God in a Box

This is the old reliable nonsense retort hurled towards the reformed, or any confessional church for that matter.  You can’t put God in a box.  What they really mean is that there has to be room for me in that box.  That is what is behind all of these protestations.  If God is in a box, there  must be room for me and my input.  What do I mean?  Let’s see.

Arius thought that Jesus wasn’t wholly God.  This was just inconceivable.  He just couldn’t wrap his mind around the idea.  If he couldn’t conceive of the thing, then the thing couldn’t be true.  His views needed room in the box.

Pelagius thought that all that Original Sin stuff was rubbish.  Adam was a bad example and Jesus was a good example.  We get to choose which example we follow.  We had to have the power over our own salvation.  Our free will needed room in the box.

Arminius thought that our salvation was based upon grace, if we would just accept the offer of grace.  God will take 99 steps if we will just take one.  He needed room in the box for his one step.

Gnostics and mystics believe in all sorts of things.  God does this and god does that and no limits are possible.  All we have to do is ask god, and like the cosmic butler or a genie in a bottle, he will do those things because he knows us deep inside.  He might send a spirit that they will call “holy” to do some of these things for them.  They need room in the box for all of their supplications and all of their extra things they expect a god to do.

I have a box.  God fits into it nicely, because He says He fits into it.  He hasn’t told me about any parts that don’t fit.  So, I just concern myself with the parts that do fit.  Those are the only parts that I know about.  Those are the only parts He has told me about.  Someday, after I die, perhaps I’ll learn about a larger box, perhaps about more parts, if that is a part of my inheritance.

Oh, by the way, here is a picture of my box:

Everything we know about God is found here.  Everything that He has revealed about Himself is found here.  If it isn’t found here, well, it isn’t God, is it?

--Ogre--

Nehemiah from 20,000 feet

Today, we witnessed an interesting exchange between points of view that some may be surprised to hear are very similar, particularly on second glance.  My purpose in this post is to flesh out the discussion in some detail with specific interest given to the issue of covenant.

A covenant, in Biblical terms, is sort of a legal contract between two parties.  The ancient near-Eastern Suzerainty treaties are of a similar type.  There would be animals cut into pieces displayed on the ground with a path between them.  The parties of the treaty would pass between the pieces.  The higher king would pass first, and the lower vassal king would pass second, and blood from the animals would be splattered upon the vassal king.  The implication was that the fate of the animals would be the vassal king's fate if he broke the treaty.  The burden of obedience was upon the vassal king.

In addition, there was a feast given by the vassal king for the higher king to celebrate the treaty.  At the feast, there would be a telling of the story of the higher king.  This would eventually get to the story of his involvement with the vassal king.  Finally, the conditions of the covenant would be spelled out for all to hear.  This was a public event.

In Genesis, there are a number of covenants, but dealing with just two is sufficient for our purposes.  The creation covenant is an understood covenant between creator and creature (Adam.) This covenant is not specifically spelled out, but the events of Genesis 3 clearly demonstrate the violation of this covenant and the curses received for this violation.  Many things can be said about this covenant.  It was a covenant of law.  It had the form of do this and you will live, do it not and you will die.  Adam chose badly.  As our federal representative, not only was his sin imputed to all of us, but it is as if we were there with him.  We not only would not have advised him differently, but we would have made the same choice.  This resulted in sin and death entering the world.

God had some options at this point.  He could have wiped out creation and started over.  He is just and Holy and this action would have been completely just.  Instead, He had a grand redemptive plan.  It is important as a Christian to understand the scope of the plan, and the fact that God was working towards this plan from the very beginning.  Each covenant has a purpose within this grand redemptive plan, but the ultimate goal is the salvation of a remnant of people for Himself for eternity.  All of the pieces fit together.

