Absalom (part 2)

Adam, of course, represents all of humanity.  Though humanity was in exile, one can rest assured that the Creator God longed to have a relationship with the beings that He had created in and as His own image in and for the world, as He was most assuredly bound together with His creation.  The Scriptural narrative insists that the Creator God longed to see humanity and the whole of His once good creation restored to goodness and right relationship with Him.  This is evident because the Creator God would eventually summon Abraham so as to put in motion His project of putting things right in the world. 

Yes, just as David longed to go to Absalom, so too did the God of creation yearn for a restoration.  David was said to have been eventually consoled over the death of Amnon.  However, he did not take action based upon this consolation, nor upon his desire to be with his exiled son.  Likewise, the Creator God, desirous of consolation over the death that entered into His world and which had come upon mankind, and desirous of mending that broken relationship so as to recover what had been lost, entered into history in order to do something about it.  The Creator God wanted to bring exodus to creation’s exile. 

Joab, the general of David’s army, sees the pain of his king, seems to understand the exile that both he and his son are experiencing (albeit in different ways), and makes an attempt at intercession.  He “realized that the king longed to see Absalom” (2 Samuel 14:1b).  Thus he sends a widow with a story of pain and heartache to the king, which evokes the response that Joab desired to hear, as his plan seems to be coming to fruition.  The woman continues speaking to David, and speaking on behalf of Joab (who has knowledge of the king’s grieving over Absalom and his desire to see him because he has been consoled from the death of Amnon), she makes reference to the Absalom situation, inquiring why “the king has not brought back the one he has banished” (14:13b). 

Now, this is the first time the text speaks of banishment.  As far as is known to this point, Absalom has fled.  There is no textual indication he was banished by the king.  Rather, it would appear to be the case that  he has fled willingly.  However, this use of “banished” actually points out David’s ability to take actions to set things right.  His lack of doing so, because of the very fact that David desired to see Absalom but did not make any moves to bring this to pass, was akin to an ongoing act of banishment. 

Again, this should cause an observer to perform a thoughtful consideration of the Genesis narrative, in that the Creator God banished humanity from that for which it had been created, but without prodding on the part of anybody else (like Joab), the same God also moved to end the banishment and restore the relationship that had been broken.  In this, David falls well short of the divine ideal with which he is charged as the representative of the Creator’s covenant people.  With Joab’s influence, exerted through the woman that he has sent to speak to David and after calling Joab to see him, David eventually gets the point and tells his general to “bring back the young man Absalom” (14:21b).  With this, David makes a move to end Absalom’s exile, beginning to grant him an exodus (as the Israel story is seen in Absalom). 

“So Joab got up and went to Geshur and brought Absalom back to Jerusalem.  But the king said, ‘Let him go over to his own house.  He may not see my face.’  So Absalom went over to his own house; he did not see the king’s face” (14:23-24).  As can be seen, this is the beginning of an exodus for Absalom.  However, his exodus is incomplete.  There is still a measure of exile in his return, as he is not allowed to see the face of the king.  The broken relationship is not fully mended.  Indeed, this is similar to the experience of Israel as a whole.  

Calling His Disciples (part 11)

In the end, for Matthew, because he does not provide any type of report on the activity of the disciples themselves in relation to Jesus’ instructions, what is important is that Jesus went out teaching and preaching and presumably doing all of those things that He had instructed His disciples to do.  Does this mean that Matthew was unconcerned with the activity of the disciples?  Clearly, that is not the case.  In all of this, one must not forget that Matthew and His audience (like Mark and Luke) are viewing the story of Jesus through Resurrection-colored goggles as a community that recognized and worshiped Jesus as the incarnate Creator God. 

What this serves to communicate, keeping in mind the context that has been created through the way that the story is being told and the covenantal context in which the life of Jesus unfolds and in which His teaching is presented, is that it is ultimately the activity of the covenant God that is of paramount importance to those who were telling the Jesus story.  Even in Abraham’s case, it was the God of Abraham that was to be recognized through Abraham’s life and actions---not necessarily Abraham himself. 

It was the Creator God that was to be revealed through Israel---they were not to be made into a great nation (as promised to Abraham) simply to be blessed by their God and to no greater end or purpose than simply being a great nation.  Being a blessing and exemplifying divine blessing, as these disciples were being called to do and be, is meaningless if it does not derive glory for the Creator and work towards accomplishing His purposes or restoration and redemption for humanity and the creation.  Foundationally, it would be the Creator God at work, through Abraham.  It would be the Creator God at work, in and through the Christ; and it would be the Creator God at work, through the Christ’s disciples, when they carried out (and continue to carry out) His instructions. 

With much foundation laid, it is now possible to clinch the argument that Abraham and the Creator God’s covenant with him are in view as Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John (to an extent) tell the stories of Jesus’ calling of His disciples, that Jesus Himself is relying upon a broad-based Abrahamic covenant-shaped worldview to inform the response to His words and deeds, and that this is functional for rounding out a proper perspective on the narrative. 

Not only that, but it should become clear, when adopting a wide angle view of what is going on if this is indeed the case, that one of the points being made is that a disciple of Jesus, then and now, is called to be for the world what Abraham (and ultimately his descendants) were called to be for the world.  Abraham and his descendants were to be the means and the mediators by and through which the Creator God enacted His plan to redeem and restore the world.  In essence, it could be said that the disciples were called to be a fresh set of Abrahams. 

