Historical Continuity (part 2)

Jeremiah, who is not even close to finished with his scathing indictment of Israel, would go on to say “But just look at you!  Your are putting your confidence in a false belief that will not deliver you.  You steal.  You murder.  You commit adultery.  You lie when you swear on oath.  You sacrifice to the God Baal.  You pay allegiance to other gods whom you  have not previously known.  Then you come in and stand in My presence in this Temple I have claimed as My own and say, ‘We are safe!’  You think you are so safe that you can go on doing all those hateful sins!” (Jeremiah 7:8-10) 

Though many of these things were most likely being carried out by the acting priesthood, it is safe to presume that the people, who also stood under Jeremiah’s gaze, are doing the same while also being complicit in the activity of their leaders.  Jeremiah continues to deliver the words of the Lord, saying “So I will destroy this Temple which I have claimed as My own, this Temple that you are trusting to protect you.  I will destroy this place that I gave to you and your ancestors, just like I destroyed Shiloh” (7:14).  These are harsh words indeed.  Jesus’ words, as they are directed at the Temple authorities and call Jeremiah to mind, were no less harsh.

So it is plain to see that Jesus is using Jeremiah and the historical situation there recorded as His model.  However, is it appropriate to consider if Jeremiah had a model upon which he drew in some way?  If Jesus is relying upon something within Israel’s history to trigger the thoughts that He desired the people to have and to provoke the response and hopefully transformation that He desired to see, it would be reasonable to suggest that there was something within Israel’s history prior to Jeremiah’s day upon which he was relying as well. 

Surely, if Jesus is not limited to only bringing new teaching founded upon an entirely new basis, then it would not be right to foist this type of responsibility upon one of the prophets.  Therefore, beyond the assertion that Jeremiah obviously had to base his understanding of the delivery of the covenant God’s judgment on Israel’s covenant failures, one could assert that Jeremiah’s words and ministry had to be rooted within the history and covenant by which Israel was defined in order for it to have any conceivable impact and permanence (which, as has been said, would have been true for Jesus as well).     

If this premise is accepted, then to what historical situation might one look in order to gain insight into Jeremiah’s understanding?  Is it possible to find something similar to the people’s reliance upon the Temple itself to protect and preserve them from the judgment that was owed to them?  The first book of Samuel records a story that may provide an answer to those questions.  The fourth chapter records in a story in which it is reported that “the Israelites went out to fight against the Philistines… The Philistines arranged their forces to fight Israel.  As the battle spread out, Israel was defeated by the Philistines, who killed about four thousand men in the battle line in the field” (4:1b-2). 

When considering the way in which the Creator God deals with His people, raising up foes such as the Babylonians and the Romans in order to exercise His judgments, as referenced by Jeremiah and Jesus, then the Philistines, clearly, demand to be understood as an instrument of the Creator God’s judgment against His covenant people, exercised in accordance with His covenant promises as the covenant people failed to live up to their covenant obligations. 

Samson's Hair (part 2 of 2)

Samson’s hair becomes a mark of the Creator God’s covenant with him and with his parents.  Like Israel’s covenant markers, not cutting his hair was to be taken as a signal of their collective faithfulness to the covenant that their God had taken the initiative to enter into with them.  If Samson is a microcosm of Israel, then there should be other points of contact between his story, especially related to his covenant marker, and that of Israel.  What happens when Samson’s hair is cut?  The story reports that the Lord left Him, he had his eyes gouged out, he was bound in chains, and he was deported to the land of the Philistines. 

How does this relate to Israel?  The nation to which the Creator God referred as His firstborn son, that had been so improbably brought to birth through the events of the Egyptian exodus (as improbably as Abraham and Sarah having a child in their old age and as improbably as an infertile woman giving birth), was given instructions as to how to live so that they may appropriately represent their God to and in and for the world.  Though there is a large number of specific instructions to Israel, the primary instructions that will mark them out as the people of the Creator God are recorded in Leviticus.  There they are instructed: “You must not make for yourselves idols, so you must not set up for yourselves a carved image or a pillar, and you must not place a sculpted stone in your land to bow down before it, for I am the Lord your God.  You must keep My Sabbaths and reverence My sanctuary.  I am the Lord” (26:1-2).  

As Samson’s hair was the response of his parents and himself to the Creator God’s covenant, so too was following these basic provisions laid out in Leviticus Israel’s response to God’s covenant with them.  It demands to be noted that it is neither a refrain from hair cutting nor the adherence to what is detailed in Leviticus that brings one in to covenant with the Creator God of Israel, but rather, it is the keeping of these things that is the glad response to the covenant activity of that God. 

What would happen to Israel if they failed to keep that which was their required response?  What if they worshiped idols, violated the Sabbaths and did not reverence the sanctuary?  Would their God cut them off and have nothing to do with them?  No, such would not be the response.  Rather, the Creator God promised that He would execute disciplinary judgment according to His covenant requirements and in accordance with the fact that He was recognizing them and establishing them as His covenant people. 

