses within it the power for transformation so that the very Gospel message is lived by its proclaimers, that the Creator God is revealed; and this would seem to be the fundamental and primary purpose of the church’s gathering. 

Absalom (part 22 of 22)

Having made this crossing of the Jordan (leaving the Promised Land), Absalom will never cross back.  It is not insignificant that Absalom’s crossing of the Jordan coincides with blessings beginning to come David’s way.  It is reported that “When David came to Mahanaim,” men came to him and “brought bedding, basins, and pottery utensils.  They also brought food for David and all who were with him, including wheat, barley, flour, roasted grain, beans, lentils, honey, curds, flocks, and cheese” (2 Samuel 17:27a,28-29a). 

Remarkably (or perhaps not so remarkably), this provision of food and supplies for David and the people with him sounds like what is to be found in the twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy.  There, along with the copious listing of curses that will come upon the covenant God’s people for failure to adhere to the terms of the covenant, one also finds the promise of blessings.  It is written: “If you indeed obey the Lord your God and are careful to observe all His commandments… the Lord your God will elevate you above all the nations of the earth.  All these blessings will come to  you in abundance if you obey the Lord your God: You will be blessed in the city and blessed in the field.  Your children will be blessed, as well as the produce of your soil, the offspring of your livestock, the calves of your herds, and the lambs of your flocks.  Your basket and your mixing bowl will be blessed.  You will be blessed when you come in and blessed when you go out” (28:1-6).  One can almost certainly imagine David reflecting upon these promised blessings as he receives the items that are being brought to him at Mahanaim. 

If he is thinking in such ways, then it is at this point that he knows that his God has turned things in his favor, that truly he is still the anointed one of Israel, and that Absalom should not have raised his hand (or contemplated raising his hand) against him.  After contemplating the blessings related to sustenance, David could go on to consider what follows in Deuteronomy, which is “The Lord will cause your enemies who attack you to be struck down before you; they will attack you from one direction but flee from you in seven different directions… The Lord will designate you as His holy people just as He promised you… Then all the peoples of the earth will see that you belong to the Lord, and they will respect you” (28:7,9-10).  It is after he receives the gifts that, for him, could serve to indicate the return of the Creator God’s favor and to remind him of the anointing and promise of his God that had been placed upon his life and his rule, that “David assembled the army that was with him.  He appointed leaders of thousands and leaders of hundreds.  David then sent out the army” (18:1-2a). 

David knew that Israel’s God was going to be with him and that his return to the throne was now but a foregone conclusion.  With full knowledge that the change of events was instigated by Absalom’s agreement to unnecessarily raise his hand in violence against his father, when David sends out the army he says “For my sake deal gently with the young man Absalom” (18:5b).  This, of course, does not happen, as Joab, David’s general (who has no fear of reprisal from David for a variety of reasons), has Absalom executed at the first opportunity to do so, which presented itself relatively quickly.  In fact, Absalom was struck down in the very first military engagement of his kingship, which is extraordinarily telling.  As was said before, once Absalom crossed the Jordan, thus departing from his exodus and going into exile, he would never cross back.  The only thing that was waiting for him on the other side was the completion of the curses of exile, which was death---dragged into the subjugation of creation’s great and foreign power.        

Absalom (part 21)

Returning to the text of Absalom’s story, Hushai, after gaining Absalom’s ear, passes along to David the news of both his and Ahithophel’s advice, along with Absalom’s response to that advice.  Knowing his own history and reflecting upon his previous time in exile, this must have been somewhat heartening for David.  Obviously, there would be a level of sadness, in that he now learns that his son thinks that it is a good idea to have him dispatched from existence, but there would be a level of encouragement because he could see this as a sign of his God’s favor returning upon him. 

David could reflect upon the fact that he did not raise his hand against Saul, and that he had been ultimately rewarded for his restraint.  He could think about the fact that Saul came out after him, and though Saul’s efforts at striking David down proved unsuccessful, Saul’s efforts also proved to be less than beneficial.  In this unwarranted plan to attack David without provocation, as (according to the narrative on offer), David has not actively said or done anything to defeat what he feels might very well be the work of the Creator God, Absalom has now turned oppressor. 

Absalom is no longer Moses, but rather Saul.  He is no longer rescuing the people from subjugation, but he is instead attempting to subjugate his father who is also now his subject.  Yes, David and the men with him are now Absalom’s subjects, and therefore it is incumbent upon Absalom to secure blessings for them.  This is quite difficult to do if one is plotting to bring death to said subjects.  

With Absalom’s approval of Hushai’s plan, events begin to unfold rather quickly.  David is advised to move quickly, lest he be caught, and he does so along with all his people.  Ahithophel, who appears to be sensing oncoming defeat in addition to having his advice ignored in favor of that of Hushai, kills himself.  David and those with him have crossed the Jordan River, symbolically leaving the land of Israel, and going to Mahanaim (2 Samuel 17:24a).  Following the plan, “Absalom and all the men of Israel had crossed the Jordan River” (17:24b) as well. 

