To my Pentecostal brothers and sisters in Christ: (part 1)

This week, our Church is starting a series on the Holy Spirit, entitled “The Grace Awakening: Discovering the Power of the Holy Spirit.” As you embark on this journey, I would put these few small pearls in your brains to keep your rudder under control.

Many of you who read this blog have children in the Noize.  What is the last song that they sing at every show?  “It’s not about you, it’s not about me, it’s about Jesus.”  Oh, that we would remember that refrain at all times, but most particularly as we read and study the Bible.  The whole Bible is about Jesus, every Word.  So, when we discuss the Holy Spirit in the coming weeks, after every “lesson,” ask yourself whether what you heard was about Jesus, or about you.  It is a simple test.  Try it.  Can you remember a time when you were taught about what Jesus did and why it matters?  Or is it always about our favorite topic, you and me?

Here is another question: does the Bible contradict itself?  If the Bible is the inspired (some would say expired or breathed) Word of God, and we believe God to be the very definition of perfection, how can His Word contradict itself?  Therefore, if we perceive a contradiction, we have interpreted one or the other passage, or both, incorrectly.  This is simple logic.  If A contradicts B, then either A is false, or B is false, or both A and B are false.  Since the Bible is not false, it must be our understanding of that passage that must be false in these instances.  This has to be the case.

Another question: can it be said that quotes from Jesus have more weight than quotes from Paul?  While I would certainly argue that not all verses have equal importance, I am not ready to make this statement.  First of all, Paul never contradicts Jesus in scripture by definition.  If it is in scripture, then by definition, it is the breathed Word of God.  Still, since there are some Red Letter Christians out there, is it reasonable to say that if Jesus voiced a view on a topic first, that Paul should be interpreted in light of what Jesus said about that topic?  Sure, that seems like a reasonable approach.  We can agree on that point as well.

Now, let us apply these three simple principles to some scripture.  To reiterate:

• 1.    It’s not about you, it’s not about me, it’s about Jesus.
• 2.    The Bible never contradicts itself.
• 3.    If Jesus says something about a topic, perhaps all of the other passages should be interpreted in light of that.

What we are going to do is look at the primary scriptural text regarding the Holy Spirit.  Here are the big ones.  John 14-16, Acts 2-4, 1 Corinthians 12-14.  That is three sections from three authors.  John is an Apostle and an eyewitness to the life of Jesus.  He gives us direct quotes from Jesus.  Luke, the author of Acts, gives us testimony from a second hand source.  We know that he received his information in this way because he tells us thus in Luke 1:2.  We also know that he was a companion of Paul, and therefore an eyewitness to much of the Book of Acts that concerns Paul.  Paul himself wrote 1 Corinthians, or at least dictated it to his scribe.  Paul is an eyewitness to the Risen Christ on the road to Damascus. 

John 14-16.

This whole section is a quote from Jesus at the Last Supper, and it actually begins in Chapter 13 and extends down into Chapter 17.  This is an amazing section of scripture.  Take a moment and read it.  I’ve linked it for you in the heading just above.  Now, let’s get down to the key sections.  John 14:15-31  Here, Jesus tells us about the Holy Spirit, whom He calls the Helper.  Verses 16-17: He is the Spirit of Truth.  Verses 25-26: He will teach us about Jesus, and give us remembrance of what Jesus said to us.  John 16: 4b-15  The rubric calls this section the Work of the Holy Spirit!  Surely, we will gain some insight here.  The Helper will not come until Jesus is gone.  He will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.  He does not speak on His own authority but only what He hears from Jesus.  He will declare the things that are to come.  He will glorify Jesus and take what is of Jesus and declare it to us.  Heavy stuff.

And so a brief recap of this section can be stated this way.  The Holy Spirit will come to be the Helper, who will convict the world concerning sin, and righteousness and judgment, then He will declare the things that are to come concerning Jesus.  The Law and the Gospel.  He will declare the Law that convicts us, and then declare the Gospel and what is to come concerning Jesus.

Now, let us apply our test.  It was all about Jesus.  Yes, the Holy Spirit always testifies about Jesus, what He has done and what He will do on the Last Day.  No internal contradiction.  The Law convicts and Jesus saves.  Now, let’s apply this section to the others for the third test.