It bears repeating here then, that all disciples of Jesus---those that join Him in the way that He is marking out for the enactment of the Creator God’s kingdom in and for this world---are called to be Abrahams.  Has this review and analysis been sufficient to make that point?  Most likely.  However, there is one final portion of Matthew’s narrative that can be included in this presentation to tie together all that has been seen to this point in the building of this case.  

Love On John's Terms (part 15)

As the story continues to be heard, and as the audience finds itself duly impressed with the structure and flow of this Gospel, it is not possible to move much further along without again being struck by what it is that the author is presenting.  Still in the sixth chapter, and following Jesus’ comparative mention of Moses and the giving of bread from heaven, Jesus is heard to say “For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world” (6:33).  Again, this serves in the role of comparison and contrast with Moses and the manna, in an exile and exodus framework in which eternal life is equated with the kingdom of heaven, the presence of which is connected to Jesus’ presence, that belief in Him as the foundation of that kingdom, and that the love of the Creator God that is the tool to be used in the founding and spread of that kingdom is on display by and through Jesus and His disciples. 

One must never lose sight of the fact that the presence of the kingdom of the Creator God on earth, with the restoration of that God’s creation, is always a front and center, primary concern for Jesus and for His church, as it was for the Jews.  The primary concern was not and is never, ever escaping earth and going to heaven, or its antecedent---seeking heaven to avoid hell.  If this becomes the motivating force underlying the Jesus movement, then it stands somewhat in opposition to the ideal to be realized by action of the Creator, which, according to this Gospel presentation, involved His stepping into His creation, in contemplation of and intending a supreme act of love and self-sacrifice, in order to redeem it whole and to set things right.

This time, the response of the people to the words of Jesus concerning the bread from heaven is “Sir, give us this bread all the time!” (6:34)  This is a good response.  Jesus does not appear to be displeased with this response, as His reply is “I am the bread of life.  The one who comes to Me will never go hungry, and the one who believes in Me will never be thirsty” (6:35).  If one is paying careful attention to the narrative on offer in John, these words and the entire scenario that has brought forth this portion of the recorded exchange, this should serve as an alert to something that has already been heard. 

Remember, it has been said to Jesus, after He had spoken about what God requires, “Then what miraculous sign will you perform, so that we may see it and believe you?  What will you do?  Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, just as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” (6:30-31)  As has been seen, Jesus took this as a reference to Moses.  Of course, also already established was the direct reference to Moses through the citation from Deuteronomy, in regards to the “Prophet who is to come into the world” (6:14b).  Why bring this up again?  Of what should the hearer/reader be reminded by this portion of the story? 

All of this sounds remarkably like the encounter between Jesus and the Samaritan woman.  Though that conversation begins with Jesus saying “Give Me some water to drink” (4:7b), rather than with the woman requesting water in the manner of the people requesting bread with their statement of “Sir, give us this bread” (6:34), the parallels are fascinating.  As those parallels are considered, one does well to  keep in mind what it was that was learned about love and the community that was being addressed with this Gospel, in that it gave an insight into concerns with Gentiles, the role of women in the church, and the way that a mixed community of disciples were supposed to treat each other.  Likewise, it is not at all surprising to find yet another parallel, as the story of the Samaritan was found to nicely parallel the story of Mary Magdalene, her encounter with the resurrected Christ, and what stemmed from that encounter. 

In This Is Love (part 3)

Though it is never appropriate to hunt and peck through the Scriptures for isolated proof texts to support positions, “tohu” and “bohu” stand in stark contrast to that which is insisted upon in Isaiah, which is that the Creator God “formed the earth and made it; He established it, He did not create it without order, He formed it to be inhabited” (45:18b).  Though this can have the appearance of proof-texting as part of an effort at Scriptural exegesis, it actually falls well in line with a grasp of the overall narrative-based structure of Scripture that reveals the Creator God, pointing readers to that God’s long-held plan to redeem a fallen creation into which disorder was disastrously introduced.  This seems to be well within the line of thought suggested by the covenant God’s creation becoming “without shape and empty,” which also suggests some type of catastrophic activity that produced such a state. 

Is it proper to here insert an idea of the devil sinning from the beginning?  Is it appropriate to here posit the reported fall of Lucifer and his cohorts, as they seem to have entered into a violation of their covenants with the Creator God (sin), with the result of that violation being a world subjected to tohu and bohu?  Is it possible that the author of John views the world through this type of cosmology?  One should dare not become dogmatic in this area, but this could very well account for the insistence that the devil had been sinning from the beginning. 

If this is so, then the creation account of Genesis, which reflects the ordering of the world into a cosmic temple in which the Creator God would rest (which would have fit well within ancient near east mythology and the idea that a temple was the resting place of a god), is the restoration of the world to the state which had been previously established by its Creator, as it had been marred by the first act of covenant unfaithfulness, with this marring carried out by the one now referred to as the devil. 