One may be predisposed to read by that quickly, but perhaps such should not be the case.  Crossing the Jordan was of tremendous significance in the history of Israel.  Following the exodus and Israel’s time in the wilderness, the crossing of the Jordan meant that they had crossed over into the land of the Creator God’s promise.  It was, in a sense, the completion of the exodus, though the exodus would never truly complete, as exodus would prove to be an ongoing process of deliverance, rescue, redemption, and salvation, which must be worked out diligently. 

Even after Israel crossed into their promised land, they still had to take the land, drive out its occupants, and crush the rampant idolatry (which they would fail to do).  In the days of John the Baptist, baptism in the Jordan River was a clear signal of a new exodus movement and a submission to the claims of the coming kingdom of their God, just as baptism in this day is a sign of departure from exile into a life of exodus (a constant entering into the Creator God’s mission and purpose) and submission to the covenant God’s King, that being Jesus the Messiah.  David, already in a self-imposed exile from Jerusalem and his throne, crosses the Jordan as he flees Absalom, who is now, unfortunately, intent upon killing his father. 

This does carry some meaning for David, though it carries far greater meaning for Absalom.  After crossing the Jordan River in his pursuit of his father, as he leads the men of Israel in this pursuit and as he goes forth to violently raise his hand against his father, he is going into another exile.  With this exile, and with what it is going to mean for him, his father is now being rescued from subjugation and delivered from his oppressor.  By this, Absalom has reversed the exodus that he has experienced.  He has completely reversed the Moses-oriented narrative that he had created for himself.  

No One Knows The Hour (part 20)

Though it is not mentioned in Mark or Luke, the notion of Jesus’ coming, as it frames the discourse on offer by Jesus and influences the way that Matthew’s twenty-fourth chapter is read and perceived, is something with which any study of this topic also must deal.  Much as one tends to hear “end of the age” in the light of “end of the world” sensibilities, there is also a tendency to hear speech about the coming of Jesus in terms of His coming to earth from heaven.  This is a natural inclination because of reading that takes place post-ascension, and because, being inhabitants of this world whereas Jesus is off in heaven somewhere, any talk of Jesus’ coming must be talk of Him coming from heaven to earth. 

Now before even addressing the issue, as best as is possible from the mindset of a first century Jew, one must look at this issue as a matter of common sense.  When Jesus speaks in terms of not being seen until He comes, He is alive and kicking.  He is there.  He has not gone anywhere.  Remember, these things demand to be heard in their narratival context.  Though Jesus has made mention of His death and Resurrection, such as is found in the seventeenth chapter of Matthew when He says “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men.  They will kill Him, and on the third day He will be raised” (17:22b-23a), this isn’t exactly something that is clearly understood by His disciples.  In fact, Matthew says “they became greatly distressed” (17:23b).  Prior to that, in the sixteenth chapter, when Jesus says something similar, “Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him” (16:22a). 

So then, returning to the realm of common sense, since Jesus is with them when He says these things---He has not been crucified or resurrected and He has not ascended into heaven (though this written record does come after all of these things have taken place), one simply cannot have the disciples presuming these things as part of their query.  Such would be absurd.  While the hearers heard it and readers read it with knowledge of these things, the narrative does not push the audience of the story to hear the disciples’ question as post-earthly-life-and-ministry of Jesus. 

Yes, this can become convoluted and confusing, but it is incumbent upon on an erstwhile reader of Scripture to best attempt to inhabit the story as it is on offer, positioning oneself to hear Jesus live and in person, as one of His disciples.  Doing that, one is then not posing a question to Jesus about His coming, and doing so from a post-ascension perspective that has Jesus coming back to earth.  That would merely gets things out of order.  At this point, as far as His disciples are concerned and from their perspective, Jesus is with them and Jesus is not going anywhere.  Thus any talk of His coming cannot be about His coming to earth.  There must be an altogether different point of reference. 

Yes, He’s talked about His coming death and resurrection, but one cannot force the disciples to have already come to terms with what those words truly meant.  In fact, this is where Luke provides a wonderful glimpse into the mindset of the disciples of Jesus through His Emmaus-road presentation in chapter twenty-four of His gospel.  There, downhearted and dejected disciples, who were clearly struggling to cope with Jesus’ death and what it meant, say “we had hoped that He was the one who was going to redeem Israel” (24:21a). 

Not only was there no expectation of a resurrection, though Jesus has been reported to have spoken in advance of His being raised, there was certainly no hope or expectation of an ascension, and there was obviously no prevailing ideology that had Jesus returning to earth from heaven after an unexpected crucifixion, unexpected resurrection, and unexpected ascension.  As far as those Emmaus road disciples knew, Jesus was dead.  So in terms of rightly dealing with Matthew’s narrative, the movement of the story does not allow for a reader or the disciples themselves injecting a hoped-for return of Jesus to earth into their question about His coming.  It simply does not fit.