Acts 2-4

Before we dive too deeply into Acts 2, let me say a word about Acts 1:5.  This passage is often interpreted as a second event, that we require a second Baptism.  Let me be plain.  If you accept that you require a second baptism of any type, it implies that the resurrection of Jesus was insufficient in some way.  If you do not understand the vicarious atonement and penal substitution, then, perhaps, yes, you might need something else.  But the Christian has no such need of second Baptisms!  The Christian is full of the certain hope in the resurrection, that through Christ, he will receive all of the just rewards in heaven that Christ has promised.  I have gone over some of the exegesis of this question in my last post, almost a month ago now, so let me refer you there, then, I will return to this topic again at the end here.

I want to do something that I don’t often do in these posts.  I want to go out of order.  Skip down to Acts 2:41, 47.

So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.  (Acts 2:41 ESV)      

…praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.  (Acts 2:47 ESV)

These are not small statements, indeed, these statement are the point of all that has occurred.  What does Luke say happened that day?  Did 3000 people find their best life now?  Did 3000 people find health, wealth and happiness in this present evil age, in this world?  Did 3000 people have fire dancing on their heads?  Let’s learn some grammar, shall we?  Acts 2:41 is written in passive voice.  This means that the subject of the sentence is not the 3000, nor the ones who received his word, but rather they are the object of the verb baptized.  These 3000 didn’t do anything.  They were acted upon by the Holy Spirit through the Words of Peter, who were given to him by the Holy Spirit.  The book is called the Acts of the Apostles, not the acts of all the people who received His Word.  The people received his word.  They didn’t seek it.  They didn’t go on a search party for the truth.  In fact, most of them were minding their own business being good Jews, when they happened upon this guy Peter speaking loudly in their native tongue about another Jewish guy, who they thought was dead, who turned out to be the messiah after all.

What did most Jews in the first century think was their largest problem?  Was it righteousness?  No, they had the Law and their sacrifices; they were covered there.  Was it health, wealth and prosperity?  Certainly, Jesus and the Apostles went around healing people, but they thought that disease was a consequence of sin.  They had sin covered by the sacrifices.  No, they had bigger fish to fry than personal affluence and happiness.  It was the Roman occupation!  They believed that their largest problem was that this piece of dirt that was promised to them by God hundreds of years earlier, but that they had lost through their own disobedience, was still not their own piece of dirt again.  And we would all say about them today that they sort of missed the point.  Jesus tried to explain this to them over and over.  The pharisaical righteousness that they claimed was falling miles short of the mark.  Jesus tried to explain to them repeatedly that their biggest problem was an issue of righteousness before God on the Last Day in judgment for their sin.

Today, what do we see as our largest problem?  Is it righteousness?  No, we have Jesus for an example, and we can work out our righteousness through His example.  Is it health, wealth and prosperity?  We don’t think that misfortune is the result of sin any longer.  So, for many, yes it is the biggest problem.  Is it that Israel is now back on that piece of dirt (though not all of it, not even all of Jerusalem,) and a new enemy has arisen against them?  For many more, yes it is.  Now, you icons of proficiency in English grammar, do you see the parallel construction of these last two paragraphs?  Let me spell it out for you in table form.

First Century	Today
Righteousness by the Law	Righteousness by Works
Health, wealth and prosperity	Health wealth and prosperity
Israel occupied	Israel partially occupied

OK, do these columns look similar?  What can we say about these three Jewish opinions in the First Century?  That they were wrong?  Jesus said that they were.  Now, look at the second list.  What has changed in this list?  Did Jesus give us any reason to believe that this list is any less wrong today?  Hmmm, we’ll come back to that question.

What were the conclusions of Acts 2:41, 47?  Souls were being saved.  Salvation is the issue.  Salvation is our biggest problem.  We don’t have it.  We need it.  Jesus came to do it for us and then give it away.  So, we can agree perhaps, that according to Jesus, Peter, and Paul, that our greatest problem is Salvation.

Ok, are you with me so far?  Let’s get to another key verse. 

Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” (Acts 2:37-39 ESV)

Wow!  This looks like action!  This is something for us to do!  Repent!  Wait.  What is that and what does it mean and why do we need to do it?  Be baptized!  Wait.  We just said that we cannot Baptize ourselves.  We receive Baptism from someone else.  You will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.  Stop!  Another gift!  That means we have to sit and wait for someone else to do the giving!  We can’t go get it, we have to receive it.  Now, I like this next part.  It’s about a promise for me and my children and everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.  Oh, no.  God does the calling?  God does the calling to himself?  What if we don’t hear him call?  What if we do?  Then what?