The Covenant with Abraham is the key moment of Genesis after the fall.  It is arguably the key moment of the Old Testament.  The story of Abraham is set out from Genesis 12-18.  Genesis 15 has the description of the Covenant ceremony.  The important issue is that God passes through the pieces and symbolically the blood is splattered on God.  Behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces.  God takes all of the responsibility on Himself.  This is absolutely huge, and this is the point that my friend this morning was making.  God never breaks a covenant.  It was Adam who broke the creation covenant and Israel who broke the Mosaic Covenant.  The Abrahamic Covenant is still intact. 

But the Abrahamic Covenant, by its very nature, is a wholly different type of covenant.  This covenant is of Grace, not of Law.  There is no curse placed upon or threatened upon Abraham or his seed.  The language of the covenant opens some interesting possibilities that we will discuss at a later time.  The important issue is that there is a distinction between Law and Grace, or as Luther says, Law and Gospel.  These are different types of Covenants.  The burdens are on different parties.  The expected end point of each type of covenant is different.  A covenant of Law after the fall is expected to be broken by man.  A covenant of Grace cannot be broken, because God does not ever break covenants.

Moses made a Covenant with God that was completely about Law.  The Ten Commandments are the articulation of the moral law that is spelled out upon the hearts of all men.  This law is common revelation to all creation.  Moses received an amped up version in writing.  The issue of rabbinical or Levitical law has been discussed in a prior post.  It is tied up in the Mosaic Covenant, and thus it ends when this covenant ends.  The Moral Law is actually bound up in general revelation.  It is specifically held as remaining valid by Jesus in Matthew 5.  But Moses received Law.  Do this and you will live, live well, in this land.  Do this not and you will die, be scattered, be exiled from the land.

In each of the subsequent covenants, as Israel repeatedly falls short of the expectation of God, Israel attempts to atone for their sins and keep the Covenant going.  The purpose of the temple was to teach us about sin and atonement.  It was to teach us about the work that Jesus would do on the cross, only to much larger degree.  The Jewish sacrificial system is a type and shadow that points to Calvary.  This is a bloody religion.  Lots of animals get butchered.  This blood is important as a type and shadow that points to the blood of Christ.  The blood of the New Covenant in Christ will follow the types and shadows of the Old Testament covenants.

Nehemiah comes along in a different era of redemptive history.  The time of Christ is known as Second Temple Judaism.  This is because the Babylonians destroyed the first temple and now Ezra is building the second at our point in the story.  Nehemiah appeals to the Covenant of Moses.  This is done for a number of reasons.  The Mosaic Covenant is the article whereby Jerusalem and the Temple were built.  Its violation by Israel was the cause of the sacking of the city and the Temple.  The hope to rebuild the city and the Temple is a hope to renew the Mosaic Covenant.  Repentance is necessarily part and parcel of this effort, and it is an admission of Israel's culpability in the breaking of the Mosaic Covenant.

Having said all of that, the model here in Ezra and Nehemiah resembles that of the lesser covenants in the Bible, those renewal ceremonies where Israel sort of hopes they still have a deal and goes through the motions.  Why would God allow this to continue?  Perhaps there is value in this type and shadow preserving the language of Covenant for the coming of Jesus.  But God does not speak to Nehemiah in the manner than He does with Abraham, Moses and David.  There is no guarantee that God is a participant in the ritual Ezra recites.  And even if God did participate, this is still a covenant of Law.

The purpose of all of these Law Covenants is to teach Israel the futility of fulfilling these Law covenants after the fall.  Israel is being taught to look away from themselves, back to God.  They are being taught that they are in a hopeless situation without God.  They are being taught that fallen man is condemned.

The Abrahamic Covenant is specifically linked to the New Covenant in Jesus by Paul in Romans 4.  These are covenants of Grace.  These are not about man, they are about what God does for man.  The reason that the reformation makes good sense is because of the types and shadows of these Covenants all point towards Christ.

