Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 28)

Verse one of chapter six also introduces yet another counter-cultural element.  As one is careful to understand that the slavery mentioned herein is not the race-based slavery with which most in the western world are familiar, but more likely the debt-based (or subjugation-based) slavery that was prevalent in the world of Paul, one reads “Those who are under the yoke as slaves must regard their own masters as deserving of full respect” (1 Timothy 6:1a).  Though some take Paul to task here for not simply condemning slavery, which would have been the ultimate counter-cultural move (and ultimately counter-productive at that point), or for not ordering Christian masters to release their slaves, this is really not the issue at hand.  At the same time, this was probably not a sensibility possessed by the tiny church at this point. 

Slavery was a social institution that provided stability, while also providing life’s basic necessities for the one forced into slavery, along with a mechanism for the erasure of debts and the achievement of a state of freedom.  It was not necessarily a permanent situation, and it was not necessarily a state that was indiscriminately inflicted upon a class of people.  Slaves could and did become free men.  Some slaves would hold slaves of their own, who had become indebted to them.  Slavery, in some cases, was preferable to freedom, especially if freedom meant going without food, clothing, and shelter.  If one wants to see Paul’s treatment of the issue of slavery, an observer would need to look to his letter to Philemon (in which Paul sends a believing, runaway slave back to his believing master, who were both going to be a part of the same body of people that worshiped Jesus as Lord). 

In the case of Timothy, and with his words, Paul is being quite counter-cultural.  Inside the church, it was well understood that there were no class-distinctions, and that all were equal.  Outside the church, however, was a different story.  Clearly, with the words of the first verse, Paul is addressing an issue with Timothy involving slaves that were part of the church body, whose masters were not a part of the church body. 

This is quite a bit different than the picture painted by the letter to Philemon, or for that matter, that of the circular letter that has come to be called Ephesians, or the letter to the Colossians.  Both of these letters, along with the letter to Philemon, offer instructions to both slaves and masters, though the “instructions” in Philemon (Paul presents them as requests, as the letter is quite rhetorical in nature) are primarily directed to the recipient.  Such is absent from this letter to Timothy.  Paul deals only with the response of slaves to their masters. 

The encouragement to “regard their own masters as deserving of full respect” would represent quite the change of pace in that day, as most slaves, as can be imagined, probably treated their masters with a grudging respect.  Naturally, it is not difficult to surmise that this would have been quite the counter-cultural witness, which provokes Paul’s additional statement that “This will prevent the name of God and Christian teaching from being discredited” (6:1b).  The Christians had enough issues with being called atheists, while also being viewed as seditious and disruptive of social order and harmony, so the last thing that was needed was to sow seeds of disruption and potential recalcitrance in this area as well. 

In addition, this conferring of respect, in light of the knowledge of the humanity that the Creator God truly expected, in which situations of master and slave did not exist, would certainly be an act of love, self-sacrifice, and preferential treatment that could only be explained by the activity of the Spirit of that God through believers.  Again, this is not to sanction the social arrangements, but rather, to “prevent the name of God and Christian teaching from being discredited.” 

Good Conduct, Good Deeds, Good Works (part 8)

A more minor example, in which nearly all would be able to engage and which would be instrumental in its application in an era and an area in which one’s daily food was a constant concern and in which debt and debt slavery were extraordinarily pressing and very real problems, would be something like the brother-directed insistence that “You must not lend money at interest and you must not sell him food for profit” (Leviticus 25:37). 

The need to borrow is here wrapped up with the need to purchase food, so the directive takes aim at capitalizing on misfortune in the area of life’s basic necessities, and doing so in such a way that increases the likelihood that slavery will result.  This is not a blanket statement, insisting that it is wrong to sell food or anything else for profit or that it is even necessarily wrong to charge interest, as the prohibition against charging interest is definitively linked to a brother’s ability to obtain the necessities of life (he’s not buying a new laptop or a car).  Surely, it is possible to differentiate between charging interest for that which is not wholly necessary, with ideas about that which is wholly necessary complicated by modern day cultures that are bent on acquisition and the portrayal of all things as needs. 

However, one must note that in this section of Leviticus the prohibition is provided context by “If your brother becomes impoverished and is indebted to you, you must support him… Do not take interest or profit from him, but you must fear your God and your brother must live with you” (25:35a,36).  This does not deny that some would be wealthier than others, nor does it offer up a value judgment on the mere fact or presence of wealth (wealth defined as the excess of what is needed), but it does have an underlying message that the Creator God’s people are to be conscientious of the plight of their brothers and to be ready to have their hand out to make ready assistance, though this is a matter for another dissertation. 

It would be far easier, in a manner of speaking, for Christians of the first century (and for Christians of the twenty-first century who live outside of the remarkably affluent western world) to relate to these words from Leviticus, and to engage in such activity as part of their call to be benefactors for their communities.  Imagine what would be stirred by a person, operating in the marketplace during times of scarcity and need, who, seeing all as brothers and potential brothers within the always advancing kingdom of the covenant God, sold his food at no profit to himself. 