Ahab, Jezebel & A Vineyard (part 2 of 2)

So what happens with this plan that has been set in motion by Jezebel?  As directed, “The men of the city, the leaders and the nobles who lived there, followed the written orders Jezebel had sent them” (1 Kings 21:11), unaware of the source of the orders, and believing that they had come from the king.  With this belief in mind as the story is read, one can surmise that it is doubtful that the original communication that was presumed to have come from Ahab used the term “villains” (at least, not in the way that some tend to think of villains---in reality, they were the unwitting dupes of an oppressor). 

Ultimately, the men who carried out these orders would have believed that they were simply acting in accordance with the demands of justice.  As far as they knew, and regardless of his honor standing in the community, one would suppose that there would be little reason for them to think otherwise, Naboth had actually done that of which he was accused.  Accordingly, they would be predisposed to believe that he was indeed deserving of the rightful judgment that they knew would take place.  Jezebel took advantage of this situation.  So “They observed a time of fasting and put Naboth in front of the people.  The two villains arrived and sat opposite him.  Then the villains testified against Naboth right before the people” (21:12-13a), as this would have been a gathering of the entire community, “saying ‘Naboth cursed God and the king.’” (21:13b) 

Just as the community leaders were not necessarily complicit in this act of injustice, neither were those who testified against Naboth.  Again, as far as they knew, this information and directive came from the king himself.  Predictably, “they dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death” (21:13c). 

It would seem that this horrible achievement of Naboth’s death was predicated on honor and the meal table.  The two “villains” that were set opposite Naboth would be seated to his right and left, in what would likely have been the positions of greatest honor at a meal or any community gathering.  These persons that were seated immediately to the right and to the left of the chief seat could also have been presumed to be possessive of even greater honor than the one seated in the host position, and these two men would not have been unknown to the community.  If there were unknown, or known to be men of lesser honor, their testimony would not have been acted upon so seriously. 

Accordingly then, when these two men, who were undoubtedly well-respected men of the community and not simple villains whose words would carry no weight with the community, offered these words of testimony about Naboth, their testimony would have been presumed to be truthful and would have carried a tremendous amount of weight.  Thus the resulting fate of Naboth.  

Clearly then, when the opportunity is taken to move past a merely superficial reading of the story of Ahab, Jezebel, Naboth, and the vineyard, one can conclude that the story is less about Jezebel (who is undoubtedly cast as a villain) and Ahab, and much more about the abuse of power, corruption, and injustice that so often accompanies unnecessary acquisitiveness (desire to continually acquire things).  It is not primarily (or even necessarily) a story about a rebellious wife usurping her husband’s authority and lording over him, or the story of a weak man and husband, as it is so often portrayed.  It is a story of oppression and murder that is brought about by a perverted use of the very provisions of justice that were put in place by the Creator God so as to enable His image-bearers to reflect His glory.

Den Of Lions (part 14)

The record of Daniel presents King Darius as being supremely vexed by the whole situation.  Concordantly, it is said that “the king,” after sealing Daniel to his doom, “departed to his palace.  But he spent the night without eating, and no diversions were brought to him.  He was unable to sleep” (6:18).  One is left only to wonder if the same could be said of Pilate after presiding over Jesus’ trial and sending him off to His death.  It is a remarkable feature of the book of Daniel, and of this story of Daniel and the lion’s den, that Darius is never criticized or condemned for the role that he played.  Such is a remarkable feature of the Gospels and their accounts of Pilate, in that the authors do not treat him harshly in their assorted tellings of the story. 

Though Pilate disappears from the New Testament scene following the Christ-event, this is not to be said of Darius.  After his fitful and troubling night, the reader learns that “In the morning, at the earliest sign of daylight, the king got up and rushed to the lion’s den” (6:19).  There is an interesting measure of hopeful trust on display in this action by Darius.  By this, he appears to have taken quite seriously whatever it is (likely the twenty-second Psalm, as previously discussed) that Daniel had said leading up to his being deposited into the den of lions. 

Honestly, why else would the king be rushing to the lion’s den?  What was he expecting?  It is unlikely that any had ever survived that particular ordeal---it is akin to the disciples rushing to the tomb upon hearing the reports of its being empty and that Jesus was alive.  The stark and obvious contrast however, is that the disciples did not rush to Jesus’ tomb of their own accord, and those that had previously visited the tomb did not do so with any expectation of a Resurrection.  They knew that Jesus was dead.  They had seen it happen.  This speaks well of the Persian king.  

Strangely, at least as it would sound in the ears of the king’s attendants, “As he approached the den, he called out to Daniel in a worried voice” (6:20a).  So not only has the king rushed to the lion’s den, but now, for some reason, he is calling out to the man that has been tossed into that place only to experience the certain death that has overcome every other person ever relegated to that place.  Is this not odd?  Is this not what is being done by those that call out to Jesus?  Indeed, it does seem to be the case that those that call out to Jesus are in fact calling out to one that was presumed to be dead, with that calling out based upon a hopeful trust in the God that is called upon and referenced as a God that delivers.  Darius is indeed cast as an instructive and sympathetic figure in this drama. 

