No One Knows The Hour (part 39 of 39)

It was in response to these direct and specific questions that “Jesus answered them” (Matthew 24:4a).  Jesus did not set about answering an unasked question about the end of time.  No, He answered the question that He was asked.  No, one does not always expect this from Jesus, but then again, He is not answering a challenge from the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, or experts in the law.  He is answering His disciples, and as usual, when it comes to them, He is speaking plainly.  Yes, to the crowds He speaks in mysterious language, but He gives answers to His disciples.  So Jesus answers them.  His answer begins in verse five of chapter twenty-four, and it runs to the end of chapter twenty-five. 

The entire time, the focus of the answer remains unchanged, though He does provide interesting information in the process---unexpected information (unexpected in terms of Mark and Luke’s presentation of the disciples’ question, but anticipated in the question from the disciples as presented by Matthew) about the connection of the fall of the Temple to the time of the Son of Man’s coming to the Ancient of Days.  He even reinforces the connection, speaking about the Son of Man beyond the thrust text of this study, repeating the term three times in rapid succession, from verse thirty-seven to verse forty-four.  In all three cases, the Son of Man comes to receive His kingdom at an unexpected time---no one knows the hour. 

Throughout the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew (as well as Mark thirteen and Luke twenty-one), Jesus gives His disciples a great deal of information, clueing them in so that they will have a decent idea as to when the Temple is going to fall.  However, He could not be more clear that they will not know the exact moment that events will coalesce and conspire to bring down the Temple.  When it comes to that, “as for that day and hour, no one knows it---not even the angels,” the ones that will be sent out to gather His elect (24:31) and that accompany the Son of Man when He comes in His glory (25:31), “except the Father alone.” 

With the repeated mentions of the Son of Man, which seems to override the importance of fall of the Temple and truly becomes the point of the discourse, one gets the sense that Jesus’ words, though initially prompted by the question about the Temple, becomes less about them knowing the exact time of the Temple’s collapse, and more about them knowing that when it happens, and when Jesus’ prediction comes true, that they can then know that He, the Son of Man, has had His universal dominion confirmed and that He indeed rules as King and Lord of all. 

Had one been in the position to hear Jesus speak, that one may not have been able to know the hour that the Temple was going to come crashing down.  However, that same one could be certain that, according to His words, when it did, it would be possible to be supremely confident that He ruled as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  Indeed, it is appropriate to look to the place where the Temple once stood, see that it stands there no longer, and know that Jesus spoke truly, that He rules His kingdom, and that He demands participation in that kingdom along the lines outlined in the narrative found in Matthew.  Is it not that knowledge that should animate the lives of believers in this day?             

No One Knows The Hour (part 28)

Recall Mark’s account of the disciples’ question, as he reports their asking “when will these things happen?  And what will be the sign that all these things are about to take place?” (13:4)  In Luke, the disciples pose a similar question which, one can also recall, differed from Matthew’s report, as there they instead went on to ask “what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age” (24:3c).  As has been adequately demonstrated, this question was not making reference to Jesus’ return to earth, nor to the end of the world, but was a question that was ensconced in a worldview shaped by the presentation of Daniel seven, as the Son of Man comes to the Ancient of Days to receive His kingdom, thus ending the present age and ushering in the age in which the Creator God exercises cosmic dominion through the Son of Man. 

So how should this statement by Jesus be heard?  It should be heard as plainly as possible.  When Jesus says that “this generation will not pass away until all these things take place,” making reference to the fall of the Temple, what He means is that this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.  Simple.  Jesus is informing His hearers that the Temple will fall during the lifetimes of many of those that were listening to Him speak at that moment.  Seeing as how the Temple actually did fall in the year seventy, with not one stone left upon another, and with this taking place roughly forty years beyond the time of His speech, it appears that He was right.  As one contemplates that, it should be remembered that Jesus was very clear in His insistence that the fall of the Temple would coincide with “the Son of Man arriving on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (24:30b).         

So, pausing here for a bit before going on to the remainder of the statement about that generation and their capacity to witness these things, it’s now clear that Jesus was referencing the fall of the Temple when He spoke in this manner.  Would this really have been so clear to those that heard Him?  Was this really and truly clear to His disciples?  Were these words of Jesus unambiguously clear to the early church?  It would seem so.  The fact that identical language is in use at this point in the records of the three evangelists, when such a thing cannot be said up until this point, goes a long, long way in demonstrating that Jesus’ disciples and the early church well understood what Jesus meant, taking this speech about the Temple and about the coming of the Son of Man (presumably an earth to heaven movement) quite seriously.  Indeed, it would appear that a great amount of weight was placed on these words. 