My friends, this is the point.  There is a Holy Spirit.  His job is to bridge this gap that you are starting to perceive, this gap between God and man.  You know about a promise now, but to whom was it made?  You know about a gift, but you don’t know how to receive it.  The gift is about Salvation.  I hope that at least in this first part, we have made that much plain.  These first parts are the building blocks upon which we will build the rest of Acts 2-4 and Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians.

Maranatha!

--Ogre--

“Why Can’t I Own Canadians?”

“Why Can’t I Own Canadians?” Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth - White Horse Inn Blog

The title alone should make this worth the read! Direct response is becoming the word of the day. Enjoy this brief word on rightly discerning the Old Testament.

--Ogre--

Hebrews 4

His rest.  Clearly, we need to understand exactly to what the writer refers with this phrase before we can understand this chapter.  Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it.  While the promise of entering his rest still stands….  Let us make no mistake about it, this statement comes completely upon the heels of the Chapter 3 discussion of His heritage and we know that this heritage is based upon the promise of God to Abraham.  These are eschatological ideas and refer to redemptive historical context.  We enter His rest after we die or on the Day of the Second Coming, whichever comes first.  Until that day, we continue to life IN Adam, simultaneously citizens of this present evil age and the Age to Come.  That is the tension with which we live as Christians.  Therefore, the promise still stands as long as we are alive and before the Second Coming.  After either one of those events, it is too late for us.  

…let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it.  The key word here is seem.  Why is this the case?  First of all, we are not given the job of fruit inspection, and we don’t truly know the fate of anyone else.  We only know whether we truly believe.  Some may seem to be true believers.  They say all the prayers correctly and attend church every Wednesday and Sunday.  Others may seem to struggle in their faith, forever tottering in doubt, full of ethical dilemmas and questionable decisions.  The mysteries of the Holy Spirit are not made known to us.  Who is to say which of those two is saved and which is not.  Therefore, let us fear.

This is going to sound like a contradiction in a while when the writer talks about boasting, but you know that it isn’t.  When the writer is speaking to the whole congregation, he does not know to which group he is speaking.  There is the distinct possibility that there are reprobate present within the congregation.  This is not a statement about works, because we can see that he qualifies the comment with seems. 

For good news came to us just as to them, but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened.  This is a remarkable statement.  Remember that the prior passage is about the Jews in the time of Moses.  Think about that point in redemptive history.  They had just received the Law in written form.  And yet, the writer says that good news came to them, also.  To what message is the writer referring?  Is it the Law?  No!  Israel was saved at Passover just before the Red Sea events at the beginning of their sojourn across the desert.  They were shown the sacrifices.  All of the types and shadows of what was to come in Jesus were there for them to see.  The message of the good news did not benefit them because they did not believe like those who truly listened.  Moses understood the big picture.  Abraham certainly understood the big picture.  But those Israelites who wandered the desert did not see beyond the promise of earthly Jerusalem to the promise of heavenly Jerusalem.

As you wander through verses 3-6, notice these points.  We who have believed entered that rest, in contrast with those who failed to enter because of disobedience.  Again, this is a remarkable passage.  Salvation is a passive event for the believer.  It is based upon the active work of another, Christ Jesus.  In contrast, disobedience is an active event by the nonbeliever.  The only actions of which fallen man is capable are in disobedience.  It is by listening and by faith in the promise that we receive Salvation.  Now, in the middle of that passage, God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit finished His works from the foundation of the world.  And as we will see shortly, after his earthly mission, Jesus finished His works in this incarnation with His death, burial and resurrection.  Notice how all these pieces fit nicely together, Old Testament and New Testament.

Watch what happens in verses 8-10.  For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on. 9 So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, 10 for whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works as God did from his.  OK, who are the people of God?  Are we talking about earthly Israel?  Of course not.  We are speaking of Heavenly Israel, those native branches and those wild branches alike that are grafted together on the root of Jesse, Jesus Christ.  When do we enter into God’s rest?  We enter into His rest when we die or on the Last Day, whichever comes first.  Thus, we rest from our works when we die or on the Last Day, whichever comes first.  Is this about righteousness?  No, this is about the reward, Salvation.  Righteousness is from belief, from faith in the redeeming work of Jesus on the cross, a faith we receive from the Holy Spirit.

Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. 12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.  This passage is tough and will require careful consideration.  Starting from verse 11, is the writer suggesting that our works will profit us in terms of salvation?  At first glance, he seems to be doing just that.  But then, we realize that he is explaining the purpose of the Law.  When we read the phrase the word of God is living and active, remember that this is a double entendre.  We receive the Holy Spirit by listening to the Word of God preached into our ears.  But also, remember John 1.  Jesus Christ is the Word.  He is the Word made flesh.  He is living and active.  He does discern the depths of our hearts.  He does pierce our souls.  Why the image of the two-edged sword?  There are different types of blades.  The two edged sword can cut in either direction and can also be used to stab.  It is a more direct weapon.  But the crux of the imagery is that a two-edged sword cuts both ways.  If wielded unskillfully, it is as likely to cut the one who wields it.

Finally, this section ends in judgment.  All are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.  Make no mistake.  We will all have to give an account.  And what have we learned so far from the writer of Hebrews?  Remember from the last chapter:

So, who then, ultimately are the righteous, the upright of heart?  We know from Psalms 5, 10, 14 and 36,  Isaiah 59 and 64, and Romans 1-3, that no one is righteous, no, not even one.  Look at Ecclesiastes 7:20.  Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.  So, who are the righteous, the upright of heart?  No one.  No one qualifies.  That is the point of the Law.  After the Fall, no one is capable of fulfilling the Law. 

Therefore, this whole idea of impending Judgment absolutely should put fear into us, fear of the Wrath of God.  At the end of chapter 4, though, the writer refers us back to the end of chapter 2.  Jesus is the Great High Priest.  Next, we will discuss the role of the Great High Priest.

--Troll--

Categories: Law and Gospel, the 3 uses of the Law

When the Reformed and Lutheran scholastics talked about God’s moral law (lex moralis), they taught that there are three basic uses of the law (usus legis).  They are:
1) The civil use (usus politicus sive civilis).  That is, the law serves the commonwealth or body politic as a force to restrain sin.  This falls under the general revelation (revelatio generalis) discussion in most of the scholastics as well as natural law (cf. Rom 1-2).
2) The pedagogical use (usus elenchticus sive paedagogicus).  That is, the law also shows people their sin and points them to mercy and grace outside of themselves.  In Muller’s summary, this is “the use of the law for the confrontation and refutation of sin and for the purpose of pointing the way to Christ” (p. 320).  This can be found in the Heidelberg Catechism Lord’s Days 2-4.
3) The normative use (usus didacticus sive normativus).  That is, this use of the law is for those who trust in Christ and have been saved through faith apart from works.  It “acts as a norm of conduct, freely accepted by those in whom the grace of God works the good” (p. 321).  This can be found in the Heidelberg Catechism Lord’s Days 32-52.
Note: “In this model, Christ appears as the finis legis, or end of the law, both in the sense that the usus paedagogicus leads to Christ as to a goal and in the sense that the usus normativus has become a possibility for man only because Christ has fulfilled the law in himself” (Ibid.).  In other words, in both the pedagogical use and the normative use Christ is central as the one who has saved his people from the law’s demands and the one who has merited the gift of Spirit-wrought obedience.

And now in plain speak.  We have discussed in the past that there is a clear and distinct difference between Law and Gospel.  This is one of the two main category distinctions that we get from Martin Luther.  The other main category distinction is between the two kingdoms, which we will discuss in the next post.  The Law consists of commands.  It is always tied to a blessing and curse principle.  Do this and you shall live; do it not, and you shall perish.  One of the most important things to develop at the outset is the context of that last sentence.  When discussing do this and you shall live, we are not talking about the here and now.  This is a statement concerning Judgment Day.  We are in the realm of eschatology again, and we are talking about eternal life.  So, in terms of the Law, Do this and you shall live means do this and you shall have eternal life.  Obviously, the second part of the clause is the curse that damns the person to eternally suffering the Wrath of God, i.e. hell. 

The key feature of the Gospel is that it is in the indicative mood.  We can call this the present perfect tense as well, because it is completed action in terms of the present.  The Gospel events have finished.  It is a declaration of the condition of things based upon events that are finished.  This is NOT present progressive tense.  This is NOT ongoing action.  This is completed action.  The Gospel is News.  It is not dependent upon how we react to it.  The World Trade Center towers have fallen.  They fell regardless of how we feel about it, or how we reacted to it.  That event is outside of us.  That event occurred independent of our interaction with it.  That was news.  The Gospel is news.  The Gospel is in the indicative mood.  The Gospel is in the present perfect tense.  The Gospel is NOT about how we feel.  The Gospel is about what Jesus has done for us.