Darius called out to Daniel and said, “Daniel, servant of the living God, was your God whom you continually serve able to rescue you from the lions?” (6:20b)  Here, reinforcing a guiding premise of this study, Darius essentially quotes Psalm 22:21, in which the Psalmist has implored the Creator God of Israel to “Rescue me from the mouth of the lion” (22:21a).  Those that hear this story go on to learn that “Daniel spoke to the king” (6:21a). 

Can one not imagine what was felt by Darius upon hearing the voice of Daniel?  Darius knows that he, through agreeing to a careless and somewhat conceited course of action had, by any reasonable consideration, brought death to the man who was his most highly trusted adviser.  Now, he is hearing Daniel speak.  The one whom Darius had sent to death has been, almost before his very eyes, raised up to life.  This is nothing short of a virtual resurrection, though it becomes known from the report of Daniel’s own words that “God sent His angel and closed the lion’s mouths so that they have not harmed me” (6:22a), so there has been no actual death and resurrection here.  

Den Of Lions (part 13)

Just as a stone had been placed and sealed over what was to be Daniel’s tomb, so too was a stone placed and sealed over the tomb of Jesus.  If Daniel had indeed spoken the twenty-second Psalm in the ears of all who were there to hear him, which is a reasonable proposition to believe, then Daniel spoke of something akin to a resurrection---and Daniel did is said to have indeed come out of that which had been intended to be his tomb, unscathed by the lions. 

Jesus’ reference to the same Psalm, coupled with His own talk of rising again, together with His references to Daniel and the “Son of Man” tradition that it contained, can be presumed to have caused a bit of worry.  The main difference, however, was that nobody was able to witness the events inside the lion’s den, whereas all and sundry were able to be witnesses of Jesus’ horrific death.  Therefore, in the minds of the bringers of death, the only way that Jesus could be said to have risen again was for His disciples to come and steal His body, and simply lie about why the body had gone missing and why the tomb was now empty.  This is what precipitated the sealing of the tomb.  In the case of Darius and Daniel and the sealing of that tomb, it was likely to have been sealed at the insistence of the nobles, so that Darius himself, since he had been quite desperate to spare Daniel, would not come and attempt to retrieve Daniel from the den.

Is there really a good reason to believe that Psalm 22 was spoken by Daniel?  The Gospels report that Jesus spoke the words of the Psalm, but could one presume that Daniel did the same?  Is there any evidence that such a thing took place?  To that end, it is to be noted that, following from his suffering and his vindication and his declaration of praises, the Psalmist goes on to say “Let all the people of the earth acknowledge the Lord and turn to Him!  Let all the nations worship You!  For the Lord is king and rules over the nations.  All of the thriving people of the earth will join the celebration and worship; all those who are descending into the grave will bow before Him, including those who cannot preserve their lives.  A whole generation will serve Him; they will tell the next generation about the sovereign Lord.  They will come and tell about His saving deeds; they will tell a future generation what He has accomplished” (22:27-31).  These words follow talk of help, deliverance, and rescue. 

Turning back to Daniel then, and skipping over the events that are reported (though there shall be a return to them), it is reported that “King Darius wrote to all the peoples, nations, and language groups who were living in all the land: ‘Peace and prosperity!  I have issued an edict that throughout all the dominion of my kingdom people are to revere and fear the God of Daniel.  “For He is the living God; He endures forever.  His kingdom will not be destroyed; His authority is forever.  He rescues and delivers and performs signs and wonders in the heavens and on the earth.  He has rescued Daniel from the power of lions!”’” (6:25-27)  Here, the words of the Psalmist and of Darius are astonishingly similar.           

For all practical purposes, when Daniel was placed in the den of lions, death was his lot.  There was to be no escape.  In reality, there could be no escape.  His fate was to be the same as that of Jesus---and that fate was death.  Though Daniel did not succumb to the limits of mortality, as did Jesus, and though a hopefulness for deliverance was expressed by Darius, it is appropriate to suggest that Daniel, when sealed into the lion’s den, had been overtaken by death.  One can be assured that his opponents celebrated a great victory, confident that they had done away with one that had been oh so troubling to their plans for power and authority.  Certainly, Jesus’ opponents celebrated in a similar fashion and for similar reasons. 

Only Son (part 20)

It is written that “When Solomon became old, his wives shifted his allegiance to other gods; he was not wholeheartedly devoted to the Lord his God, as his father David had been.  Solomon worshiped the Sidonian goddess Astarte and the detestable Ammonite god Milcom.  Solomon did evil in the Lord’s sight; he did not remain loyal to the Lord…  The Lord was angry with Solomon because he had shifted his allegiance away from the Lord, the God of Israel…  So the Lord said to Solomon, ‘Because you insist on doing these things and have not kept the covenantal rules I gave you, I will surely tear the kingdom away from you’.” (1 Kings 11:4b-5a,9a,11a)  This idolatry would reportedly lead to the division of the kingdom of Israel into north and south, and the dual monarchies that would persist until their respective subjugations and exiles. 