This, in fact, when one gets right down to it, is one of very few places where Jesus can be seen offering up a prediction that could be empirically verified and tested by a watching world.  Yes, He often speaks about His pending death and Resurrection, but it is with these words about the Temple that He pushes His predictions (prophecies if you like) into a time in the future, with a determinate end-point (i.e. this generation).  Now, one could argue that these words, as recorded in the Gospels, did not actually come from Jesus, and that they are interpolations by later authors, placing words in Jesus’ mouth.  However, the univocal witness of the Matthew, Mark, and Luke, as Jesus reaches this point in His discourse about the Temple, forces one to consider that there was an expectation, throughout the time following Jesus’ ascension, that the Temple needed to fall, so that Jesus could receive a final validation as a prophet. 

Only Son (part 15)

When a teacher of Israel, be it Nicodemus or Jesus, spoke of their God’s son, such language would not be restricted to thoughts of messiah and kingship, or to Adam alone.  Speaking in such a way would also direct one’s thoughts to Israel itself.  This would be in connection with Israel’s most powerful, popular, and deterministic story---that of the Egyptian exodus, which was believed to have been personally conducted by the Creator God via the instrument of Israel’s greatest leader, that being Moses. 

In the fourth chapter of Exodus, Moses is given his instructions.  He is said to have been told by the Lord God of Israel, “When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the wonders I have put under your control.  But I will harden his heart and he will not let the people go” (4:21).  This is the pretext for the especially important statement (for purposes of this study) that follows, which is “You must say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the Lord, “Israel is My son, My firstborn, and I said to you, ‘Let My son go that he may serve Me’”’” (4:22-23a). 

So here, quite importantly, as it relates to the conversation between Nicodemus and Jesus, and what it is that Jesus seems to be attempting to communicate to Nicodemus about Himself and about His place within the Creator God’s long running redemptive plan for His creation, Israel can be found being referred to as the son of God.  With this, Israel, in a sense, is picking up the narrative from where it was left off by the first being to be recognized as the son of God, that being Adam. 

The son of God that was Adam, according to the story of Israel, was exiled from the garden and dragged all of humanity and creation down with him.  Here in Exodus the reader meets up with the son of God that is Israel, as they find themselves in an exilic state of oppression and subjugation.  This son, Israel, is going to be liberated from his bondage.  Following the liberation (essentially a restoration and a resurrection), this son of God is going to be brought under a covenant and given responsibilities related to that covenant.  That covenant comes to be known as “the law”; and the responsibility with which they have been charged, in essence, is to rightly bear the divine image and reflect their God’s glory into the world in such a way that it will cause all men to seek their God, especially as they see the blessings that are enjoyed by this particular people, Israel (understood as the “only son” of the Creator God). 

Israel was to be the representative of the Creator into the world.  Like Adam, they were given a realm of dominion that they were to occupy, in which they were to have dominion, and which they were to steward as a foretaste of the renewed creation to come.  Whereas for Adam the realm of dominion was the whole of the creation, Israel’s realm of dominion was the land that had been promised to them through the Creator God’s covenant with Abraham---the firstfruits of an entire creation that was to be redeemed (a microcosm of what would eventually come to be true, again, of the entire cosmos). 

There, in that place of dominion, they were to be fruitful and multiply.  Their successful occupation of their land, and all that went with it, would be accomplished by their adherence to the basic premises of the covenant, which were to avoid idolatry, to reverence the sanctuary, and to keep the Sabbaths that their God had ordained for them.  It was understood to be the case that if they succeeded in these areas, they would be blessed.  On the other hand, if they failed they would be cursed. 

On the whole then, this was a matter of trust.  In this area, Israel (son of God) would stand alongside Adam (son of God).  Adam’s successful occupation of the land would be accomplished by adherence to the premises of the covenant that the Creator God gave to him, which was to freely eat of all the trees of the garden, save one.  Blessing or cursing would result.  Of course, the narrative record indicates that Adam chose to violate the covenant, so it would be the curse (rather than the blessing) that came upon him and the creation. 