If this is so, then it becomes possible to gain an even better understanding of the role that is given to Adam.  Why is Adam created?  Why is the one that is called the son of God revealed?  First and foremost, it is to bear the image of the Creator God in and to and for His creation, in proper and loving stewardship of the world.  That was part and parcel of the covenant that the Creator God is said to have made with Adam, with the mark of that covenant being Adam’s obedience in regards to the trees from which he could and could not partake.  Secondly, it is to be in a position to come against and destroy the works of the devil, who, as is revealed in the Genesis account of the activities in the garden, is present in the world.

If this is a reasonable position, then one can see that the author of the letter goes on to write about an ideal situation in which “Everyone who has been fathered by God does not practice sin” (John 3:9a).  Sin, as one must remember in an effort to constantly steer away from thinking about sin as “the bad stuff that I do,” is “being unfaithful to the covenant that is designed to bring glory to the Creator God via man’s participation in his role of stewardship of the creation, and thereby falling short of the Creator God’s intention for man as His image-bearer in and to and for this world.” 

The author goes on to write that the reason those fathered by the Creator God do not practice sin is “because God’s seed resides in him, and thus he is not able to sin, because he has been fathered by God” (3:9b).  This hardly describes Adam, so it should be reiterated that this is an ideal representation, which would then appear to be hyperbolic usage that is designed to point his audience to the uniqueness of the one that is most properly looked to as the Son of God, and to His unbroken faithfulness to God’s covenant.   

Hated (part 7 of 7)

Secondly, hate comes when Christians proclaim Jesus as their Lord and God and are thereby charged to exemplify divine blessing, subsequently presenting themselves as a chosen and rescued and delivered people, but then deny the blessings associated with that confession by not living their proclamation into the world.  If one names the name of Jesus, and revels in being a part of the chosen people of the covenant God, but then turns a back to this world to dismiss this creation in a way that Jesus never did; or if believers hold to the claim to be the transformative power of the Gospel to themselves within the walls of their churches without taking that power out to give cups of cold water and food and clothing (exemplifying divine blessing), then the world has every right to express hatred. 

Is this what happened to Israel in Egypt?  Was it these type of actions, or lack thereof, that caused the Creator God’s fruitful people to be hated?  Is this what Jesus had in mind when He spoke of the hatred to come?  Is it possible that followers of the Christ are hated when they proclaim allegiance to the name of Jesus, but then simply do not live according to that proclamation?  At the risk of redundancy, should they be hated when they live as if this world does not matter, looking to a rapture or a far-off realm, turning God’s blessing into that which is merely personal and spiritual under the cloak of a cultivation of personal holiness in supposed service to Jesus, and thereby showing contempt for the world in a way that is not to be found with Jesus?  With a historical grounding for the language of Jesus that is rooted in the experience of Egypt and the exodus, this would appear to be highly plausible. 

Finally, with Jesus’ speaking to enduring to the end and being saved, there comes a reminder that His disciples are most certainly in this world, but at the same time they are a part of the kingdom of the Creator God that was being proclaimed by Jesus and which was inaugurated at the Resurrection.  Believers live in anticipation of the age to come, which is already present with the power of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) that began to be shed abroad by the Resurrection of Jesus, but the coming of which in its fullness (the restoration of the cosmos) is still awaited. 

Like Israel in Egypt following their enslavement to an oppressive power, believers are to know themselves as a people of promise.  Believers are to know themselves as people of the covenant, yet maintain the understanding that they will toil in bondage to the eventual coming of death, waiting for their final deliverance that has been promised in the Resurrection of the Christ, while compassionately sympathizing with a suffering world as did their Lord. 

Though they were oppressed in Egypt, Israel knew that they had a promise that had been given to Abraham---that a deliverer, bringing salvation, would come after a certain period of time.  That hope was never lost.  The believer holds on to that hope as well.  It sustained them even as they served the Egyptians, which they were forced to do unwillingly through hatred, rather than joyfully with divine blessing.  Though they experienced the effects of hatred at the hands of the Egyptians, for whatever reason that hatred came, those that endured were saved and they were led out into their God’s land of promise.

If one is to be hated in association with the Christ,  it is best to be hated for the right reasons.  The believer is to be hated because of a proclamation of the Lordship and the supreme rule of Jesus over all of mankind and over all of this creation as they await a resurrected entrance into their God’s restored creation.  Thus the believers will be hated for a cause, as the redeeming and resurrecting power of the Gospel is brought to bear.        

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. 

Only Son (part 12)

Not only would these things be foreign concepts, but they also represent something of an inward, anthropocentric focus, whereas Israel, and especially Jesus, had a theo-centric focus, being fully concerned with what their Creator God had done, was doing, and was going to do for His people and for the world that He had created and that they understood He had promised to redeem and renew (beginning with their own land). 

Though it’s often difficult for the contemporary, western, individualistic mind to grasp, their eyes were cast upon their God and His plans and purposes, rather than upon themselves.  A “personal relationship with God” would have been an odd thought, and the notion that “God has a special plan for my life” would likely not have been on the table.  The covenant people were defined by, and defined themselves by the community, the role of the covenant people, and what their God was doing to do for and through the covenant people.  Naturally, the presence and operation of an honor and shame culture, in which one’s status was defined by the community, did not lend itself to isolated individualism. 