Notice how the prophets speak of the second Temple.  I'm waiting.  I've written about Daniel 9 (part one is just below part 2) in the past, and I'll refer that to you here.  Daniel speaks of the seventy year exile, and then he speaks of the messiah.  When he speaks of the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Holy Place, there is no talk of covenant with Israel.  He never talks about a new Covenant of Law between God and Israel.  The New Covenant of which Daniel speaks is between the messiah and many, and it comes afterwards.  Daniel gets a glimpse at the Book of Life, and he knows that something much bigger is coming.  The whole Old Testament is designed to give us the types and shadows that teach us how to recognize Jesus as the Christ.

Nehemiah is a story of a man perched at the last moment of premessionic history, at a moment in redemptive history when Israel believes that they have been given a second chance.  Instead, God is moving the story of redemptive history in a wholy different direction.  Israel, for the most part, missed it then, and they miss it now.  The Covenant that matters is with Abraham.  Abraham points to the promise that is redemption through the work of Jesus on the cross.

--Troll--

Antiphon to a Homily

No, Sir, I don’t agree. These passages are two of the quintessential statements of the Gospel. As Dad said, we had two Gospels read this morning.

For those who might read this, here is the background. The readings this morning, given above, are from 1 Corinthians 15 and John 20. Most of us recognize them and many even know their sources. The homily that accompanied these absolute gems of scripture focused on John 20:30. We were told that we have to read between the lines and apply the things not written in this book to mean our experiences in our lives in this time. Really? With these two scriptures, this is what we get?

In that last paragraph of John 20, John is making a point about why he wrote his Gospel and why he included the stories that he selected. We should remember that John was the last of the Gospels to be recorded, and that John is different from the Synoptics in a number of ways. John spends as much time discussing theology as he does telling the historical narrative of Jesus. John does not use nearly the number of events in the life of Jesus as, for instance, Luke. His purpose was somewhat different. Rather than trying to read something into that paragraph that simply isn’t there, let’s try reading what John actually said.

30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

John tells us that Jesus did more miracles than he reports in his Gospel. No problem there, we know about others of them from other Scripture sources. John also tells us that his purpose for writing was to affirm to the reader that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. That seems like a first order important item. John also tells us that we may have life in the name of Jesus if we believe that He is the Son of God. That is about as clear and concise a statement of the faith as exists in scripture. But let’s not just let John tell us these things, what does Paul say?

Verses 3-11 are absolutely incredible! Paul delivered to us what he first received. Can you deliver an experience? Can you receive an experience from someone else? Perhaps you can receive and deliver something else…like the news, Good News, the Gospel. What does Paul say that this Good News might be? To begin, it is of first importance, not just some trivia he picked up eaves dropping on the road to Ephesus. This is the meat, the main point, the punch line.

Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, He was buried, He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and He appeared to quite a few people, some of whom were still alive and could be questioned on the matter.

Fantastic! Paul is telling us that he gave us these Doctrines, delivered to us not only as historical fact, but in fulfillment of prophesy. The Scripture of Paul’s time was the Old Testament. 1 Corinthians is thought to be the oldest of the New Testament documents; therefore, scripture has to mean the Old Testament. So, logically, in accordance with the scriptures has to mean in fulfillment of prophesy. But more than that, it is also historical fact, and here is the list of witnesses. Our doctrine derives directly from historical events that happened regardless of how we might feel about them, or what these facts mean to us 2000 years later. And these same events fulfilled prophesy signifying the messiah. Paul appeals to the resurrection as a historical event. He links this event to the doctrine of salvation. And there were a lot of witnesses, lots of them. Back in the first two verses, Paul calls this the Gospel by which you have been saved.

Both John and Paul believed that these historical events actually happened. Both John and Paul believed that Jesus was exactly Who He said that He was. Both John and Paul believed that Salvation was linked to and dependent upon the Resurrection of Jesus. Both John and Paul believed that belief in these facts were the fruits of the Spirit that signify true faith and therefore are sufficient for salvation.

My opinion is not found either in the lines or between the lines of these two passages. My experience is not found either in the lines or between the lines of these two passages. In fact, expand to the whole Bible, and you will fail to find one line anywhere about me or my experience. The Gospel is news. The News is external to you and your experience. You have to Hear about it. How you react to it does not have an effect on the News. The News is still the same. The same facts remain unchanged. The same historical events occurred 2000 years ago.

