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”? 

Moses & Jesus (part 3 of 3)

Now, because we see this situation around us each day, how are we supposed to see a connection between Moses and Jesus?  The most obvious is that Jesus came to reconcile.  He came to reconcile by showing that He was the Messiah that allowed God’s people to live both within and beyond the yoke of human rulers, through the Kingdom of God that He was establishing.  He reconciled religious factions and showed them that their petty differences were swallowed up by the scope of His Salvation mission. 

He provided reconciliation by becoming the end of the law for those who believe, and that their wrangling over that which brought them under a curse was useless and un-necessary, as the basis for blessing and cursing was now to be found in relation to Him and whether or not one believed upon His Name.  He reconciled by bringing the Kingdom of Heaven in amongst men and setting it up above all rulers and authorities, showing His brethren that they did not have to live separate from the world, but that through Him, and through His working through them, by faith, in the power of the Holy Spirit, that He would bring renewal and restoration and reconciliation to God’s chosen, elected, covenant people throughout the world, and to the world itself.

Beyond that, and in thinking about a specific application of this scene from Moses’ life to that of Jesus, we have to look at the question that came to Moses, which was “Who made you a ruler and a judge over us?”  In chapter twelve of Luke, we find that “Someone in the crowd said to Him,” Him being Jesus, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me” (12:13).  How did Jesus reply?  He said, “Man, who made Me a judge or arbitrator over you?” (12:14)   Moses was challenged as to who gave him the right to rule and judge.  Later on, upon God’s authority, he did become that very ruler and judge. 

Jesus, on the other hand, had every right to rule and judge and arbitrate, but did not do so.  Had He done so, this could have been seen as Jesus taking steps to set Himself up as an earthly authority, which would then have given the Roman government just cause to prosecute and probably execute Him for seditious behavior.  Moses had initially been rejected as a ruler and judge, while Jesus rejected the opportunity to take that role.  As was said, Moses would later become that very thing, as would Jesus, after being unlawfully put to death as a revolutionary leader, but then rising from the dead, as “the One appointed by God to be the judge of the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42b). 

Continuing on, Stephen says, “This Moses, whom they rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’---this man God sent as both ruler and redeemer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush” (7:35).  Here, Stephen refers to the incident of Moses and the burning bush, where he heard a voice that said, “I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob” (7:32a).  This would have been a reminder, to Moses, and to Stephen’s hearers, of God’s covenantal promises toward His people.  As Moses was looked to as a ruler and redeemer, so too was the Messiah, Who was to be the embodiment and fulfiller of all of God’s promises of covenant.  Additionally, the reference of “the angel who appeared to him” must surely put us in mind of the fact that Jesus’ birth, the birth of the Ruler and Redeemer, was announced by angels both before and after its occurrence.

Of both Moses and Jesus it can be said, “This man led them out, performing signs and wonders” (7:36a).  Of both Moses and Jesus it can be said, “He received living oracles to give to us” (7:38b).  Unfortunately, of both Moses and Jesus, it can be said, “Our fathers refused to obey him, but thrust him aside, and in their hearts turned…saying…’Make us gods who will go before us’.” (7:39-40a) 

Reign Of Life (part 1 of 3)

For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. – Romans 5:17  (ESV)

Paul writes that because of one man’s trespass, death reigned.  This death is very much present.  It’s presence is felt and seen and experienced on a daily basis.  It is inescapable.  It is real.  It is here.  We do not speak of it in lofty, supra-existential terms.  As Paul says, death does indeed reign.  Paul however, continues on with the words of hope, saying that those who receive an abundance of grace in the “free gift” that “brought justification” (5:16), who were “saved by His life” (5:10), who “have now received reconciliation” (5:11) because “while we were still weak…Christ died for the ungodly” (5:6), have been “saved by Him from the wrath of God” (5:9). 