So even though Israel as a generalized whole thought about their God from inside the context of a separation from the nations, they certainly did not think about their God inside a counter-intuitive isolated individualism that was extremely personal in scope.  Now this is not to say that personal improvement, achievement, reflection, and excellence is not something that should be encouraged, or that it should not be valued, or that it is unbecoming for a believer (as individuals do indeed comprise a community), but it should be recognized that such thinking would not serve the purposes of their God that loved the world and sent His Son into the world because of that love. 

So if Adam is the son of God, how is one to think about him in light of Jesus’ statement which is so routinely thought of as nothing more than a self-referential evidentiary proposition that Jesus thought of Himself as the Son of God, and merely used this meeting with Nicodemus to inform him (with the author also informing his readers) that He was indeed the second person of the divine trinity?  Well, the answer lies in Genesis.  Israel’s God created the world. 

Regardless of what it was that was happening and is recorded in the first two chapters of Genesis, the fact of the matter, which was well-accepted by Israel and obviously by Jesus, was that Israel understood and insisted that their God was the Creator of this world, and that He was a providential God that held all things together by His power.  To them, He evidenced His presence by dramatic and powerful interventions in the affairs of the world, doing so primarily because He was a covenant-making-and-keeping God.  To that way of thinking, the very first verse of Genesis show forth a God that created the heavens and the earth (i.e. everything).  Together with that, the narrative goes on to present, over and over again, a God of restoration.  There is a consistent pronouncement, throughout the Genesis account and beyond (if one is attentive to it), that the Creator God saw His work as being good. 

In addition to that, from the very beginning one finds a God that speaks in the language of covenant.  In the first chapter, when God repeatedly says “Let there be,” this can be understood as an approximation of covenant language.  To get one’s mind around that, it is possible to think of the Creator God’s covenant with Abraham and hear Him saying “Let it be so,” as He declares the covenant that sets forth His purpose for Abraham, for His descendants, and for the world.  

Only Son (part 2)

The brief answer to that important question is found in chapter twelve of Genesis.  There, the Creator God instructs Abraham (Abram) to “Go out from your country, your relatives, and your father’s household to the land that I will show you.  Then I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will make your name great, so that you will exemplify divine blessing.  I will bless those who bless you, but the one who treats you lightly I must curse, and all the families of the earth will bless one another by your name” (12:1-3). 

So yes, the covenant God is demonstrated to have chosen Abraham so that through Abraham the nations and families and the whole of the earth could be blessed.  This becomes, for all time, the explicit charge of the covenant people.  Naturally, a person that is recognized as a “teacher of Israel” would have been quite familiar with the answer to this question.  This, however, it should be recognized, is not a sufficient answer. 

The Creator God’s words to Abraham merely beg the question as to “why.”  Why did the sovereign God of the cosmos need to choose Abraham?  Why did this God have a need or desire to make Abraham into a great nation?  Why did the one who, as indicated in the story of Scripture, repeatedly showed Himself as the God of covenants want to bless him?  Why make Abraham’s name great?  Why was there what seems to be a pressing need to exemplify divine blessing through Abraham?  Why is there all this talk of blessing and cursing in association with Abraham?  Why indeed? 

The reason for all of these things is to be found in what comes before the introduction of Abraham.  In the narrative structure, what comes before, of course, is the presentation of the ordering of the creation as the Creator’s cosmic temple, the pronouncement at every stage that this ordering was “very good,” and the placement of man, created as the divine-image, into that creation-as-cosmic-temple so as to steward it, to be a reflection of the glory of its Creator into it, and to stand as a constant reminder to the whole of the creation of its Ruler, that being the Creator God of Israel (Genesis 1 & 2). 

This record of the ordering of creation is quickly followed by the report of the divine image-bearers’ first act of idolatry, rebellion, and violation of their God’s commandment.  This is swiftly followed by the exile of the now marred image-bearers from the role to which they had been assigned by the Creator.  What accompanied this, as pointedly and painfully indicated by Scripture, is the exile of the creation from the condition and state in which it had been created (very good, perfection), as it came to share in the cursing brought about by the one appointed to its rule and stewardship (Genesis 3). 

Subsequent to that the first murders are to be found (Genesis 4), along the fathering of a son in the likeness of the fallen image-bearer rather than in the image of the Creator God (Genesis 5), the growing wickedness of the collectively fallen image-bearers (Genesis 6), a worldwide flood of judgment (Genesis 7), the curse of Canaan (Genesis 9), and the culmination of man’s self-idolatry, rebellion, and defiance of the Creator, which was the construction of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11). 

It is at this point that the Creator God is said to have reached down into His creation for the purpose of choosing and appointing Abraham, as something of a project manager charged with the task of the restoration of the fallen creation.  Undoubtedly, accurately and purposefully communicating this definitive story would be part and parcel of being a “teacher of Israel,” and it would have to in such a context that Jesus delivers the words of what have come to be the most famous words in the whole of Scripture.   

Describing David, Seeing Jesus (part 2 of 3)

How should one frame this issue of Jesus offering tribute to His enemy?  Jesus does not say “You take the bodies, I only want the souls.”  Jesus did not experience merely a spiritual, soul-ish Resurrection, nor will those that stand in the union of trusting allegiance to Him, calling Him Lord.  Jesus did not say to His enemy, “You take this world (the creation), we’re just going to heaven.”  No, with man’s fall came the fall of all of the covenant God’s good creation and the flood of death and corruption into the world.  The Creator God’s promise is to redeem all of His creation, defeating death in its entirety and ending corruption.  Indeed, the creation is described as groaning for this redemption to occur, as it was subjected to futility through no fault of its own, and hopes for a resurrection like that which will come upon the Creator God’s children (Romans 8:20-21). 