Visiting Bethany (part 1)

Now Jesus had not yet entered the village, but was still in the place where Martha had come out to meet Him. – John 11:30  (NET)

In the time of Jesus, when the emperor (the Caesar) came to pay a visit to a town or a city within a colony or province under his dominion, his visit was generally referred to as a “parousia.”  When this visit would be made, as one would expect, the great emperor, for whom notoriety and honor (especially in an honor and shame culture) would be of paramount concern, would not simply enter into the town or city un-announced. 

Such a thing would be unthinkable, especially in light of the Caesar-cult (worship of Caesar as a divine being---the son of god) that was so prevalent in the first century world so dominated by Rome.  Quite the opposite would occur, in fact, as the Caesar would be lauded in grand fashion by the people of the places that he deigned to visit.  After all, the man making this visit was rightly viewed as the most powerful man in the world, and would be afforded as much honor as possible. 

Not only would this honoring of the god-man be expected, but it would also demanded.  To effect this, quite apart from Caesar simply entering into the city by himself, or with nothing more than his imperial entourage, a large group from the city would be expected to go out to meet him while he was still outside of or at some distance from their city.  This would occur while all (or at least most) inside the city would be preparing themselves, in a conformity (for some) that was most likely under the threat of physical pain or even death (or shame), to receive the exalted emperor with the appropriate acclamation and with reverence. 

Upon greeting the Caesar outside the city boundaries, the selected and special group from the city, quite naturally, would return to the city with Caesar  and his royal entourage in tow, celebrating his entrance into yet another place in which he was acknowledged to both reign and have complete and unrivaled dominion.  This would seem to be an entirely appropriate reception for the one who, beginning with that which would come to be said of the emperor Augustus, is referred to as “lord” (the lord of the world who claimed allegiance and loyalty from his subjects throughout the whole of his empire), whose birthday was referred to as “evangelion” or “good news,” is referred to as the “son of god” and “savior,” and who was thought of as the one who had finally brought light and peace and order into a  dark and often chaotic world.

Having provided that basic bit of information, the scope of this study move to the eleventh chapter of the Gospel of John, and the story of raising of Lazarus from the dead at the hands and word of Jesus.  In the story, one is able to observe some rather interesting elements, making His visit to Bethany something of a “parousia” by Jesus.  The first thing to notice, though it is not revealed immediately, is that after Jesus had remained in the place where He was for two days after hearing that Lazarus (the one He is said to have loved) was sick (John 11:6), and upon His finally reaching the town of Bethany after what can be thought of as an unexpected delay, Jesus did not immediately go into the village. 

According To His Own Image (part 2 of 2)

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

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

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

Unfortunately, due to what is put forth as a faithless rebellion against their God’s command, the dominion and rule had been forfeited.  This son would be told, in stark contrast to that which was first told to his father, that “cursed is the ground… in painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.  It will produce thorns and thistles for you, but you will eat the grain of the field.  By the sweat of your brow you will eat food until you return to the ground” (3:17b-19a). 

So it is to this day.  As the Scripture says: “This is the record of the family line of Adam” (5:1a), as generation after generation come into being and pass away, all fathered in the image and likeness of Adam.  Though today’s generations live within a world in which the kingdom of God has been established, and in which Jesus (the second Adam-Romans 5), Who is the Son of God that is the representation of God’s essence (Hebrews 1:3) and the image of the invisible God that is the firstborn over all creation (Colossians 1:15), Who has rule and dominion because of His death and death-conquering Resurrection through which God began to set His creation to rights, all still struggle with the cursing effect of the fall, in the inaugurated but not yet consummated kingdom of God.   

Nebuchadnezzar's Fall (part 3)

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

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

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

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

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

Preaching & Believing (part 3 of 3)

Salvation would involve regaining a lost dominion, doing so in union with Jesus (believing in Him as Lord), sharing in His rule over all creation.  Most assuredly, for Paul, though it played a part in a greater hope, salvation had very little to do with an assurance of going to heaven when one died.  Sharing in the Resurrection of Christ and in His defeating of death, through that believing union with Him, meant that salvation and eternal life was at hand, and that the Creator God was at work, through the second Adam and those that claimed allegiance to Him, to undo and reverse that which was wrought by the first Adam.  This did not entail an escape from the world, but rather, an engagement with the world based upon the Creator God’s purposes, in hopes that the world, created as good, would one day be set completely to rights, restored, and renewed. 