The Law, then, is imperative.  The Law is a command.  The Law tells us what to do.  Let’s break down Luther’s three uses of the Law and see what they mean.

The first use of the law is the civil use.  This means that the law restricts how we behave towards one another.  All people are aware of this use of the law.  We receive this form of the law by general revelation or natural revelation.  Natural revelation is the law as we have imprinted upon our hearts.  We, in creation, are hard wired for natural revelation.  Adam and Eve did not yet have the stone tablets of Moses, and yet they were aware of the Law.  The Law was obvious to them by observing creation.  Natural revelation is available and known to all people, even atheists.  Natural revelation gave Adam and Eve the Law under which humanity fell.

Specific revelation is more specific than natural revelation in that it uses words.  Specific revelation is the Law as written in the Torah.  Specific revelation was given to Moses.  Whether we are Christian, Jew or neither, some form of natural or general revelation is known to us.  Under these terms, we know the difference between right and wrong.  We know generally how to behave towards one another.  This is the Civil use of the Law.  When governments make civil laws, they are using general and natural revelation, which are right kingdom items, to mandate behavior in the left kingdom, the kingdom of man, the kingdom of the here and now.  The Civil use of the Law is a government of man using the Law of God to restrict behavior and enforce some ethical code.

The second use of the law is the pedagogical use of the law.  This is a vastly important point that must be clearly understood in order to understand the Gospel.  The second purpose of the Law is to show people that we are sinful.  I didn’t know what it meant to covet; I had to look that up.  Now, I know what it means to covet, and I realize that I do, indeed, covet.  The Law has made me aware of my sin.  This goes much deeper than mere definition, however.  The Law carries reward and punishment.  The wage of sin is death.  The Law teaches us that we have all earned death.  The Law finally teaches us that we are all fallen creatures in Adam.  The purpose of the Law is to condemn man.  The second purpose of the Law is to bring man to his knees in the realization that we cannot possibly uphold the Law.  The second purpose of the Law is to turn us away from ourselves, outside of ourselves, to the Gospel.  The second purpose of the Law is to turn us towards the redemption and salvation offered to believers through Christ’s life, death, resurrection and ascension.  The second purpose of the Law is to show us that we cannot do it, and turn us toward the One who, not only could do it, but did do it, and He did it for His people.

The third use of the law is normative use of the law.  This use is for believing Christians.  It has no applicability to non-Christians.  Once we understand that we are completely incapable of fulfilling the law, that we are therefore left in a wholly desperate predicament, that we have therefore turned outward towards Christ and His alien righteousness through the Blood of the New Covenant, then the Law serves a very different purpose.  Jesus has fulfilled the Law in terms of the Blessings and the Curses of the Old Testament Covenants of Law.  We are reborn through Christ’s blood in the Sacrament of Baptism into the New Covenant as believers.  We have been given the gift of faith by the power of the Holy Spirit.  Therefore, we are no longer under the Law.  That is Christian Liberty.  Now, we have a new master that is not the Law.  Our master is Christ Jesus, our Lord, our Savior, our King.  We have an obligation of obedience to Him.  We are expected to follow the moral law, the Decalogue, not under the blessing and curse principle, but out of our obedience and gratitude for the intervention of Grace on our behalf.  We freely accept this obligation as our duty to Christ as one of His people, chosen before time to receive from the Holy Spirit the gift of faith.

In summary, the three uses of the law are the civil, the pedagogical and the normative uses.  The civil use of the law is the use of general and natural revelation by civil authorities to mandate behavior that avoids sin.  The pedagogical use of the law is to cause believers to realize that they are sinners incapable of the standard of perfection required for salvation, and to therefore turn them away from themselves towards Christ.  The normative use of the law is for believers who understand and believe that their righteousness before God is independent of their works, based completely upon the imputed righteousness of Christ for us, and is therefore a freely accepted normal standard for behavior.  I hope that you found this helpful.

--Troll--

Sodom and Gomorrah Revisited

"Just how different are we today from Sodom and Gomorrah?" Why did God find no redeeming qualities in the men of that time. Is it because of Christ, today, that He withholds his wrath?

This is a comment from the Old Testament Covenants post, and I thought it worthy of a full answer.  In order to answer this fully, there are several aspects to consider.  What are the points of redemptive history for the events in question?  What is the particular relationship of all of the people in each era in question to God?  Does God actually withhold his Wrath today?  That should be a good starting point.