The Resurrection is taken to be the sign and the promise that the enemy exacts no tribute whatsoever from Jesus.  If there was to be no physical resurrection and no restoration of the creation---if believers are just waiting to be whisked away into heaven so that they can watch the world be destroyed---then they can know that a tribute (sign of subservience to His enemy) was exacted from Jesus, that death was not truly defeated, and that they have no true reason to hope in Him.       

As believers continue to see their King Jesus through the Psalmist’s description of the anointed, supported, and strengthened one referred to as “David, My Servant,” they read that “a violent oppressor will not be able to humiliate him” (89:22b).  Death, of course, is the greatest of all oppressors.  It is and has been the constant, stalking, baneful enemy of man from the time of the fall.  It has crowded in upon his thoughts, and in some way, covered the majority of his waking moments. 

For Jesus, as a man, death stood in the same role.  When the Gospels are read, the reader finds that death surrounded Jesus on a regular basis.  Not only did it surround Him because people were constantly coming to Him for healing from maladies that were often productive of death, and not only did He raise people from the dead, but quite often, the Gospel stories reveal that his own life was threatened, with reports of there being a relatively consistent existence of plans, from nearly the beginning of His ministry, to silence Him through assassination.  Sometimes, these plans were well thought out and deliberated, and sometimes, such as that which occurred in Nazareth, they seem to be a spur-of-the-moment thing. 

When death finally caught up with Him and had Jesus in its grasp, not only was it going to be an oppressor, but it was going to be a violent oppressor.  Jesus was going to experience the full weight of death’s might as He underwent the scourging and the cross, which represented the pinnacle of man’s corrupted creativity, as it was one of the most torturous and painful means of death ever devised. 

The cross, along with its attendant punishments, was designed to not only induce the utmost of painful deaths, but also to humiliate, and to demonstrate the shamed victim’s utter powerlessness against the nearly omnipotent power of Rome.  This is that which Jesus underwent.  To all appearances, it seemed that He was made to succumb to the same fate as all that had been sent down the path of the cross, sharing in its shame and its humiliation, violently oppressed by death at the hands of Rome. 

Marring Of A Servant (part 4 of 4)

Continuing on, and interpreting Isaiah according to the Christ-event, one finds that the shock of these kings will come about because “they will witness something unannounced to them, and they will understand something they had not heard about” (52:15d).  How will they witness something unannounced and understand something that they had not heard?  This will occur through the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus (He is Lord of all).  The shock will come when they hear that they are now subservient to One that they had shamed and crucified.  The fact of their subjection to this King, Jesus (the one now understood as the marred and suffering servant of Isaiah), was certainly not something that had been announced to them beforehand.  Indeed, a suffering messiah was not even expected by His own people  Nevertheless, the fact, at least as interpreted by the followers of Jesus after His death and Resurrection, was inescapable. 

In addition to the shock of the announcement about subservience to a crucified man, no one had ever heard of one rising physically from the dead in the way that Jesus was said to have risen from the dead.  As a matter of fact, the very idea was ludicrous.  Men did not come back from the dead---not in their physical bodies.  Ghosts and spirits?  Yes, this was understood and even expected.  There was language for such things.  A man coming back from the grave and being exalted as the Lord of all people, nations, and things---who would ever have spoken of such a thing?  Little wonder then that the earliest believers in Jesus looked at the words of Isaiah and envisioned him looking forward (while also looking backwards and folding in Israel’s story and purposes according to what he would have understood to be the purpose of the Creator God for His world) and putting pen to paper for precisely this reason and writing “Who would have believed what we just heard?” (53:1a) 

In some sense, it is reasonable to presume that Isaiah had an idea that what he was writing was completely incredulous.  How could this servant (Adam, humanity, Israel, the messiah), disfigured so that he no longer looked like a man, and marred so that he no longer looked human, startle nations, shock kings, and be lifted high, elevated, and greatly exalted?  This question could not only be asked of the suffering servant of Isaiah, but of his God’s servant that was Israel, and His first servant, that being man. 

The answer would lie in the Resurrection of the righteous dead and the restoration and recreation of the world attendant to that as the Creator God would come to live with man (heaven come to earth) and rule all things, which was long held as a hope of Israel, and ultimately for those that would be witnesses of the resurrected One and attempt to put it into words, its power that is mysteriously transmitted and infused into this world through the preaching of the Gospel in both word and deed.  The servant would be resurrected.  Israel would be resurrected.  Humanity would be resurrected.  The previously marred would be restored, according to the power and promise of the Creator God. 

The Resurrection is put forth as the answer to the question, but is that when this would happen?  Isaiah seems to ask the same question as he writes, “When was the Lord’s power revealed through Him?” (53:1b)  The answer has already been heard, but it is returned to now, declaring again that the Creator God’s power to do all that He planned to do, for and through His covenant people throughout all of time, was made manifest when Jesus “was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by the Resurrection from the dead,” which made Him “Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 1:4). 