No, Sir, I do not agree.

--Ogre--

BioLogos on Calvinism, Part 14

Evolution and our Theological Traditions: Calvinism, Part 14 The BioLogos Forum


Surprisingly enough, this one has the feel of actually being the last one. Rather than jump all over his conclusions, I'm going to work through from beginning to end on my own, then decide how to present this to you. This is a huge topic by now, and his historical account, while flawed in some areas due to the bias of his conclusions, is still compelling. I hope to have a preliminary work on this in a couple of weeks.


--Ogre--

BioLogos on Calvinism, Part 13

Evolution and our Theological Traditions: Calvinism, Part 13 The BioLogos Forum


I know this has been a long time coming, but he is promising a summary in the 14th post. Since this has become so long, I'll probably not review the whole thing until June, with some sort of reference system used to deal with the lengthy series. There is, at least the possibility, the promise of an endpoint.


--Ogre--

How to Listen to Joel Osteen--or Not

How to Listen to Joel Osteen Unto the Glory of God

If this were not so true and so horrible in the lives of so many people, both in Houston and elsewhere, this post would be almost comical. The first point alone had me in stitches. Alas, this man is counted among the wolves leading good people to Hell with his talk of prosperity and worldly gains. While Joel Osteen is the poster boy, there are so many others who qualify on these points.


--Ogre--

Heidelberg Catechism: The Second Part--Of God the Father

This particular group is low on prose and high on referenced passages.  The catechism basically is letting the Bible say all we need about God the Father, and there is a lot of it.  As usual, the references are grouped together for easy clicking, even if the citations are far longer than prior sections.

Of God The Father

9. Lord's Day

Question 26. What do you believe when you say, "I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth"?

Answer: That the eternal Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (who of nothing made heaven and earth, with all that is in them; (Genesis 1, 2; Exodus 20:11, Job 33:4; Job 38, 39; Psalms.33:6; Acts 2:24, 14:15; Isaiah 45:7) who likewise upholds and governs the same by his eternal counsel and providence) (Matthew 10:29, Hebrews 1:3, Psalms 104:27-30, 115:3; Matthew 10:29, Ephesians 1:11) is for the sake of Christ his Son, my God and my Father; (John 1:12, Romans 8:15, Galatians 4:5-7, Ephesians 1:5) on whom I rely so entirely, that I have no doubt, but he will provide me with all things necessary for soul and body (Psalms 55:23, Matthew 6:25-26, Luke 12:22) and further, that he will make whatever evils he sends upon me, in this valley of tears turn out to my advantage; (Romans 8:28) for he is able to do it, being Almighty God, (Romans 10:12, Luke 12:22, Romans 8:23, Isaiah 46:4, Romans 10:12) and willing, being a faithful Father. (Matthew 6:25-34, 7:9-11)

Isaiah 45:7 is quite interesting and worth a discussion.  The ESV records this verse as I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things.  Interestingly enough, the Heidelberg references this translation of that passage:  I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.  When I discuss Hell this week, I’ll be sure to include this passage, as it is one of those that just sticks in the craw. 

Also, if there are duplications of passages, particularly at each end of a section of citations, this was by design in the catechism.  I did not add these of my own accord.

10. Lord's Day

Question 27. What do you mean by the providence of God?

Answer: The almighty and everywhere present power of God; (Acts 17:25-28, Jeremiah 23:23-24, Isaiah 29:15-16, Ezekiel 8:12) whereby, as it were by his hand, he upholds and governs (Hebrews 1:3) heaven, earth, and all creatures; so that herbs and grass, rain and drought, (Jeremiah 5:24, Acts 14:17) fruitful and barren years, meat and drink, health and sickness, (John 9:3) riches and poverty, (Proverbs 22:2) yea, and all things come, not by chance, but be his fatherly hand. (Matthew 10:20, Proverbs 16:33)

Question 28. What advantage is it to us to know that God has created, and by his providence does still uphold all things?