Sodom and Gomorrah are reported in Genesis 18-19.  This is the first action after the discussion of Circumcision and the Abrahamic Covenant.  At this point in redemptive history, man has demonstrated his utterly evil nature and fallen heart badly enough to be destroyed by a flood.  Remember that Noah is still IN Adam and still possesses a fallen heart.  Therefore, all of man still possesses a fallen evil heart.

So, why pick on Sodom and Gomorrah?  By God’s standard of sin, all sin being equal, surely Sodom and Gomorrah are no more or less sinful the rest of humanity?  By the same token though, why not Sodom and Gomorrah?  It is important to understand that this is not necessarily a pietistic commentary so much as an object lesson on the wages of sin.  The question put before Abraham concerns righteousness, not piety.  Find a righteous man in Sodom is his instruction.  If you understand original sin, you know that this is impossible.  In the end, Abraham is declared righteous based upon his faith and belief in the promise.  The lesson here is that there is no righteousness in Sodom and Gomorrah because no one there believed the promise of God.  Abraham is taught an object lesson about the wage of sin being death.  Abraham is taught that the Law only brings condemnation.  Remember, Moses hasn’t even been born yet.  This is the Law as it is engrained upon our hearts.  We know the Law empirically.  Because we continue to fail to understand that we are offending God, He decided to give us the Law in Word, so that we would fully understand our sin.

So, why did God level Sodom and Gomorrah?  Because He decided that they were a good object lesson on Law and sin.  Unfortunately, man still didn’t get it.

Today, the situation concerning our fallen nature is no different.  All men are still fallen.  All men are still IN Adam.  What is different?  The point in redemptive history is different.  We already know about God’s redemptive plan.  There are thousands and thousands of people who are transformed by faith in the propitiating work of Jesus through the Cross.  The Gospel has already been revealed.  It isn’t as if people are any less evil.  God just doesn’t have any particular need to teach another lesson.  He has revealed His plan for His people.  The Holy Spirit is busy about the work of gathering His sheep.  The only part of the plan that remains is Judgment on the Last Day.

Therefore, I would argue that God has no need to give any further examples or object lessons.  He can just sit back and watch His elect come into the world until He is ready to bring us to Judgment on the Last Day.  When the last of the elect is born, we will be within a lifetime of the Last Day.  It isn’t because there were no redeeming qualities in men then, but the situation now is different.  That just isn’t the case.  There is simply no purpose to another Sodom and Gomorrah at this point in redemptive history.

--Ogre--

The Old Testament Covenants

Another great topic from last week was that there are five Covenants in the Old Testament.  This post will review each covenant and discuss how it is a type and shadow of what Jesus would do later in redemptive history.  As we have said often, every word of the Old Testament is about Jesus in much the same way that every word or the New Testament is also about Jesus.  The Old Testament presents types and shadows of the New Covenant in Christ.  What does this phrase mean?

 

Let’s look for a moment at cars.  The regrettably named Smart Car is a type of thing in the group that we call cars.  Yes, this is debatable, but that helps make the point.  There are other types of cars that we place in this group that we call cars.  Let us take for example the Lamborghini Aventador LP 700-4.  This even sounds like a more impressive car.  Look how impressive the name of the car is.  Now, let’s look at the car itself.   Now that’s a car!  It has a 396 cu. in. V12 engine with 700 horse power.  It goes from 0 to 60 m.p.h. in only 2.9 seconds.  To give you some perspective, the Smart Car comes in blue; the Lamborghini comes in red.  While the Smart Car was a type of car, it was only a shadow of the Lamborghini, and a poor shadow at that.

In much the same way, we can say that Jerusalem is a type and shadow of heaven.  It was meant to give us a vague idea of what heaven might be like.  The Jewish people were a type and shadow of what God’s people would be like.  The Old Testament goes a step farther than this.  It compares a wagon or a skateboard to a Lamborghini.  The type and shadow is so vastly inferior to the real thing that we sometimes do not realize that the skateboard was actually pointing towards the Lamborghini.  And yet, some people mistake chapters and verses and even books of the Old Testament wanting to talk about skateboards instead of Lamborghinis.  Every word of the Old Testament is pointing forward to Jesus Christ and His redeeming work for His people.

Now, let’s move on to the Covenants.  All five of these Old Testament covenants point forward to an aspect of the New Covenant in Christ, but each has a different purpose in redemptive history.  Some of them are still intact and some have been broken.  Let’s start with a table and then fill in some details as we go.