Moving along with that, as one focuses on that which Paul preached and which also somehow brought belief---the Gospel, Paul begins to provide a practical definition for the term.  In explaining what he will always mean by “preaching the Gospel,” he writes “For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received” (1 Corinthians 15:3a).  What is about to be read, Paul says, is “of first importance,” so it  should probably receive careful attention.  He writes, “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (15:3b).  He does not let this stand by itself, but continues on, attaching to this important proclamation of Christ’s death “that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (15:4-5). 

The whole of this statement is important.  Without an inclusion of all of this information, in verses three, four, and five, the Gospel, as defined by Paul, is not preached.  By definition, the preaching of the Gospel message that Jesus is Lord includes the preaching of death, burial, Resurrection, and appearances.  Most would find this strange, as one would not generally refer to one’s Lord and King as one that was crucified; and certainly, nobody would be inclined to speak of such a thing as a resurrection from the dead, as such simply did not happen. 

Gospel then is effectively summed up by saying that Jesus of Nazareth is the crucified, buried, and resurrected Lord of all.  That is the message of the Gospel.  That message is an announcement about Jesus, which would fit into the well-defined mold of the use of the term “gospel” in that day, which was that of announcements about the Caesar.  With that understood, Paul continues on, writing “Then He appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.  Then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles.  Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, He appeared to me also.  For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God” (15:6-9). 

Paul makes this appendage to the primary Gospel proclamation, bolstering the factual basis of the Resurrection, while apparently allowing himself to provide a bit of biography that points to what he believed to be evidence of the immeasurable grace of the Creator God---allowing him to preach the Gospel.  He adds, “But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace to me has not been in vain.  In fact, I worked harder than all of them---yet not I, but the grace of God with me” (15:10).  That grace of the covenant God that was at work in Paul was, at the least, the Resurrection power of the Gospel. 

By all means, it is possible to teach the sayings of Jesus, but if it is not presented with the firm foundation of the Gospel proclamation, then it is not really preaching the Gospel.  One can make presentations about Bible stories and characters, but if they are not tied together with the proclamation of Jesus as Lord, then there is not actually preaching the Gospel.  There’s nothing wrong with that.  Not every teaching demands to have a Gospel component, but it is quite helpful to have a definition of terms.  Having pointed to the grace of God as that which even allowed him to come to belief and to preach the Gospel message, Paul comes to the point about the power to produce the faith for belief and transformation that is inherent in what it is that he has preached, saying that, “this is the way we preach and this is the way we believed” (15:11b). 

If one truly desire to have an impact for the Lord God of creation in this world, then it is incumbent upon believers to speak the very message that sends His transforming, renewing, re-shaping, re-creating, restoring, and saving power into the world.  That message is the message of the Gospel.  The proclamation of Jesus as Lord is what carries the power, and it never fails.  If the Gospel is preached, belief will follow.      

Terms Of The Covenant (part 2 of 2)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let Nature Sing! (part 1 of 2)

Let the sky rejoice, and the earth be happy!  Let the sea and everything in it shout! – Psalm 96:11  (NET)

Let the sky rejoice?  Let the earth be happy?  Let the sea and everything in it shout?  We could probably agree that this is rather odd language.  Can the sky rejoice?  Can the earth be happy?  Can the sea and everything in it actually shout?  In the way we would think of such things, of course not.  So is this hyperbole?  Of course it is.  However, this use of hyperbole, and its use here in the Scriptures, also points to the eternal plan of the Creator God, and is an interesting contrast to what can be read in the eighth chapter of Romans.  There, the reader is given a glimpse into a situation in which the sky is not rejoicing, the earth is not happy, and the sea is not shouting.  We read “For we know that whole creation groans and suffers together until now” (8:22). 

This is more hyperbole, as it is understood that the creation does not literally groan (though natural disasters and plagues could certainly be looked upon in such a way).  Why does the creation groan?  It groans because “it was subjected to futility---not willingly but because of God who subjected it” (8:20).  As this is heard, one should not forget the exodus connotation to the text, with Paul alluding to the groaning of the Israelites under Egyptian bondage. 