Answer: That we may be patient in adversity; (Romans 5:3, James 1:3, Psalms 39:9, Job 1:21-22) thankful in prosperity; (Deuteronomy 8:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:18) and that in all things, which may hereafter befall us, we place our firm trust in our faithful God and Father, (Psalms 55:22, Romans 5:4) that nothing shall separate us from his love; (Romans 8:38-39) since all creatures are so in his hand, that without his will they cannot so much as move. (Job 1:12, 2:6, Acts 17:28, 25, Proverbs 21:1)

The next section is on Jesus, the Son.  As you may expect, it is by far the longest section; therefore, it will be broken into a few pieces for better consumption.

--Troll--

Heidelberg Catechism: The Second Part--Deliverance, sub B

True Faith

To say that this section is huge would be to understate its absolute hugeness.  OK, I’ve been spending time with my teenage daughter, but the point is well given.  This section is about the definition of true faith.  Faith is a very specific and clearly defined entity in scripture.  Faith always has an object, and these questions explain what the object of faith must be, according to the Bible.  I have been promising the meat.  This is the first course.

7. Lord's Day

Question 20. Are all men then, as they perished in Adam, saved by Christ?

Answer: No; (Matthew 7:14, 22:14) only those who are ingrafted into Him, and, receive all His benefits, by a true faith. (Mark 16:16, John 1:12,3:16, 18, 36; Isaiah 53:11, Psalms 2:12, Romans 11:17, 19-20, 3:22; Hebrews 4:2-3, 5:9, 10:39, 11:6)

Question 21. What is true faith?

Answer: True faith is not only a certain knowledge, whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to us in his word, (James 2:19) but also an assured confidence, (2 Corinthians 4:13; Ephesians 2:7-9, 3:12; Galatians 2:16;Hebrews 11:1, 7-10; 4:16; James 1:6, Matthew 16:17, Philippians 1:19, Romans 4:17,21; 5:1; 1:16; 10:10, 17; 4:16, 18-20; 3:24-25) which the Holy Ghost (Galatians5:22, Matthew 16:17; 2 Corinthians 4:13, John 6:29, Ephesians 2:8, Philippians 1:19,Acts 16:14) works by the gospel in my heart; (Romans 1:16, 10:17; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Acts 10:44, 16:14) that not only to others, but to me also, remission of sin, everlasting righteousness and salvation, (Romans 1:17, Galatians 3:11, Hebrews10:10, 38; Galatians 2:16) are freely given by God, merely of grace, only for the sake of Christ's merits. (Ephesians 2:8; Romans 3:24, 5:19; Luke 1:77-78)

True faith is not only a certain knowledge, whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to us in His Word, but also an assured confidence, which the Holy Ghost works by the Gospel in my heart; that not only to others, but to me also, remission of sin, everlasting righteousness and salvation, are freely given by God, merely of Grace, only for the sake of Christ’s merits.

Question 22. What is then necessary for a Christian to believe?

Answer: All things promised us in the gospel, (John 20:31, Matthew 28:19,Mark 1:15) which the articles of our catholic undoubted Christian faith briefly teach us.

Question 23. What are these articles?

Answer: 1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth: 2. And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord: 3. Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary: 4. Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead, and buried: He descended into hell: 5. The third day he rose again from the dead: 6. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty: 7. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead: 8. I believe in the Holy Ghost: 9. I believe a holy catholic church: the communion of saints: 10. The forgiveness of sins: 11. The resurrection of the body: 12. And the life everlasting.

Amen.

Notably, there is the issue of Hell in article #4 that we will have to address soon; but otherwise, those articles should look awfully familiar, sort of like the Apostles' Creed.

8. Lord's Day

Question 24. How are these articles divided?

Answer: Into three parts; the first is of God the Father, and our creation; the second of God the Son, and our redemption; the third of God the Holy Ghost, and our sanctification.