As the Lord Jesus is elevated and lifted high through proclamation of His Lordship in word and in deed, nations continue to be startled and kings are still driven to shock.  As the Gospel proclamation is live, the Lord’s power is continually revealed through those that have cast their allegiance with Him, and the powerful and faithful Creator God continues to re-shape, re-make, re-new, and re-store His people and His world through them, reversing the marring of the fall of the creatures that had been created as His image, and making them into those that truly bear His image and reflect His glory into the world.     

Nebuchadnezzar's Fall (part 7 of 8)

What was involved in Nebuchadnezzar’s return to sanity?  A precursor to this return has already been covered, in that the Creator God said that Nebuchadnezzar would live like an animal until he understood “that the Most High is ruler over human kingdoms and gives them to whomever He wishes” (Daniel 4:32e).  This come to fruition when Nebuchadnezzar, sanity returned, can be heard saying “I extolled the Most High, and I praised and glorified the One Who lives forever” (4:34b). 

Now it seems, with real conviction, Nebuchadnezzar points to Israel’s God and says, “His authority is an everlasting authority, and His kingdom extends from one generation to the next” (4:34c).  In humility, he adds, “All the inhabitants of the earth are regarded as nothing.  He does as He wishes with the army of heaven and with those who inhabit the earth” (4:35a).  With what would appear to be a mild flourish of self-introspection concerning his previous demonstration of high-mindedness, this king adds, “No one slaps His hand and says to Him, ‘What have You done?’” (4:35b) 

As Nebuchadnezzar’s fall has been shown to have mirrored Adam’s fall (the fall of man), would it not be appropriate to say that his restoration will ultimately be mirrored by mankind’s restoration as well?  This would seem to be an eminently reasonable proposition that possesses the full support of the Scriptural narrative.  If it is true that Nebuchadnezzar’s sanity returned, that he was returned to human society, and that his time spent living like an animal was ended upon his acknowledgment of the Most High, would it not reasonable to take the step of making the same, albeit wider application?  Nebuchadnezzar’s time of living a sub-human existence began with his self-exaltation.  This was true for him just as it was for Adam.  Nebuchadnezzar’s period of time spent living a sub-human existence ended when he confessed that it was the Most High God that ruled.  Does it not stand to reason that it would be much the same for all of mankind? 

Until there is an acknowledgment, on the part of man, of the Creator God, of His rights, and of the failings of humanity, mankind remains in a sub-human condition---not being what the Creator God intends, not bearing the divine image, and not being truly human.  It could be said that such is a state of insanity.  With the requisite acknowledgment like that of Nebuchadnezzar,  humanity is freed from that sub-human state, regaining a long-lost sanity, with a restoration and re-purposing to rightly bear the divine image, so as to reflect the Creator God’s glory into this world, and no longer falling short of the glory of God.

According to the Scriptural narrative, all of which points to the Christ as the revelation of the Creator God and His intentions for His creation, this long-needed recognition and restoration occurs through a believing union with Jesus the Christ, which is achieved through a confession of Him as Lord and King of all.  Effectively, this confession and concomitant allegiance is one that looks to Jesus and says “His authority is an everlasting authority, and His kingdom extends from one generation to the next.”   

This is a statement of faith (loyal allegiance), in recognition of the Creator God’s covenant faithfulness as shown through the Christ, that demonstrates that one has come to the place of a trusting allegiance in the One that perfectly bore the divine image in every way.  

Believing For Pleasing (part 2 of 2)

So when the author of the first letter of John writes that “this is His commandment” (3:23a), He is speaking to a group of people that should be in a position to well understand what is meant by “commandment” and that which “pleases God.”  This is especially so among Jewish believers, as it is borne in mind that Christianity (to use a general referent) was a Resurrection and creation restoration movement that had its roots in Judaism, that looked to the one now confirmed to have been the Jewish Messiah as its founder and resurrected Leader, was informed and undergirded by the history and prophecies of the Hebrew Scriptures, and which was understood to be the movement of the Creator God in fulfillment of His desire and His promise to bless all nations through His covenant people. 

Because of these things, the reader also does well to remember that the Jewish understanding of righteousness, covenant, commandment, and Resurrection would be fundamental in forming the theology of the new movement that was now centered upon Jesus, the son of Joseph, who was said to have hailed from Nazareth.  So even if the author is writing to a mixed group of Jews and Gentiles, or to a group predominantly composed of Gentiles, Jewish understanding of the primary concepts would always have to be front and center in order to make any sense of the message of Jesus, of the Kingdom of heaven, or of the sovereign, creative, providential, and covenant God.

With that covered, one can infer that, with talk of commandments, reference is indeed being made to covenant markers.  Reference is being made to that which denotes a person as being in positive covenant standing, and therefore part of the kingdom of the Creator God that was understood to have been unexpectedly inaugurated in the midst of history with the Resurrection of Jesus, and therefore righteous (justified) and pleasing to God.  This was always an important and controversial issue within the very early church.  There was a group of believers that firmly believed that the works of the law---the established covenant markers---needed to be kept in place to identify believers as people under the covenant.  These individuals should not be painted as enemies, but rather, as those that also sought to live by faith. 