When the Temple of Jerusalem had been dedicated, Israel’s God promised to make it the place of His presence, as it was recognized in the ancient near east that temples were the resting places of the gods (the whole of the creation was the temple of the Creator God, for that is where He was said to have rested).  At the same time, the covenant God issued a warning for Solomon, saying “if you or your sons ever turn away from Me, fail to obey the regulations and rules I instructed you to keep, and decide to serve and worship other gods, then I will remove Israel from the land I have given them, I will abandon this Temple I have consecrated with My presence, and Israel will be mocked and ridiculed among the nations” (9:6-7).  To this was added: “This Temple will become a heap of ruins” (9:8a).  Is not this same warning, given to Solomon, also that which was given to both Adam and Israel? 

These respective sons of God were all given responsibilities, and all three, as the historical narrative would indicate, fall short of those responsibilities through which they were to reflect the glory of the Creator God, and through which their God would gain worship and praise.  Indeed, Adam’s temple (creation) would fall into ruin, subjected to death and decay.  Israel’s temple (it’s promised land) would fall into ruin, subjected to foreign power and exile.  Solomon’s temple (the Temple) would fall into ruin, destroyed by subjugating powers. 

For all of the good that was said to have been done during his reign, it was Solomon’s idolatry that set the nation on course for the eventual destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple at the hands of the Babylonians.  For all of the good that Adam presumably did, in service of his Creator, it was his self-idolatry that brought destruction into the world.  For all of the good that Israel had done, as they carried out at least a portion of their God’s commands in taking and subduing their promised land, it was their idolatry that routinely and repeatedly and finally brought about destruction. 

Before coming to that however, Solomon is shown to have served his Lord well.  As was said, kingdoms paid tribute to Israel, as the Creator God blessed Israel for its faithfulness.  “People from all nations came to hear Solomon’s display of wisdom; they came from all the kings of the earth who heard about his wisdom” (4:34).  The queen of Sheba was one of those that reportedly came to Solomon, having heard of his reputation.  It is said that when she heard him and saw all of his wealth, that “she was amazed” (10:5b).  She would go on to say, “Because of the Lord’s eternal love for Israel, He made you king so you could make just and right decisions” (10:9b).  This hearkens to the words of Jesus.  Is it not possible to hear echoes of these amazed words from the queen when Jesus says, “For this is the way God loved the world: He gave His one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16)? 

Describing David, Seeing Jesus (part 3 of 3)

The Psalmist insists, however, that “a violent oppressor will not be able to humiliate him.”  It may have appeared that Jesus had been successfully oppressed and humiliated by death, but this was not the case.  There was a Resurrection.  Those that commented on it saw it as a vindication.  They saw it as a glorification.  They perceived it as an exaltation.  By His Resurrection, it came to be understood that Jesus was made to defeat death.  Now, with that defeat, the oppressor has become the oppressed, with Jesus having gained victory for Himself and for the kingdom of God that was now to extend itself forth upon the earth.  Jesus has been shown forth to the appointed Son-of-God-in-power by the Resurrection.  With this, He comes to be recognized as the unquestioned King and Lord of all. 

Though it will still be unfortunately at work in the world, because there is a hope for a general resurrection because of Jesus’ Resurrection, the once powerful oppressor that had ruled the thoughts and minds and emotions of mankind, has been stripped of its power and holds sway over the lives of the Creator God’s people no more.  Indeed, because of the Resurrection, the New Testament authors insist that the Holy Spirit, through the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus (He is Lord) that is and tells of the Creator God’s power and faithfulness, somehow gifts a faith that shows forth as a public and trusting allegiance to Jesus as Lord of all.  The attendant renewal and transformation of the mind, so that the place once occupied by death and all that death brings in its train, is now occupied by Jesus.  Accordingly, it is thoughts of Him and being in His service, along with a contemplation of the Creator God’s mission for the world, that now rules the thoughts, the minds, and the emotions of men and women that are now understood to stand free. 

With the Resurrection and the hope for resurrection that it sparks, together with no real fear of death as exhibited by countless willing martyrs down through the centuries, it can be said that death has lost its sting and the violent oppressor is de-toothed and de-clawed.  The enemy that sought to humiliate, is now itself humiliated, as the covenant God speaks through the Psalmist and says “I will crush his enemies before him; I will strike down those who hate him” (89:23). 

Though the Psalmist presents the reader with these words in association with David, the ultimate view that is provided, as the Psalms are viewed through the apex of the Scriptural narrative that is the Christ-event, is most definitely that of Jesus, as one is able to find a portion of the Gospel message when the Psalmist goes on to report the Creator God, following the defeat of this once vicious and all-conquering enemy, as saying “I will appoint him to be My firstborn son, the most exalted of the earth’s kings” (89:27).  Is Jesus not referred to as the King of kings?  In regards to the statement concerning the firstborn son (a royal title), of that son the covenant God of Israel says, “I will always extend My loyal love to him, and My covenant with him is secure” (89:28). 