Question 25. Since there is but one only divine essence, (Deuteronomy 6:4, Ephesians 4:6, Isaiah 44:6, 45:5; 1 Corinthians 8:4, 6) why speaks thou of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost?

Answer: Because God has so revealed himself in his word, (Isaiah 61:1,Luke 4:18, Genesis 1:2-3, Psalms 33:6, Isaiah 48:16, Psalms 110:1, Matthew 3:16-17,28:19; 1 John 5:7, Isaiah 6:1, 3; John 14:26, 15:26; 2 Corinthians 13:13; Galatians 4:6, Ephesians 2:18, Titus 3:5-6) that these three distinct persons are the one only true and eternal God.

And obviously, the next three sections have been introduced.  We will be going through specific doctrinal statements concerning each person of the Trinity.  I have made some effort both to have the citations grouped together in their original position, but also to have them linked together as a group to make for easy clicking and easy reading.  If you were ever going to follow the links to read the passages, this is the section.  At least try the references for question #21. 

In the future, if you need to find scripture on a topic, this confession is a great reference tool.  All that is required is finding the appropriate question, and there is the scripture that you need.

The next few sections will be over larger chunks of material.

--Troll--

Thoughts on Nehemiah 1

In the context of Bible study, it is not often that full, coherent opinions on the section can be given. Thus, today, I offer these thoughts.

In terms of the story of redemptive history weaving through the Bible, Nehemiah is a critical moment. A brief review of the covenants in the Bible will be helpful at this point. In addition, in terms of the countdown prophesies of Daniel, Nehemiah is the moment in the historical narrative where things get set up for the coming of Jesus.

The Covenants of the Old Testament begin with the creation covenant, which is not specifically articulated. At the point of creation, Adam is capable of fulfilling a covenant of law, the understood covenant that exists between creator and creature. After the fall, man was no longer able to keep the law; further proof being offered by the flood. This is why Genesis 15, or the whole section from 12-18 concerning Abraham, is so important. In the manner of Suzerainty treaties, God passes through the animal pieces in Abraham’s dream, making a promise to Abraham. The burden of obedience God places on Himself. This point is absolutely huge and is completely unlike what follows. Next, after a series of events land the Israelites in Egypt, Moses receives the Law.

A brief aside concerning the law, there are three types of law given in the Torah. The Mosaic Law is the moral law. There are other portions of law contained in Exodus as well, both civic law and ceremonial law. What has to be remembered is that Israel is a theocracy. As such, it is appropriate that the law at that moment of redemptive history contains all three types of law. This becomes very important in the New Testament.

The Mosaic Covenant is famously violated before Moses can even get down from the mountain to present it. It can be argued, validly, that Israel had lost their inheritance at that moment. But God was merciful and allowed Israel to, eventually, inherit the land promise of the Mosaic Covenant. Skipping forward to 2 Chronicles 36, we see clear and obvious evidence that God has seen enough. Jerusalem is burned to the ground and Israel is scattered. This is known as the Diaspora. At the end of 2 Chronicles 36 is the edict of Cyrus. This is an important event that is the reference point for three related books, Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel.

The Diaspora is the exact punishment that God outlines for Israel for breaking the Mosaic Covenant. Notice in Exodus 24 that the Covenant is sealed by the sprinkling of blood on the Israelites. The words of Exodus from 18-30 are all in this format: do this and you shall live; do it not and you shall die. Do this and you get the land and your nation; do it not and you lose it all. The sprinkling of blood on the Israelites signifies that the burden of obedience falls to them. They have clearly broken the Covenant, yet again, by the end of 2 Chronicles; and this time, God has run out of patience.