This escape from the wrath of God appears to be wrapped up with an escape from death.  That seems to be a reasonable conclusion, as Paul writes that the free gift of God’s righteousness, that is, the free gift that stems from the execution of God’s covenant faithfulness as dramatically evidenced by and through the crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus, is life.  Not only is it life, but Paul informs us that the reigning in life, the reigning of life, the reigning that takes place because of the Resurrection, is to be understood akin to the way in which death reigned.  How does death reign?  As has already been said, death’s reign is present, felt, seen, experienced, inescapable, and very much real.  Yes, through one man’s trespass death reigned.  This was not the Creator God’s intention for this world that He is said to have brought into existence and ordered as recorded in Genesis, and over which He set a being created in His own image to have dominion and to represent Him.  Therefore, this skewed situation was set right by one man’s “act of righteousness (covenant faithfulness)” (5:18). 

If it has been set right, then the reign of life, eternal life, which is concomitant with the resurrected life of Jesus, must also be spoken of as being very much present and felt and seen and experienced on a daily basis.  It must also be understood to be inescapable and real and here.  Paul does not present this reigning of life as being something solely on the other side of the termination of mortal existence.  No, he sets it alongside the reign of death, which occurs in this present world, saying that the reign of life replaces it when one confesses Jesus as Lord, and so shares in the life of the age to come, bringing the kingdom of heaven to bear in the world.  Paul is not pointing to an other-worldly existence in which to enjoy the reigning of life that is associated with God’s faithfulness to His covenant, which is evidenced through Jesus, but says that that life is to be understood as having dominion in this world, in the exact same way in which we speak of death. 

If there must be a wait until an earthly existence has ceased in order to enjoy eternal life in and with Christ, then a true deliverance from death is something of which we cannot rightly speak.  If we do not speak of the reign of death in spiritual, other-worldly terms, but employ understandable and sensible earthly terms when speaking of death as Paul does here, then why must we constantly couch our speaking of the gift of eternal life in covenant participation in such ethereal terms, rather than in the present, earthly terms in which Paul is clearly presenting them?  Why must we constantly engage in pushing our hope away from us?  Is God’s arm shortened?  Is His power to save only limited to the after-life?  Is the power that raised up Christ from the dead actually insufficient to quicken our mortal bodies?

Justification, The Spirit & The Family Of God (part 3 of 3)

Even “exile” itself was being broadened to encompass the nations.  Though it had been a source of shame for Israel, Israel could no longer keep exile to itself, as a paradoxical badge of honor and privilege.  All peoples could now understand themselves to have stood in exile from the Creator God, in need of reconciliation, and this recognition is what would allow them to participate in their own exodus, thus finding yet another way to join up with Israel’s self-defining story and to relate to the covenant God.  As we have seen, Paul understands that God has kicked down the doors and broken down the walls that had been used to restrict entrance into the household of Abraham, now offering His reconciliation to all peoples and folding them in to His covenant and kingdom purposes. 

In a patriarchy and head-of- household oriented society, rooted in honor and shame constructs that incorporated patronage and benefaction, along with a heightened sense of connection to certain people by which one’s status could be elevated, we should not discount this sense of inclusiveness and dynamic of lineage that seems to be one of the apostle’s filters.  With these thoughts, expressed so early in chapter five, coming on the heels of a chapter dedicated to an exploration of the faith and covenant standing of Abraham, and with this placed alongside a recognition of the importance that Jews and Jewish believers attached to the ability to lay claim to Abraham as their father, we do ourselves a tremendous service to keep these particular cultural, historical, and sociological underpinnings in mind. 

Of course, the Jewish covenant narrative did not include only Abraham.  Indeed, the story of Abraham only made sense because of its precursor, which was the story of Adam.  The Genesis narrative demonstrates that God’s covenant with Abraham only becomes necessary because of the failure of Adam, the original covenant and image bearer.  Conversely, the story of Abraham, to which Gentiles are being attached through belief in Jesus, which is the means by which they are entering into covenant with the Creator God and doing so in the mold of Abraham, moves along to become the story of Israel.  Though the story of Abraham moves from Isaac to Jacob, Jacob to Joseph, and Joseph to Egypt, and though these stories are certainly important and wonderfully instructive, they are the means by which we meet up with Israel.  