What if that person, acting counter to the supply and demand equation in that time of scarcity, which would naturally see prices for scarce items rise, actually began selling sustenance items at below his own cost, so as to bring down the cost (at least temporarily, as that person would quickly exhaust his own supply and be unable to restock, having sold his inventory at a loss)?  What if that person did so as an obvious sacrifice on his or her part, and did so as a conscientious actor for the kingdom of God?  Would that not be a monumental display of costly love?  Would that not be living out the cross?  Would that not be the power of the resurrection and the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) at work?  Again, this is not meant to be applied at all times, as it is unsustainable in practice, but it does inform the body of Christ of its need to engage with the world at multiple levels, as the kingdom of the Creator God invades every aspect of life, never saying “I go here and no further.” 

Corinth's Communion (part 16)

A symposium would be overseen by a “symposiarch,” or a “master of the feast.”  Among the many duties of this person would be making a decision as to the strength of the wine for the evening, and this would depend on whether serious discussions were going to be taking place, or whether sensual indulgences were all that were on tap for the gathering.  The wine would be drawn from a large jar that was designed to be carried by two men, with the wine then served to the guests from pitchers. 

Continuing to learn about this social institution, Paul’s words of the sixth chapter are kept in mind as information is gathered about customary central features of the symposium.  Though free women of status were not allowed to attend such events, female prostitutes were often hired to accentuate the festivities.  This brings Paul’s mention of sexual immorality and prostitutes (1 Corinthians 6:13,15) into play, as Paul’s critique of this church is considered in the light of meal practice and the symposium.  Together with the prostitutes, slaves and boys would also be employed for entertainment and used to provide service, thus drawing attention to Paul’s mention of being “bought at a price” (6:20), which is the language of slavery. 

In effect then, the symposium or convivium was a male-oriented drinking session that would traditionally be held at the end of a meal.  Greek pottery of ancient times, including the time of Jesus and Paul, frequently includes decorations depicting symposium, showing that the range of activities would include drinking, music, singing, dancing, games, and sexual intercourse. 

As one imagines what might very well be the raucous nature of the symposium, and as one holds in mind the vital nature and importance of meal gatherings as demonstrated by Jesus and therefore embraced by the early church, can Paul not be understood to be writing into the context of this type of event (rather than in as a general approbation) when he delivers words such as “Do not be deceived!  The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God” (6:9b-10)?  This makes a great deal of sense if Paul is addressing a church that is engaging in this practice, while they presumptuously and falsely refer to it as their celebration of the messianic feast, which is the very thing that was suppose to signal the in-breaking of the kingdom of the Creator God.   

So not only is one forced to begin considering having “a careful regard for the body” in the mode of the body of believers (rather than the personal body or the body of Christ in terms of the bread of the communion table), but there is also a requirement to deal with the idea that Paul’s delineation of the parameters of the Lord’s Supper, or the communion table, are offered within the context of a grave concern over what is being put on display, or conversely, what is not being put on display by the meal practice of the Corinthian church. 

Paul appears to be quite concerned with the fact that love---true love as demonstrated by compassion and mercy, which should be reflected by image-bearers that are supposedly claiming Jesus as their Lord and living by the precepts on offer by Him in both word and deed and which are part and parcel of the celebration of the communion, is being left off the table.  This is in the wake of understanding the communion as a microcosm of the messianic feast by which it is confessed that Jesus is Lord, and in which the in-breaking of the Creator God’s compassion and mercy for this world is looked to and celebrated, with this having taken place by and through the Christ-event. 

Where Your Treasure Is (part 3)

Continuing on in chapter twelve of Luke, Jesus can be heard to say “Watch out and guard yourself from all types of greed, because one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (12:15).  This will be programmatic and quite significant for what comes later.  With this said, Jesus embarks upon a parable, saying “The land of a certain rich man produced an abundant crop” (12:16b).  With the mention of an abundant crop, and with the shared background of the knowledge of the Levitical/Deuteronomic blessings to be had for adherence to covenant responsibilities, Jesus’ hearers would likely and immediately take this as a sign that this man was blessed by the Creator God. 

What would or should also come to mind is the passage from Deuteronomy that says “Be sure you do not forget the Lord your God by not keeping His commandments, ordinances, and statutes that I am giving you today.  When you eat your fill, when you build and occupy good houses, when your cattle and flocks increase, when you have plenty of silver and gold and when you have abundance of everything, be sure you do not feel self-important and forget the Lord your God who brought you from the land of Egypt, the place of slavery, and who brought you through the great, fearful desert of venomous serpents and scorpions, an arid place with no water” (8:11-15a). 

Such ideas would not be lost on a people that, though they occupied their promised land, stood under the yoke of Rome, and figuratively at least, were in the place of slavery.  Of course, this was the position of both Ezra and Nehemiah, who gave voice to a mindset that prevailed among the people through the hundreds of years following the return from Babylonian captivity and on into Jesus’ day,

(contrary to the Pharisaic claim of John 8:33 that “we are descendants of Abraham… and have never been anyone’s slaves”) as they insisted that even though the people of God had re-settled in the land, “we are slaves” (Ezra 9:9, Nehemiah 9:36).  According to what comes next in the eighth chapter of Deuteronomy, Jesus’ hearers would have expected the rich man to adhere to the proviso to “Be careful not to say, ‘My own ability and skill have gotten me this wealth’,” and to “remember the Lord your God, for He is the one who gives ability to get wealth” (8:18a).