Covenant	Lesser King	Blessings	Curses
Creation	Adam	Remain in Eden	Banishment from Eden; Sin; Death
Noah	Noah	No further cataclismic distruction	More trouble
Abraham	God	People the planet	?
Moses	Jewish people	Land promise	Destruction of Temple; dispersal
David	God	King will come from his line	?

The Creation Covenant, Genesis 2-3 is unlike all other covenants in the Bible in one aspect.  This covenant is not specifically spelled out as such in the text.  The covenant is understood.  We know that it is a covenant because it has the characteristics of a covenant.  There were blessings, curses and conditions.  This conditional covenant had the provision that Adam should never eat of a particular fruit.  He broke this covenant and suffered the consequences of that action.  The curse of this covenant was that sin and death entered the world.  The curses of covenants remain intact, while the blessings are lost.

At this point in redemptive history, God looks at His creation and it is doomed.  His creation is totally incapable now of passing judgment.  Since I am handling the doctrine of original sin elsewhere, I will not belabor the point here.  For our purposes, God needs to create a scheme by which He can save some of His creatures for the Age to Come.  We are not told why He chose progressive revelation or why He didn’t just wipe us out and start over.  We are given a series of covenants that point to the New Covenant in Christ.

When we come to Noah, the situation is that God was angry again and had just wiped the slate nearly clean.  Notice Genesis 6:5.  I would ask what is different now.  Paul’s answer is that nothing has changed.  It is interesting that man sort of receives a second punishment for the creation covenant here.  God saves Noah and then he makes a new covenant with Noah.  In Genesis 6:9, Noah is accounted as righteous, blameless in his Age.  By what means was Noah accounted as righteous?  Was Noah accounted righteous based upon his works?  Noah was still in Adam.  We are given his genealogy in chapter 5 to prove this.  His condition was still of sin.  He was included in the statement of God in Genesis 6:5.  Why was he accounted as righteous by God?  Noah believed in the promise of God.  He believed in the flood and the promise of God to deliver him from this peril.  Noah was accounted righteous based upon his faith in the promise of God.  In Genesis 8, we see that while God had decided not to punish the whole earth again on account of man, the condition of man has not changed.  The intension of man’s heart is evil from his youth.  We still have a sin problem.

Let’s examine the actual covenant in Genesis 9.  First, what are the conditions?  There are two.  Don’t eat live animals.  Don’t murder.  What are the blessings?  God promises never again to use a flood to wipe the earth clean.  The issue and imagery of water both here, in the Exodus and with Jonah makes for an interesting issue, but I will return to that later.  Remember that everything here is a type and shadow.  What are the curses?  If you violate this covenant, you will die by the hand of man.  One can also argue that the curses came first in the form of the flood, but that line of thinking is fairly thin in my view.  With whom is this covenant made?  Noah’s offspring and all living creatures are included in the covenant.  The sign of the covenant is the rainbow.  Now, for the tough question: is this covenant still intact?  Of course it is.  We have empirical evidence of this in the sky.  Has man violated this covenant?  Absolutely.  But as we have said before, God never breaks covenants.  Man is the one who breaks covenants.

At the end of the first two covenants, here is the situation.  God has cursed man through Adam and his sin.  This curse is the remnant of that covenant and it is intact.  God has not flooded the whole earth again and we still have rainbows, but man commits murder with alarming regularity.  Both the blessings and the curses are intact for this covenant, although man continues to violate it.  God is indeed merciful.  But man still has a problem: man is still evil in his heart and not worthy to stand before God in judgment and receive a verdict of righteousness.  With Abraham, God will get the ball rolling in the righteous direction.

Abram was deemed righteous before God.  The Abrahamic Covenant sort of tumbles out over 7 chapters and has several parts.  I will ask the covenant questions and then go get the answers.  By what means was Abram accounted as righteous?  From Genesis 15:6, we see that it was due to Abram’s belief in the promise of God.  This is an enormously important point.  Abram had already deceived Pharaoh concerning his wife.  This was not exactly righteous behavior.  His righteousness is specifically attributed to his belief in the Promise.  Who guarantees this covenant?  This is the most amazing section of Genesis, and perhaps the most important of the whole Old Testament.   The smoking fire pot representing God passes through the pieces first, as usual.  However, the flaming torch, representing the Son of God passes through second.  They are both fire, of the same substance.  One, the torch, comes from the fire pot, the father.  The guarantor of the covenant, therefore, is God!  The blessings and the curses will therefore fall upon God Himself.  He creates the covenant in Abraham through which Salvation will finally be possible.  He does all it.  He takes all the responsibility on Himself.  He demonstrates infinite Mercy and Grace.  Who benefits?  Clearly, there is a land promise that has to do with Abraham’s offspring.  Read this part of Genesis 13.  Now, it will be Paul who will spiritualize this land promise both in terms of the land itself and the beneficiaries.  That discussion will be in the Progressive Revelation series, part 2.  Who carries the curses if the covenant is violated?  The torch does. 