Why was the creation subjected?  The Creator God subjected it because He gave dominion over creation to the being that He had created in His image, to tend the creation, to reflect His glory into the creation, to remind the creation of its Lord, and to gather up the praises of the creation (rejoicing, happiness, shouting) and return them to that Creator.  Man, however, by not trusting God and living up to his calling (covenant), brought the curse of death and decay upon his race, while also foisting that curse upon the creation.  So yes, the creation was subjected to futility.  It was cursed with thorns and thistles.  So it groans, as the Apostle says, “in hope that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of decay into the glorious freedom of God’s children” (8:20b-21). 

What is the glorious freedom of the children of the Creator God?  The glorious freedom is the eternal life (the life of the age to come) in which believers participate upon their confession of Jesus as King (the Gospel), and which his fully and finally consummated in their being resurrected from the dead in the same way that Christ was resurrected from the dead, as was understood by the earliest of Jesus believers. 

The glorious freedom, among other things, is a glorified body (animated by the life of the age to come) that experiences the Resurrection power of God, just as was experienced by Jesus the Christ, here in the midst of God’s creation (again, just like Jesus the Christ).  This is a state in which the believer is free from death and decay---free from sorrows, pain, and suffering (just like Jesus the Christ)  Paul insists, reflecting widespread and fairly standard Jewish hope concerning the eschaton, that the creation itself hopes for that freedom, in the same way that those “who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we eagerly await our adoption, the redemption of our bodies” (8:23). 

Transgressions & Sins (part 3)

Having looked at the first three verses of the second chapter of Ephesians, and having laid the groundwork for a fuller understanding of what is presented there (as well as what is to come), we can now move forward.  Upon that forward movement, we read “But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even though we were dead in transgressions, made us alive together with Christ” (2:4-5a). 

So even though Israel was still in exile (a foreign power ruling over them --- “slaves” in the words of Ezra and Nehemiah), having been unfaithful to their covenant God’s intentions for them, which was to be a light to the Gentile nations; and even though in that unfaithfulness they sought not to reveal God’s glory to them, but rather harbored animosity and resentment as part of a desire to drive them from their land rather than being a beacon that would draw them to their God and His temple, the Creator God was rich in mercy towards His covenant people.  Even though all men from all nations, due to, according to the Scriptural narrative, Adam’s fall in which man willfully submitted himself to worshiping what was made rather than the Maker of all things, were in exile from God’s intention for them to bear His image and have dominion over His creation, the Creator God was rich in mercy.  He would not allow those created to bear His image to fail in that task.  He would not allow for His once good creation to remain in a condition less than that which had been intended for it. 

Why was He rich in mercy?  Because Israel was His chosen, covenant people.  He was rich in mercy because He had another chosen people, with which He was making a new covenant through union with the Christ (confession of Jesus as Lord).  God had a renewed Israel that He was bringing forth---a people in union with Christ through belief in the Gospel, that would, through a submission to His rule characterized by loving self-sacrifice (evidenced of the Spirit of God at work), to proclaim God’s glorious rule over the entirety of the cosmos (in stark contrast to all other gods) through the Christ’s universal Lordship, and so establish and extend the kingdom of God, thereby allowing that group of covenant bearing people to bea blessing to all peoples. 

Based on the Abrahamic covenant that had been passed to them through their forefathers, this had been Israel’s charge, but it had been almost completely abandoned due to their turning inward and erecting barriers and walls of separation between themselves and the peoples of the world.  Nevertheless, God exercised His great love for those that He had gone forth to redeem, doing it in the midst of their transgressions (their actions that worked against the outflow of the covenant, and after the revelation of the Christ and the way of God as represented by the Christ, their continuing to pursue the kingdom of God through inappropriate means). 

Paul, being part of two camps, Israel by descent and renewed Israel through belief in Christ as Messiah (the covenant mark of faith), speaks of all being dead in transgressions.  Effectively, the transgression of both camps was exactly the same, with that transgression being rooted in idolatry.  Israel’s continuing exile was engendered by idolatry, and though idol worship had ceased from the land, the idolatry was manifested in an exaltation of the marks of national identification that set themselves apart from the other nations whom God sought to bless, along with the desire to impose those marks upon other peoples.  For those that would be renewed Israel, the idolatry is easier to understand, as we can simply scan the pages of history up until that time and since, to see the lengths to which men will go in their creation of beings to worship, rather than worship the One being Who was their Creator. 