This rich man, unfortunately, did not have the proper mindset, as “he thought to himself: ‘What should I do, for I have nowhere to store my crops?’” (Luke 12:17)  In answering this self-directed query, the appropriate response would have been to provide the excess to the poor of the land, as was repeatedly suggested to the covenant people in what is presumed to be their charter, but this was not the route that he chose, Jesus goes on to report that “he said, ‘I will do this; I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods.  And I will say to myself, “You have plenty of goods stored up for many years; relax, eat, drink, celebrate!”’” (12:18-19) 

It would seem that this theoretical rich man also has a portion of Deuteronomy in mind, though it may have been twisted and excerpted through his own personal translation.  The crowd that is listening to Jesus could have understood that this rich man with abundant crops that are clearly productive of excess, has selected portions of the fourteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, reading for himself “When He blesses you… you may spend the money however you wish for cattle, sheep, wine, beer, or whatever you desire.  You and your household may eat… and enjoy it” (14:24a,26a,c). 

They would have known that what he should have done was use the excess in such a way that “the resident foreigners, the orphans, and the widows of your villages may come and eat their fill so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work you do” (14:29b).  Unfortunately, he did not choose this path of action, and Jesus insists that “God said to him, ‘You fool!  This very night your life will be demanded from you, but who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’” (Luke 12:20)  Jesus punctuates the parable with “So it is with the one who stores up riches for himself, but is not rich toward God” (12:21). 

In This Is Love (part 12)

The second of the two-fold consideration of Jesus’ experience of forty days in the wilderness also causes Him to be connected, quite rightly, with the nation of Israel as a whole.  Forty is an often referenced and significant number in relation to Israel and to the history of the people pre-Jacob (forty days and nights of rain for the flood in the days of Noah).  In connection with the all-important exodus event itself, Moses is on Mount Sinai for forty days and nights, where he is said to have received Israel’s covenant marker directly from the finger of Israel’s God.  This time of Moses’ absence presents itself as a test of Israel’s faithfulness to their covenant God that had just rescued His chosen people from their slavery in Egypt.  It was a test that they are said to have failed, doing so quite miserably. 

Elijah, the one looked upon as Israel’s greatest prophet, fasts for forty days as part of an experience that will take him to the mountain of God (1 Kings 19:8).  Saul, David, and Solomon are each said to have ruled over a united kingdom of Israel for forty years.  Quite naturally then, within the context of His presentation as the Son of God, it is altogether logical to draw an analogy between Jesus’ forty days of wilderness testing and the story of Israel in general.  Forty days in the wilderness for Jesus after baptism in the Jordan---forty years for Israel in the wilderness after what is often referred to as their “baptism” in the waters of the sea. 

Jesus had entered the waters of the Jordan to be baptized at the hands of his cousin, John the Baptist.  For a messiah-like figure, this baptism in the Jordan, at the hands of one who presented himself as the voice of one crying in the wilderness to prepare the way of the Lord (with heavy tones of expectation concerning the coming of Israel’s God), would have been taken to be emblematic of a new exodus movement in anticipation of the Creator God’s working through His messiah on behalf of His oppressed people.  Israel had entered the waters of the divided sea (though they did not get wet) as part of their God’s working on behalf of His oppressed people, with this resulting in the crushing defeat of those that had oppressed them, in the movement that would forever define “exodus,” Israel as the people of exodus, and their God as a God of exodus. 

Of course, there is a major difference between Jesus and Israel, in that Jesus’ wilderness experience was on the heels of having been declared as being pleasing to the Creator God, whereas Israel’s forty year wilderness experience was for the opposite reason.  Though the covenant God had previously shown forth Israel as His elect people (son) by bringing them out of Egypt, much like this God shows forth Jesus as His elect Son (who had also been brought out of Egypt, though that is for a different time), His displeasure was evident. 

Needless to say, Israel had its share of problems during their forty years, but it did serve to strengthen their trust in their delivering, covenant God, as the faithless generation that doubted at the foot of Sinai and at the edge of Canaan is said to have died off in the desert.  Owing to this, the people were prepared to enter into their land of promise, and therefore prepared to enter into the mission that their God had established for them.  Israel would cross through the waters of the Jordan (inviting a direct comparison between Jesus and Israel) into their promised land and to their mission, to carry out the work of their God, to establish a kingdom that would allow them to experience their God’s blessing, to become a light for the surrounding peoples, and thereby elicit praise for and acknowledgment of their God as the true and only God.  Israel was to leave the wilderness and enter their land for the purpose of their God’s glory.  

Joshua's Battle (part 1)

Joshua campaigned against these kings for quite some time. – Joshua 11:18  (NET)

As Israel was taking what it believed to be its promised land and, according to what was believed to be their God’s command upon them, dispossessing the land-corrupting and non-divine-image-bearing nations that were to be found there, it is said that “Joshua conquered the whole land, including the hill country, all the Negev, all the land of Goshen, the lowlands, the Arabah, the hill country of Israel and its lowlands, from Mount Halak on up to Seir, as far as Baal Gaad in the Lebanon Valley below Mount Hermon.  He captured all their kings and executed them” (11:16-18).  It is these kings of whom it is said, “Joshua campaigned against these kings for quite some time” (11:18). 

As one reads about Israel’s conquering and taking of their land of promise, it is necessary to bear in mind what was understood to be the Creator God’s purpose for His covenant people called Israel.  Israel, by and large, was to be the Creator God’s instrument for setting the world to rights.  To that end, it was they who had received the special revelation of their Lord, so that they might become a light to the nations and to all of creation, so that they might be the reflection of their God’s glory into the world---representing their Creator to creation as had been the intention for the father of their race (Adam).  Israel was redeemed (exodused) by their God, from the slavery and exile of Egypt, so that they could be His instruments of redemption and exodus for a world in exile and in bondage to corruption and decay. 