Now for the confusion, let’s go to Genesis 17. “Walk before me and be blameless.” The grammar of this sentence is a declaration.  There is no work of Abraham involved in this declaration of righteousness.  We already know that Abraham is adjudged righteous based upon his belief in the promise.  What do we make of verse 4?  Do we take this at face value?  Will Abraham be the direct patriarch of a multitude of nations?  Perhaps.  Paul will answer this question.  Now, we move to verse 10 and circumcision.  The male will have the covenant seal on his body.  I will make mention of a modern Jewish commentary on Paul and circumcision in the Part 2 post to which I have referred above.  In the lines of Genesis, the seal of circumcision is required for covenant benefits.  Again, Paul will have much to say on this topic.

Now, let us move on to Moses.  The problem is that God’s chosen people, the Israelites, do not realize that their behavior is an affront to God.  God needs to teach them the meaning of sin.  God needs to spell it out for us.  Moses was deemed righteous before God.  As another aside, I will come back to the Passover when we discuss the water issue of the Red Sea.  God gives Israel the Law through Moses.  The Covenant of Mount Sinai is sealed with the blood of a sacrificial animal.  Notice upon whom the blood is poured in Exodus 24.  Half is poured out on the altar and half is sprinkled upon the Book of Law and the people themselves.  This is not just a random ceremony.  The burden of obedience to the Law is attached to the people of Israel through the blood of the ceremonial sacrifice.  The curses of the Covenant will fall upon them if they break the Covenant.  The blessings of the Covenant were deliverance from captivity in Egypt and a new homeland.

Notice at this point something vastly important.  Circumcision is associated, not with Moses, but with Abraham.  Many Jewish scholars throughout time have viewed the Mosaic Covenant as the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant, and that the Mosaic Covenant supersedes or replaces the Abrahamic Covenant, but this cannot be the case for two very important reasons.  First, a Covenant that involves different parties than the original cannot supersede the original.  It wouldn’t make any sense.  Secondly, the terms of the Mosaic Covenant have clearly and obviously been broken by Israel, bringing about the curse portion of the covenant, while the Abrahamic Covenant is still completely in force at this point, unbroken by either party.  The purpose of the Covenant of Law is to demonstrate to Israel that they cannot possibly keep the Law, and they should therefore be repenting and begging God for Mercy.  Unfortunately, man doesn’t see things as they are intended.  Israel actually believes that they can keep the Law.  They create more and more rules to protect the actual Law from being in danger.  They do not see or understand the spirit of the Law, much less the letter of the Law.  But this was the purpose of the Law: to teach man of his sinful nature.

David’s Covenant was similar to that of Abraham.  David, whose highlights include arranging the death of Uriah and taking Bathsheba as his own although after the covenant is made, is reckoned righteous.  Look at the actual Covenant blessing in 2 Samuel 7.  The key word is the word “offspring.” In many places, this is read as meaning a collective noun implying family.  It is often translated as such.  But the Hebrew is in the singular number, not plural.  There is one seed, one offspring.  Notice the language of the rest of the passage.  I will establish the throne of His Kingdom forever.  I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son.  This is all singular.  We are talking about one man in this passage, one king, one messiah.  It is clear that David believes that Israel is ethnic Israel over whom he is king.  But Paul will, again, take this in another direction, spiritualizing this Covenant as well.

In summary, we have looked at the five Covenants of the Old Testament.  I have hinted at some of the types and shadows that we will find in the Old Testament.  In order to fully understand what it is that Christ did for us, in His life, in His death and in His resurrection, we must fully understand what it was that God did in redemptive history in the Old Testament.  Although we are in Covenant with God through Christ and His blood, we are still the wild vines, grafted into a Jewish family by adoption.  It behooves us to learn about our adoptive family.

--Troll--