Jesus is to be understood as the culmination of the covenant that began with Abraham, and the restoration of the covenant that God made with Adam.  In Him, that covenant remains secure, and all those that call Him Lord, and who order their lives according to that approbation, can stand secure in the knowledge of their redemption and the hope of their joining Him in the restored creation at the final consummation of the kingdom of God, in which the Creator God’s people are allowed to humbly participate in this day.  God’s promise, to “give him an eternal dynasty, and make his throne as enduring as the skies above” (89:29) was sealed by the Resurrection, and made manifest by His people, in believing union with Him as He works through them to be the people of His kingdom, so that the will of the Creator might be done on earth as it is in heaven.    

Describing David, Seeing Jesus (part 1)

I have discovered David My servant. – Psalm 89:20a  (NET)

As an attempt is made to fathom the depths of the Hebrew Scriptures for information and for instruction, it is eminently necessary for the reader to not view these writings through the lens of what they might personally mean for them today in the specific situation or circumstance in which the reader finds him or herself.  Rather, it is necessary (and expected), if one was to engage these writings as did those that composed the covenant community in the days and years after the Christ-event, to view them through the lens of the cross of the Christ. 

When one does so, the words of the page are brought splendidly to life and provided with a depth of meaning and value far beyond anything that might have ever been expected, as they become imbued with the living and salvific power of the Gospel of Jesus the Christ---the crucified and resurrected Lord of all.  This is quite true of the words of this Psalm.  Here in the eighty-ninth Psalm, the reader is said to be hearing the very words of the Creator God when reading, “I have energized a warrior; I have raised up a young man from the people.  I have discovered David, My servant.  With My holy oil I have anointed Him as king” (89:19b-20). 

As these words are viewed through the light that is cast upon them by the cross, Jesus is clearly and quickly to be found, especially when words such as “king,” “anointed,” and “servant” are employed.  Here one also finds the term “raised up” used, which should certainly cause the reader to contemplate Jesus’ Resurrection, though such should not necessarily consider such to be an implicit reference.  However, one can also here find the word “warrior,” which does not seem to fit what is known about Jesus from the Gospels. 

Moving on to the next verse, the reader finds it being said that “My hand will support him, and My arm will strengthen him” (89:21), which (again, appropriately reading conscientious of the cross) can serve as a reminder that it is the Creator God Himself that will fight battles on behalf of His anointed servant King Jesus.  It is on the other side of the cross and the grave that one is then able to speak of Jesus as a great warrior King, having flung Himself headlong into the most significant and terrible battle ever waged, which was the battle with death and the powers of evil, and emerging victorious.  With this said, the Resurrection can then almost be thought of as the Creator God having “energized a warrior,” though it makes the analogy a bit messy and one may not necessarily want to carry it too far. 

The Creator God of Israel is reported to go on to say, “No enemy will be able to exact tribute from him” (89:22a).  Throughout the Scriptures, there are reports about kings and countries “paying tribute money.”  Whether it was being paid to the kings of Israel, or whether Israel was paying it to an oppressing enemy, the purpose of paying tribute, ultimately, was to show subservience.  It was a bowing of the knee, by the king, through an economic transaction, that represented the bowing of an entire people. 

Whether it was the reported time of temptation at the hands of Satan, or the time in which He was subjected to the over-powering sway of death itself, it is understood that Jesus, the representative of Israel (the Creator God’s covenant people then, now, and forever) did not bow the knee to His enemy.  He would not become subservient.  He would offer no tribute and barter no deals, hoping for kind treatment.  This is part of the reason that believers have the hope of a bodily Resurrection within the covenant God’s creation in the same way as that which was experienced by Jesus.  Believers have that hope because Jesus does not allow His enemy to exact tribute. 

Joseph's Release (part 1 of 2)

The shackles hurt his feet; his neck was placed in an iron collar, until the time of his prediction came true.  The Lord’s word proved him right. – Psalm 105:18-19  (NET)

Oftentimes, it is a relatively simple matter to find Jesus and the Gospel being spoken of in a proleptic manner in the Hebrew Scriptures  On numerous occasions, when the aforementioned Scriptures are viewed through the lends of the cross and the Christ-event, it is not at all difficult to find Jesus especially reflected in the purported accounts of the life of Joseph.  Here in the one hundred fifth Psalm, the link between Joseph and Jesus, and with it the presentation of Jesus and the message of the Gospel (Jesus is the crucified and resurrected Lord of all), seems to be one of the most explicit and direct that one will ever be able to find. 

In verses eighteen and nineteen, as the Psalmist recounts a portion of the tale of Joseph in Egypt, the reader is reminded that Joseph’s feet were in shackles, while his neck was in an iron collar.  This situation existed until he was vindicated by a prediction that he is reported to have made.  One would be hard pressed to find an analogy closer to that which would eventually be experienced by Jesus.  With these verses then, the reader is reminded of Jesus’ death, along with His being placed in a tomb, as death and the grave symbolically (and somewhat literally) take the place of the shackles and iron collar. 

As was said to have been the experience of Joseph, Jesus too was imprisoned.  This prison was a tomb.  How long did His imprisonment last?  Naturally, it is well understood that the duration of His imprisonment was three days.  On a deeper level however, one could insist that the imprisonment continued until the time of Jesus’ hopeful predictions about His Resurrection came true.  With that Resurrection, like Joseph (who experienced a veritable resurrection), He was vindicated.  To borrow the language of the Psalmist, He was proved right. 