Of course, making the natural and logical extension, this can also be said of Jesus, as He was the embodiment of Israel.  Extending beyond that, such can also be said of all that would become a part of the Creator God’s covenant people, with this occurring through the believing union with Jesus that is the mark of a trusting allegiance (faith) in Him as Lord.  For Israel, because that redemption from slavery and exile from their God’s intentions was for both humankind and the creation itself, the land that they were promised and commanded to occupy can be safely viewed as the first part of the whole creation that was itself to be redeemed.  What becomes clear in the Mosaic and historical narratives, is that Israel was to drive all that was representative of evil from the land and occupy it. 

Returning to Joshua then, it can be found that “No city made peace with the Israelites (except the Hivites living in Gibeon); they had to conquer all of them” (11:19).  Drawing the natural correlation from the responsibility of the Creator God’s covenant people in that day (Israel), with that of the covenant people that are the renewed Israel in Christ (the church,disciples and followers of Jesus), one can here think about that which was penned by the Apostle Paul, in that there would be a constant battle against principalities and powers, against what he refers to as “world rulers of this darkness,” and against spiritual forces (Ephesians 6:12). 

Though the believers is never and will never be called to draw swords so as to extend the kingdom of God by violent force, just as Jesus challenged Israel in His day to forsake the idea that the kingdom of God was to be ushered in by bloody overthrow, believers are well able to understand the use of the imagery of battle in the way in which they are employed by Paul.  Yes, because of the corruption that entered into the world because of the initial failure to keep covenant, human nature---the nature that had been designed to perfectly bear the divine image and to do that which was pleasing to the Creator God as glory-reflecting stewards of His creation---is itself corrupted.  

Veil Of The Temple (part 6)

The veil of the temple, with its cherubim, would have served the purpose of reminding the covenant people of the Creator God’s narrative story of creation, of fall, of cursing, of a way now barred, of covenant, of promises, of slavery, of exodus, of redemption, of a promised land, of their responsibilities to their God, of exile, of a promised messiah that would be the physical embodiment of their God, of His coming to set things right, of the eventual end of their long exile, of their being empowered to fulfill their God’s intentions for them, of their gift of their long-promised inheritance of the land, of their redemption from oppression, of their being granted another exodus, of the fulfillment of all of the blessings promised to them by their God, of the establishment of a new covenant, of the granting of access to His presence, of the reversal of the curse that man had wrought in the earth, of the bringing of man back into right standing with their Creator, and the long-hoped for restoration of creation to the state of perfection in which it had been created.            

This now brings this study to the issue of Jesus’ death.  As has been presented by the authors of the Gospel accounts, that death was said to have been accompanied by the tearing of the temple’s veil, from top to bottom.  That veil, and all that it represented for the covenant people, and which had been in place for so very long, was destroyed.  That veil, with its cherubim that were presumably woven into the curtains in the same manner as the curtains of the tabernacle and Solomon’s temple, which served as an ever-present, physical reminder of the blocking of the pathway to the source and giver of life (calling to mind the Adam story), was taken out of the way.  The veil, which spoke of man’s fall and the Creator God’s curse, and the death that was said to have ruefully entered into this world at man’s hands, was put aside.  Of course, it is also significant that the tearing was from top to bottom, because, yes, it is presumed that it was Israel’s God Himself that did the tearing.

The Creator God would be understood to have done the tearing because of what had been accomplished by the long-awaited and expected Messiah.  Because the community of Jesus believers set forth a clear and direct association between Jesus’ death and the tearing of the veil, and because the veil, as has been seen from the Garden of Eden through the second temple that stood just a short distance from the place that saw the crucifixion of the Messiah, was a reminder of cursing and separation, its tearing would have to have meant, at the very least, that the curse had been broken. 

This is what could have been readily understood by those that witnessed the event, as well as by those that would hear about the event or come to learn about the event through either the telling of the Gospel tale or by the reading of the written record that now stood in the line of Israel’s long-running and defining narrative.  Yes, this tearing would be folded into the story of the activity of the Creator God and the people that He continued to set forth for His purposes.  This was yet another chapter in Israel’s long, narrative history, and in their God’s single plan of redemption for all of mankind.

According to that story, Adam had been placed in the Garden of Eden.  He was said to have been created in the image of the one who formed him.  His story is one of failure and fall and the delivery of a curse upon himself and this world that he was charged with stewarding.  He was expelled from Eden.  The Creator God, following this expulsion, is said to have placed cherubim at the entrance to that Garden, figuratively (and literally?) veiling man’s access to the Creator God’s place, and in some way, to the purpose for which the man had been created. 

Because Adam is presented as the father of all of mankind, much like would be the case for Abraham and his descendants, or of those that were brought forth from Egypt and their descendants, all that would follow from him would share in the curse that descended upon him because of failure to keep his covenant charge.  Thus, because Adam had been given dominion over all of creation, the curse extended to the whole of creation as well (the story of Abraham and Israel and their covenant-making speaks of blessings flowing forth to the world, reversing the curse of Adam).  From that point in Genesis, up to and through the eleventh chapter, what can be seen is a world in decay, with murder and corruption and a flood of judgment that would ultimately serve to produce the even greater rebellion of the tower of Babel and its defiance of the Creator God, rather than repentance. 