Advancing The Gospel

I want you to know, brothers, that what has happened to me has really served to advance the Gospel – Philippians 1:12  (ESV)

This is what defined the Apostle Paul.  His mission, wherever that mission took him, was to advance the Gospel of Jesus the Christ.  His mission was to tell the world, to tell all who would hear him even if they did not want to hear him, that Jesus the Christ was Lord.  Paul’s mission was to inform all men everywhere, whether they would come to believe it or not, that there was no greater principality or power or ruler than the resurrected Christ, Jesus the Messiah of Israel, the One to Whom “was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him” (Daniel 7:14a).  Paul’s message was that the realm in and over which this King Jesus ruled, was an “everlasting dominion which shall not pass away,” and a Kingdom “that shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:14b).  All, regardless of status or rank or privilege or supposed power, were to hear this message.    

So what was it that had happened to Paul, as we read in our text, that had really served to advance the Gospel?  He was in some form of imprisonment.  This is what was serving to advance the Gospel.  How so?  Well, it has to do with his mission, which, as said above, was to inform all people, without exception, that there was a true Lord and King Whose name was Jesus.  Being in prison, Paul said, had served to make this message “known throughout the whole imperial guard” (Philippians 1:13b). 

Effectively and for all practical purposes, Paul was in prison for claiming that there was another King, and that this King possessed a greater power, both here on earth and in the heavens, than did Caesar.  Paul was in prison for saying that Jesus was truly the Son of God, and not a mythical, play-acting son of god as was pretended by Caesar.  Paul had declared that Caesar’s instrument of power over the people, that being the cross, had been taken by a true King and been turned from an instrument of subjection and forced submission to imperial power, into an instrument of eternal life (the life of the age to come) which served to convey the message of Resurrection power.  Paul was declaring that Jesus had stripped Caesar of his power by His actions on the cross.  Paul said that when Jesus came out of the tomb, in a bodily Resurrection, that He was declared by that to be the true Son of God, with real power (Romans 1:4).  This flew directly in the face of the claims of Caesar and the cult of worship that was associated with his rule. 

With that established, Paul echoed what he may have known to be the words of Jesus, putting Caesar in his rightful place, by saying, “Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed” (Romans 13:7).  Regardless of what is here being communicated, Paul seems to make it clear that one thing that was not owed to Caesar was worship.  That belonged to Christ alone. 

We must bear in mind that this message was being made known to the whole imperial guard.  This was being made known to those who were most likely immersed in emperor worship, or forced to participate at some level, as part of the Caesar cult.  Paul was not being sensitive to their culture and religion, nor was he changing his message in the least little bit.  Though some were obviously being changed by this message of power, it is reasonable to presume that not all came to belief, so we can imagine this was not making his time in prison any easier.  Nevertheless, he did not back down, saying that not only was it being made known to the imperial guard, but that it was being made known “to all the rest that my imprisonment is for Christ” (1:13b).  Who these “all the rest” were is unknown, but we can surmise that some were people of influence, because the message of the Gospel appeared to be having an effect, especially as it relates to the governing authorities (Caesar’s household, as we shall shortly see).  We can make that connection because Paul says that “most of the brothers, having become confident in the Lord by my imprisonment, are much more bold to speak the Word without fear” (1:14).  It was the very fact of Paul’s imprisonment, and his continuing to proclaim and prove the message of Jesus as Lord of all without change or alteration, that created an environment in which there need be less fear of persecution by the authorities (though the persecution would come, Caesar and his authorities could merely kill the body). 

The very proclamation of the Gospel message (Jesus is Lord of all), without addition or insistence upon any type of sanctifying performance, was what was changing hearts and minds, and creating fallow ground for the continued propagation of the Gospel, the growth of the ministry, and the extension of God’s covenant to the people that were desired to be a part of His Kingdom.  The Gospel itself, as Paul would write to the Roman church, was and is “the power of God unto salvation” (1:16), which aped the claims of Rome and Caesar, who was also looked to as a bringer of “salvation” to the world.  When Paul looks at his imprisonment and can say that what was happening to him was really serving to advance the Gospel, it can truly be said that the preaching of Jesus as Lord was indeed turning the world upside down (Acts 17:6).  This was so much the case, that Paul comes to the close of this letter to the Philippian church, writing “All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household” (4:22).  Yes, the Gospel was being advanced.