This is detailed in the same chapter in Leviticus, wherein the Creator God promises that horror, consumption, and fever will be visited upon His covenant people if they fail to live up to their obligations.  He promises that seed will be sown in vain and that enemies will eat whatever happens to be produced through that vain sowing.  He promises to set His face against His people and to strike them down before their enemies, as they are ruled over by those who hate them (26:16-17).  The afflictions go on and on and culminate with “You will perish among the nations; the land of your enemies will consume you” (26:38).  Israel is also promised that the horrors that their God will inflict will serve to “diminish eyesight and drain away the vitality of life” (26:16b). 

Is this not, along with the fact that Samson was ruled over by his enemies, almost precisely what is reported to have happened to Samson when he forsakes (though he did not actually cut off his own hair) the mark of his God’s covenant with him?  However, that same God also promises that “I will remember for them the covenant with their ancestors whom I brought out from the land of Egypt” (26:45a), doing so “when they confess their iniquity and their ancestors’ iniquity which they committed by trespassing against Me” (26:40a). 

In the end, Israel’s God promises to bring them back to their promised land.  In much the same way, even though Samson has been bound, and even though the Levitical curses have devolved upon him, “His hair began to grow back after it had been shaved off” (16:22). As the Creator God would not forget His people, so He had not forgotten Samson.  With words that hearken back to the Creator’s remembering of His covenant with Israel, Samson, having been placed before the Philistines, having apparently and to some extent realized his failures, and having devised a rather interesting “exit strategy,” cries out “O Master, Lord, remember Me!  Strengthen me just one more time, O God, so I can get swift revenge against the Philistines for my two eyes!” (16:28) 

With that, Samson brought the house down upon himself and the Philistines.  Thus he perished among the nations, and was consumed within the land of his enemies; and thus, though a deliverance from the Philistines is brought about through his actions, the note of personal revenge has been struck, and Samson, though the symbol of his God’s covenant with him had begun to reappear (his hair growing back), dies along with the Philistines.  He does not experience a return to the land, but dies in his bondage.  Maddeningly and enigmatically, so ends the story of Samson.     

Justified By Faithfulness (part 5)

For the Jews in Jesus’ day, and quite obviously on in to Paul’s day since it was something with which he was still dealing as evidenced by the subject matter of his letters, maintaining these marks of covenant status was important.  For a large number, these marks are what made them their God’s covenant people.  It was what demonstrated their righteousness, or their justification, or their right standing before their God, as people of His covenant.  Though justification was a crucial matter, Paul makes it clear, apparently following from what he knew of the words of Jesus in which He made belief in Himself as Messiah (Lord/King) the basis for justification, that even though “we are Jews by birth… we know that no one is justified by the works of the law” (Galatians 2:15a,16a).   

Bearing in mind what was being referenced when Paul writes about the works of the law, “No one,” the Apostle effectively says, “not even the people to whom God gave strict covenant requirements at Sinai through Moses, has a positive covenant standing conferred upon them by being circumcised, keeping kosher laws, purity laws, and keeping Sabbath.”  When it came to the issue of right covenant standing (justification), these were no longer relevant factors.  Paul himself would claim to have kept these things perfectly, but in futility in relation to the obligations of covenant, as he would come to realize that these things did nothing to secure justification. 

Was covenant now irrelevant?  Were covenant markers now of no value?  Absolutely not!  As has already been said, if one is justified, or is going to experience justification, then one must be adhering to the marks and requirements of the covenant that have been put in place by the Creator God Himself.  The issue at hand, for Paul, as he addressed both his countrymen and his Gentile brothers in Christ, was that, just as had been done before, the God of covenant had shifted the terms of His covenant.  The new and final covenant marker had been put in place, though belief in the power of God, through belief in Jesus as His representative, and His faithfulness to fulfill the promises of the covenant were still going to be paramount. 

Now, unlike before, when the Levitical requirements concerning idolatry, sanctuary, and Sabbath did serve as the mark of belief in the Creator God and His covenant, and adherence did secure the promised blessings (with disobedience bringing cursing), “no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ” (2:16a).  This faithfulness of Jesus Christ, it would seem, is the power of the Creator God, represented in Jesus the Christ.

It must be understood that the performance of the works of the law are actually set at a great distance from the idea of doing good works as a means of achieving the Creator God’s saving justification and thereby earning a place in heaven upon death.  For the Jews of that era (and any era), as has come to be learned, that simply was not an issue, and is actually foreign to the Jewish way of thinking.  Good works were the manifestation of the Creator God’s blessing.  Good works were what would naturally flow from positive covenant status. 

Keeping the law would not have been considered to be good works.  Good works would have been the response to the realization of being a member of the covenant people of the Creator God, which was achieved by adhering to the works of the law.  In addition to that, heaven, as it is routinely imagined as a place of unending bliss, and achieving heaven, was not the ultimate goal of the Jew.  These realizations are terribly significant, because Jesus, Paul, and all of the disciples and so many of the earliest believers in Jesus as Messiah were first century Jews, living in the midst of second temple Judaism, under Roman domination, and therefore, still under their God’s cursing, according to the law.