Measure Given, Measure Received (part 3)

Having laid a bit of contextual foundation, it is now possible to commence an attempt at figuring out what exactly is being said by Jesus when He says, “Give, and it will be given to you: A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be poured into your lap.  For the measure you use will me the measure you receive” (Luke 6:38).  With everything that has been said to this point (in parts 1 and 2), clearly, one cannot simply look at this verse and conclude that Jesus is talking about giving and getting in terms of finances and material items.  Additionally, it’s going to take some work to formalize that conclusion.    

To get the point of Jesus’ words, one has to revisit the twenty-seventh verse in this chapter.  As that is done, it is then possible to systematically build on the foundation that has been laid.  There, Jesus says, “But I say to you who are listening: Love your enemies” (6:27a).  Who are their enemies?  The Jews in the audience (from Judea and Jerusalem) would have heard Jesus speaking about their enemies, which were, by and large and popularly, the Romans.  They are being told to love these enemies, when they most likely wanted to have nothing to do with them, and would rather have elected to eject the Romans from their land and from their lives. 

Now remember, the person that is saying these things is the man that might very well be the Messiah and the Son of God (both terms for Israel’s promised king – Son of God being a kingly term that was then regularly applied to the Caesar, with no direct connection to thoughts about the “second person of the Trinity”).  The messiah, in popular imagination, though this is not the exclusive messianic proposition, is supposed to lead the revolution that defeats their enemies; but instead, here the potential messiah is insisting that the enemies be loved.  For a member of Israel, this would be understandably strange and unexpected.  Additionally, those in Jesus’ audience that hail from Tyre and Sidon (presumably Gentiles), may find the Romans to be an irritant, but ultimately, they would not harbor the same feelings of animosity towards Rome as would the Jews, for reasons that shall be seen later.    

However, so as to actively engage the whole of His audience, Jesus can be heard adding, “do good to those who hate you” (6:27b), perhaps as something of a sympathetic nod to the Gentiles.  The Gentiles would not be looked upon by the Jews with the same type of negativity with which they viewed and in which the Jews held the Romans.  They would, unfortunately, be held in extreme disfavor (hated) by the Jews.  Of course, the Romans were Gentiles as well, so there would clearly be an over-lapping and potential magnification of opinions.  Though having said this, it would probably be inappropriate to limit the feelings of hatred to the Jews only.  The Romans, having had to deal with stubborn and rebellious and zealous Jews for such a long period of time, might very well have come to hate them as much as they were hated by them.  Regardless of the specific direction of the statement, each person that heard these words would be able to search their own heart.  Hatred, at the very least, was a two-way street. 

The point here is, it is necessary to continually connect the words of Jesus with the very real, historical situation in which they were spoken and by which they were vested with meaning.  That is the only way, with some type of solid foundation, for the words to have any meaning for believers today.  These were not imagined or potential enemies.  No, they were real enemies.  Jesus was not talking about some nebulous sense of feelings of hatred.  He was talking about very real hatred.  Jesus told His fellow countrymen that they should love enemies that oppress them and tax them into slavery, doing this with an eye to what He was going to be saying in short order.  He told all of His hearers (Jew & Gentile) to do good to those that would probably be content with seeing them dead, simply so that they would not have to look at or deal with them.  It is through understanding this that one is then able to devise an ethic under which it is possible to operate and know that one is acting according to the will of the Creator God, in submission to the dictates of their Lord and King.

Broken The Permanent Treaty (part 2 of 2)

Yet again, Isaiah speaks of the fact that man fades away into death, doing so through employing the imagery of the disappearance of the inhabitants of the earth.  As has been said, the impact of man’s sin (failure to rightly bear the divine image by violating the covenant requirements established by the Creator God) extends beyond himself, reaching the created order, which is why Isaiah insists that “The new wine dries up, the vines shrivel up,” and with terminology that would remind his readers or hearers of the exodus (set in motion by the groaning of Israel in its slavery), and can put readers of the post-Christ era in mind of Romans chapter eight and liberation of the creation, saying “all those who like to celebrate groan” (24:7).          

Bringing an awareness of the Adam and exodus story forward to the time in which he was writing, Isaiah could easily have looked around him, considered what it was that Israel was charged with doing and being under their God’s covenant, and determined that Israel had done the same thing as Adam.  In a sense, Israel was also recapitulating what Egypt had done to them.  Whereas Israel, now representing mankind, was supposed to be the means by which the Creator God revealed Himself, the way in which that God had chosen to deal with the problem of evil in the world, and accordingly functioned as a shining light of the Creator God’s glory to draw all men to Himself and bring them into a right standing with Him under His covenant, they were instead actively engaging in the further defiling of the earth that has begun under the influence of their purported progenitor (Adam). 

Contrary to what was occurring under the watch of His covenant people, the Creator God’s plan, beginning with Abraham, was to reverse the devastation of the curse through those covenant people, but instead they contributed to its ongoing devastation.  Israel, of course, had been given specific laws and ways of living as the covenant people so that they might rightly bear the divine image by their God, yet the recorded history of this people insists that they violated those laws almost unceasingly.  From time to time, their history suggests that Israel would recognize the violations and come to repentance, but for the most part, there was an utter disregard for the regulations that had been delivered to them, especially in the area of caring for orphans and widows. 