Likewise, and contrary (in this matter) to those that believed that the established covenant markers needed to be maintained so that covenant members could be readily identified, there was a group of believers, of which the Apostle Paul seems to be the loudest voice, that said that the only thing that was necessary was a confessed belief in the Gospel of Jesus (He is Lord of all), and that it was this alone, which sprung from a faith that was somehow gifted by the Holy Spirit as a gracious and sovereign act of the Creator God, signaled a believer’s membership in the kingdom of the Creator God, making them righteous (justified), pleasing to God, and partakers in the covenant God’s promised blessings for His people. 

The author of this letter seems to be very much in agreement with this second position, as even though he takes the liberty of redundantly adding “and love one another” (which would be the natural outworking of a believing union with Christ that would make one a vehicle for God’s blessings), it is quite clear that he is of the opinion that believing in Jesus as the crucified and resurrected Son of God (King of Israel/Messiah), is that which brought one into the covenant, sealing a person into the kingdom of the Creator God.  Belief in Jesus and in His Gospel (messiah-ship, crucifixion, Resurrection, rule as Lord of all) was paramount.  All else was secondary, flowing from the faith and power housed within that message.    

My Enemies (part 1)

I chase My enemies and catch them; I do not turn back until I wipe them out. – Psalm 18:37  (NET)

When a Jesus-believer finds him or herself venturing into the Psalms, such should be done with an ever-present reflection on the primary reason why one ever ventures into the Word of God---our resurrected Lord Jesus.  Upon arriving in the Psalms, and more specifically the eighteenth Psalm, and doing so mindful of the historical narrative of Israel and its covenant and associated promises, one is confronted with words and thoughts that could very well be ascribed to Jesus, and certainly reflected upon and embraced by Him, as He tread the earthly path of ministry that was going to take Him to His cross. 

In the midst of first century expectations concerning Israel’s messiah, and of the kingdom of God on earth that would be established by the messiah’s victory over the enemies of the God of Israel’s people, it is not difficult to imagine Jesus, as a would-be messiah attempting to work out the nature of His vocation, searching the Scriptures as He contemplated what He had come to believe was His role and His task and His method of ushering in that long-expected kingdom. 

Clearly, His searching and reflection would have Him going about that ushering in of the kingdom and all it would portend, in a way that stood contrary to what many of His fellow countrymen were imagining and in some cases pursuing.  The Jesus that is presented on the pages of the Gospels is a Jesus that obviously came to realize that the Creator God’s kingdom would not be established in the way that every other kingdom (including Israel’s kingdom) had been established in this world---that of the violence of sword and spear.  Such was the method of the old age, and Jesus indicates that such means had no place in the new age of Resurrection and new creation. 

At the same time, Jesus knew that there was going to be violence, but that the violence, if it was going to align with what He understood to be the purposes of the Creator God for renewal and restoration, would be that which He would suffer and endure at the hands of the Romans.  Yes, Jesus knew that there was going to be a massive conflict, and that there was an enemy to be defeated, but also realized that the enemy with which He was going to engage in battle, was far more ferocious and powerful than the ones that His countrymen sought to overthrow.  Earthly foes and oppressors such as Rome were merely a shadow---meager representatives and parodies of the true enemy of creation and the divine image-bearers 

Ultimately, Jesus would realize that He was going to do mortal battle with death---that enemy which ruled unchecked and with apparent absolute sovereignty through its power over all men and all things at all times and all places.  Jesus, relying on His understanding of Scripture and the faithfulness of the God of Israel, trusted that His God was going to empower and enable Him to emerge victorious over this enemy, through a Resurrection, thereby stripping death of its power.  In its place, the Creator God, through Jesus, would make an offer of life to all men and all things, in submission to His Messiah. 

It is with such things in mind that Jesus could certainly return, time and again, to this Psalm (as He hears it as an Israelite and therefore according to Israel’s defining narrative as the covenant people of the Creator God), inserting Himself with a growing and eventual full understanding of His vocation, reflecting on the Roman cross to which that vocation was surely leading Him, and read “I chase My enemies and catch them; I do not turn back until I wipe them out.”  To that could be added, “I beat them to death; they fall at My feet” (18:38).  Recognizing the source of such power, Jesus could read, “You give Me strength for battle; You make My foes kneel before Me” (18:39). 

Do Not Fear (part 2 of 2)

In this new age, the one that has been inaugurated so that the Creator God can pour out His Spirit on all flesh as Peter will say in Acts, the prophet Joel reports that God saying, “Do not fear, My land!  Rejoice and be glad, because the Lord has accomplished great things!” (2:21)  This is an age in which the covenant God is reversing the curse that mankind brought upon His creation that had been established as very good.  The insistence of the New Testament is that the God of Israel will begin to do this through His covenant people as they are in union with Christ (confirming Jesus as King), with the beginning of that reversal pointing to a final consummation in which a great and final restoration, a final reversal, will take place.  The Creator God speaks and says, “Do not fear, wild animals!  For the pastures of the wilderness are again green with grass.  Indeed the trees bear their fruit; the fig tree and the vine yield to their fullest” (2:22). 