Throughout the historical narratives leading up to the reign of Solomon, there are covenant renewal ceremonies. The reason for this is obvious: Israel keeps breaking the covenant. As federal representatives of the nation of Israel, the theocracy that is in covenant with God, the leaders reaffirm the Mosaic Covenant as each new ruler begins his reign. Two things should strike you at this point. Israel has been unfaithful and God has been exceedingly patient and merciful. This covenant should not need to be renewed, but since man can’t keep the Law after the fall, Israel keeps scrambling to renew the covenant. When God says enough, Israel is destroyed. This is the end of the Mosaic covenant once and for all.

This is also the end of the types of law unique to the theocracy of Israel, civil and ceremonial law.  Only the moral law remains.  Israel never quite figures this out.  When Jesus says that he has not come to cancel the law, He is referring to the moral law.  This is a huge point, but it is made clear throughout the New Testament, particularly in Galatians.

Notice that the ritual established by Ezra is merely a shadow of the old Temple ritual. Why is this? Have all of the priests been wiped out and no lineage remains of the old ways? By whose edict did Israel return to the land and rebuild the Temple? The edict came from Cyrus, not from God. This new Israel is not a theocracy in covenant relationship with the God of Moses. Of note, the same can be said about Israel circa 1948 A.D. This new Israel of Ezra and Nehemiah is out of Covenant. They are there by the grace of a human king, not by the Grace of God.

Finally, we come to Nehemiah 1. Look at his prayer again in this Covenant context. In the first sentence, Nehemiah is calling upon the Covenant of God with Moses. What is amazingly poignant is at the same time missing the boat. Why would Nehemiah appeal to Moses? He appeals to Moses because he does not understand Abraham. The Mosaic Covenant is broken, but the Abrahamic Covenant remains intact. His appeal was to something that was lost, not to something older and still in force. The fact that the Mosaic Covenant is broken is not lost on Nehemiah. He prays for all of Israel. He tries to repent for the sins of a nation, for the sins of a people. He tries to pray Israel back into covenant relationship with God, not realizing that there is still an older covenant intact.

One other question is this:  Is Nehemiah a person who can be a federal head of Israel?  The reason genealogies are important in the Old Testament is that we need to know that various people are in the royal line and can therefore make binding Covenants with God.  We will come back to this in Chapter 8.

One final word about the last line of Chapter 1: Now I was cupbearer to the King. This is an interesting symbol dropped down at the end of the chapter. Obviously, this was not written with a chapter break at this point, but we receive it this way now. Clearly this is an important issue. A couple of weeks ago, during Holy Week, we discussed the Cup of Wrath and the Cup of the New Covenant. I will refer you again to this excellent article by Brent McGuire. And now, we see another place where a cup appears in a prominent position in a narrative. If Israel follows the path of trying to return to Moses, which cup will this represent?

The Law is given to convict us of sin. Israel has not yet learned, and they are not listening to their own prophets.

--Troll--

Heidelberg Catechism: The Second Part--Deliverance, sub A

One of the most interesting parts of doing these catechisms is that we get to see the doctrine spelled out, but also we are given the proof texts along with it.  Although it takes a considerable bit of time, these catechisms make a great reading guide.  Read not only the verses quoted, but also the sections around those verses for context.  If you keep in mind the doctrines that are being added as we go, you will have a nice systematic theology built.  At the end of the second part, I'll go back and summarize the doctrine without the proof texts.  It reads very nicely as a clear and coherent doctrinal statement, as it was designed to do.  The second part has an introduction that I've divided in half, then it goes through the Trinity, and finally through the sacraments.  This is the real meat of the discussion, but remember that each part builds upon the prior section.

The Second Part - Of Man's Deliverance

5. Lord's Day

Question 12. Since then, by the righteous judgment of God, we deserve temporal and eternal punishment, is there no way by which we may escape that punishment, and be again received into favor?

Answer: God will have his justice satisfied: (Genesis 2:17, Exodus 20:5, 23:7, Ezekiel 18:4, Matthew 5:26; 2 Thessalonians 1:6, Luke 16:2) and therefore we must make this full satisfaction, either by ourselves, or by another. (Romans 8:3-4)

Question 13. Can we ourselves then make this satisfaction?