Yes, just like Adam, sadly, the Creator God’s people had broken their everlasting covenant, failing to uphold their covenant requirements to represent the Creator to the whole of the creation.  As a result, devastating judgment of cursing and exile would come upon them, with this cursing provided context by the promises of both Deuteronomy twenty-eight and Leviticus twenty-six.  This would occur as an outworking of their God’s faithful justice.  He had brought them into a treaty---an everlasting covenant with Him---and the execution of coming destruction, in according with the aforementioned promises, was the ongoing demonstration of their God’s righteousness (covenant faithfulness) towards His people and towards His creation. 

Ultimately, it would take a Redeemer ---a messiah, for the Creator God Himself, as it would be understood to act in the flesh, returning to His people to repair the treaty and to set His people and this world to rights, doing so through a people who organized their lives according to a new covenant, a renewed Israel, that live in a believing covenantal union with Jesus.          

Remembering Egypt (part 2 of 2)

In his desire to make it so that the people of Israel “remember the day” that they “came out of the land of Egypt” all the days of their lives, Moses continues to present the mighty hand and outstretched arm of Israel’s faithful God, recounting “His signs and His deeds that He did in Egypt…and what He did to the army of Egypt” (Deuteronomy 11:3-4).  Though the people continued to cast their eyes and hopes backwards in a longing for what they thought of as simpler days, Moses bids them look forward, saying that “the land that you are entering to take possession of it is not like the land of Egypt” (11:10).  Because it is the land that is the covenant gift of their God, it is better.  So that they would not be taken by faulty memories of supposed freedom from the want of the wilderness, Moses speaks again of the Lord “Who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery” (13:5).  Belaboring the point, Moses repeatedly refers to “the land of Egypt” as “the house of slavery” (13:10), regardless of the people’s present struggles as they made their way to their promised land.  He goes on to quite bluntly inform the people to “remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God redeemed you” (15:15). 

When they came to the season of Passover, its purpose was to remind the people that “the Lord your God brought you out of Egypt by night” (16:1).  They were to remember that they “came out of the land of Egypt in haste” (16:3), wasting no time at all in coming out, because of the great oppression “of the land of Egypt” (16:3).  Moses was very clear in telling the people that God was giving them this celebration of remembrance to mark “the time you came out of Egypt” (16:6), with each person reminding himself, “that you were a slave in Egypt” (16:12).  God wanted His people to have a clean break from Egypt, relying on it for nothing, not even allowing one of their future kings to consider a “return to Egypt to acquire many horses” (17:16).  God is clear in informing His people that He can provide them all things of need and value.  Even in the midst of the fear of those who would come against them with horses and chariots, they were not to turn back, but find value in calling to mind that “the Lord your God is with you, Who brought you up out of the land of Egypt” (20:1).  It was made to be understood that there was power in remembering the deliverance provided by the Lord. 

Even their dealings with foreign nations were to be defined by such remembrance.  Ammonites and Moabites were not allowed to “enter the assembly of the Lord” (23:3).  Why was this?  “Because they did not meet you with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt” (23:4).  Israel’s treatment of foreigners, the fatherless, and widows was determined according to God’s deliverance, regulated by the remembrance “that you were a slave in the land of Egypt” (24:22).  Later in Israel’s history, God would direct His kings to show no mercy to the Amalekites, because of what they “did to you on the way as you came out of Egypt” (25:17). 

When the people told their story, they were to include the fact that their forefathers “went down into Egypt and sojourned there” (26:5), even though the slavery experienced there would be a source of shame and derision.  This part of the story must be told, for then the rest of the story, that of their faithful, covenant God could be told, and the people could exclaim that “the Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and outstretched arm, with great deeds of terror, with signs and wonders” (26:8).  This story of their covenant God would necessarily include a recounting of the potential for blessings or curses which He presented to them.  The dreaded curses spoke of “the boils of Egypt” (28:27), and “the diseases of Egypt” (28:60), recounting the plagues that befell those that would attempt to stand against this mighty God.  The greatest of all of the curses associated with Israel’s failure to be faithful to the demands of the covenant, would be for “the Lord” to “bring you back in ships to Egypt” to “offer yourselves for sale to your enemies as male and female slaves” (28:68). 

As he is reported to have worked towards the conclusion of his message to the people, once again, Moses is heard to declare that “You have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt” (29:2).  Lest the people begin to be deceived by the recollections of the life lived in Egypt, Moses says “You know how we lived in the land of Egypt” (29:16).  If the people began to engage in the practices in which, no doubt, many were engaging in while living in their land of slavery, the Lord would bring calamity upon His people, and “Then people would say, ‘It is because they abandoned the covenant of the Lord, the God of their fathers, which He made with them when He brought them out of the land of Egypt, and went and served other gods and worshiped them’.” (29:25)  God’s people would know, by this daily remembrance, that when misfortune befell them, such perdition was of themselves.            

The Creator God, through Moses, seems to have repeated Himself a great deal here.  With that, we who assent to the confession of the covenant (Jesus is Lord) can take a moment to agree and say “Yes, we would do very well indeed to keep the memories of where it was from which our God redeemed His covenant people, and that from which He delivered, close at hand and near to our hearts.”  We do well to remember being dragged out of the house of slavery (which is no doubt on the mind of somebody like the Apostle Paul, in his references to slavery), but along with that, to remember the place that God had originally intended for His creation, and the place from which the divine image bearers fell.  In this, we can have a vision of the place to which our God is bringing us in restoration and renewal and salvation.  Indeed, as it was of great value for God’s covenant people in that day, so it is of great value for God’s covenant people in this day, to not only remember that He brings into covenant for a purpose, but also to hearken to the words spoken by the man who spoke to God face to face, to cast our eyes rearward, so “that all the days of your life you may remember the day when you came out of the land of Egypt.” 