The story of Israel essentially begins with Moses, the exodus, Sinai, and the giving of the instrument by which Israel would define itself and by which God intended them to reflect His glory to the nations, which was the law.  Naturally then, Paul, having effectively and persuasively incorporated Gentiles into God’s covenant family by convincingly demonstrating that justification (covenant inclusion) comes to them through belief in Jesus as Lord (believing the Gospel---believing in the decree of the Creator God and acting accordingly, as did Abraham), now does business with the other major components of the story that Israel told about itself, which would be the Adam/Creation narrative, and the birth/election of the people of Israel.  We see this as he writes “So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, so death spread to all people because all sinned---for before the law was given, sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin where there is no law” (5:12-13).  While in these verses we are hearing allusions to Adam and Moses, we are forced to note Paul’s equation of sin with death, doing so in light of his belief that Jesus (and God as and through His Messiah) conquered sin and death by the cross and the Resurrection. 

Staying focused on Paul’s incorporation of Israel’s narrative though, we continue to read “Yet death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who did not sin in the same way that Adam (who is a type of the coming one) transgressed” (5:14).  Keeping in mind the possibility of Paul’s use of exilic language, we here consider that even though Adam earned for himself a specific exile for specific transgressions of his covenant with God, all humanity, though they do not recognize Adam in their origin narrative and do not ideologically, traditionally, mentally or conceptually share in his specific covenant failures, experiences the reign of death because of their own failures to rightly bear the divine image with which they were created (sin).   

Justification, The Spirit & The Family Of God (part 2 of 3)

If the people of God were in exile, it was well understood that they were not in covenant (not in right standing, not righteous).  A people in exile, or a people experiencing the Levitical/Deuteronomic curses that accompanied exile, were understood to be experiencing God’s wrath.  When a time of exile was brought to an end and the people were restored to their right standing according to God’s covenant with them, they were then thought to have escaped (having endured) God’s wrath.  It was also understood that God Himself would intervene to end the exile of His people, and this was very much the hope of Israel in the days of Jesus (though they were in their land, they were under the heel of Rome).  However, the oppression went much further than that of Rome. 

Owing to the understanding of the world’s oppressive powers/kingdoms that was provided by the visions of the book of Daniel (a popular book in the days of Jesus, and a book on which Jesus relied quite heavily, as evidenced by His employment of the title and imagery of the Son of Man), the people of God were under the impression (quite rightly it seems) that the true oppressor was not the kingdom of man that happened to be the prevailing world power under which they labored and to whom they paid tribute, but was actually the power of death that stood behind and animated those kingdoms.  Post-cross, towards the end of the first century, and drawing heavily from the imagery on display in Daniel and the popular prophetic genre of apocalyptic, this understanding of the nature of power in the world is given voice by the book of Revelation. 

What has this to do with what Paul writes in Romans?  Well, it goes hand in hand with the drawing together of all peoples, as they share in Israel’s covenant and Israel’s history.  In this sense then, all peoples, being ungodly and sinners, are in exile, rightly experiencing God’s wrath.  It is belief in Jesus, which provides justification and therefore induces right standing with God, that delivers all people from their long-standing exile, and so saves (justifies) from God’s wrath.  God’s wrath, of course, is generally reserved for His people that are failing to live up to their covenant responsibilities.  By extending this to all peoples, Paul makes the point that it has always been God’s intention to encompass all peoples within His covenant family, doing so on the basis of belief in Him that produces an unswerving loyalty to Him and His ways.  Therefore, this saving from God’s wrath informs the reader/hearer that God does indeed view all of humanity as being His covenant people.  This goes a long way in informing believers that God intends His redemption to be cosmically holistic.     

We can hear the language of an internationally inclusive redemption from exile flowing heavily from Paul: “For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, how much more, since we have been reconciled, will we be saved by His life?” (5:10)  Reconciliation and salvation, from out of exile, are components of the language of justification, and Paul continues to apply it liberally to all peoples, as he also continues his self-identification with Gentiles.  As always, he re-centers his thoughts on Jesus and the belief in Him that provides said justification, writing “Not only this, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ,” another thumb in the eye to “lord” Caesar as he writes to this assembly of believing kingdom representatives in Rome, “through whom we have now received the reconciliation” (5:11).  Yes, it is through the instrumentality of the cross of Christ, and the belief in Jesus that centers on that event that did so very much to reveal God and His radical kingdom principles to the world, that God grants the exodus from out of exile that seemed to have been specifically and previously reserved to the designated covenant people that had begun with Abraham.