In the verses that follow, the Psalmist provides an analysis of this release from prison.  For Joseph, it is said that “The king authorized his release” (105:20a).  Pharaoh released Joseph from his imprisonment, and the believers knows that this release by the king to be true of Jesus as well.  The Creator God---the sovereign ruler of the universe---released Jesus from the shackles of death.  Indeed, in the very first public proclamation of Jesus’ Resurrection, as recorded in the second chapter of Acts, Peter speaks about death and says that “it was not possible for Him to be held in its power” (2:24b). 

Of Joseph it is said that “the ruler of nations set him free” (105:20b).  With His being freed from death, it is more than appropriate to speak of Jesus with such words, while also finding that it is said of Joseph that Pharaoh “put him in charge of his palace, and made him manager of all his property” (105:21).  In fact, if one was to turn to the original story of Joseph, there it would be found that Joseph was made second in command over the empire of Egypt.  Only Pharaoh was greater than Joseph. 

Suppression Of Truth (part 4)

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

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

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

   

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

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

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

But The World Will Rejoice (part 2 of 2)

Believers are called to, at the least (if they have not personally experienced suffering and shame), empathize and sympathize with those that are suffering, making the cares and concerns (troubles and suffering) of the fatherless and the widows (and those in prison or in need of clothing or a cup of water) their own cares and concerns.  Believers are to enter into this suffering and know that it is worthwhile, and know that their work will remain, precisely because they serve the one hailed as the risen King who endured suffering and gross humiliation, overcame it in every respect, has conquered the world, and is ruling it even now, even though this often would not appear to be the case.  Does this view of suffering and conquering not seem to be more in line with the Spirit of the Word? 

With this said, how should one approach this issue of the world rejoicing?  Is it negative or positive?  Does the world rejoice because Jesus has been removed and “the world” (when viewed through the lens of “the church versus the world”) can now go on its merry way in defiance of the Creator, or is it something altogether different?  Perhaps it is worthwhile to see it in the positive light of the Creator God’s intentions for His once-good-though-fallen-creation? 

The Apostle Paul, based on His understanding of the Christ-event and its implications (perhaps relying on the oral version of the Gospel accounts, but certainly offering his thoughts on the subject prior to the written biographies of Jesus) writes in Romans about the creation (the world) itself, having been subjected to futility through no fault of its own, groaning and suffering under the bondage of decay, while awaiting its liberation from the same (8:21-22). 

When Jesus went away into death, His disciples were sad because they did not expect a Resurrection.  As expressed in the narrative, nobody did.  Somehow though, as implied by Paul, the world (the creation) itself knew that with Jesus’ death, a Resurrection was coming, and it rejoiced that its new day was about to dawn.  Yes, Jesus’ Resurrection marked the beginning of the covenant God’s new creation, and the inauguration of the kingdom of heaven on earth.  A new world had begun.  In this world Jesus reigned, having conquered the power of death that had ruled the world since Adam, by making it possible for those that lived with a trusting allegiance to Him as cosmic ruler, to overcome any and all fear of death (or suffering and shame), grounded in the hope of their own resurrection into the world that Jesus now inhabited---the world of the coming together of heaven and earth.  

To convey this, Jesus uses the imagery of a woman giving birth, experiencing pain and distress because the time has come for her to deliver (John 16:21).  Is it not interesting that Jesus, in speaking of His death and hoped-for Resurrection, in the expectation that His Resurrection, if it happened, was going to mark the beginning of a new age, resorts to speaking of the pain of childbirth that was said to have been introduced into the world because of the fall, thus linking the climactic act of world history with the veritable beginning of the story?  The woman giving birth groans and suffers, but when the “new human being has been born into the world” (16:21b), she forgets her suffering and she rejoices. 

Is this not what happened when Jesus came forth from the tomb?  Was not a new human being born into the world?  Indeed, something more than what is thought of as a human being was born into the world.  Affirming that thought, those who served as eyewitnesses of this exalted individual struggled to find the words to adequately convey what they were experiencing in their interactions with this one that came to be understood to be the firstfruits of the new creation---a being now fully and truly human---with a physical, resurrected body fully animated by the Spirit of the Creator God, bearing the divine image as that God had intended for the being that was intended to be the crowning glory of His creation.       

But The World Will Rejoice (part 1 of 2)

I tell you the solemn truth, you will weep and wail, but the world will rejoice; you will be sad, but your sadness will turn into joy. – John 16:20  (NET)

These words from Jesus follow statements like “But now I am going to the One Who sent Me” (16:5a), “it is to your advantage that I am going away” (16:7b), and “In a little while you will see Me no longer; again after a little while, you will see Me” (16:16).  Though the disciples did not understand what it was that Jesus was He referencing with such statements (16:18b), believers have the benefit of hindsight and the knowledge that Jesus was speaking of His what He was almost certain was His pending crucifixion, along with what He hoped and prayed was His Resurrection. 