Remembering Egypt (part 1 of 2)

…that all the days of your life you may remember the day when you came out of the land of Egypt. – Deuteronomy 16:3b  (ESV)

In the book called Deuteronomy, the fifth and final book of what are commonly referred to as the “books of Moses,” we find the above statement made in connection with the celebration of the Passover.  Now, it is often said that we should forget the past and put things behind us, and we are routinely told not to dredge up old memories, because doing so is not useful or helpful.  Yet here, Moses tells the people of Israel, God’s covenant people---those that are called a chosen and treasured possession to whom God has gone out to reveal Himself and to make a people for His praise and His glory, to actively call to mind their day of deliverance from the place of their captivity and servitude.  The instruction to them is to do this “all the days of your life,”  and this charge is given this quite seriously.  Moses is presented as being so insistent about this directive, that throughout the book of Deuteronomy, which is set forth as Moses’ final address to the people of Israel, we find Moses consistently reminding the people of their time in Egypt.  In fact, Egypt is mentioned nearly forty times through the course of Deuteronomy. 

The people had said, “Because the Lord hated us He has brought us out of the land of Egypt…to destroy us” (1:27).  Moses told them “The Lord your God will fight for you, just as He did for you in Egypt” (1:30).  He reminds them that “the Lord has taken you…out of Egypt, to be a people of His own inheritance” (4:20), and references the “trials…signs…wonders…war…mighty hand…outstretched arm…deeds of terror…which the Lord your God did for you in Egypt” (4:34), to bring them “out of Egypt with His own presence, by His great power” (4:37).  Moses reminds them again of the very words of the Lord, which had been “I am the Lord your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (5:6), before recounting for them the “Ten Commandments.”  To these, he then adds, “take care lest you forget the Lord, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (6:12).  In association with these commandments, the people were instructed to tell their children, “We were…slaves in Egypt.  And the Lord brought us out of Egypt...And the Lord showed signs and wonders…against Egypt” (6:21-22).

Moses speaks of God’s faithfulness to His people, telling them that “it is because the Lord loves you and is keeping the oath that He swore to your fathers, that the Lord has…redeemed you from the house of slavery…of Egypt” (7:8), adding a reminder of “the evil diseases of Egypt” (the plagues) that did not come upon Israel.  The people are charged to remember “what the Lord…did to Pharaoh and to all Egypt” (7:18).  As we move forward, we find Moses warning the people against unfounded pride in their prosperity, prophesying that their hearts will “be lifted up,” and that they would “forget the Lord your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (8:14).  He tells them to “Remember and do not forget how your provoke the Lord your God to wrath…From the day you came out of the land of Egypt” (9:7), as a reminder of His longsuffering nature. 

With that, Moses has them call to mind their rebellion, and informs them that even when the Lord speaks, He reminds the people what has been done for them, speaking to Moses of the “people whom you have brought from Egypt” that “have acted corruptly” (9:12).  With that said, when Moses speaks to God, he even takes it upon himself to make mention of Egypt in connection with His people, turning that around and calling them the people “whom You have brought out of Egypt with a mighty hand” (9:26).  These very people, whom God brought out, were the evidence of God’s covenant faithfulness, as they “went down to Egypt seventy persons,” and “the Lord” made them “as numerous as the stars of heaven” (10:22).  Even when they thought of their vast multitudes, they were made to remember Egypt.       

Conduct In Step With The Gospel (part 2 of 3)

Having laid the foundation through our examination of the second chapter of Galatians, and specifically, the meal separation that was being fostered by the circumcision party, we can now move on to the fifth chapter of Galatians, which begins with “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (5:1).  To what is Paul referring when he speaks of slavery?  We do not have to wait long to find out, as we read “Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you” (5:2).  The thing that brought slavery was fairly clear.    

                          

Before we consider this issue of slavery, does this not bring us quickly back to the second chapter, and Peter’s separation of himself from the Gentiles for fear of the circumcision party?  Are we not made to contemplate the rebuilding, based on the ongoing idea of a need for circumcision and other delineations of national Israel, of what it was that Christ tore down, as also mentioned in the second chapter?  The things that God had commanded Israel to do as their end of being faithful to the covenant, which would have made them a light to the nations, had not been kept.  Not keeping to those things had brought God’s judgment.  That judgment, among other things, had taken the form of subjection to foreign powers, which could easily be thought of as a yoke of slavery. 

Pointing back to his discourse of the second chapter, Paul once again says “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace” (5:4).  Holding to the standards of the old covenant, rather than the new covenant of the Gospel, results in nothing more than being severed from Christ.  Under the old covenant, though there were times in which Israel had been blessed, cursing was what Israel had achieved.  Insisting on old covenant requirements, such as circumcision and separation and the making of distinctions based on national boundaries, would only keep one under the curse of exile, slavery, and judgment, rather than in the grace of God, awaiting “the hope of righteousness” (5:5b), which was an expectation of God’s faithful fulfillment of His covenant of renewal and ultimate restoration of His people and His creation. 