In this new age, the Creator God speaks to His covenant people, saying “Citizens of Zion, rejoice!  Be glad because of what the Lord has done” (2:23a).  What is it that the Lord has done?  Well, because Peter appears to link all of this with Jesus, it can be declared that He has performed a great work in and through the Christ.  Through Him then, He has redeemed a people for Himself from exile.  This is the ongoing story of Israel, as reflected by their history, and this is the continuing story of the covenant people that are formed around Jesus.  Yes, once again, a new age has been inaugurated.  This is an age in which Resurrection power has been brought to bear in the world, with Jesus being the first to thoroughly experience that Resurrection power as the first-fruits of what is to come for God’s people and God’s creation. 

In this inaugurated age, where Jesus is King, awaiting His final crowning (much like David was anointed king, merely awaiting His final crowning, though the analogy to David should not extend too far beyond form rather than substance), it is said that “The threshing floors are full of grain; the vats overflow with fresh wine and olive oil” (2:24).  Such language speaks to the removal of the thorns and thistles that plague this world.  It is an age in which the exile that is being experienced by the creation, ends in an exodus into becoming a promised land.  As always, the language of the prophets is provided context and depth of meaning by Israel’s narrative 

Through His prophet, the covenant God says that in this age (the one that is Peter affirms has begun with the Resurrection of Jesus) “You will have plenty to eat, and your hunger will be fully satisfied; you will praise the name of the Lord your God, Who has acted wondrously in your behalf” (2:26a).  Because of what the Creator God has wrought---the Resurrection of the Christ and the redemption of His covenant people to be set forth as royal servant ambassadors for the world---the promise is made that “My people will never again be put to shame” (2:26b).  That is, once the covenant God brings His Spirit to bear in this world, His people will never again experience the curse of exile. 

After declaring that His people will be fully convinced of His power (2:27a), which will take place by the gift of faith by the Spirit, Israel’s God repeats Himself, saying “My people will never again be put to shame” (2:27b).  The witness of Scripture affirms that there is no need to fear, for everywhere, the Word of God speaks of His faithfulness, Resurrection, redemption, restoration, renewal, and re-creation.  In Him, one may confidently trust and rejoice.      

Renewed (part 1)

Therefore we do not despair, but even if our physical body is wearing away, our inner person is being renewed day by day. – 2 Corinthians 4:16  (NET)

Paul’s words point the believers towards his great and final hope.  The great hope of those that are in union with Christ, confessing and submitting to Him as Lord, is not heaven, but the final renewal of creation and a participation therein.  Here, Paul expresses it in terms of the day by day renewal of the inner person.  Here, one can imagine Paul drawing on Jeremiah’s Lamentations, where it can be read that “The Lord’s loyal kindness never ceases; His compassions never end.  They are fresh every morning; Your faithfulness is abundant!” (3:22-23) 

Yes, those in union with Christ share in His Resurrection life, renewed day by day, and sharing in eternal life here and now as the renewing, restoring kingdom of heaven (the Creator God’s realm of existence breaking into earth when and where deeds of love and sacrifice in the name of the Christ are performed) advances, even though the believer’s daily experience is that of a physical body that is wearing away and a creation that is often filled with chaos.  That wearing away, of course, will eventually result in a physical death.  However, this expectation of renewal and restoration, and the ongoing experience of it, is based upon the fact of the Resurrection of Christ and its implication for humanity and for God’s good creation. 

Because it is a hope and an expectation, Paul writes that “we are not looking at what can be seen, but at what cannot be seen” (4:18a).  There is faith here.  It is supposed that faith is a gift that is given by God’s Spirit, in the accompaniment of the preaching of the power of God for salvation, which is the Gospel (Jesus is Lord).  It cannot be seen, “For what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal” (4:18b).  Yes, the physical body is wearing away each and every day, but what the believer cannot see---and instead must trust because Christ was raised from the dead and because the believers is in union with Him and shares His life through belief in Him as Lord by the movement of the Holy Spirit---is that he has been made to share in His eternal life.  That gift of eternal life is unseen, though glimpses of it can be caught when God works through those that share in that union to be “a sweet aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved…a fragrance from life to life…speaking in Christ before God as persons of sincerity, as persons sent from God” (2:15a, 16b, 17b).

Paul continues with this theme of the contrast being the physical body that wears away, and the inner, unseen person being renewed day by day through the power of the Spirit and the Gospel, carrying it forward into the fifth chapter.  There Paul writes, “For we know that if our earthly house, the tent we live in, is dismantled, we have a building from God, a house not built by human hands, that is eternal in the heavens” (5:1).  The tent in which the believer lives, that tent of human flesh, is being dismantled.  This seems to be another way of indicating that it will be worn away.  As was said, all will die. 

As an aside, an interesting corollary to this is that only some will truly ever live, doing so in union with the Christ.  In that thought of the inevitably of death however, there is no need to ultimately despair.  The believer does not lose heart.  Why  not?  Beecause “We have a building from God,” as Paul says, “a house not built by human hands.”  Is this the “many dwelling places in My Father’s house” (John 14:2a) that Jesus mentions in the Gospel of John?   Of course not.  There is no need to here shift one’s thoughts away from what it is that Paul is presenting.  He is speaking of the renewed body that will be inhabited by those that claim allegiance to Jesus, His reign, and His way being human and bringing about the kingdom of God.