To that end, Jesus goes on to say that “though you have sorrow now… I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you” (16:22).  In the Gospel accounts, Jesus is presented as one who is fully reliant upon His understanding of the promises of the one He called Father, as it related to His understanding of the role and vocation of the messiah as set forth based upon Israel’s prophetic history and long-running narrative as the covenant people of the Creator God, that the suffering and death of the messiah was necessary (the messiah, as king, represents the people and would experience a personal exile and exodus on their behalf).  

Based on the presentation of Jesus in those same Gospel, it would seem that Jesus also hoped that the messiah, having suffered on behalf of all of the covenant people (the Creator God’s chosen people from Abraham through this day) and the whole of the creation, would be delivered from that suffering and be somehow raised up from the dead. 

Generally, when one reads about the world rejoicing at Jesus going away, or going into death, there is an almost natural tendency amongst those trained in the sometimes unhelpfully dualistic Christian mindset of “us versus the world,” to think about the “wicked” and “evil” sinners exalting in jubilation over the fact that the man that was pointing out their sins and making them feel bad about themselves, was removed from their presence, never to be heard from again.  In doing this, there is another tendency to point an unwarranted finger of judgment, especially as one considers that it is said that it was while believers were yet sinners (outside of right covenant standing and failing to rightly bear the divine image) that Jesus died for them (Romans 5:8). 

As one thinks in this way, he or she is naturally led to the final verse of this chapter in John, where it is insisted that “In the world you have trouble and suffering, but take courage---I have conquered the world” (16:33b).  Believers too often get themselves hung up on that which applies to them---the trouble and suffering---thinking of this as the wicked sinners of this world---the ones that rejoiced at Jesus being killed---as being against them because of their trust in Jesus, somehow forgetting or not realizing that the more important part of the statement is that Jesus has indeed conquered the world. 

In thinking along such lines, believers may also fail to recognize that part of what they are called to do, if they are truly in a believing union with the Christ, is to, by the mysterious motivation and empowerment of the Spirit of the Creator God that is so heavily spoken of in this chapter, enter into the trouble and suffering of the world, as did Jesus (who certainly did not escape suffering and shame).  This is to be done so that they might, as the Apostle Paul says, rejoice in sufferings and fill up in their physical bodies what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ (Colossians 1:24). 

Vindication For Joy & Rejoicing (part 4 of 4)

The crucifixion and vindicating Resurrection of Jesus the Christ, which (among a great many things) evidenced the grand defeat of death and the dawn of a new age, was a battle in which one could certainly find purpose to use the words “attack” and “shields” and “spear” and “lance” (Psalm 35:1-5).  Together with that, the words of the Psalm ask for the destruction of the enemy (35:8).  However, when it came to those who actually carried out the crucifixion---those who were temporary adversaries and very much a part of the world for which Jesus was going into a cursed death in order to redeem, all are again forced to consider Jesus’ words of forgiveness, and find displayed an altogether different demeanor. 

Rather than a request for attack and destruction to be visited upon those who brought Him harm, what is instead to be found is only a request by the Psalmist (again, with words that could eventually be understood to have fallen from the lips of the Christ as He endured the horrible ordeal of the cross) that “those who want to harm me be totally embarrassed and ashamed!  May those who arrogantly taunt me be covered with shame and humiliation!” (35:26)  This could be viewed in two ways.  In the first way, it can be viewed on the surface level, with the understandable desire for these adversaries to experience the same type of embarrassment and humiliation (35:4) which is requested for those who fight and attack (35:1). 

In the second way, one is forced to dig deeper, so as to remember Jesus’ intercession on the behalf of His tormentors and to consider the prevalent cultural equating of embarrassment, shame, and humiliation with going down into death, and thus quite possibly see a desire on the part of Jesus for these men to join Him in His death (exile) so that they too can be experience redemption (exodus).  With this, one is pressed to consider the words of the Apostle Paul in his letter to the Galatians, and his being “crucified with Christ” (2:20), sharing in His shame and humiliation so that He might truly live. 

By the trusting allegiance of the gift of faith that makes Jesus the King and representative of believers and of all people, and enables those that cast their lot with Him to join with Him in His crucifixion, the same group of people is also enabled to join with Him in His Resurrection and in the expectation of the great resurrection and renewal and restoration of creation that is happening and is also to come.  As subjects of His kingdom, believers, and indeed the whole of the creation, awaits His final vindication, and find themselves poised as “those who desire my vindication” and in so doing “shout for joy and rejoice” (35:27). 

That shouting for joy and rejoicing can and should very well take the form of preaching His Gospel in both word and deed, and so proclaiming His present kingdom and His ongoing rule, though the presentation of that message may bring temporary shame and humiliation.  The believer, participating in that kingdom and its work, gladly endure such things, as through the Spirit of God, the glorified Lord Jesus mysteriously works through and in those that our allied with Him to create lights for the glory of the Creator God, as they confess through the entirety of their beings the desire to “tell others about Your justice, and praise You all day long” (35:28).