Paul goes on, writing “For you were called to freedom, brothers.  Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh” (5:13a).  Here, just like in the first verse, we find that use of the word “freedom,” making it an important facet to truly understanding Paul as we move forward.  In light of all that we have seen, what should we suppose that Paul means when he talks about opportunities for the flesh?  Well, it seems rather clear, based on the theme of the letter up to this point, that the opportunities for the flesh, which for Paul is also a sign of the old age prior to the Christ-event that changed everything, were somehow connected to the circumcision party, and the re-institution of the previously torn down marks of Israel, as seen in the desire to keep separate table fellowship, rather than acknowledge equality with Gentiles under the principle of the new covenant and the universal Lordship of Christ.  Rather, Paul insists that they should “through love serve one another” (5:13).  This was freedom.  The presentation of freedom should have effectively reminded them of the slavery that resulted from doing what it was that they were intending to do.    

As he observed the continuance of separation, Paul would say, “This persuasion is not from Him Who calls you” (5:8).  Jew & Gentile were to serve one another through love.  Taking opportunities for the flesh, insisting on an analysis and verification of circumcision, in the context of the standards of the now old covenant, was the opposite of the love that was dictated by the Spirit of Christ.  To this line of thinking, Paul adds, “walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.  For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for they are opposed to each other” (5:16-17a). 

Clearly, what Christ demanded, and which He expected to be carried out by the Spirit that would be gifted to His chosen, covenant people, was not to be found in maintaining standards and boundaries that would be conductive of separation and isolation.  Israel had done this before, and in so doing, had not been the light of the world and the reflectors of the glory of God for all peoples.  Doing anything along such lines would, once again, defeat God’s purposes for the calling out of a distinct, covenant people to be a blessing to all nations.  The movement of the Spirit would be a movement of unity and the elimination of that which divided, whereas the desires of the flesh, in this case, would actually serve “to keep you from doing the things you want to do” (5:17b)

Remaking Creation (part 2)

It is with thoughts of this defining story of a captive, groaning Israel now placed squarely in the midst of Paul’s words here that we now read “Not only this, but we ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we eagerly await our adoption, the redemption of our bodies” (8:23).  God redeemed Israel from their slavery and delivered them into a land of promise, flowing with milk and honey, and so too is He going to do the same for His renewed Israel who call Jesus “King.”  We know this to be true because the Spirit has convinced us of the truth of the firstfruits of that redemption, that being Jesus, raised physically and bodily into a world that was now forever changed, His physical body now a spiritual body because it is animated by the power of heaven.  God redeemed Jesus’ body from its bondage to death, delivering it, renewed, remade, and re-created from the grave, and that same Spirit is now at work, renewing, remaking, and re-creating anywhere and everywhere a person engages in an activity that declares a belief in the Gospel of Jesus and the kingdom that said belief and Gospel entails.  Israel’s small portion of good land was merely a signpost of the good land that would be the restored creation.  

Like Israel out of Egypt, “in hope we were saved” (8:24a).  It is hope because we can only catch glimpses of it, in the midst of the ongoing bondage that is to be observed all around us.  Yes, this family of God is very much like Israel in Egypt, who groaned in hopeful expectation; and to this end, Paul writes “Now hope that is seen is not hope, because who hopes for what he sees?  But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with endurance” (8:24b-25).  Israel hoped and God acted.  We hope and God acts.  We will continue to hope and we will continue to see God acting, through us, as those actions, which may entail suffering and shame, continually point us towards the consummation of all things and the glorious advent of the kingdom of God on earth.

As we move on to verse twenty-six of chapter eight, we see that Paul continues the theme that is at work, which is the enfolding of all peoples within the defining narrative of the covenant people of God.  He writes “In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness, for we do not know how we should pray, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with inexpressible groaning” (8:26).  The context for this statement is still Israel’s groaning under Egyptian bondage.  The context for this is still the crying out of verse fifteen, the bondage of decay of verse twenty-one, the groaning of creation expressed in verse twenty-two, and the inward groaning of verse twenty-three.  As we saw in verse twenty-five, and in the hoping for what cannot be seen, Israel hoped for what it could not see when in Egypt.  According to the story, known by Paul and by which Israel defined itself, Israel had the hope of a promise that had been made to Abraham.  In the fifteenth chapter of Genesis we read “Then the Lord said to Abram, ‘Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a foreign country.  They will be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years.  But I will execute judgment on the nation that they will serve.  Afterward they will come out with many possessions” (15:14). 

With the point being made repeatedly in Paul’s communications that the Gentile peoples have been enfolded into the story of Israel, in a need to embrace that narrative as their own that they may understand the ministry of Jesus and the actions, intentions, and desires of the Creator God as they go about the business of participating in the kingdom of God that had been announced, enacted, and advanced in the life, death, and Resurrection of Jesus; and with that enfolding necessarily reaching beyond Israel as a unique people and stretching back to Abraham as Gentiles join the worldwide covenant family that was promised to Abraham (of which the nation of Israel was a foretaste, much like Israel’s promised land, hearkening back to the unsullied world and the garden of Eden, was to be a glimpse of the restored creation to come), it is necessary to include this particular portion of the Abraham story, as it is gives shape to the groaning of Israel in Egypt.  Though the labor of their bondage may have seemed futile, there was a hope, based on a promise, and they were able to entrust that God was at work.