Answer: By no means; but on the contrary we daily increase our debt. (Job 9:2-3, 15:15-16, 4:18-19, Psalms 130:3, Matthew 6:12, 18:25, 16:26)

Question 14. Can there be found anywhere, one, who is a mere creature, able to satisfy for us?

Answer: None; for, first, God will not punish any other creature for the sin which man has committed; (Ezekiel 18:4, Genesis 3:17, Hebrews 2:14-17) and further, no mere creature can sustain the burden of God's eternal wrath against sin, so as to deliver others from it. (Nehemiah 1:6, Psalms 130:3)

Question 15. What sort of a mediator and deliverer then must we seek for?

Answer: For one who is very man, and perfectly (1 Corinthians 15:21, Jeremiah 33:16, Isaiah 53:9, 2 Corinthians 5:21) righteous; (Hebrews 7:26, 7:16) and yet more powerful than all creatures; that is, one who is also very God. (Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Romans 9:5, Jeremiah 23:5-6, Luke 11:22)

This section lays out our need for a savior and exactly what His qualities must be.  We obviously already know the answers to the questions, but it is good to know that the questions also come from the Bible.  Often, when we are talking to others who are nominally Christian, the wrong questions are being asked.  We need to be sure to refocus the discussion on the right questions.

6. Lord's Day

Question 16. Why must he be very man, and also perfectly righteous?

Answer: Because the justice of God requires that the same human nature which has sinned, should likewise make satisfaction for sin; (Ezekiel 18:4,20, Romans 5:12, 15, 18; 1 Corinthians 15:21, Hebrews 2:14-16; 1 Peter 3:18, Isaiah 53:3-5, 10-11) and one, who is himself a sinner, cannot satisfy for others. (Hebrews 7:26-27, Psalms 49:7-8; 1 Peter 3:18)

Question 17. Why must he in one person be also very God?

Answer: That he might, by the power of his Godhead (Isaiah 9:6, 63:3) sustain in his human nature, (Isaiah 53:4, 11) the burden of God's wrath; (Deuteronomy 4:24, Nehemiah 1:6, Psalms 130:3) and might obtain for, and restore to us, righteousness and life. (Isaiah 53:5, 11, Acts 2:24; 1 Peter 3:18, John 3:16, Acts 20:28, John 1:4)

Question 18. Who then is that Mediator, who is in one person both very God, (1 John 5:20, Romans 9:5, 8:3; Galatians 4:4, Isaiah 9:6, Jeremiah 23:6, Malachi 3:1) and a real (Luke 1:42, 2:6-7; Romans 1:3, 9:5; Philippians 2:7, Hebrews 2:14, 16-7, 4:15) righteous man? (Isaiah 53:9, 11; Jeremiah 23:5, Luke 1:35, John 8:46, Hebrews 4:15, 7:26; 1 Peter 1:19, 2:22, 3:18)

Answer: Our Lord Jesus Christ: (1 Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 2:9, Matthew 1:23; 1 Timothy 3:16; Luke 2:11) "who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." (1 Corinthians 1:30)

Question 19. Whence knows thou this?

Answer: From the holy gospel, which God himself first revealed in Paradise; (Genesis 3:15) and afterward published by the patriarchs (Genesis 22:18, 12:3, 49:10-11) and prophets, (Isaiah 53; 42:1-4, 43:25, 49:5-6, 22-23; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 31:32-33, 39-41; Micah 7:18-20, Acts 10:43, Romans 1:2, Hebrews 1:1, Acts 3:22-24, 10:43; John 5:46) and represented by the sacrifices and other ceremonies of the law; (Hebrews 10:1, 7; Colossians 2:7, John 5:46) and lastly, has fulfilled it by his only begotten Son. (Romans 10:4, Galatians 4:4-5, 3:24; Colossians 2:17)

Now, we have the answers to the questions that we raised above.  These two days of questions lay the framework for the whole Christian faith.  In the next group, we will finish the first section of the Second Part.

--Troll--